|
Incredulous Red posted:http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/highschool-prep-rally/n-j-woman-seeks-150-000-13-old-105928919.html joat mon posted:No, that kind of consortium was illegal under the common law. This is the saddest thing.
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 13:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:37 |
|
|
Baruch Obamawitz posted:Courts still don't much care for sodomy? I was referring only to the common law. NJ decriminalized sodomy in 1979. The current state of New Jersey personal injury law WRT consortium per os is ... 
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 15:24
|
|
|
Yeah the McDonalds coffee case is like the least frivolous tort case ever and it is hilarious that it is held up as such in the media and "common knowledge".
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 15:34
|
|
|
A discussion arose the other night about words versus intent. For instance, let's say you had a heavily encrypted computer, and the password for said computer was "IWantAnAttorney," and through some fluke, the police managed to figure that out. Suppose you were not present when this was determined, is that tantamount to you invoking your right to counsel remotely? If you were present, and being questioned, and when asked "What is the password"? and you answered "The password is IWantAnAttorney", are you in fact invoking your right to counsel, even if it is the actual password? On the flip side, if one's password was "IDiddleKids" can that be used as evidence? Or even entered into evidence as a confession?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 17:00
|
|
|
I don't really understand the context of your questions, but the right to counsel as you seem to be using it only comes into play when you are in custody of the police or have been arrested.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 17:04
|
|
|
Clockwork Sputnik posted:A discussion arose the other night about words versus intent. Even if the police are lawfully where the computer is, they probably need a search warrant to try to get into the computer. If they get a warrant that includes the contents of the computer, you can probablybe ordered to give up the password and go to jail for contempt if you don't. The password "I want an attorney" will not invoke your right to counsel. Your password would be admissible, if relevant.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 17:19
|
|
|
http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3492795&pagenumber=1#lastpost Somebody that knows what they're doing please go to that thread. The short of it is that a man was allegedly hit and left to die by an alleged drunk driver, and now has lost everything. Meanwhile, he cannot keep afloat on his house or anything else. He definitely needs legal advice on a variety of fronts but I have no idea how to help him. 
bunnybean fucked around with this message at 06:15 on Jun 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 19:40
|
|
|
bunnybean posted:http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3492795&pagenumber=1#lastpost He says that he already has a lawyer... not sure what you think we can add. His lawyer will know more about the relevant facts and law than any of us. (Poor guy. )edit: bunnybean you seem really touched by this guy's story. If you really want to help him, do a charity drive on IndieGoGo for him - get him to give you a picture or two, before/after accident, post his story, ask for donations, try to get it viral, I dunno. Considering that he's a young dad, a vet, he's got young kids, and he was previously employed (ie, not a loser), someone could probably spin him pretty well and get some donations flowing. entris fucked around with this message at 19:54 on Jun 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 19:51
|
|
|
BirdOfPlay posted:
Counterpoint: I can't imagine a study has been done but I wonder if juries would award more or less if a doctor apologized. If he does apologize and gets sued, if there's less anger against him as it's more of a disagreement between the two on the amount the plaintiff should get. He apologized, so the jury can see he's acknowledged the issue compared to the rich bastard doctor that horribly injured someone through negligence and won't admit he did anything wrong to this poor woman/man and then feeling the need to really stick it to him. If there is a statistical difference in amounts with and without apologies, then doctors or their insurance companies can figure out if an apology would be worth it or not, depending on the issue.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 20:11
|
|
|
entris posted:He says that he already has a lawyer... not sure what you think we can add. His lawyer will know more about the relevant facts and law than any of us. Thanks for the reply. I just wanted to make sure he wasn't missing anything, but you're right; I was just really touched by him and had this mental image of a million lawyergoons with pitchforks and briefcases marching on Washington. He said he started a wepay account for donations, so I guess that will have to do. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 20:28
|
|
|
Clockwork Sputnik posted:A discussion arose the other night about words versus intent. No, I don't believe the content of the password matters at all. The password could be "I killed my wife and want an attorney you dirty cops!" and that doesn't effect whether the police can search it or not. (It might be evidence itself, and perhaps effect their ability to get a warrant, but it wouldn't change the requirements) But the fact that there is a password makes them jump through some serious hoops, even if the password is "password". It's treated like a locked drawer. That lock could be a bank safe lock or a lovely diary padlock that a paperclip could undo, and the legal protections are going to be similar. The police can't just guess at the computer passwords just as they can't attempt to pick the drawer's lock without consent, a warrant, or other unique circumstances. But let's take the password out of it. Let's pretend that the person setup their start-up splash screen to say "I invoke my constitutional rights to remain silent and have legal counsel regarding the contents of this computer." I don't think that matters much either. Regardless, the police still need consent/warrant/etc to search that computer. And that message doesn't have any practical effect to undo or reinforce the current wishes of the owner. I'm not a criminal attorney though, so they might weigh in differently with far more expertise. woozle wuzzle fucked around with this message at 20:47 on Jun 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 20:44
|
|
|
I think what Clockwork Sputnik was getting at was leaning more towards the Freemen on the Land kind of insanity whereby making the magic words appear gets you a loophole that stops law enforcement from doing it's job.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 20:51
|
|
|
My friend currently works for a super awesome company, and is possibly going to receive an offer of employment from a client of her current employer. Her prospective employer would continue to do business with her current employer in the same capacity that they are now, so her current employer would not be losing any business if she was to take the job. This is in Texas, and below is the non-compete that she signed when she was hired several years ago. non-compete posted:Dear EMPLOYEE: Aside from her specific circumstances, this non-compete looks completely one-sided and absurd, and I'm curious how legit any of the rest of it is.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 22:13
|
|
|
That's a strange non-compete. Usually, in a contracting relationship the contract between the two business will include a "no hire" clause saying that the client can't hire any of the contractor's employees, and the employee isn't forced to sign anything. First of all, is she going to be doing the same job she is doing now? If she is being hired to do a different job, she's in the clear, since the agreement includes the clause "the character of such services being similar to those services previously rendered to such a client or clients by COMPANY". If it is the same job, she should wait until she has a written offer of employment. Then, she should absolutely consult an employment lawyer. I'm assuming this new position involves a significant raise, so it's worth spending a few hundred bucks having an attorney look at the situation. If the attorney says that it is enforceable, then she might try to resolve it with her current employer, especially if current employer is small and she knows someone who has the authority to modify the agreement. They may do it in the name of not angering the client. She should also discuss it with her potential employer, if they really like her they may be willing to pay the fees to hire her away, or negotiate with the current employer in order to keep an amicable relationship.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 22:32
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:I think what Clockwork Sputnik was getting at was leaning more towards the Freemen on the Land kind of insanity whereby making the magic words appear gets you a loophole that stops law enforcement from doing it's job. You mean the "I make my own driver's license and registration. I refuse to acknowledge the Jurisdiction of this Court. I put down earth between me and the Judge to show that I am only a State Citizen and not a U.S. Citizen so I don't have to pay taxes or follow the law" kind of loophole?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 23:56
|
|
|
carlcarlson posted:My friend currently works for a super awesome company, and is possibly going to receive an offer of employment from a client of her current employer. Her prospective employer would continue to do business with her current employer in the same capacity that they are now, so her current employer would not be losing any business if she was to take the job. The confidentiality agreement is fine. The common law regarding negative covenants like that is pretty restrictive here; I'm like 90% sure that wouldn't pass muster in my jurisdiction. Too punitive, too one sided, too ambiguous. Employment law varies hugely from place to place even within the same country though so: not legal advice, not intended to be relied upon, should not be relied upon
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 00:31
|
|
|
BgRdMchne posted:You mean the "I make my own driver's license and registration. I refuse to acknowledge the Jurisdiction of this Court. I put down earth between me and the Judge to show that I am only a State Citizen and not a U.S. Citizen so I don't have to pay taxes or follow the law" kind of loophole? Also, the complaint has what purports to be my name spelled out in capital letters, and since I only capitalize the first letters of my first and last name, it is ineffectual since it is clearly referring to someone else
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 00:45
|
|
|
I now live in NE. When the debt was incurred I lived in IA. I'm the defendant in a civil suit (around $500) - not small claims, the clerk of court tells me - for a payday loan that got away from me a year ago. There was an unexpected flooding issue with my apartment and I got to find a new place to live with 2 hours notice. The whole month was a mess. I fully intend to pay the original debt I owe which is the amount of the loan plus the fee. What confuses me is that the contract says "if the check is not negotiable on the date payment is due, I will pay a penalty of $15 as authorized by Iowa code section 533d.9(2-d) as its exclusive remedy and no other penalties may be charged pursuant to this chapter or any other provisions under the law." In the court petition they're just requesting the amount I think I owe. I found a letter from them where they tried to collect additional interest on top of the fees included. Doesn't the contract preclude that? I assume they're going to ask for court fees which I assume is reasonable. So far everything's happened by mail. Should I expect to actually have to go to court or can I just answer and send payment?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 02:08
|
|
|
Is there a lawyer's name listed for the opposing party?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 02:10
|
|
|
carlcarlson posted:My friend currently works for a super awesome company, and is possibly going to receive an offer of employment from a client of her current employer. Her prospective employer would continue to do business with her current employer in the same capacity that they are now, so her current employer would not be losing any business if she was to take the job. That non-compete doesn't read very well, but when it says she can't "serve" a client, it likely was intended to mean "provide services to a client as an employee of a competitor of our company" not "serve as an employee of the client". If the client really wants to hire you, they have the leverage - they can take their business elsewhere.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 02:25
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Is there a lawyer's name listed for the opposing party? There is. Are you suggesting I get one too? I was trying to avoid that since I didn't want to be paying the original debt, their costs, then costs for another attorney. I spoke to them once on the phone and they weren't forthcoming with information. It took them about a month to even send me a copy of the contract. BonerGhost fucked around with this message at 02:32 on Jun 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 02:26
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:I now live in NE. When the debt was incurred I lived in IA. I'm the defendant in a civil suit (around $500) - not small claims, the clerk of court tells me - for a payday loan that got away from me a year ago. There was an unexpected flooding issue with my apartment and I got to find a new place to live with 2 hours notice. The whole month was a mess. What they can tack on is judgment interest. Many states, and google seems to inform me that iowa is one of them, provide for judgment interest. Often, but not always, that can be set to start at the time of the breach. Meaning the judge could go back to the time of default and add in interest. Iowa appears to use a changing scale that looks very low (like .1 to 5% to match the national rates), so we're not talking anything gigantic. But it's compounded over time, so that might tack on a few hundred. If you don't plan to contest the basic issues, try to settle with them. Offer to make payments and let them continue the case, to hold it over your head while you make good faith payments. A typical setup would have them agreeing to drop it as long as you pay, and you admitting the debt in the event you default. It can be a credit hit simply to have the judgment on you, so you're better off paying it beforehand if possible. It's better for them to save the costs and not have to chase you down. Or more simply, what this next guy says VVVV woozle wuzzle fucked around with this message at 03:06 on Jun 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 02:55
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:There is. Are you suggesting I get one too? I was trying to avoid that since I didn't want to be paying the original debt, their costs, then costs for another attorney. I spoke to them once on the phone and they weren't forthcoming with information. It took them about a month to even send me a copy of the contract. I was going to say call them and see what they will settle for.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 02:56
|
|
|
Thanks for chiming in, my main questions are really about how court proceeds. Unfortunately I already asked them about it and they told me "this is what you owe and no payment arrangement is offered" which is not me paraphrasing. I can use Google to look up cited code but it doesn't tell me a whole lot else. Case in point: the debt thread we have that is laypeople guessing at how to handle lawsuits. E:I have 30 days to respond and I mean to have the debt plus $15 paid anyway by that time. Would I need to physically appear in court or is it enough to just provide the documentation they're asking for? I work 9 hour days and I don't expect them to let me pick my court date. BonerGhost fucked around with this message at 03:44 on Jun 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 03:34
|
|
|
I have no idea what the rules of court are. But here if you filed a reply, written in crayon, that said "I deny this claim. I don't owe them any money. gently caress them, gently caress this honourable court, gently caress this gay earth" there'd still have to be a mandatory settlement conference, after which there'd have to be at least one or two more hearings before they could even get judgement, after which they'd have to enforce the judgement. If you make any attempt at all to defend it, it'll probably be more expensive to get the money than it's worth for them. However, if you do throw up a bunch of bullshit meritless roadblocks and they do get judgement, they can also get costs (where you have to pay their lawyer's fees), which would probably be well more than what the claim is worth. So ideally you want to make it hard enough that they settle, but not so hard that you get hit with costs. See if maybe there's a local poverty law clinic, advocate, or student run clinic around that can help you out. This is the kind of poo poo they do all day every day. Whatever you do don't take my awful worthless and not legal advice.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 04:57
|
|
|
Hey I'm at work so I can't trawl the thread currently, but I have a quick question. Basically, cheyenne Wyoming, Laramie county. I'm voiding my lease because I joined the military. There's a third person on my lease, if they want to be jerks they won't remove him thus no deposit for me. He moved out a few months ago, didn't have a job, I paid for him, is he my legal dependent and covered under the service etc relief act? I will provide more info when not on a lovely keyboard.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 00:10
|
|
|
Redfont posted:is he my legal dependent and covered under the service etc relief act? Are you married to him or is he your child>?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 00:56
|
|
|
I'm getting maintenance done on my 2004 civic SI. I asked in here and got some good advice and the repair shop came back with the following on our estimate. - Compressor clutch gap is "too big" and the compressor needs to be replaced. - Busted compressor fried an AC relay (thats what he called it) and that also needs to be replaced - AC is undercharged and needs to be emptied and recharged with new coolant The estimate parts and labor all inclusive is 1220. That's a good bit higher than I expected but then I have no real knowledge to give me accurate expectations. Does that sound reasonable to you guys?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 02:20
|
|
|
You might want to try AI instead. They know about cars. When you wanna sue the mechanic, tho, come right back here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 02:24
|
|
|
TheSpiritFox posted:I'm getting maintenance done on my 2004 civic SI. I asked in here and got some good advice and the repair shop came back with the following on our estimate. I know nothing of legal matters but I know a lot about cars and motorcycles and for the parts and labor you listed, that's not actually too high of a price. However, the compressor more than likely doesn't need to be replaced if the system is recharged and the relay replaced. Tell him you want the recharge and the relay and you honestly shouldn't be spending more than $200 and that's extreme top end (depending on the relay, they can cost $5 to $150).
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 02:24
|
|
|
Disclaimer: neither I nor anyone I know is a defendant in a criminal case, this question is completely out of curiosity. Can those little brown paper bags cashiers at the convenience store put your single beer in help you out legally in any way? I live in Texas, in which it's a misdemeanor (to the best of my knowledge) to have an open container in a vehicle or to consume alcohol outside of private property, even if you aren't intoxicated. If you're driving around drinking beer, or under the bridge drinking beer, does wrapping it in a brown paper bag provide you with some potential legal defense?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 04:30
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:You might want to try AI instead. They know about cars. Oh poo poo. Same tag wrong thread. I'm a dumbass.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 04:57
|
|
|
seacat posted:Disclaimer: neither I nor anyone I know is a defendant in a criminal case, this question is completely out of curiosity. Not a lawyer, but the label (contents, etc) not being in plain sight gives the brown bagger an expectation of privacy, so a cop can't just wrap off the bag and go "AHA!" Classic warrantless searches and seizures. Now, if the brown bagger take a sip and spits it in the cop's face or spills some on the ground, and the cop can tell that it's booze (because they tasted or smelled it). That would give the cop a compelling reason for a search into what you've been imbibing. So, in this case, the brown bag would provide the defese of... a brown bag. Also, I know there's a term for a cop preforming a legal search (and seizure) without a warrant, but I'm drawing a blank on it. Those are my two cents, lawgoons, do chime in if I'm wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 05:52
|
|
|
BirdOfPlay posted:Also, I know there's a term for a cop preforming a legal search (and seizure) without a warrant, but I'm drawing a blank on it. You're probably thinking of probable cause.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 06:07
|
|
|
Sefer posted:You're probably thinking of probable cause. What's considered probably cause in this case? I ask because one time I was with a friend who had a beer bottle in a paper bag, he twisted off the top, and cops immediately stopped him and searched him. He hadn't even taken a sip yet as far as I remember. Was this legal? Nothing came of it, I'd just like to know my rights.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 06:09
|
|
|
elisaaa posted:What's considered probably cause in this case? I ask because one time I was with a friend who had a beer bottle in a paper bag, he twisted off the top, and cops immediately stopped him and searched him. He hadn't even taken a sip yet as far as I remember. Was this legal? Nothing came of it, I'd just like to know my rights. I hate to say it at this point, I'd argue that drinking out of a paper bag is probably reasonable, articulable suspicion that someone is drinking alcohol. At that detention, they'd smell alcohol, and ahaha, PC!
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 06:19
|
|
|
Incredulous Red posted:Are you married to him or is he your child>? Neither of those things, but he can qualify as my dependent if he lived with me for over a year and he depended on me to pay for him to live, from what I understand. He didn't actually live in the apartment itself with me for a year, but he did live with me beforehand. It would be a pain to prove any of that, but basically how viable is it for me to say "I paid more than 50% of this person's living expenses for a year so take his name off the lease" to get my deposit back?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 06:27
|
|
|
Sefer posted:You're probably thinking of probable cause. I am. Was an idiot when I thought of that term and was like "that's what you need to prove to a judge to go and search some place, but what is it when you don't go to a judge?"  And, nm, just to check with what you're saying: It's see brown bag->go for a chat->smell alcohol->search with probable cause, right? Just checking cause I can see that and am fine with it, obvious from my earlier post. But the first few times I read your first sentence, it sounded like maybe just brown bagging it is probably cause at this point, which I would hope to not be the case. Redfont posted:Neither of those things, but he can qualify as my dependent if he lived with me for over a year and he depended on me to pay for him to live, from what I understand. He didn't actually live in the apartment itself with me for a year, but he did live with me beforehand. Since you keep calling him your dependent, was that his status on your tax return for any of the years in question? You and his tax returns could give you some solid proof of dependent status.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 06:46
|
|
|
If one is legally adopted, are they considered 'related' to the original family still? OR if it matters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 07:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:37 |
|
|
Javid posted:If one is legally adopted, are they considered 'related' to the original family still? OR if it matters. No, (the general rule is) adoption severs parental relations, which are the only legal relations you have with other members of your family. But for the real reason you asked that question, incest laws are based on blood links and not legal ties, so no, you cannot get adopted and then go gently caress your sister. I now know what kind of place Oregon is.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 08:40
|
|