|
Thermopyle posted:Say an employee hurts themselves doing an activity they've been instructed not to do. Generally, yes. http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C200-299/2870000120.HTM The rest of the Worker's Comp statutes are here, if you want to browse them. http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c287.htm
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2012 02:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 21:33 |
|
|
Yeah generally under WC "negligence" of the worker is not an issue. Whether the injury happened "in the course" of employment can be important.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2012 03:39
|
|
|
If someone commits a crime on an airplane flying from one state to the other, what law applies? The origin/destination? The airspace where the crime was committed? Federal law?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2012 04:36
|
|
|
IANAL, but I'm pretty sure that falls under Bird Law.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2012 04:51
|
|
|
Bold Robot posted:If someone commits a crime on an airplane flying from one state to the other, what law applies? The origin/destination? The airspace where the crime was committed? Federal law? I think everything that takes place once in the air in an airplane is federal law. But literally that knowledge comes from law & order, so...
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2012 05:18
|
|
|
This is like the worst civ pro exam question about personal jurisdiction for state misdemeanors committed while airborne.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2012 05:40
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:This is like the worst civ pro exam question about personal jurisdiction for state misdemeanors committed while airborne. Yeah, it came from class. We were talking about reasonable mistake of fact defenses for statutory rape: most states don't allow it but federal law does. The professor asked the class in what circumstances someone might actually be subject to federal statutory rape law. I suggested a plane flying over several states and the professor was not sure, so now I'm curious about it. For what it's worth, the correct answer was Indian country.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2012 05:48
|
|
|
I realize that I need to get a lawyer, and I'm working on it, but I thought I'd ask a few things here anyway. My marriage is over, but I'm the one who made the decision. If I had to pick an "official" reason I think it would be something like the classic "irreconcilable differences." I could write a loving book about the details, so I'll spare you. I'm facing a couple of difficulties right now: 1. She refuses to accept the reality that it is over, and as such she won't go along with any kind of separation. In the short term this means that even though we can't afford to maintain two households, she refuses to leave (not trying to be a dick but I make more than twice as much money as her and so I think she should be the one to leave, not me). 2. In the long term, she's also refused to agree to a divorce. A no-contest divorce is pretty easy to get in my state (Georgia), but if she won't sign it then that's another matter. I have not cheated on her, nor have I done anything else that would be considered by a judge as reasonable cause to find me at fault. I've been told that Georgia is a "no fault state" but I don't really know what that means. There is very little property or money to even decide about or split so that part should be pretty simple. She has a car that is in her name. I have a car that is in my name. We have a joint bank account but I'm going to change that as soon as possible. She has a full time job and makes enough money that I believe a judge would not find her to be left destitute by the divorce. We've been married since 3/11. I guess what I'm asking is, what should my next step be to protect myself and get out of this with minimal financial losses? Is there any way that I can compel her to leave our home? What should I avoid at this point to protect myself? I did write her a letter to make things final but it was very balanced and I softened it as much as I could, so I'm not worried about that letter coming out in court if it comes to that. Sorry for the long post. Edit: I realized that I didn't mention that she does in fact have more than one place she could go (family or friends) and live without rent or other cost for now. She just refuses to do it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2012 06:02
|
|
|
Hey, I have a few questions relating to a C misdeamoner charge and a C infraction I got over the weekend by Indiana Excise police. I was cited for transporting alcohol and for driving without headlights on after sunset. I actually did have my lights on, etc, but thats probably impossible to counter against the word of 2 officers. During the stop, I was asked for my registration as usual, but I couldn't find it right away because I was flustered. I had different registrations from years past, and while I was sorting through them, the officer just said "Give me that one, it looks newest" and took it. The only problem was that registration wasn't for the car I was driving, and was expired for 3 years anyway. On my citation, I have the wrong color/make/model/license plate, pretty much everything relating to the actual vehicle. My driver information is correct, and the officers took a picture of me, and my license plate. My only question, are there any grounds for dismissal since they knowingly took the wrong registration and wrote down the wrong information even though they could have easily have saw the difference from looking at the vehicle and the registration? I assume the pictures they took of me pretty much screw me, but getting it dropped due to a technical error would be lucky. I'm going to call a local traffic lawyer and ask about it but I just wanted some more information if possible. I don't think I will actually want to be represented by a lawyer, but then again, in total I'm facing up to $1500 in fines, 60 days in jail and 1 year suspension of my license. I'd rather only pay the headlight ticket or get it all dropped so I'm waiting to talk to a traffic lawyer. TheSpartacus fucked around with this message at 06:56 on Sep 2, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2012 06:28
|
|
|
Not legal advice, not your lawyer, and not licensed to practice in your state.Powdered Toast Man posted:I guess what I'm asking is, what should my next step be to protect myself and get out of this with minimal financial losses? Your attorney will have in-depth advice at your meeting. As a general precaution, it wouldn't hurt to make sure you have a copy of all your financial records in a safe place that only you (and your attorney, if applicable) knows about. Powdered Toast Man posted:Is there any way that I can compel her to leave our home? Barring a court order, I doubt she's obliged to move out anymore than you are. It's her home, too, after all. But I don't know if Georgia has any special laws about that. I suspect, though, that you may have to just grit your teeth and bear it until you two come to an agreement or the court orders either ownership to one party or a sale of the property. Powdered Toast Man posted:What should I avoid at this point to protect myself? Consult a lawyer ASAP. You don't have to retain his or her services, but $200 to $300 for an hour or so of professional advice for your specific scenario would likely be a wise investment.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2012 06:48
|
|
|
Edit: Nevermind, talk to a lawyer
Konstantin fucked around with this message at 14:00 on Sep 2, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2012 13:25
|
|
|
Powdered Toast Man posted:why_im_glad_i_dont_do_family_law.txt Don't transfer assets until you talk to a lawyer. Make sure you give him/her a copy of the letter you gave your wife. TheSpartacus posted:My only question, are there any grounds for dismissal since they knowingly took the wrong registration and wrote down the wrong information even though they could have easily have saw the difference from looking at the vehicle and the registration?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2012 14:46
|
|
|
.
FrozenVent fucked around with this message at 05:15 on Feb 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2012 19:56
|
|
|
I have a buddy that put down a (fairly substantial) deposit to a trade school. Trouble is that he may not be able to secure a loan to cover the tuition to the school. Setting aside the wisdom or foolishness of this decision, can anyone point me in the direction of legal theories that might allow my buddy to get his deposit back if he is not able to acquire loans sufficient to pay tuition? I'm thinking of something like frustration of purpose? I'm not getting paid for research into this legal issue and I don't expect anyone else to burn time, but if this strikes a chord with anyone in terms of familiarity I'd appreciate some direction.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2012 22:22
|
|
|
Hypothetical child support question (spoiler: captainscraps is involved in the argument): Someone argued that a father of an unwanted child could waive his rights to visitation and get out of paying child support in texas. Is this possible? My non-lawyer opinion is that the father could only avoid child support if the mother agrees to it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2012 00:30
|
|
|
Andy Dufresne posted:Someone argued that a father of an unwanted child could waive his rights to visitation and get out of paying child support in texas. Is this possible? My non-lawyer opinion is that the father could only avoid child support if the mother agrees to it. In my state (not TX), if mom and dad are unmarried and there's no petition for support / custody / visitation, mom's the custodial parent by default but dad won't have to pay child support. Dad could "waive" his rights in the sense that he never files court paperwork for enforceable parental rights (although mom always has the option to go after him). Every once in a while a family law client will want to establish custody or visitation until you let him know that the judge will order him to pay child support too (and the parties can't agree to waive it), at which point he changes his mind.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2012 00:49
|
|
|
Andy Dufresne posted:Hypothetical child support question (spoiler: captainscraps is involved in the argument): As I understand it once you have been adjudicated a parent you are pretty much stuck with paying support, and the only way to avoid it is to get genetic testing proving that you are not the father. So if you never had any rights in the first place and no one sues you, that is pretty much the only way. Even if your rights are terminated you can be ordered to pay DFPS. Not so sure how this works out in practice, this is just what I remember from BARBRI/working for DFPS.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2012 01:03
|
|
|
I am in a News Reporting class this semester and one of the assignments is to report on a criminal hearing. I am literally clueless here and my professor is one of those "ramble the entire class hour and say nothing related to the course other than when assignment X is due" types. I know this is going to sound retarded but I have never been to court a day in my life. Obviously I am planning on dressing formally, so I have that part down, but literally know nothing about court proceedings- Hell, I don't even know where I should sit. What should I expect, as someone who is acting as a member of the media? Would it be best to call and ask the clerk beforehand? The very idea of going to court as someone who has only ever had traffic tickets before makes me nervous so I don't want to screw up and make an idiot out of myself.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2012 01:18
|
|
|
SlenderWhore posted:I am in a News Reporting class this semester and one of the assignments is to report on a criminal hearing. I am literally clueless here and my professor is one of those "ramble the entire class hour and say nothing related to the course other than when assignment X is due" types. If you're in the US, court proceedings are open to the public. Anyone can go. They clearly have an audience area, just don't go beyond the "bar" (really obvious). Dress nice, turn off your cell phone, and it might be worth it to look at the court calender to see who's in trial because watching pre-trials and arraignments will bore you to tears.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2012 01:39
|
|
|
Andy Dufresne posted:Hypothetical child support question (spoiler: captainscraps is involved in the argument): Even if the law is that she can agree, if she's getting government assistance, the state can still go after him (to pay back the state for what it's paying for the kid.) SlenderWhore posted:I am in a News Reporting class this semester and one of the assignments is to report on a criminal hearing. To add to what nm said, call the district attorney or the public defender's office and tell them what you're doing and ask if they could recommend a particular hearing/trial. Or you could call the clerk and ask the same thing. If there aren't any trials going on, ask in what courtrooms(s) preliminary hearings are held, and when. (Assuming you're still in OH) joat mon fucked around with this message at 02:38 on Sep 3, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2012 02:30
|
|
|
 What kind of special handling applies to a set of conjoined twins? Say the twins are stopped by police and they find an illegal substance in their left pants pocket. Are they both liable? If only one is liable, and they are found guilty, could they be sent to jail with their innocent twin? If they took a job at McDonalds, would they have to be each payed at least minimum wage?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2012 04:19
|
|
|
Feces Starship posted:I have a buddy that put down a (fairly substantial) deposit to a trade school. SlenderWhore posted:I am in a News Reporting class this semester
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2012 04:21
|
|
|
Guy Axlerod posted:What kind of special handling applies to a set of conjoined twins? There's very little case law on this subject for obvious reasons, but you're in luck! Some dude with a law degree wrote an essay on the subject of conjoined twins in criminal law. His conclusion is that in the US, at least, you couldn't do anything that would have the effect of punishing the innocent twin. That assumes that one twin is found not guilty, of course.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2012 12:01
|
|
|
Thuryl posted:There's very little case law on this subject for obvious reasons, but you're in luck! Some dude with a law degree wrote an essay on the subject of conjoined twins in criminal law. His conclusion is that in the US, at least, you couldn't do anything that would have the effect of punishing the innocent twin. That assumes that one twin is found not guilty, of course. I found the case of those twins to be very interesting, because they 'break' a lot of systems. For example, they have 2 driving licenses, but both 'DL holders' need to be simultaneously in charge of a motor vehicle. Do they both need to carry insurance?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2012 12:34
|
|
|
spog posted:I found the case of those twins to be very interesting, because they 'break' a lot of systems. The only way they could conceivably pass a driving test is at the same time anyway. I doubt they could pass though, neither of them would be fully in control of the vehicle.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2012 12:51
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:The only way they could conceivably pass a driving test is at the same time anyway. That part wasn't a hypothetical: those twins did in fact pass their driving tests. Apparently they had to do it twice, and one test counted for one twin's licence and the other test counted for the other twin. In practice they have to work together to operate the vehicle anyway, though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2012 13:11
|
|
|
Looking for advice legal goons: Story: I am a 26 year old male in a large college town (so housing is hard to find). Last year I signed a lease for a room in a house owned by a guy a couple years older than me. We got along so-so. After my lease was up (this past july) he said that I could stay in the room on a by month basis which I have been doing. A few months ago he bought a golden retriever puppy without mentioning it to me, for a while it was fine but the dog is now large and completely untrained. When the dog is out of its cage myself and the 2 other tenants are confined to our rooms because if you are in a common area you are fending off an 80 pound jumping, drooling, pissing animal. My hands and arms are clawed all over, and my chest has 2 sets of giant claw marks 14 inches long from the dog jumping up on its hind legs and raking my torso. I do my best to control the animal but am concerned about beating someone elses dog. The owner of the house/dog will just sit on the couch while his pet assaults his tenants. I jokingly said to the new tenant that we gotta try to get the mutt under control and the owner snapped at me and said "WELL THEN loving HELP". Any time I try to talk to the owner about it I get bitched at about not helping to train it and then storms off to his room for the next day and a half. Now obviously I am on a month to month agreement and can GTFO anytime I want, the issue is due to the time of the year finding another place to live is nearly impossible and I have to stay near where I currently am for work. I am also very concerned what kind of possible drama I could get wrapped up in if the dog decides to shove me down a flight of stairs (which has nearly happened several times). I am just looking to find a way to handle this as maturely as possible while not jeopardizing my job by having to leave the area.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 02:19
|
|
|
What's your legal question? You're on month-to-month, you can stay or leave. If you put it to the owner that it's the dog or you, he'd pick the dog. So I dunno what to tell you...
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 02:28
|
|
|
Yeah, get a new place then leave.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 04:59
|
|
|
So looking for some info on a disability discrimination issue that I've had with some local company. To start off, a month ago, I applied to a company that was asking for a potential candidate to do a "Technical Support" job that was paying $15 an hour off Craig's List. I was kind of in a frantic situation where I needed a job since I had buttloads of debt to pay off since I'm married and I thought I was well qualified for the job. I shot off my resume to the email address and got a response back a day later which turned out to be a local company thankfully since a lot of them are just straight up scams. They asked me some basic info like how long I would be available to work for them and then asked me a preliminary question in order to weed out candidates which was your standard troubleshooting question. They were satisfied with the response and then asked me to do a telephone interview. This set off an alarm in my head thinking it wasn't a local company at all and I asked to clarify their response why they wanted to do a telephone interview and they assured me that they were a local warehouse in town. I checked that to be true since they are right down the highway from me. So I informed them I couldn't do a telephone interview since I am hearing-impaired and that makes communication extremely difficult which I asked to do an in-person interview with them. They proceeded to cease all communications with me which that declared to me that they were not going to consider me as a candidate for the job they were looking to fill. Flash forward to a week back, I filed a complaint with the Human Rights Commission of Idaho stating that I feel I have been discriminated against based on my disability. Right now the HRC did file a case against the company pending my signature on some legal documents which is in the mail right now. According the legal documents filed by the HRC for me, it stated that "I believe the practices of the above-named Respondent are in violation of: Title 67, Chapter 59 of the Idaho Code & Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)" Right now, I'm awaiting the process to take place whatever the hell it's supposed to be. On one document that I got, it talks about how I may be entitled to damages for loss of back pay but I never was hired though? Does anyone have an idea of what I should expect in terms of assessing damages? I was expecting to work for this company if hired for at least 12 months since they wanted me that long. Am I to assume that I faced a loss of at least $30,000 since they made their decision not to hire because on my disability? I never sought out any legal action in the first place since I was just looking for a job and got this treatment instead.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 05:19
|
|
|
nm posted:If you're in the US, court proceedings are open to the public. Anyone can go. They clearly have an audience area, just don't go beyond the "bar" (really obvious). Be on your toes for an "all rise" because those judges like to make a speedy exit sometimes. Also, if you want bang for your buck, smaller courts will have more exiting stuff like A punched B's wife in a bar fight or something, and unless it is a murder trial, the bigger courts will probably be stuff like "Judge Y misdirected jury on the aspects of self defence" or something.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 06:58
|
|
|
Kaitian posted:So looking for some info on a disability discrimination issue that I've had with some local company. It could be that the job requires you to perform technical support over the phone as an essential function, and they will probably argue that this is the case, although they should have told you that up front. Here's another situation I am curious about. At a local deli I frequent, there is a sign that advertises a line of under 300 calorie sandwiches that they sell. It has fine print that says "calorie figures are for standard dress without cheese or condiments" but it has large pictures of sandwiches that clearly have cheese on them. Does this count as deceptive advertising?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 14:36
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:It could be that the job requires you to perform technical support over the phone as an essential function, and they will probably argue that this is the case, although they should have told you that up front. I agree with this assessment. Also initial telephone interviews for every job are routine now. In my experience.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 14:40
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:It could be that the job requires you to perform technical support over the phone as an essential function, and they will probably argue that this is the case, although they should have told you that up front. euphronius posted:I agree with this assessment. Kaitian fucked around with this message at 17:04 on Sep 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 16:59
|
|
|
Kaitian posted:
I don't know what law you are reading but American disability discrimination law does not say that at all. Using your sentence, it would be more correct to say that "certain employers must reasonably accommodate candidates" To address the rest of your post: The candidate or the employee does not get to dictate accommodations. euphronius fucked around with this message at 17:56 on Sep 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 17:50
|
|
|
Kaitian posted:They proceeded to cease all communications with me which that declared to me that they were not going to consider me as a candidate for the job they were looking to fill. I'm not saying you were treated right or wrong, but discrimination can be very difficult to prove. I wouldn't expect much to come of it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 18:05
|
|
|
euphronius posted:I don't know what law you are reading but American disability discrimination law does not say that at all. Actually I'm going by Idaho Code. Also the ADA does say this contrary to your thoughts about it. http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/jobapplicant.html quote:1. I have a disability and will need an accommodation for the job interview. Does the ADA require an employer to provide me with one? So the job interviewer was wrong to refuse to grant me an in-person interview since they are right down the road and it was not unreasonable for them to do so. Hell, they could have conducted the interview in a fast food restaurant if the workplace was unsafe for job candidates.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 18:07
|
|
|
No I am right and you are not reading it correctly. First the ADA does not apply to all employers. 2nd, as I mentioned, they must only make reasonable accommodations. You yourself posted a quote which makes this exact point. Again your statement was quote:However the law states that all companies must accommodate all potential candidates, This is not true, as your own quotes show. Lastly, I will mention again that the candidate/employee does not dictate or determine what the reasonable accommodation is. The employer does. euphronius fucked around with this message at 18:15 on Sep 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 18:12
|
|
|
euphronius posted:No I am right and you are not reading it correctly. First the ADA does not apply to all employers. 2nd, as I mentioned, they must only make reasonable accommodations. You yourself posted a quote which makes this exact point. So, you're saying that the employer can determine what kind of qualifications and hurdles I must meet in order to get the job interview especially when I met their job qualifications anyways? Especially when they asked me why I couldn't do the telephone interview and I gave my response that I was hearing-impaired. Sorry, but you're wrong. I asked for an in-person interview and they did not give one. Even the Human Rights Commission investigator & Attorney General's office of Idaho AGREES that they discriminated against me. Another thing, you're wrong about the reasonable accommodation. The candidate/employee has every right to request reasonable accommodation and the employer can work to provide those reasonable accommodation. Some woman got fired from Wal-mart a while back because she has CP and needed occasional temporary breaks off her feet which was reasonable by any standard. She requested that and they didn't care so they fired her. Are you just trolling here or just hilariously bad at this information? Kaitian fucked around with this message at 18:55 on Sep 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 18:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 21:33 |
|
|
I never said those things. You posted a statement that was wrong and I corrected you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 18:54
|
|