|
Going to meet with the school lawyer tomorrow, regarding an insurance case. My apartment building burned down in March, after my downstairs neighbor neglected to properly dispose of a cigarette on her patio. That neighbor happened to have liability insurance, and they contacted us to get our information about how much we would be pursuing. In July the woman I had been talking to told me that they were waiting to hear if one party was going to make a claim, and then they would start writing settlement checks. Then in August she told me that the party, our building's insurer, had decided to bring a 1 million dollar claim against the 300k policy. In Illinois there is some case law indicating that tenants are coinsured under property insurance policies, and so cannot be held liable for repaying the insurance company. However, the building was going ahead with their claim. I hadn't gotten an update for a few months and decided to check in. The woman I had been dealing with is no longer with that company. The new woman that's handling the claim told me that the building's insurance company has asked to enter arbitration and has agreed to a 100k max settlement out of arbitration. She said that they would be doing this in about 6 months. She also said that they're considering fighting the claim entirely, which may mean that there will be no settlement for anyone. Finally, she indicated that they cannot settle until the arbitration is complete, even though it sounds like all of the building occupants' claims are less than $200k. We don't have any of the fire investigation reports. Our insurance company wrote one up, and I'm sure they would press back if it looked like they wouldn't get their settlement. What should I bring to the lawyer appointment tomorrow? I printed out all of my emails with the insurance women, including the one where I was told that they'd be writing the settlement check soon. I also printed out the documents I sent them. Should I bring a copy of my lease? Anything else? I'm so nervous about this whole thing. We lost about $25k more than we were insured for, and it would be really nice to get some of that back, since we had to run up our credit cards to replace the stuff we lost.
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2012 21:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:08 |
|
|
I don't know what to do here. I live in ne and work in ia. I have been sick with something that my pcp, a surgeon, and radiologist have been unable to diagnose or to effectively treat. Yesterday I bought myself an ambulance ride. When I got home I called work to let them know what was going on and to let them know I wouldn't be in today. This morning I am called by my immediate supervisor and she tells me the store manager insists I have no sick time available. According to the benefit info I have at home and another manager looking up my info, I have sick hours available to cover this shift. Since he believes I have no sick time available, the store manager is going to write me up for the absence. The only way the info I have would not be correct is if I have used a sick day in the last 2 weeks. I don't believe I have. My immediate supervisor cannot tell me when this other day was taken. Also, I have no idea where the information that the store manager has is coming from. My immediate supervisor either can't or won't tell me. Last week I traded shifts with another employee to cover time I needed for a procedure. I didn't use any pto on this day because we each worked the same number of hours that week that we would have if we worked our original shifts. I also informed my immediate supervisor of the intended swap and asked her if that was alright. She said it was. I'm concerned our payroll person might have put me in for a sick day there where it was neither needed nor asked for. I haven't yet been paid for that period. This company is huge. I have worked for them for 8 and a half years, I am a good worker and consistently get good reviews, I've never been written up once. I'm bewildered by all of this. Apart from filing for fmla coverage, I don't know what to do next. The store manager has had several complaints filed against him for the way he treats employees. I don't want to get myself in a position where I'm being forced to come to work just so I won't lose my job, because the state licensing body can discipline me for coming in under the influence of the drugs I've been prescribed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2012 22:33
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:I don't want to get myself in a position where I'm being forced to come to work just so I won't lose my job, because the state licensing body can discipline me for coming in under the influence of the drugs I've been prescribed. If this is the case, then don't go in. It will be much easier (and probably less harmful to your long-term career prospects) to fight against a write-up and any subsequent disciplinary actions with a legitimate medical issue and the fact that the state says you cannot perform your job while taking your prescription than it would be to explain to the state that you just had to go to work under the influence of a prescription medication in violation of their rules because your boss was going to write you up otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 01:15
|
|
|
I live in Los Angeles. My wife was ticketed for crossing at a crosswalk after it had changed from the walking man to the flashing hand (which we have in LA, not the stop hand). She claims she honestly can't remember the moment she crossed (whether it was still a walking man or had already changed) but it absolutely wasn't a DONT CROSS sign and she didn't have to even jog to cross to make it in time. There was a cop posted on the side she walked from -- he yelled at her to come back over, and he cited her immediately for an illegal crossing. She said he wouldn't explain anything and the ticket was 200 dollars. According to a shop owner who saw the whole thing, the cop posts there every week and hands out citations like candy. The law is the law, but if you've ever lived in LA you understand this seems even more ridiculous in light of the city's troubles and with the pedestrian etiquette in the city (none), not to mention an exorbitant fee. She's heard horror stories from coworkers about showing up to the downtown court all day just to defend the ticket, so she asked for a written declaration. Any advice on what she should put down? tl;dr : wife ticketed for crossing at crosswalk during the flashing hand sign. Advice for a written declaration?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 01:45
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:I don't know what to do here. I live in ne and work in ia. I have been sick with something that my pcp, a surgeon, and radiologist have been unable to diagnose or to effectively treat. FMLA should protect you here. I'd consult counsel or your union (ha!) ASAP.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 01:54
|
|
|
Cocoa Ninja posted:Any advice on what she should put down? What law was cited on the ticket.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 02:00
|
|
|
xxEightxx posted:What law was cited on the ticket. 21456(b)vc. And while this has no bearing on the case, part of what makes this so ridiculous is that these cross walks show the walking man for about one to two full seconds, then IMMEDIATELY go to flashing hand and count down anywhere from 15-20 seconds. I have never in my life seen anyone post up on a street corner, wait for the countdown and another light cycle, THEN cross. I understand why outright jaywalking is an issue (and remember two girls being killed at college because of it) but this doesn't seem to be a public safety issue, just an easy ticket issue that preys on people following the spirit but not the letter of the law. /rant Cocoa Ninja fucked around with this message at 06:37 on Nov 13, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 06:29
|
|
|
Cocoa Ninja posted:this doesn't seem to be a public safety issue, just an easy ticket issue that preys on people following the spirit but not the letter of the law. /rant Welcome to the law enforcement of the last 30 years. Unfortunately, the law is pretty clear on this point. In any event, contesting in writing can't hurt. Unlike an in court testimony, the cop apparently doesn't get court time so he may just not respond. You should write the city traffic department though regarding the signal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 08:30
|
|
|
nm posted:Welcome to the law enforcement of the last 30 years. Unfortunately, the law is pretty clear on this point. Yeah, that was my hope too, if he hands out dozens of these a week. I appreciate your time, sounds like it's a lost cause. But we must fight (in writing), because today is not the day that the courage of men fails! 
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 08:49
|
|
|
Cocoa Ninja posted:Yeah, that was my hope too, if he hands out dozens of these a week. The fight against strict liability must continue!
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 11:36
|
|
|
nm posted:FMLA should protect you here. I'd consult counsel or your union (ha!) ASAP. I also think FMLA may apply.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 15:09
|
|
|
Cocoa Ninja posted:21456(b)vc. Not your attorney, not legal advice. Presuming your wife did not make statements to the officer to the contrary, only argument you have is that she started to cross when the crossing signal indicated walk. Due to the police officer's vantage point and the how fast the crossing signal changes from walk to flashing don't walk, it is easy to make a mistake. Go back to the scene, take some measurements of how long the signal displays walk until switching to don't walk, and mark where the police officer's vantage point is and see if you can use those facts to bolster your argument. Call the police officer a police officer, not a cop. Any discussion about the spirit of the law, or the "real" purpose of the law won't get you anywhere. For every argument about the lack of any hazardous situation from the crossing, or a the fact that LA needs money because it just voted to kick a billion dollar industry out of town, can be met equally by an argument about the cost to the Fire dept. scraping body parts off a roadway, and crime prevention, since theieves often jaywalk you see.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 19:10
|
|
|
I'm a homeowner in Baltimore City. Someone bought the vacant house next door as a rehab project and found out that the basement leaks like crazy when it rains where her property abuts our patio. What is my liability here, generally? We recently regraded our brick patio, partly in response to her complaints. We were planning on doing this anyway, so it was really just a matter of doing it sooner than we originally planned. It stopped the leaks for a while, but after the recent hurricane, they're back. It is currently laid with polymeric sand rather than mortar. She is now asking us to have a brick mason relay all of the bricks with mortar so that her basement will stop leaking completely (at our cost). I feel she should have her basement waterproofed first, since there is another neighbor another 15 feet away (the lots in the city are pretty narrow where we live) that could raise the water table and flood her basement again anyway, regardless of what we have done to our property. I'd be willing to talk to an attorney here locally if I knew what specialty to look for.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 19:23
|
|
|
xxEightxx posted:Go back to the scene, take some measurements of how long the signal displays walk until switching to don't walk, and mark where the police officer's vantage point is and see if you can use those facts to bolster your argument. Call the police officer a police officer, not a cop. Does anyone know if traffic signal patterns are publicly available to people who know the right place to make a request?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 20:00
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:Does anyone know if traffic signal patterns are publicly available to people who know the right place to make a request? This depends entirely on where you are.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 20:03
|
|
|
In my local area every time there is an accident where a signal may be an issue they send someone out after the fact to see if they are functioning. That info could probably be had by subpoena.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 20:14
|
|
|
gold brick posted:I'm a homeowner in Baltimore City. Someone bought the vacant house next door as a rehab project and found out that the basement leaks like crazy when it rains where her property abuts our patio. What is my liability here, generally? Check your city building code to see your responsibility. If your property discharges water within the code, it is not your responsibility to fix it for your neighbors basement. It would be really unusual for your city to mandate that you have no permeable area in order to protect your neighbors basement. Completely sealing your patio would just send more water to wherever you are discharging. Think about it this way: if you are not mandated to completely seal your yard (as in, could your patio be grass if you wanted it to be) , any pavement you have only reduces the infiltration of water. Now, if your patio slopes toward your neighbors property line, and you have a ditch or French drain that encourages infiltration there, you might have an issue. But still, if you are within code you should be fine. One thing to check: your patio may have been in compliance when it was originally built. But in most places, since you made improvements to that area, it now has to meet any changes to the code made in the meantime. You may have requirements such as collecting runoff and routing it to your storm water system, although that is unusual for residential units except in very dense urban areas.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 20:33
|
|
|
MD attorney here - gold brick, I don't do that sort of property law but have brother counsel who do. Shoot me an PM and we can talk.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 20:58
|
|
|
loving New Jersey. I seem to be in a pickle regarding a car accident I was involved in last year. It took place in New Jersey, it was 0% my fault, I was injured with $2,500 in medical bills, two months out of work and $15,000 worth of damage was done to my 6 month old sports car. The Accident: I was driving home from New Hampshire (family lives there) to Virginia (where I live.) On the New Jersey turnpike, I ended up stopped in traffic in the rain. After being stopped for about 90 seconds, I was struck from behind by a driver who had fallen asleep at the wheel. He was probably traveling upwards of 45MPH. I knew immediately that I was injured, but not badly enough to require an ambulance. Aftermath: The car (2012 Mustang bought just six months prior) needed $15,000+ in repairs. I was diagnosed with severe whiplash ("you sprained or tore everything between your butt and your skull.") I was completely out of commission for about seven weeks. When I returned to work I was on a lifting restriction (20Lbs) for about two months. My medical bills totaled $2,500. I cook for a living, so my job is quite physically demanding. As an example of the physical pain that resulted from the accident, riding the subway was excruciating for weeks due to the fact that I had damaged the muscles in my back so badly that stabilizing my spine when the train accelerated and decelerated was horribly painful. complicating factors: I was between jobs when the accident occurred. My husband is in the Army and we had just been reassigned to a new duty station at the beginning of December. We were still living in a hotel. I would have been looking for work the day after the accident, had it not occurred. In my industry (foodservice) it is very easy for someone with my credentials and experience to find work. When I was finally ready to work, I was hired within 48 hours of the job opening being posted. I received only chiropractic care. I was evaluated in an Army ER the day after the accident, and since my x-rays didn't show any slipped discs or broken bones, the doctor endorsed my decision to seek chiropractic care. My chiropractor has a great reputation, has been in practice a long time, and is very conservative. The Icing: Apparently, in New Jersey, they have a limitation of liability law that states that NJ residents have to choose between no limitation of liability (expensive) or limitation of liability (cheap) Limitation of liability means that basically, unless you're permanently disabled, you can't sue for any kind of damages. But I don't have NJ insurance! I have insurance through USAA in Virginia! No fuckin' dice. As became precedent with Whitaker V. DeVilla, if your insurer is authorized to provide insurance in NJ, you are subject to limited liability laws EVEN THOUGH YOU PAID for unlimited liability in your state. Which I did. This is not fair, and not okay. Now, the insurance company of the person who hit me HAS offered me an amount for pain and suffering. This amount is nowhere near my lost wages. If the accident had taken place anywhere but NJ, I would be entitled to: ~7k for diminished value to my car. ~6k lost wages. Some amount for pain and suffering. What I think: The insurance company wouldn't have offered me squat if they were 100% sure that I was entitled to nothing. I might need a lawyer. Can anyone give me any insight to this aspect of NJ insurance law? It boggles my mind that I can pay for a feature in my auto insurance (no limitation of liability) and have that be null and void if I am innocently involved in an accident in a certain state. What recourse do I have here?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 00:04
|
|
|
You clearly have the means to at least consult with a lawyer, and understand that it would probably be a benefit to you to do so. Not sure what other answer you're looking for
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 03:53
|
|
|
So, this isn't really about a situation I'm in, it's more of a theory question that I've been thinking about a bit (and has seen some discussion elsewhere on the forums where relevant). There's an anime series, currently ongoing, named JoJo's Bizarre Adventure. About half to 75% of the unique names in the show (characters, places, attacks) are references to classic rock music, and often really blatant ones like a character being named Robert E.O. Speedwagon. In previous related works that have been brought to the US, all of the music-related names have been changed, and whenever the subject of the current series getting licensed comes up in the ADTRW thread people mention that being a legal requirement. Is it something that's legally required of the licensors? I'm pretty sure naming a character, place, attack, or what have you after a musician or song is fair use, but IANAL and I'd like some clarification from somebody who is to ease my curiosity.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 07:53
|
|
|
I haven't seen the anime, but in general things like that are okay unless they give the impression that the celebrity endorses or is involved with the work.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 08:18
|
|
|
Generally speaking, words and short phrases can't be copyrighted. That excludes most song titles from protection, and indeed you see songs with the same title all the time. That leaves trademark protection. A trademark identifies the source of goods and services and distinguishes them from other goods and services--think the name Xerox, the Coca-Cola font, the color brown (UPS). Usually, trademark is only an issue if there is some risk of the consumer confusing your goods/services with those of the trademark holder. So for example, using the color brown doesn't infringe on UPS's trademark unless you use it in connection with shipping services. I don't think anyone is very likely to confuse a JoJo manga with a Cars album, or think they're somehow affiliated. However, there's a somewhat newish doctrine (at least, its widespread use is relatively new) called initial interest confusion, which allows trademark liability if consumers are drawn to the infringer's product by the trademark holder's goodwill. Example: I make an anime called Something Awful Offline, it comes up on Google searches for something else, and people check it out because of the name. Even if the consumer's confusion is clarified before he actually buys anything, the infringer has still diverted potential business; he's still used the goodwill associated with the mark for his own benefit (even if that benefit is just getting the consumer in the door.) So goes the theory, anyway. I still think any actual case against JoJo's use of homage would be weak, but under initial interest confusion, the possibility is there. And a possibility is enough for risk-averse companies to cover their asses.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 08:40
|
|
|
terrorist ambulance posted:You clearly have the means to at least consult with a lawyer, and understand that it would probably be a benefit to you to do so. Not sure what other answer you're looking for Sorry, I should have been more clear. I want to know if there's anyone here who knows anything about NJ insurance law that can tell me if I'm completely wasting my time and effort trying to find my way around that stupid limitation of liability law.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 10:59
|
|
|
In a single party state (MN) is there anything at all illegal about recording a co-worker during a private one-on-one meeting where the person recording is one of the two involved in the meeting to gather evidence that the co-worker is doing something that is against company rules, but not illegal? I'm wondering if the evidence causes the co-worker to get fired, will the co-worker have any legal claim against the person who recorded them?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 13:58
|
|
|
Bro Enlai posted:Generally speaking, words and short phrases can't be copyrighted. That excludes most song titles from protection, and indeed you see songs with the same title all the time. I think trademark dilution is probably the more applicable doctrine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 14:03
|
|
|
Baruch Obamawitz posted:I think trademark dilution is probably the more applicable doctrine. Listen to this guy, he works for the USPTO
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 18:09
|
|
|
Bro Enlai posted:Listen to this guy, he works for the USPTO I don't do trademarks, that's just from my trademark law class six years ago.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 20:25
|
|
|
AnonymousNarcotics posted:I'm trying to read up on ADA/Equal Opportunity stuff but it's somewhat hard to understand for a non-lawyer type like me. Reposting this because I didn't get any responses. Does anyone know what employers do with this type of information such as an employee having a history of treatment for substance abuse?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 22:27
|
|
|
Having a drug addition or being in recovery is not necessarily a disability under the ADA. Moreover, even if it were a disability, and employer could still discriminate against someone with it as long as they can prove accommodating that person would cause undue hardship. HIPPA prevents disclosure of medical information without your consent, generally. euphronius fucked around with this message at 22:59 on Nov 14, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 22:56
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Having a drug addition or being in recovery is not necessarily a disability under the ADA. Moreover, even if it were a disability, and employer could still discriminate against someone with it as long as they can prove accommodating that person would cause undue hardship. It is. Bolding mine. quote:May an employer ask applicants about their prior illegal drug (from http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/preemp.html) And I don't need any accommodations. So basically I can't do anything about possibly being denied the job because of my medical history, but if I am I can file a claim? Sucks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2012 00:52
|
|
|
This September, my partner and I moved into a new apartment in a building that we judged to be fairly nice (turns out it's one step away from being a crackhouse) and in a relatively safe area (far from the truth). Because of my student loan debt, the rental agency required a double security deposit, which we agreed to because it was the only place we could find that fit our requirements. Now, we need break our lease. The weird thing is that there is nothing whatsoever in our 22-page lease about what happens to our security deposit if we break the lease. There's actually nothing at all about the tenants breaking the lease, other than a section about property that has been left in the apartment for 30 days after rent has not been paid for the month. So our question, is whether we can use the terms (or rather, lack of terms) of the lease to demand that our security deposit be returned. Is it possible that there is a law that applies to apartment tenancy in our state (New York) that holds tenants who break a lease responsible for fees by default?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2012 01:23
|
|
|
Ran across something weird today and I did a little research on my own but thought I would ask for contributions from my fellow attorneys. If an employer writes "paid under protest" in the memo line on a final paycheck, does this have any legal significance? Some limited research has suggested this is only applicable in a tax context when allowed by statute or procedure, or when accepting less than full payment of an amount owed when making out the endorsement. edited to add I have been told by payee it is the full and correct amount, so... 
Dogen fucked around with this message at 01:36 on Nov 15, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2012 01:28
|
|
|
Dogen posted:Ran across something weird today and I did a little research on my own but thought I would ask for contributions from my fellow attorneys. Outside of law school hypos about the UCC and disputed amounts owed, I cannot imagine what force if any it has. Maybe the employer is reserving its rights to challenge that they owe that much?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2012 03:23
|
|
|
Maybe the employer was robbed, and the Robin Hood style thieves wouldn't leave until the employer paid their debts to employees, and that was a cry for help. You should call the police. (Actually I guess it has no legal bearing as magic words, but it'd help if the check was ever used against the employer as an admission)
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2012 03:27
|
|
|
woozle wuzzle posted:(Actually I guess it has no legal bearing as magic words, but it'd help if the check was ever used against the employer as an admission) In some jurisdictions (mostly in the tax or UCC context), a payment made "under protest" cannot be considered a "voluntary payment" for application of the voluntary payment doctrine, which otherwise has a nasty tendency to stop recovery of an overpayment. See: http://www.cityofsanmateo.org/index.aspx?NID=375 http://www.qcode.us/codes/redondobeach/view.php?topic=5-2-2-5_2_213&frames=on http://www.tax.ny.gov/pubs_and_bulls/orpts/legal_opinions/v6/09.htm http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/article1.htm But see: http://www.lexisnexis.com/community...-agreement.aspx
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2012 04:23
|
|
|
AnonymousNarcotics posted:It is. Bolding mine. I don't know why you think that contradicted what I wrote. I am confused. Also that source is hilariously old and I would not rely on it without legal advice to help you. Just a warning.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2012 12:52
|
|
|
woozle wuzzle posted:Maybe the employer was robbed, and the Robin Hood style thieves wouldn't leave until the employer paid their debts to employees, and that was a cry for help. You should call the police. Like how my wireless network is named "TrappedInWirelessFactorySendHelp"? Anyway, yeah it sounds like (much as I suspected) in an employment law context that this is pretty meaningless. Thanks guys. I hate the kind of research when a crazy person does something crazy and I can't figure out what it is they are even trying to accomplish.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2012 14:01
|
|
|
Dogen posted:Like how my wireless network is named "TrappedInWirelessFactorySendHelp"? You may as well respond to crazy with crazy. Write them a letter telling them that you received the cheque, but due to your status as a free citizen of the land, "paid under protest" has no meaning if written on a cheque and must instead be sent separately in a wax-sealed envelope carried by horsemen.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2012 09:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:08 |
|
|
UT code 57-17-4 ( http://le.utah.gov/code/TITLE57/htm/57_17_000400.htm ): The holder of the owner's or designated agent's interest in the premises at the time of termination of the tenancy shall be bound by the provisions of this act. Will someone please explain what is alluded by the "interest in the premises"?
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2012 03:07
|
|