|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:I WAS going to ask what you guys do when someone is convinced that they're right, even though you're the one who went to law school. You can also ask for a huge retainer. That usually gets the message across. And it isn't even really about going to law school. It is about practicing law and knowing what works and what does and doesn't what the likelihood of success is. euphronius fucked around with this message at 13:00 on Dec 1, 2012 |
#
?
Dec 1, 2012 12:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:16 |
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:I WAS going to ask what you guys do when someone is convinced that they're right, even though you're the one who went to law school. I have the advantage of working for a government department, not in private practice, so the usual answer for me is to say "Sorry, that's my decision on this, for the reasons I've given you. If you don't agree with the decision, you can have it judicially reviewed by the court. If you don't like the way we dealt with you, here's our complaints system, starting with my manager." Some of them complain, but they almost invariably disappear when my manager tells them that he's not upholding it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2012 14:21
|
|
|
I was watching the Wire, and I was wondering how does Maryland handle "Life" imprisonment? Is that 25 years? What is the ballpark for Life, no parole? Mass-murderer? Or less than that?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2012 15:05
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:I WAS going to ask what you guys do when someone is convinced that they're right, even though you're the one who went to law school. You tell them, "You have every right to testify in your defense, but it is probably not a good idea to admit that you were driving, that you were drunk, and that you were swerving between lanes, just so you can accuse the white cop and the 'little goomba' cop (who is Hispanic) of a giant racist conspiracy against you."
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2012 18:36
|
|
|
BgRdMchne posted:You tell them, "You have every right to testify in your defense, but it is probably not a good idea to admit that you were driving, that you were drunk, and that you were swerving between lanes, just so you can accuse the white cop and the 'little goomba' cop (who is Hispanic) of a giant racist conspiracy against you." This is as interesting to me because our office doesn't do any work that involves court work - we see the occasional nut in every branch of work, but the main source of our drama comes from the estate department, where we get to listen to people who are pissed at an executor try and redefine a will according to how they think it should go, based on such credible sources as the internet, a friend of a friend, the guy at the coffee shop whose uncle is a lawyer, and their own unerring instinct that dear Aunt Petunia most definitely meant to leave them all her money and obviously was evilly and cruelly influenced by the six national charities she chose to leave it to instead. Yeah, no, obviously Doctors Without Borders totally dragged your loving aunt, whom you admit you haven't spoken to in forty years, into a back room somewhere and forced her to sign this will. Yes, I'm sure we *will* be hearing from your lawyers. We'll be more than happy to introduce them to the charity's lawyers. On a serious note, it does get really frustrating sometimes to see how petty people get over the smallest of estates, even when a will is perfectly fair and splits things evenly, even and especially against their own family members. Death really does bring out the dicks in families.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2012 20:30
|
|
|
Based on this case or anything else: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/11/wiseguys-plead-guilty/ Is it basically always a bad idea and/or outright illegal bypass CAPTCHAs in software I write via a service like deathbycaptcha.com, without permission from whoever is using the captchas? Does it make a difference if this is not being done in a way that ultimately exploits consumers (as in the linked case) or the site whose captchas I'd be bypassing? They would probably never sue me otherwise because they would benefit from my software and I'm not really abusing the servers or anything, and if they told me to stop or blocked my ip address or whatever I would give up with no struggle. There are no plans for any sort of revenue being generated for me from such software. Would it make a difference if there were? I'm going to get a real lawyer soon, just wondering if this is an obvious "HOLY poo poo STOP DOING THIS AT ONCE YOU FOOL" or "there are currently so many people probably doing this with more malicious intentions that there's probably nothing to worry about for the short term" Edit: to summarize the article, these guys were basically using web bots and breaking CAPTCHAs to buy tickets to concerts and stuff and resell them on a large scale and made a ton of money. The most troubling line is this: "In bringing charges, prosecutors pushed the envelope on the federal computer-hacking law by asserting that bypassing Captcha constituted unauthorized access of ticket-seller servers, according to policy groups who filed an amicus brief in the case to back the defendant’s motion to have the charges dismissed. ... 'The Court is satisfied that the indictment sufficiently alleges the elements of unauthorized access and exceeding authorized access under the CFAA, and sufficiently alleges conduct demonstrating defendants’ knowledge and intent to gain unauthorized access'" a cat fucked around with this message at 20:48 on Dec 1, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2012 20:36
|
|
|
Addy posted:This is as interesting to me because our office doesn't do any work that involves court work - we see the occasional nut in every branch of work, but the main source of our drama comes from the estate department, where we get to listen to people who are pissed at an executor try and redefine a will according to how they think it should go, based on such credible sources as the internet, a friend of a friend, the guy at the coffee shop whose uncle is a lawyer, and their own unerring instinct that dear Aunt Petunia most definitely meant to leave them all her money and obviously was evilly and cruelly influenced by the six national charities she chose to leave it to instead. Yeah, no, obviously Doctors Without Borders totally dragged your loving aunt, whom you admit you haven't spoken to in forty years, into a back room somewhere and forced her to sign this will. Yes, I'm sure we *will* be hearing from your lawyers. We'll be more than happy to introduce them to the charity's lawyers. Working in a Public Defender office is a lot different than in a corporate office. My job as a paralegal is going to get a lot more interesting now that our county is getting rid of our Mental Health Court for reasons that I don't quite understand. I guess we'll have to deal with all the sovereign citizens instead of just transferring them to Ct. 8. I expect that my attorneys will have to do a lot more juries now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2012 20:44
|
|
|
My former (as of 2 days ago) employer did not pay us this past Friday. Their excuse was they "forgot" and we will be paid this coming Monday. But I have some suspicions they used payroll money to pay a supplier bill and therefore did not have money to pay us (employees). I'm not looking to sue anyone, but I would like to feel justified in thinking they stole from us. Was it stealing? It feels like they took out a loan with our money (without consent) and used it to pay for something else. Besides being pissed we weren't paid on time, can we also be pissed because our employer "stole" from us? This is in Reading, Pennsylvania, about ~20 employees including the CEO & COO.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2012 01:38
|
|
|
I live in Virginia. I have a neighbor that blasts music every weekend for hours on end. I have called in multiple complaints to the police, but with little success due to the county's generous noise ordinance. I have tried to work with the neighbors and law enforcement with no success. I have kept a detailed log of the noise for about 8 months and I have multiple witnesses that can corroborate the length and volume of the noise. Is a nuisance suit plausible, or is my house just unlivable during the weekend?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2012 02:04
|
|
|
YancyQ posted:I live in Virginia. I have a neighbor that blasts music every weekend for hours on end. I have called in multiple complaints to the police, but with little success due to the county's generous noise ordinance. Is it rented or owned? (most counties have tax assessments online and you can see owner names) It can just make a practical difference if you can complain to their landlord. Other than that... the same county laws apply to you. Gungham Style on loop might clash with their flow.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2012 03:08
|
|
|
woozle wuzzle posted:Is it rented or owned? (most counties have tax assessments online and you can see owner names) It can just make a practical difference if you can complain to their landlord. My house is owned. The neighbor in question is a small "church" across the street that only meets up on the weekends. Gungham Style might be an option, but I don't want to be a jerk to my other neighbors and add to the noise that they also have to deal with.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2012 03:50
|
|
|
Ahh... now you might be getting someplace. Are they zoned for that? They can't just have a church in the middle of residential. How do they park? Any structural defects on the building? You probably have little direct legal leverage, but you might in permits. And what do you mean "church"? Spit it out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2012 05:19
|
|
|
woozle wuzzle posted:Ahh... now you might be getting someplace. Are they zoned for that? They can't just have a church in the middle of residential. How do they park? Any structural defects on the building? You probably have little direct legal leverage, but you might in permits. I have no idea what the zoning rules are. Like I said, the police have been involved; I figure if there were any zoning issues they would have jumped on it. They have a parking lot across the street where their parishioners park. The police have admitted that the building has 0 sound proofing. The police, my wife, and I have each contacted the church and they said that they're "working on it"... That was 6 months ago. There has been no change in noise volume or duration. The church is a legit church, I just parenthesized it because the amount of noise that we get is incredible. Like when I think church music I think of pipe organs and choirs. This place has a live band with super heavy base. It's ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2012 05:54
|
|
|
BigHead posted:Law school exam question: Can a man who has never been laid, and it can be objectively shown he will never be laid, lose his consortium? If so, are damages restricted to a very pleasant glove and baller fingernail clippers? Doesn't loss of consortium lie with the other spouse? Though arguably you have lost the ability to consort with yourself.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2012 06:05
|
|
|
Dogen posted:Doesn't loss of consortium lie with the other spouse? Though arguably you have lost the ability to consort with yourself. Yeah, it's the loss of spousal relations. A lot of states still don't allow you to recover if the plaintiff isn't married (e.g., no damages for homosexual relationships or cohabitation).
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2012 06:35
|
|
|
YancyQ posted:Like I said, the police have been involved; I figure if there were any zoning issues they would have jumped on it. NOOOOooooooooooooooooooooo... NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooo..... noooooooo The police don't give a crap about code or zoning anything, man. It's the equivalent of thinking they'd pick up your mail or help with a social security claim. It just isn't in their ballpark; they neither know or have the authority to care. The zoning commission is the only place that cares about zoning. The county dept of utilities (or environmental quality or whatever) is the only place that cares about certain code violations like parking lot runoff, while housing will care about building code. Zoning and code enforcement are totally separate. If it's zoned residential, then they're shut down period if the zoning board gets wind. If they are operating a church, there is a PILE of building code requiring them to have accessible bathrooms, fire exits, etc. Each bureaucrat will only handle their specific niche, and will absolutely not help you on anything that they aren't required to do. It can be pretty expensive to setup a church in compliance with code, so there's a solid bet there's leverage in there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2012 07:05
|
|
|
Addy posted:On a serious note, it does get really frustrating sometimes to see how petty people get over the smallest of estates, even when a will is perfectly fair and splits things evenly, even and especially against their own family members. Death really does bring out the dicks in families. Can you share any stories? It is always interesting to hear how petty some people can be.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2012 07:10
|
|
|
What if he didn't have a very pleasant glove to start with? Wouldn't that be enrichment?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2012 07:30
|
|
|
woozle wuzzle posted:The zoning commission is the only place that cares about zoning. The county dept of utilities (or environmental quality or whatever) is the only place that cares about certain code violations like parking lot runoff, while housing will care about building code. Zoning and code enforcement are totally separate. If it's zoned residential, then they're shut down period if the zoning board gets wind. If they are operating a church, there is a PILE of building code requiring them to have accessible bathrooms, fire exits, etc. Each bureaucrat will only handle their specific niche, and will absolutely not help you on anything that they aren't required to do. It can be pretty expensive to setup a church in compliance with code, so there's a solid bet there's leverage in there. Actually, churches are exempt from ADA access policies. I know a handicapped minister, and there have been instances where she turned down invitations to attend religious functions at other churches because there was no way for her to access the building without literally being carried in.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2012 10:21
|
|
|
A construction crane dropped its hook through my airwell cover, I already have photos of the damage, should I make a police report as well or do I just talk to the site manager when he shows up tomorrow?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2012 10:36
|
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:Can you share any stories? It is always interesting to hear how petty some people can be. Augh, see, that's the problem with my job - sharing stories usually means getting into specific detail, and that's something I try never to do (plus I'm concerned that this might be seen as derailing). In general, I can tell you that the pettiest people are the ones who skip the lawyer and try and intimidate, harass, or otherwise coerce the executor into doing what they want. When it's one person's lawyer talking to the other person's lawyer, things can stay civilized and generally get worked out as fast as possible. When it's an executor with a lawyer vs. family member(s) who think if they just push enough, the executor will get scared or sick of it and give in to their demands, it gets UGLY. Passive-aggressiveness like you wouldn't believe - the insinuations about the executor's trustworthiness and capability - and even the deceased relation's mental capability at the time of making the will! - are frequently brought into question. And the more it doesn't work, the angrier the get, and the more their ability to be coherent or stick to any one story about why they're justified in their actions goes to pieces. It is pretty funny reading some of their letters though. Picture a letter full of threatening, abusive and accusing language, but interspersed with a bunch of legal jargon someone picked out of any legal document they could find based on "it sounds important and legal-y." Those I *really* wish I could share. When I'm feeling really down about how nasty a person can get to their family members when they've just lost a parent or sibling, I like to go back to those letters and amuse myself with the ultimately pointless thrashing to be found within them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2012 11:23
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:Actually, churches are exempt from ADA access policies. I know a handicapped minister, and there have been instances where she turned down invitations to attend religious functions at other churches because there was no way for her to access the building without literally being carried in. But they're not typically exempt from local building, environmental, and fire code.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2012 15:03
|
|
|
woozle wuzzle posted:NOOOOooooooooooooooooooooo... I don't know anything about zoning laws. Where would I even find what the address is zoned as? I'd prefer not to shut down an entire church if I could help it, but at this point there might not be another way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2012 00:34
|
|
|
YancyQ posted:I don't know anything about zoning laws. Where would I even find what the address is zoned as? If it was worth suing them over a nuisance, then it might be worth consulting an attorney versed in local law (a real estate attorney or local civil attorney might know the ropes). It's all about gaining leverage. The zoning board might grant them a variance to operate... after neighbors get a public hearing. I think your options are 1. just talk to them and roll a save versus CHA, 2. find a violation and threaten them, turning them in if they refuse, 3. go Westboro Baptist on their rear end, 4. buy noise canceling headphones. There's no direct route.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2012 01:13
|
|
|
woozle wuzzle posted:You gotta do your homework. Each path of zoning/code is it's own journey of horsecrap. You can't just call a local county department and sick them on the church, it has to be reporting a specific violation. Thanks for the help. I checked the county zoning map and they are zoned as a residency; which is weird because the building is totally a church. I'll submit a complaint with zoning that the property is being used as a live music venue and see what happens.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2012 01:19
|
|
|
NP. Just a nitpick: you'd report that it's a church. They care about having a zoning violation, they don't care about live music. Mention the noise pollution, but also mention an estimate of their attendance, how often, parking lot, if people live there outside of services, and any signage. VVV That too. But I have a feeling that the art of negotiation isn't going to work out. woozle wuzzle fucked around with this message at 01:32 on Dec 3, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2012 01:30
|
|
|
YancyQ posted:Thanks for the help. I checked the county zoning map and they are zoned as a residency; which is weird because the building is totally a church. I'll submit a complaint with zoning that the property is being used as a live music venue and see what happens. You're missing the point of this exercise. You find where they're non-compliant and threaten them with it, not turn them in right away
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2012 01:30
|
|
|
Yeah, generally churches would need special zoning, because of how difficult it is to manage a property that draws zero traffic 6.75 days per week and a massive influx each Sunday morning.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2012 07:45
|
|
|
Warcranium posted:Does anyone know anything about false accusation laws in Maryland? I apologize in advance if my explanation of what is going on is a little shaky or hard to follow; I’m not directly involved in any of this and I really don’t know poo poo about the law. Hi, MD attorney here. Mom should ask her attorney to file for a restraining order against crazy woman. If Mom's attorney does not do that sort of thing, I can help you find a referral (it's not my area of practice either). It may not work (will depend on precisely what Crazy Woman is doing), but is relatively quick and cheap, and shows that Mom is not to be hosed with by crazy woman without costs involved. Mom also has potential grounds for a civil suit against crazy woman, possibly, depending on how things were presented, and what kind of poo poo crazy woman has done. What court is this all being filed in?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2012 11:52
|
|
|
I thought a peace order was the MD version of a (non-domestic) restraining/ protective order? OP said the latest crazy was because of a peace order (most likely(?))
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2012 12:33
|
|
|
LordPants posted:I was watching the Wire, and I was wondering how does Maryland handle "Life" imprisonment? Is that 25 years? What is the ballpark for Life, no parole? Mass-murderer? Or less than that? Not an area I generally practice in but I'll give it a shot at what I think you're asking. Typically in MD, LWOP must be a unanimous determination by the jury/court, which must explicitly say that it is LWOP. If they do not determine this within a reasonable time, it automatically becomes a life sentence (for which parole will eventually become possible). Sentencing is typically done by the MSCCSP guidelines, available here; chart version with all the crimes here.. Certain crimes are "violent crimes", which carry non-suspendable mandatory minimums. 14-101 (a) lists those crimes but you can basically guess at what they are. They're also in the chart on the MSCCSP page. These start at 10 years for your second offense, 25 years for third offense, and LWOP for your 4th offense. By statute, these sentences cannot be suspended in whole or in part. Quick and dirty chart: here for all crimes with mandatory minimums, here for violent crimes only. Regardless of any of the above (even the four-strike LWOP sentence), if you're over 65 and did 15 years of your bid, you are eligible for parole. Does that help? Like I said, not my area of practice, but I believe that should be what you're looking for.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2012 12:33
|
|
|
Diplomaticus posted:if you're over 65 and did 15 years of your bid, you are eligible for parole.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2012 16:22
|
|
|
YancyQ posted:Thanks for the help. I checked the county zoning map and they are zoned as a residency; which is weird because the building is totally a church. I'll submit a complaint with zoning that the property is being used as a live music venue and see what happens. Something just like this was in the news within the last couple months. Church got told they couldn't do the meetings at the house. Neighbors were complaining about all the singing. Something else was brought up a few pages back too that was just in the news. 3 people had been breaking into cabins in a certain area and were at it again. One of the residents fired a couple warning shots, one of which hit one of the burglars in the head and killed them. The residents weren't charged with anything but the other burglars were charged with murder. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2240527/Summer-Moody-Teenage-boys-charged-murder-girl-accidentally-shot-dead-homeowner.html chemosh6969 fucked around with this message at 18:01 on Dec 3, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2012 17:58
|
|
|
joat mon posted:I thought a peace order was the MD version of a (non-domestic) restraining/ protective order? OP said the latest crazy was because of a peace order (most likely(?)) It is. I skipped over reading that part apparently. I'm actually kind of curious whether it was granted or not.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2012 18:37
|
|
|
chemosh6969 posted:Something just like this was in the news within the last couple months. Church got told they couldn't do the meetings at the house. Neighbors were complaining about all the singing. This got me reading about the US felony murder rule, and  e: Other than Alabama, my favourite is Arizona, where you're guilty of first degree murder if someone is killed while you're selling marijuana. bub spank fucked around with this message at 20:11 on Dec 3, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2012 20:02
|
|
|
burf posted:This got me reading about the US felony murder rule, and If you want to know what the Felony Murder rule means in practice, read this article by Hunter Thompson and Mark Seal; http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2004/06/innocent-murderer-200406. In short, she was convicted of Felony Murder of a police officer which occurred while she was handcuffed in the back of a police car.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2012 00:03
|
|
|
BgRdMchne posted:If you want to know what the Felony Murder rule means in practice, read this article by Hunter Thompson and Mark Seal; http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2004/06/innocent-murderer-200406. Later granted a new trial by the CO supreme court, and I believe is now a free(er) woman. Still a jacked up story.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2012 00:13
|
|
|
Diplomaticus posted:Does that help? Like I said, not my area of practice, but I believe that should be what you're looking for. Brilliant! That's all I wanted to know. I was watching it wondering whether the LWOP character was ever going to get out. burf posted:This got me reading about the US felony murder rule, and Happens in some places in Australia if someone dies in the commission of a crime or something similar. And it sort of makes sense. But my favourite is Felony Murder through Criminal Mischief of the First Degree in Alaska. algebra testes fucked around with this message at 01:05 on Dec 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2012 00:48
|
|
|
I have a lawyer billing dilemma that I need some advice with. I hired a lawyer because I was wrongfully arrested for an obstruction of a public servant charge. I admit that the first mistake that I did was not figure out how much this was going to cost. I assumed that a few thousand dollars would be expected. I put aside that much cash and dealt with it, regardless of how frustrated I was for having to go through this stupid ordeal over nothing. From the beginning, my $250/hr lawyer told me that my best option was to take this to trial. He told me that since this case was complete BS it would more than likely be dismissed early on. He proceeded to interview the officers and spent a lot of time preparing for the trial. It went to the point where my girlfriend and I were asked to come in so we could prepare for the case. At that point I asked him for the billing information... I was absolutely flabbergasted. Even without going to trial, my lawyer has logged in over $10,000 worth of his time. Including billing me for the time he drove 1.5 hours to interview an officer in a completely different county, and billing me for the time he spent to come back... including the gas mileage he spent. His reasoning was that he could not get a hold of the officer, and since he was in that county for another court case, he interviewed the officer in person. Another issue I had with his billing was that for one of the court dates he went on vacation so he had to ask another lawyer in the firm to represent me while he was gone. This lawyer charged $400/hr for his work and billed me over $1,000 for the two hours he spent sitting next to me in the court room. Everything just seems too excessive and now I have over a $10,000 lawyer fee that I was not expecting over a case that I believe did nothing wrong and was wrongfully arrested for. Should I talk to my lawyer about the excessive billing that I mentioned above? Or should I have expected this from the beginning? Busy Bee fucked around with this message at 01:23 on Dec 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2012 01:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:16 |
|
|
Nothing in there sounds excessive to me. High yes but not excessive. Depends a lot on your location. I charge WAY WAY less than those guys and, for me, $10,000 is in the ball bark for a trial. When I worked at a huge, expensive law firm, trials were in the 50-100 range. euphronius fucked around with this message at 01:40 on Dec 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2012 01:26
|
|