|
matthew j posted:I think I'm in a predicament, and need some advice! When I was in college about 10 years ago I was charged with distributing alcohol to a minor. The court told me to take AA classes, pay a bunch of fines, and do community service. I did all these things and moved back to my home state soon after. I've worked various jobs in these last 10 years with no problem, been pulled over a few times for minor traffic violations, with no issues. I recently applied for a state job and they said that there was a warrant for my arrest in Oregon, where I went to school. I kind of freaked out at that point because I guess this warrant has been following me around for 10 years? So I'm not sure what to do now. Going to Oregon to figure it out probably entails sitting in jail for a few days and doing all that stuff over again and I would no doubt lose the job I currently have and that would be very bad. But I definitely don't want this warrant after me all my life, so I've gotta do something about it. This happens quite often. You have two options: hire an attorney who can simply call the prosecutor and say "hey here's what's up" or you can deal with it yourself. I can't tell you how option one goes in your neck of the woods, but in my neck of the woods if a dude hired an attorney in a '02 or '03 case and the attorney could say "he's been law abiding since then just look him up," then I'd 100% dismiss whatever misdemeanor bullshit was hanging out there. If you go option two, it's a pain in the rear end because the prosecutor will dislike you and assume you're lying to him.
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 07:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 18:51 |
|
|
Can a bank use personal financial information that they found inside a foreclosed home or office?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 16:15
|
|
|
Depends, maybe, sorta. First off, if you're worried about a bank finding documents inside a foreclosed property, chances are they won't. They hire cleaning crews to clear out foreclosed properties, and those crews toss EVERYTHING. I know people who do that work, and it's like "in 30 minutes this house will be 100% empty". They don't give a poo poo about the bank, or finding paperwork, or doing anything but tossing out garbage as fast as humanly possible. I'm sure in many foreclosed properties there's sensitive info left behind (social security numbers, etc), but the bank never has any contact with it. The cleaners just toss everything not nailed down. In the unlikely event that a bank receives sensitive information, it depends. The foreclosed property was theirs, so any personal property left is probably theirs too. So it depends on the contents of the information. Like a written plan to rob their nearest branch will be treated differently from a random credit card application. And it'd depend on what they plan to do with it, such as not extend you another loan, sue you for damages, etc. In general, I'd think they can do whatever they want with it. But in the overall scheme of things... whatever is left in a foreclosed property vanishes, and the bank doesn't give a crap.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 18:50
|
|
|
In this case, I know for a fact that they obtained information accidentally left behind and are trying to use it in litigation against the person in question. There is no property right or privacy right that would protect the owner of the information
Zealous Abattoir fucked around with this message at 18:59 on Jan 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 18:55
|
|
|
Bank isn't a state actor here so I'm not seeing much.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 20:56
|
|
|
Zealous Abattoir posted:In this case, I know for a fact that they obtained information accidentally left behind and are trying to use it in litigation against the person in question. There is no property right or privacy right that would protect the owner of the information They should consult with an attorney ASAP if they don't have one. An attorney might be able to object to that evidence, but in general I think they're stuck.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 21:04
|
|
|
Zealous Abattoir posted:In this case, I know for a fact that they obtained information accidentally left behind and are trying to use it in litigation against the person in question. There is no property right or privacy right that would protect the owner of the information If I was the bank's lawyer I'd probably argue that the individual waived any rights they had in that information when they abandoned the documents in the foreclosed home. Either way your friend or whomever needs a lawyer if they're getting sued.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 21:32
|
|
|
Do foreclosure proceedings generally provide for disposal and use of abandoned personal property? If they don't, could that behavior be called conversion or something similar?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 21:33
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:Do foreclosure proceedings generally provide for disposal and use of abandoned personal property? If they don't, could that behavior be called conversion or something similar? Sometimes, but it can get fairly fact-specific. If the bank can show that the homeowner abandoned the home, along with all the personal effects, then the homeowner is SOL. Every once in a while a bank will clear out a house they think has been abandoned prior to the foreclosure process being complete - but the homeowner then comes back and says they were still living there or were using it as storage or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 23:05
|
|
|
This is in Ontario, Canada. My girlfriend is about to incorporate a fashion company. At this point her and her partner have settled on a name called The (noun). Through some research they have discovered that there is a registered partnership/business in Alberta called simply (noun), which also happens to be a clothing company. The company in Alberta has not incorporated and her and her partner can't find any trace of them outside of that registration. They'll be seeing a lawyer when they do incorporate but they are looking to get some tags and such made before that and are wondering if they would be able to incorporate that name or if they might run into some legal hurdles.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 00:23
|
|
|
Do practicing lawyers ask each other questions in this thread? If no, is there a thread like that?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 08:23
|
|
|
I'd ask the occasional simple question here, or bounce a theoretical idea off someone with more trial experience. But I get more use out of my state bar association's listserv for solos and small practices. Other states also have dedicated mailing lists for certain practice areas. Not only are they great for asking questions, but you can also ask for forms/sample docs, get/give referrals, and find recommendations for things like process servers, PIs, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 09:24
|
|
|
Hi thread. I have a question not pertaining to the USA law, but maybe someone would know anyway, and it won't hurt to ask. Essentially, it's about Swedish law - someone asked for my help in the matter. Specifically, the person that asked said that: - their mother had been a citizen of Sweden and she died, she was on a pension - someone told them that every citizen being on a pension has some sort of a mandatory life insurance paid monthly, and that it pays up after the death - there is only one heir, not a Swedish citizen Now, the death was seven years ago. That "someone" who told them about the insurance didn't tell anything more, specifically who would pay the sum, how to fill a claim, where to get a claim form etc. For some reason they never thought to ask those questions, which I find very odd, but oh well. They had tried to claim the insurance two years ago, but never got any response. So what I'd like to ask is: 1) Can someone shed some more light on this enigmatic insurance? Who can be a claimant, does the citizenry play any role, is there any time limit to filling the claim, where to write etc.? 2) Alternatively, if someone better at googling than I could provide some insight how to get to the official site on that subject, preferably in English rather than Swedish? Szurumbur fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Jan 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 11:09
|
|
|
beergod posted:Do practicing lawyers ask each other questions in this thread? If no, is there a thread like that? http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3301274 I guess
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 16:08
|
|
|
.
753951 fucked around with this message at 18:43 on Nov 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 20:00
|
|
|
MassaShowtime posted:This is in Ontario, Canada. I'm on my phone but pm me and I'll tell you words.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 20:40
|
|
|
753951 posted:From the debt collection thread, sorry for the double-post.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2013 01:42
|
|
|
753951 posted:From the debt collection thread, sorry for the double-post. Yes, you have a claim but maybe not in the way you think. The collection company can definitely come after you, and you can turn around and go after her pursuant to your divorce decree. It will depend on your state as to whether you have to pay the company first then sue, sue her first, etc. It is possible that you'd be entitled to compensation for any damage she caused your credit. So yes, you certainly have a claim but you should contact a local family law attorney. They'd know the answer immediately as this would be routine for them. Don't try to solo this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2013 03:43
|
|
|
We mostly talk about tacos in between telling people not to go to law school.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2013 04:20
|
|
|
I'm about to go into mediation for custody of my son; since I suspect that my ex-husband will not be interested in mediation (I suspect because he keeps screaming at me that a judge will tell me to do the things he wants), I have been preparing for court. Will I really have to show that he is "unfit" to be a father and that I should win on those grounds, or is it possible to compare our parenting methods and show that I am a better choice for what is in the "child's best interest"? Also who decides the definitions of what is unfit or in a child's best interest? The requested details: 1. Orange County, North Carolina 2. I have filed a motion for custody 3.No 4.N/A 5.No 6.N/A
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2013 07:26
|
|
|
Caylene posted:I'm about to go into mediation for custody of my son; since I suspect that my ex-husband will not be interested in mediation (I suspect because he keeps screaming at me that a judge will tell me to do the things he wants), I have been preparing for court. Will I really have to show that he is "unfit" to be a father and that I should win on those grounds, or is it possible to compare our parenting methods and show that I am a better choice for what is in the "child's best interest"? Typically unfit only comes into play in terminating parental rights, which is a drastic step in cases of abuse/drug addiction/etc. So it's "best interest of the child", and the judge decides based on state guidelines. You may want to get an attorney, but it's not necessary. It's less about parenting methods, and more about who provides a safe, stable home for the child. It's more about having an educational plan, adequate and safe housing (doesn't share a bed), knowing his teachers, having the pediatrician lined up, supporting activities/clubs (like signing them up and driving them to sports, if applicable). It's those kinds of things. You still want to bring up problems with the father's parenting abilities, safety, and stability. Don't be bashful, but you want to focus it always towards the child, not your convenience or cost. There's probably decent internet resources to help prepare you. But if it comes to a trial date, then depending on your finances I'd strongly consider getting an attorney. (e: weird typos) woozle wuzzle fucked around with this message at 05:52 on Feb 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2013 21:51
|
|
|
Caylene posted:I'm about to go into mediation for custody of my son; since I suspect that my ex-husband will not be interested in mediation (I suspect because he keeps screaming at me that a judge will tell me to do the things he wants), I have been preparing for court. Will I really have to show that he is "unfit" to be a father and that I should win on those grounds, or is it possible to compare our parenting methods and show that I am a better choice for what is in the "child's best interest"? Not your state, my own experience, I dont deal with this often but have on occasion, I am presuming the child is younger and more impressionable. Understand that the Court is pretty much going to presume both parties are going to lie in order to make themselves seem like an angel, and the other seem like the devil. Stories you tell do not amount to much, do you have any neutral third party evidence to support your position (e.g. Child protective services, police report, independent psych evaluation, substance abuse etc?) Getting someone deemed "unfit" without such evidence is going to be nearly impossible. When you say you want custody is that full or partial? How is the Court going to compare parenting methods? Long story short, what information can you present to the Court that is unbiased and will help the Court get a better understanding of what the family dyanmic is like? Understand that I have seen some pretty clear cut examples of child abuse, substance abuse, and neglect and the Court still did not strip the offending parents of all rights. You have to play for the long haul, keep building your file, document everything (taking pictures of bruises is harder than you think), and don't relent. Be prepared for the other spouse to say mean things about you to the child, and to try to manipulate and control the child to side against you. Don't expect to walk into court with a smoking gun and suddenly expect to get everything. I pray your experience is nothing like the ones I have had because they have all been ugly, long, drawn out affairs that have taken years to resolve, and by "resolve" I mean get to a point where the parties have stopped running to the Court everytime something happens, not that either one of them are happy with the situation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2013 23:13
|
|
|
I'm back guys! Surprise: it's my lovely (pun intended) landlord! I'm sorry to keep asking questions relating to this but I'm feeling pretty lost here. To summarize the back story, the apartment I'm in flooded with sewage, the landlord can't or won't make the repairs necessary (Even stating in an e-mail the place may flood again). He let us off of the lease and requested 14 days notice. We gave him notice for February 17th on the 23rd of January, so 21 days. We sent him a final notice detailing the proration of February's rent for 17 days. My landlord is requesting we pay the entire month of rent for February or he'll take us to court over the remainder of the month. The landlord acknowledges the possibility of future flooding and that it will not be fixed any time soon. We have written testimony from the upstairs neighbors as to the unit's track record for frequent flooding, and written testimony from the previous tenants who went through the exact same flooding issue. Every single thing I've listed from the landlord I have in e-mail form. Does the guy have a snowball's chance in hell? I've gone over all of the applicable landlord-tenant Idaho codes I can find (Idaho Code sections 6-303, 6-320, 6-321, 55-208, and 55-307) and nothing covers proration either way. The lease specifies the monthly amount, requires we make 30 days notice (amended in our e-mails), and also the end date (amended in the same e-mail), but makes no mention of proration past how the first month's rent was prorated. I feel I'm in the clear but wanted another opinion or two. Also, we'll be moving on the ninth. We can get away with not paying rent until the 5th, per the terms of our lease, if that would help for any reason. Does anyone have any advice as to what I could do to help cover my rear end?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2013 06:26
|
|
|
Call me crazy but I think a call to the local health department might go a ways in documenting that your apartment is uninhabitable due to RAW SEWAGE (better or worse than cooked?) and give your landlord a little "incentive" to stop renting that space as is. My local health department evacuates people with help from law enforcement if necessary for simply not having sewer access for too long, their cutoff may even be 24 hours. Of course, I'm not a lawyer and I'm sure as hell not your lawyer. Just an idea.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2013 07:57
|
|
|
Before I ask my question I will give everyone a quick rundown of my situation, so here goes. I have been separated from my wife for almost a year now and am in the final stages of divorce (all that is left is for her to sign the final papers, then I go in front of judge.) We have one child together, which is why our divorce has taken a year. As with most ex's mine is abnormally insane. She constantly blows up over literally nothing just because she thinks about why she hates me or why she wishes I was dead. I have recently started seeing someone and my ex is now demanding that I sign an agreement that I will not let our son be around any significant other for a period of one year. Is this something that she could actually force me to sign or even enforceable in any way? I could understand if my s/o was a bad or dangerous person, but she is gainfully employed, self sufficient and very experienced with children, having had a huge hand in raising her own brother & sister after her dad flew the coup. I will obviously be discussing this with my attorney, but wanted to get some advice to see if it was even worth wasting my time (and money.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2013 22:36
|
|
|
xxEightxx posted:Not your state, my own experience, I dont deal with this often but have on occasion, I am presuming the child is younger and more impressionable. Understand that the Court is pretty much going to presume both parties are going to lie in order to make themselves seem like an angel, and the other seem like the devil. Stories you tell do not amount to much, do you have any neutral third party evidence to support your position (e.g. Child protective services, police report, independent psych evaluation, substance abuse etc?) Getting someone deemed "unfit" without such evidence is going to be nearly impossible. When you say you want custody is that full or partial? How is the Court going to compare parenting methods? Long story short, what information can you present to the Court that is unbiased and will help the Court get a better understanding of what the family dyanmic is like? I don't want him to have no parental rights- I just want him to stay gone away. It seems weird that he can have no interest in parenting at all, and it's been fine for us. He doesn't provide child support, only calls every couple of weeks or so, if that. He's more of an uncle or something like that. I've been fine with that. Only lately he's gotten more serious with his current girlfriend, and has decided that his starting a new life and wants his son to be a part of that. He doesn't want to pay child support, he just wants to be called daddy and for me to unreservedly allow him to take my son up for visits to another state with no parenting agreement in place. Obviously I'm not going to be having that, since I have managed to work really hard and create a stable lives for us- including my fiancee, who my son calls daddy, and has been in his life since he was very small (he's now six). I wouldn't mind a sensible agreement but sharing custody with my ex-husband? Leaving him was a painful decision enough, he couldn't keep a steady job, etc, and it seems terribly unfair that he should get to waltz back in and demand joint custody merely because he's my son's biological father, when he's had little to nothing to do with him being raised thus far. Maybe that's just the way the cookie crumbles, though. I am preparing negotiation tactics and I have a good lawyer in the wings just in case it does go to trial, but I am hoping to be able to talk some sense into the situation through the state ordered mediation. Too optimistic?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2013 17:45
|
|
|
Caylene posted:...I just want him to stay gone away. You are not going to get the result you desire by yourself. You are not going to get the result you desire without spending a lot of money on an attorney. You are probably not going to get the result you desire anyway. Instead of getting a court to tell him he can't be a dad, let him de-select himself as a dad. It will probably happen faster and will certainly be cheaper.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2013 19:12
|
|
|
Okay so say in this situation you are a landlord who receives a complaint from the tenant that because of the bathroom on the otherside of the house that their kids use, the wife is sick, because that bathroom had water going under the tub and all around mold growing in the drywall and through water under the tub liner. The tenants dont really want to move because the house is really close to the school but they have also claimed that the wife has been sick for a year and a half since they moved in. We've had people suggest that the tub needs to be removed (900) and the bathroom retiled (1400) these are absurd prices and we were in the process of looking for more quotes when they called us again and said its a health issue and started attacking us like we are at fault. So the landlord said he's going to ask them to leave, or call the health department on the house if they don't, and has offered to pay for their rent costs (for three months, thats when their contract ends) and to help them find a new place to rent. Also its very unlikely shes sick because of the mold, but is this the write way to go about things? As a landlord in Florida are you legally obligated to fix health issues or do you also have the option of telling the tenants to leave and find another place while absolving them of any future rent payments they may have owed? What should we put in writing? The landlord is telling me to write a letter saying because of 'health issues they claim' we are asking them to leave and offering to pay for the rest of their contracts rent expenses and pay for three months rent at their new place. Is any of this wise at all? This is in Florida by the way. Her bronchitis or asthma or whatever probably stems from allergies because they moved here from New England and have like three-four dogs, a parrot, and a bunch of lizards and poo poo. What else can we do to be legally responsible besides hire a lawyer?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2013 20:59
|
|
|
Jesus Christ how have you been in the lovely landlord business for two whole years and not realized it would be more convenient and cost-effective to hire a goddamned lawyer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2013 21:07
|
|
|
Because we are still not convinced that's the most cost effective solution and it's also out of principle. I am pretty sure the landlord would rather just give them the 150k house rather than hire a lawyer based off some strange principles. Right now to me it seems 50/50 whether they want to sue us or just scare us into fixing the place. Edit: Actually it's probably to sue. Tomorrow I was told to call the Department of Health and today I am told to help find them a new place to live. How dangerous are mold lawsuits in Florida? They called one time in the past about the bathtub when the soap holder fell off. Behind that wall there was mold but I just sprayed some mold chemicals on it and patched it back up. Now I am afraid that because I did not fully remove all the mold when I saw it they have grounds to sue. But no one there is sick except the mother and it's probably not because of the mold. Edit: The landlord believes that once you hire a lawyer the process never ends, you lose thousands of dollars, and the lawyers collude with each other to prolong the process and make it more costly. His plan is to treat the tenants like 'Retarded Children' and he wants me to offer my assistance in finding them a new place to live while I call the Health Department on the house tomorrow to have it 'condemned'. Is any of this wise? Kneel Before Zog fucked around with this message at 23:15 on Feb 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2013 22:51
|
|
|
e- Never mind, this got swallowed up by a bunch of drama and I should probably just hire someone to research it anyway.
Berlin Swing fucked around with this message at 03:52 on Feb 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2013 23:04
|
|
|
Kneel Before Zog posted:His plan is to treat the tenants like 'Retarded Children' and he wants me to offer my assistance in finding them a new place to live while I call the Health Department on the house tomorrow to have it 'condemned'. Is any of this wise? Yes good idea you should literally call the Health Department and admit on record that the house is not suitable for people to live in because it's full of deathmold. Fantastic plan there champ.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2013 23:28
|
|
|
Kneel Before Zog posted:Edit: The landlord believes that once you hire a lawyer the process never ends, you lose thousands of dollars, and the lawyers collude with each other to prolong the process and make it more costly. Then "the landord" should take his questions to E/N instead. Good luck. Which would you prefer: From this thead: "The landlord" has been digging for at least 6 months. "The landlord" should get a lawyer to help dig "the landlord" out. From E/N: You are a terrible landlord and a horrible person. DIA(mold cleansing)F
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2013 23:39
|
|
|
If you're making your business decisions with the intent to punish tenants with no idea what your civil liabilities and legal obligations are, you are not a good businessman.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2013 23:42
|
|
|
Kneel Before Zog posted:Edit: The landlord believes that once you hire a lawyer the process never ends, you lose thousands of dollars, and the lawyers collude with each other to prolong the process and make it more costly. I'm not saying this because I'm a lawyer and have to defend my profession. And I've also worked closely with people who felt this way, and no matter how much you reason with them you cannot get anything into their weirdo brains. I'm quick to tell people they don't need a lawyer for things that can be reasonably worked out on their own. So understand I'm coming from a very nuetral place when I scream at you the following: THIS MAN NEEDS A LAWYER. TOMORROW. If this tenant dies, this man loses every single loving thing he owns. Tell him this. Every. Single. loving. Thing. His dog will be taken by a sheriff and sold on the courthouse steps. The internet will no longer provide him pornography. Children will recoil from his sight. Whatever you have to tell him, tell him. His liability is ridiculously enormous here. It can be fixed and the tenants move on. Or it can go to hell, and he will be sued for millions of dollars. No joke. It's a mother. With small kids. They reported it, and the mold was a known issue. A jury would destroy him. There can be strick liability with some mold in some states. They should sue tomorrow, and they may likely win. Going beyond the basic human elements to the cold hard fiscal reality: he needs an attorney to manage every step going forward. I would not write them a letter that was not written or approved by an attorney. Assume everything you say or do will be put before a judge, with a picture of the dead mother displayed from an overhead projector in the background, with the sounds of middle-aged jury members softly weeping into their hands. You don't have to change his mind about lawyers, you just have to convince him that his entire lifetime is on the line. If things go badly, he would give up ANYTHING to go back in time and simply hire a lawyer now. They have grounds to sue. If they had any sense they would definitely sue. He needs a lawyer now. I don't like dentists but when my teeth hurt that's just too drat bad for me. Right now his legal teeth are rotting out... woozle wuzzle fucked around with this message at 00:05 on Feb 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2013 23:56
|
|
|
You know what the most common cause of cost-spiralling in legal actions is? Complications and unforeseen issues caused by the client's failure to reveal all relevant information to the lawyer before commencing. Incidentally, what are people who distrust lawyers and view them as greedy and colluding likely to do?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2013 00:06
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Then "the landord" should take his questions to E/N instead. Good luck. I suspected I might be attacked. The landlord has offered to help them find a new place to live. The house does not have deathmold. Don't you know, like 99 percent of all houses in florida have some form of mold?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2013 01:13
|
|
|
woozle wuzzle posted:I'm not saying this because I'm a lawyer and have to defend my profession. And I've also worked closely with people who felt this way, and no matter how much you reason with them you cannot get anything into their weirdo brains. I'm quick to tell people they don't need a lawyer for things that can be reasonably worked out on their own. So understand I'm coming from a very nuetral place when I scream at you the following: Edit: I understand where you are coming from. But if she cannot prove the mold made her sick, there is no problem here, right? El_Elegante posted:If you're making your business decisions with the intent to punish tenants with no idea what your civil liabilities and legal obligations are, you are not a good businessman. There was water underneath the tub before the tenants moved in. We, and the tenants, thought there was always water under the tub. Now the landlord is reiterating he will pay every dime until the contract ends and that he will have the health department test for human habitation. Kneel Before Zog fucked around with this message at 01:30 on Feb 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2013 01:18
|
|
|
Why'd you ask if you were just gonna argue with the answers?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2013 01:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 18:51 |
|
|
Tell the landlord that if lawyers, judges and jurors knew poo poo about what causes mold related disease, they'd be physicians, not judges, lawyers and jurors. He's about to get sued. Whether he's in the right or not doesn't mater, he needs a lawyer. Call it preventative legal care. poo poo, I'm not a lawyer, just a guy who'd like to be a landlord someday, and even I know that "tenant complains about mold" = CALL A LAWYER, Jesus.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2013 01:24
|
|
