|
joat mon posted:This is the legal answer. It is also utterly unhelpful to you. How do you know what a jury of retirees in Scranton or Carlisle is going to determine if they get the Miller critieria tossed at them? Bingo, my love. Even if it's determined that he'd 100% pass the miller test: What if a kid opens the package? What if it's misdelivered or he typos the address? What if the police misinterpret the standard? What if the grandma landlord opens it and her son is a police officer? There are a thousand unlikely scenarios that could result in liability. A legal course of action can still have criminal consequences. I had a hearing this morning involving an innocent person's criminal conviction literally due to clerical error. When preparing to sit for the bar, any arrest can be an issue. So the real question is how to achieve near-zero risk, not whether the act is legal. And this is all aside from the obvious answer: "Doctor it hurts when I do this -> Then don't mail the porno magazine".
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2013 16:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 12:07 |
|
|
I hope there is a Japanese porn question on his bar exam.
euphronius fucked around with this message at 18:36 on Mar 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2013 18:14
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Regarding the legality of mailing porn: Thanks joat mon! This is a really useful answer. euphronius posted:I hope there is a Japanese pron question on his bar exam. The kawaii-est of the bar exams
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2013 18:28
|
|
|
This reminded me of a case, maybe from GBS, of a federal employee who was downloading Japanese underage porn (the cartoon kind) onto his federal government computer. He did not talk his way out of that conviction.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2013 18:38
|
|
|
Pfft, that's amateur stuffKanne, J. posted:Federal investigative agents will tell you that some cases are hard to solve. Some cases require years of effort—chasing down false leads and reigning in flighty witnesses. Others require painstaking scientific analysis, or weeks of poring over financial records for a hidden clue. And some cases are never solved at all—the right witness never comes forward, the right lead never pans out, or the right clue never turns up. U.S. v. Pelletier
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2013 18:55
|
|
|
Betcha fitty dolla that had I not said anything, there would be a perfect return address on the porno. "But your honor, those images couldn't count as underage porn! It was pixelated!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2013 21:11
|
|
|
When it comes to an abandoned/foreclosed property, who is responsible for snow removal and grass cutting, the person on the mortgage or the mortgage holder? I clear my mother's walks when it snows and take care of the grass. The city can and will issue orders to clear snow and noxious weeds, then charge for removal. I understand I can make a complaint to the city about a property not being upkept and they'll take care of it, but do they bill the bank or the mortgage holder? If it's my neighbor that gets the bill, I'll continue to take care of it because they are my neighbor. If the bank would be responsible, the bank can afford to hire someone. Alternately, is it possible to find out what bank owns a private property? It would be fun to send them an invoice for services.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 01:10
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:When it comes to an abandoned/foreclosed property, who is responsible for snow removal and grass cutting, the person on the mortgage or the mortgage holder? I would imagine whoever is the recorded owner of the property. A trip to the county recorder office can probably tell you that. In theory.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 01:23
|
|
|
My dad has a cabin and a lot of land in a rural area that he rarely goes to. I am thinking about moving out there but want to get a dog (I live in a townhouse which doesn't have a big enough yard for one right now). Anyway he has always been paranoid about liability and being sued. So he is worried that if my dog bit someone the person could sue him. I plan to keep the dog on a long rope on the property so he can't get away, but even if he did run away and then bite someone I don't see any way my dad could be sued for my dog biting someone. But, if someone comes on the property and the dog bites him could he be sued for that? Either event is extremely unlikely, but I am just wondering what you guys think. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 02:26
|
|
|
Michael Corleone posted:My dad has a cabin and a lot of land in a rural area that he rarely goes to. I am thinking about moving out there but want to get a dog (I live in a townhouse which doesn't have a big enough yard for one right now). Anyway he has always been paranoid about liability and being sued. So he is worried that if my dog bit someone the person could sue him. I plan to keep the dog on a long rope on the property so he can't get away, but even if he did run away and then bite someone I don't see any way my dad could be sued for my dog biting someone. But, if someone comes on the property and the dog bites him could he be sued for that? Either event is extremely unlikely, but I am just wondering what you guys think. Thanks! Why not just rent the house from your dad? A lease should protect him, (even if you never pay rent) and you can get cheap renter's insurance with $100k of liability.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 02:38
|
|
|
Don't tie your dog outside. Am I going to have to sic PI on you? Get homeowner's insurance.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 02:40
|
|
|
Michael Corleone posted:My dad has a cabin and a lot of land in a rural area that he rarely goes to. I am thinking about moving out there but want to get a dog (I live in a townhouse which doesn't have a big enough yard for one right now). Anyway he has always been paranoid about liability and being sued. So he is worried that if my dog bit someone the person could sue him. I plan to keep the dog on a long rope on the property so he can't get away, but even if he did run away and then bite someone I don't see any way my dad could be sued for my dog biting someone. But, if someone comes on the property and the dog bites him could he be sued for that? Either event is extremely unlikely, but I am just wondering what you guys think. Thanks! Depends on the state. Washington, for example, makes the owner liable for any dog bite (in a public place, or a private place that the victim was lawfully at) regardless of the owner's fault, or whether the dog had ever had problems with people before. e: missed the part where you were talking about his liability
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 02:40
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Don't tie your dog outside. Am I going to have to sic PI on you? In some states and counties, tying up a dog like that will get you a citation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 02:54
|
|
|
The rent idea sounds good. I am not talking about 'tying him up'. I will get a collar and then attach some paracord to it because it is rated to 500 pounds and it will save a ton of money over a leash if I want to give him hundreds of feet to run on. Maybe this is and sounds dumb, I don't know. E; I'm not going to keep him as an outside dog, just put him on a line when he goes out to do his business and when I'm outside. No matter how loyal a dog is it could always run away. Michael Corleone fucked around with this message at 03:24 on Mar 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 03:21
|
|
|
Not legal advice, but I don't think that you have thought this through very much. You can't just put a stake in the ground and tie a dog to it with a hundred feet of paracord. Unless the whole property is a flat open expanse he's going to get the cord wrapped around all sorts of stuff inside of ten minutes and you'll have to spend all your time untangling him. You need to fence an area for him, or at least set up a proper runline or something. Seriously, talk to PI about this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 14:36
|
|
|
As long as it is not a crazed fighting dog (ie you have no reasonable inference that the animal is likely to bite someone), it should get one free bite. That is going to depend on your state law though. Dog Bite law is its own sub-specialty of tort. Which makes sense I guess considering lawyers. Pay a lawyer in your state to tell you what the law is. If your dog is peaceful and the laws in your state work out, your Dad should not worry as the first bite, if it ever happens, should create no liability for anyone. euphronius fucked around with this message at 14:43 on Mar 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 14:38
|
|
|
Bro Enlai posted:Pfft, that's amateur stuff In his defense, it wasn't him just bringing it up for the bragging rights. He was doing a polygraph, failed it, then one thing lead to another with Agent Cherry. quote:Agent Dempsey again asked quote:Indeed, it chemosh6969 fucked around with this message at 18:34 on Mar 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 16:02
|
|
|
Michael Corleone posted:The rent idea sounds good. I am not talking about 'tying him up'. I will get a collar and then attach some paracord to it because it is rated to 500 pounds and it will save a ton of money over a leash if I want to give him hundreds of feet to run on. Maybe this is and sounds dumb, I don't know. You've never had a dog, have you?
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 16:06
|
|
|
Michael Corleone posted:The rent idea sounds good. I am not talking about 'tying him up'. I will get a collar and then attach some paracord to it because it is rated to 500 pounds and it will save a ton of money over a leash if I want to give him hundreds of feet to run on. Maybe this is and sounds dumb, I don't know. Here is your solution. Or fence off a part of your yard. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 18:01
|
|
|
Michael Corleone posted:My dad has a cabin Aside from the dog legal stuff, think long and hard before doing this. His paranoia isn't just limited to the dog, that's just all he's talked about. Having family members as landlord is a giant nightmare. What if the roof leaks? Or hot water heater dies, or you break something, or a thousand other normal things that can happen. Generally, anytime you mix a family relationship with a business relationship, both relationships will suffer. If he seems apprehensive now, just imagine how he'll be once you're in the place. When he comes over, he's looking in every corner like a worried landlord instead of just being your dad. I'm not saying 100% don't do it. Maybe you can work it all out. But just be really aware of these issues. Hear your voice 2 years from now, potentially screaming at you not to do it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 18:03
|
|
|
joat mon posted:You've never had a dog, have you? Yeah, all kinds of red flags here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 18:51
|
|
|
Edit: I'll just leave the summary up because nobody cares about the details: TL/DR Summary: My friend and her ex (who is a local bigshot lawyer and knows many people in the local court system) are having disagreements. She believes the court-appointed mediator is biased. Mediator called in sick this week and the ex refuses to reschedule for any time sooner than one month from now. This is California. Questions: (1) Is there a way to force a change of mediator? Preferably one from a different court altogether, since the ex is familiar with or has connections to most people in the local court. (2) Is there a way to force an earlier mediation date? They already waited near a month for the first date to come (again, that's the soonest the ex would agree to) and this rescheduling should be ASAP, not another month in the future. The court's website says "mandatory" mediations are possible, but only when a parent puts in "reasonable effort" and still cannot get the other to agree on a time. Obviously there must be limits (i.e. if the nearest "agreeable" time were five years from now that would hardly be reasonable) so it seems to boil down to whether or not one month's delay for this reschedule is considered reasonable or not. Yes, I've told her to talk to a lawyer and hopefully she does. Any insights here may be helpful though. Thanks thread! Choadmaster fucked around with this message at 01:29 on Mar 13, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 22:07
|
|
|
I just got news that my parents house is being condemned. They had some land surveyors or whatever out there to test the soil because there was a noticeable crack on the outside exterior. A few days later the test results came back and they are apparently sitting on a sinkhole (florida.gif). I only spoke with my mom briefly, but according to her the bank (or the insurance company?) said they'd only give them so much money for the house, which is A) less than what they paid, and B) doesn't take into account the amount of money they've put into it in renovations and additions and such. Obviously my parents know nothing on how to proceed. My mom mentioned paying for an appraiser to go out and give them a quote, but would the insurance company recognize that? Can you even get a house appraised that is about to be condemned? Should they lawyer up ASAP? Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 22:40
|
|
|
Brady posted:I just got news that my parents house is being condemned. They had some land surveyors or whatever out there to test the soil because there was a noticeable crack on the outside exterior. A few days later the test results came back and they are apparently sitting on a sinkhole (florida.gif). What does their insurance policy say about what happens if the property is condemned?
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 22:51
|
|
|
To start things off, here is the case in question: http://www.torrentlitigation.com/cases/LW-Systems-LLC-v-Hubbard-No-13-L-0015-(St-Clair-County-IL).pdf (link is a pdf) My boyfriend received in the mail today a subpoena from Comcast stating that his IP address was used to upload or download a movie without the plaintiff's permission. He is not the one the suit is against, the letter just states that Comcast will give his name, address, and other necessary information to the plaintiff unless he or an attorney files a motion to quash or vacate the subpoena. Does he need a lawyer, and what should he be doing?
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 22:58
|
|
|
DuckConference posted:What does their insurance policy say about what happens if the property is condemned? Awaiting a response on that now. I'm guessing that whatever phrasing is in there is the final word on the matter? Or do they maybe have options depending on what it says? I know no one outside my family really cares, but this is devastating to my parents. They poured their hearts and souls into this house and I know for a fact that if they weren't being forced out they'd stay until either the sinkhole took the house or they passed away otherwise. Sucks. LiterallyAnything fucked around with this message at 23:30 on Mar 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 23:24
|
|
|
Brady posted:I just got news that my parents house is being condemned. They had some land surveyors or whatever out there to test the soil because there was a noticeable crack on the outside exterior. A few days later the test results came back and they are apparently sitting on a sinkhole (florida.gif). Yes, get an attorney. Also, get a second opinion about the stability of the groun? Generally you are entitled to fair market value. What you paid for a house is not relevant (unless it was bought in the immediate past) and similarly what you put into it is not relevant either (very rarely does money spent on rennovations translate to a 1:1 ratio improvement of the houses value.) There are attorneys who specialize in this, look for an Eminent domain attorney, or someone who deals with condemnation matters.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2013 23:45
|
|
|
Choadmaster posted:Get out your ten-foot poles. E/N family law time! There's like 12 things that stick out in your tale of woe that make me wince. But rather than pick them out and yell into the ether about it, I think the only thing that needs to be screamed at her is to GET A LAWYER. YESTERDAY. She's basically alone versus a lawyer. In the spectrum of bad ideas, it's somewhere between driving drunk and unprotected sex with a hitchiker. She needs to do anything humanly possible to get a lawyer, and then follow that lawyers advice. She needs an attorney so bad it hurts. She's like stage 4 defcon 1 red alert, get a lawyer immediately, do not pass go, do not listen to anyone saying to hang in there, necesito un abogado.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 01:20
|
|
|
woozle wuzzle posted:There's like 12 things that stick out in your tale of woe that make me wince. But rather than pick them out and yell into the ether about it, I think the only thing that needs to be screamed at her is to GET A LAWYER. YESTERDAY. Yeah, I've told her so. The issue is it costs her a fortune and the mediation process ultimately means nothing. If they don't agree in mediation (they almost certainly won't), only then does it go to court (and then her lawyer will get involved for sure). Since what happens in mediation is confidential it has zero effect on the later stuff in court so I can see why she's hesitant to spend thousands of dollars on it. Now that it's getting drawn out and that's just adding another month of stress to everyone involved I hope she'll decide it's worth it. I was mostly hoping to get an answer here about whether or not the one month delay would be considered unreasonable or not (basically, is it even worth fighting for an earlier date or should she just wait the month and proceed as before?). Thanks for the response.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 01:35
|
|
|
Choadmaster posted:I was mostly hoping to get an answer here about whether or not the one month delay would be considered unreasonable or not (basically, is it even worth fighting for an earlier date or should she just wait the month and proceed as before?). I don't know CA, but it does not strike me as an unreasonable delay (legally speaking, not in reality speaking). It'd take her a month to get a hearing on it anyway. Unless there's some emergency with the kids, like one parent has cut off the other one due to allegations of abuse, the court's not in a hurry to get it done. Not to belittle her problems, but IMO it doesn't amount to a case that a judge will expedite. She needs to consult with an attorney even for mediation. She can easily get bamboozled by the father into agreeing into something, and all of a sudden it's binding by court order and he files for child support against her or some weird poo poo. Cost is a huge factor: it will be thousands of dollars. But she's at the point where she needs to bite the bullet. I'm sure she'd lay out thousands for her kids, and the time has come to pay the piper. Tell her to buck up, cause now she at least has a month to find an attorney 
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 01:53
|
|
|
Brady posted:I just got news that my parents house is being condemned. They had some land surveyors or whatever out there to test the soil because there was a noticeable crack on the outside exterior. A few days later the test results came back and they are apparently sitting on a sinkhole (florida.gif). I used to investigate and repair sinkhole damage in Florida. What really sucks for homeowners is that Florida law recently changed to make sinkhole insurance an optional rider, instead of being included. There is a lot more detail to it, but the bottom line is that if your parents elected not to pay for the rider (which I've read can more than double the cost of insurance, especially in parts of Hillsboro and surrounding counties) then you aren't going to get anything from insurance. There is a possible bright side, though. Some insurance companies offer coverage for "catastrophic ground collapse" for cheaper than sinkhole coverage. If your parents have that, then they probably qualify. The requirements to be compensated under that are that the house must sustain significant structural damage, such that part or all of it may be unsafe. So, if your house is condemned, and they have the cheaper optional coverage, they may get out ok. I would read through your coverage before you call a lawyer. Usually, if your house is condemned, the insurance will make an offer. If a lawyer takes your case, usually they charge at least 25%, so unless a lawyer can get your offer raised by at least the amount of his cut you won't be ahead. If you do have sinkhole coverage, and your insurance company is trying to deny that it is a sinkhole, but you think it is, (this seems unclear, given the response from a bank or maybe insurance) then lawyer up right away. There have been a lot of changes in the laws in just the past few years, so I might be off on some of this. I'll try to look up some more information on it tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 03:44
|
|
|
xxEightxx posted:get a second opinion Apparently this costs 10k and the insurance company said they won't do it. The insurance company just wants to settle, they are refusing to insure them any further. bigpolar posted:I used to investigate and repair sinkhole damage in Florida. That's really great information, thank you. I guess then my parents are lucky that the bank even offered to settle. I'm not sure what they have insurance wise, but I guess it was enough to have the bank offer them what I assume is close to market value. Sounds like they are lucky to get even that, huh?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 04:01
|
|
|
Brady posted:That's really great information, thank you. I guess then my parents are lucky that the bank even offered to settle. I'm not sure what they have insurance wise, but I guess it was enough to have the bank offer them what I assume is close to market value. Sounds like they are lucky to get even that, huh? The course of action I saw most was people taking the insurance payout, not repairing the property and then selling cheap to one of the "we buy broken houses" companies. The company usually then makes enough stopgap structural repairs to get the house un condemned and then rents it out. Here's something no one in the area likes to admit: the sinkholes are only going to get more frequent and more severe. This is due to the over pumping of the Floridian aquifer, primarily for drinking water. And demand is only going to increase as the population grows. Coastal cities are trying to get into reverse osmosis desalination, but it costs about 10 times as much as pumping, and the water doesn't taste as good. If you have a chance to move out take it. Although, if they really do have recent improvements, then you might want to look into an independent appraisal, but I don't know how to make the insurance company accept it. If you can get an independent appraisal it might be enough leverage to get a slightly better off without going to court, but you'll be out the cost of the appraisal regardless. It will be less expensive than getting an attorney involved, but you may have to do that anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 19:39
|
|
|
My friend is in a lovely situation and is asking me for advice. This is all I know of what happened: About two weeks ago there was an argument between her and one of her friends. It ended up as a physical fight. Her friends boyfriend ended up getting involved and she ended up getting thrown to the ground hitting her head. She regained consciousness as the police were hand cuffing her. She went to the ER with a mild concussion and some bruised ribs. The police asked both of them multiple times if either wanted to press charges. At the time both declined. This Monday she found out her friend changed her mind and now she is facing an assault and battery charge. I have no idea who started it or if its even relevant. She went down to the police station to try and press charges of her own against the guy who threw her down and was told that she can't and that the DA is now determining what to do next. This sounds like bs to me, can she still bring her own charges? She is very distraught at the possibility of arrest and jail. It would be catastrophic to her, she would become homeless and would be impossible for her to continue work in her profession. I believe her friend knows this and is pressing charges to be vindictive. I'm worried for my friend since the only witnesses present are close friends of the other party and would likely not be honest. It's essentially her word vs theirs. In situations like these what's the likely outcome? I think it would be unlikely the person who ended up in the ER while the other party walked away would be facing charges. She's maybe 120 pounds and 5'6" while the guy who threw her down is a physically imposing tow truck driver. I've urged her to get a lawyer but she is completely broke. I've also urged her to sever all contact with this person, not respond to her calls etc. but I'm not sure what else to tell her. Is there anything she should be trying to do? Is there anything to avoid? This all happened in California. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 21:16
|
|
|
She shouldn't go near the DA. The charging choice is always up to the DA not the parties. She should shut up and ask for a PD at her first court date if she gets one. We're good, promise. (Except certain counties with contract people)
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 21:25
|
|
|
nm posted:She shouldn't go near the DA. The charging choice is always up to the DA not the parties. Thanks. I was under the impression that public defenders were overworked and generally not available for cases like this. Is it likely she would be appointed one in this case? If there was no arrest at the time how does the DA get information on what actually happened? Would there be a police report from when they were called? This all seems so one sided against my friend since as far as I know she's not been able to tell her side at all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 21:35
|
|
|
If there's any UK lawyer types I have a question about my father's divorce. My parents were officially divorced in the middle of last year after a years separation following my mother leaving the family home. My mother wrote up several complaints in her divorce papers, which painted my father as verbally abusive and controlling to the point of the court placing a gagging order upon him. My father declined to draw up any complaints and on the advice of his lawyer he didn't object to any terms of the divorce, turned up to the court dates and eventually it was all settled. It's recently come to light that the reason for my mother getting a divorce was not because she was unhappy in the marriage but because she's been having a three year affair with one of her colleagues, and (according to another colleague at her workplace) she has kept this quiet so the divorce would go smoothly. This can apparently be confirmed through witnesses at her place of work, phone records (which my father still has in his possession), and the wife of the man who my mother was supposedly cheating with. Due to the divorce terms my father has been forced to sell his home and give half of everything to my mother, even paying for half of the cost of her lawyer. He has been wondering whether he should get in touch with his lawyer in order to appeal the terms of the divorce because he thinks due to the adultery and lies in court, he feels the terms were unfair. Is there any way this could be done or even any point in trying to re-open the divorce case?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 04:49
|
|
|
He should definitely get in touch with his lawyer, but I doubt he should be looking to get the terms of the divorce altered now they're financially severed. That ship's almost certainly sailed. More likely is that her lies about his behaviour coupled with her infidelity and, most importantly, her neglecting to mention that fidelity, give him multiple avenues to seek remedy for economic loss caused by whatever terms of the divorce would have been different if these facts had come to light.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 05:52
|
|
|
Ne Cede Malis posted:This all seems so one sided against my friend since as far as I know she's not been able to tell her side at all. -Not a lawyer- If this is true, she's better off than you think. Because she's the one accused of a crime, prior to the trial the only opportunities she could possibly get are chances to testify against herself.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 06:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 12:07 |
|
|
Ne Cede Malis posted:Thanks. I was under the impression that public defenders were overworked and generally not available for cases like this. Is it likely she would be appointed one in this case? If there was no arrest at the time how does the DA get information on what actually happened? Would there be a police report from when they were called? This all seems so one sided against my friend since as far as I know she's not been able to tell her side at all. Speaking as a public defender, we are overworked, but that means we have experience. We're better, on average, than 90% of the losers on the private bar -- we actually want to do this. poo poo, 800 people applied for my job (we had 3 openings). We get the best (well, I slithered in). We can be appointed in anything that could send you to jail. A misdo 242 is exactly that. People are so loving obsessed with telling their side. Not telling her side protects her from saying something that completely fucks you over. You don't have a working knowledge of the actual elements of self-defense or necessity, so it is bets to shut up until you talk to someone who is a: on your side b: knows the law c: bound to to tell anyone what you said, even if it makes you guilty The number of clients I have who proclaim their innocence only to find out they're technically guilty astounds me. Also, the DA and police's job is to convict. They are not truth seeking and going to talk to them is like talking to a den of wolves. If they're out to convict your friend they will get something that hurts her, even if she is innocent. Why exactly do you think that innocent people go to jail? Seriously "We just want to hear your side of the story" starts 95% of interviews that send people to prison. They're not all guilty.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 06:33
|
|