|
Just a hypothetical situation I came up with after watching some Russian dash cam videos. Not sure if it varies by state, but we'll say it is a state with a single party consent audio recording law. Scummy Steve, Responsible Rick, and Watchful Willie are all driving along and pull up to a red light in that order. Scummy Steve knows that getting rear-ended is always the fault of the guy behind you, so he puts his car in reverse and backs into Responsible Rick, then gets out and makes a big show about how it is all Rick's fault for not paying attention and rear-ending him. Scummy Steve offers to let the matter go if Rick gives him some cash. Meanwhile, Watchful Willie has his dash cam running and has clear video and audio evidence of everything. Willie is an honest guy and doesn't like what Scummy Steve is doing, so he pulls Responsible Rick aside and tells him that he has video and audio evidence of the accident and the blackmail attempt. Can Watchful Willie selectively decide who he is going to give evidence to? If the cops show up and ask for witness statements, does Watchful Willie have to say that he recorded everything and gave a copy to Responsible Rick? Does he have to give a copy to the police? If Watchful Willie legally gave Responsible Rick a copy of the audio/video without anybody else knowing. Would Rick be better off telling Scummy Steve about it on the spot to avoid further bullshit, or should he keep that ace in the hole until court day when Scummy Steve lies to the judge about what happened and then show the video to the court to prove Steve is lying?
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 04:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:11 |
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:Can Watchful Willie selectively decide who he is going to give evidence to? If the cops show up and ask for witness statements, does Watchful Willie have to say that he recorded everything and gave a copy to Responsible Rick? Does he have to give a copy to the police? Willie does not have to volunteer anything to the police, but in most jurisdictions he can't lie by commission to the police if they question him. (though they can lie to him without repercussion) SkunkDuster posted:If Watchful Willie legally gave Responsible Rick a copy of the audio/video without anybody else knowing. Would Rick be better off telling Scummy Steve about it on the spot to avoid further bullshit, or should he keep that ace in the hole until court day when Scummy Steve lies to the judge about what happened and then show the video to the court to prove Steve is lying?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 05:01
|
|
|
tishthedish posted:My company's HR EEO investigator. EEOC discovery rules seem to suggest that you're only entitled to all the company's documents after the claim investigation is concluded, and a hearing has been requested. Although I'm not certain about this, it is clear that if you don't like their answers tomorrow, you can always request a formal hearing and if it's discovered that they failed to provide you with all legally required documents during the investigation, they will be in deep poo poo. So ask for everything, and take careful notes of what they tell you you aren't allowed to see. Also, I would seriously suggest retaining an attorney for the hearing process, if it goes that far.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 06:15
|
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:
Rick would have to turn the video over to Steve (assuming Steve's lawyers propounded proper discovery requests) months before the case ever went to trial. Steve would see the video before he ever took the stand. P.s., withholding evidence like that from cops who ask for it is called "obstruction of justice" and it's a crime. Watchful Willie would need to be extra watchful of his butthole in jail.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 06:20
|
|
|
by the way, this sounds like a law school exam sample question, cut and pasted.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 06:22
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:by the way, this sounds like a law school exam sample question, cut and pasted. True that. It has law school/bar prep essay written all over it. There's also that single party consent issue. Watchful, being uninvolved, isn't that single consenting party. Admitting to making the recording would be self incriminating if it is a crime. The incident did, however, occur in public where there's no reasonable expectation of privacy, so watchful might have committed no crime by recording the incident. It therefor depends on the specific wording of the statue and on case law as to whether watchful can be compelled to give up the tape. In an essay, you pick one outcome or another and then argue the law toward that end. I'd go with the no crime because of public venue. Therefor watchful can be compelled to provide the recording.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 19:03
|
|
|
My wife and I are needing to get a will written up. Are there sources available to make our own will? We do not have money available to get one set up with a lawyer. What would lawyers recommend to make our own will?
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2013 05:08
|
|
|
If you have actual, substantial assets and/or unique circumstances, you should hire a lawyer. Even if you don't, a lawyer will likely save you money in the long run by avoiding common problems, taxes, administration costs, etc. It's not my area, but I'd be surprised if a run of the mill will costs very much. If you're just putting a will together because you want to have a will, just use Legalzoom or whatever other site is out there and cross your fingers that everything works as planned when it needs to. If your situtation is relatively simple, you can probably do as good a job as Legalzoom by using legal self help books available at a bookstore. Lots of law schools also keep materials like that around for the nearby community to use, so you may want to look into that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2013 15:29
|
|
|
Additionally, depending on your income, there may be other resources available to help with probate (estate-related) issues. For example, the DC Bar runs a Probate Resource Center, which helps people on a walk-in basis with simple probate problems. See if your local bar or local law school offers something similar.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2013 17:00
|
|
|
Bizarro Kanyon posted:My wife and I are needing to get a will written up. Are there sources available to make our own will? We do not have money available to get one set up with a lawyer. What would lawyers recommend to make our own will? Each of the follow things increases your need to pay $600 - $1000 for an attorney. - children - children from other relationships - net worth of $50,000 or greater - serious medical conditions - desire that the other spouse not be the sole recipient of all property upon death - large assets obtained prior to marriage by individual spouse - larges assets obtained by gift or bequest(from dead relative) by individual spouse If two or more of these apply to you, get a lawyer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2013 18:26
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Each of the follow things increases your need to pay $600 - $1000 for an attorney. A simple (Everything to spouse, save certain things for children) will should cost about $350.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2013 19:41
|
|
|
I do stuff with the Open Data movement in Canada. I've been asked by the people that manage the Canadian Legal Information Institute to do some work with their new API to, basically, "do something interesting". So, legal people, what kind of interesting project should we do? This could be something like combining data from the legal database with any other sort of online service, or writing a web interface to access data in a more useful way, or analyzing cases to find instances of judge bias, or anything else!
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2013 18:36
|
|
|
EAT THE EGGS RICOLA posted:I do stuff with the Open Data movement in Canada. I've been asked by the people that manage the Canadian Legal Information Institute to do some work with their new API to, basically, "do something interesting". One of the more interesting textbooks I've read was an annotated Criminal Code. It would be fascinating if relevant keywords from statutes linked to judgments that Provincial or Federal Supremes have made on those topics.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2013 19:03
|
|
|
EAT THE EGGS RICOLA posted:I do stuff with the Open Data movement in Canada. I've been asked by the people that manage the Canadian Legal Information Institute to do some work with their new API to, basically, "do something interesting". Speaking of Judge Bias, how about a tool that lets you generate a report on any given judge that shows the percentage of rulings they issue in favor of the plaintiff vs. the defendant? Or the State(Territory?) vs. Criminal defendants? Particularly compared to what the general national trend is. Then you could type in your judge and be all like: "Judge Maplesyrup: Likes some Defendants, eh? 67% of the time, finds for the Defendant, compared to the National Trend of 55% " Further, if you could break down rulings by case category, like evictions, criminal cases, contract disputes, then you would have a tool that anybody could use. Ninja Edit: Imagine this, "CNN Reports - New study shows that Canadian Courts find in favor of Toboggan Companies in 99% of contract disputes, according to new information from the CanLII database." blarzgh fucked around with this message at 19:58 on Jul 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2013 19:55
|
|
|
My husband is partially deaf, to the point where he can't use the phone, but he does fairly well in person. He has hearing aids that do help in certain situations. He has had three interviews within the company he works for in last 6 months for positions that he is qualified for, has passed all aptitude and physical tests for and in accordance with the job policy, has been the #1 seniority position bidding for the job. All three interviews he has failed to get the job. They never make reference to his hearing issue of course, but we suspect that it is playing a role, as at all three interviews he was wearing his hearing aids and did have to ask for a couple questions or remarks to be repeated. The reasons they have given for not giving him his job are, in our opinion, weak. All three positions have been given instead to some of his colleagues who have less experience, less seniority, etc. Speaking with one of the people that got a job over him, they said they don't doubt he didn't get the position due to his hearing. We live in California and my husband is part of a union, however since he is a part-time employee at the company, the union doesn't seem to care about the issues. My question is how hard is it to prove discrimination? Is it something worth discussing with a lawyer?
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2013 21:26
|
|
|
Bodnoirbabe posted:
Depends on the facts. Yes. A plaintiffs employment lawyer will not likely charge you anything or much to discuss your case. Although with being in a union things could get radically complex with charges of ineffective representation etc etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2013 21:28
|
|
|
I'm not sure if this is the right place for this, but it has to do with a speeding ticket and hey, that's breaking the law, right? So I bought a new (to me) car on the Fourth after my previous car was totaled and, naturally, I had some fun driving it that afternoon. Well, I went past a cop doing 66 in a 45 mph zone, and he pulled me over and wrote me a speeding ticket. I just noticed that he listed the year of my car incorrectly as "13" rather than the 09 that it actually is. Would I be able to get this ticket dropped if I brought that to the attention of the court? I know it seems minor, but it's a $215 ticket that I'd seriously like to avoid paying. The ticket was written in Illinois though I live in Indiana now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2013 21:38
|
|
|
Lawnie posted:I'm not sure if this is the right place for this, but it has to do with a speeding ticket and hey, that's breaking the law, right? No.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2013 21:42
|
|
|
Lawnie posted:it's a $215 ticket that I'd seriously like to avoid paying.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2013 21:44
|
|
|
Is 66 in a 45 21 mph over the limit. Or am I missing something.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2013 21:46
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Is 66 in a 45 21 mph over the limit. Or am I missing something. Yeah but since his car is a 2009, not a 2013, it's actually 17 over.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2013 21:51
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Is 66 in a 45 21 mph over the limit. Or am I missing something. Yes indeed it is, and it was awfully dumb of me! Anyway, thanks for the replies, snarky as they were. Figured it was worth a try.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2013 21:53
|
|
|
I've never known union reps to be so dismissive of a complaint, part time employees or otherwise. Maybe since my state is so anti-union, they just get real excited here when they have something to do.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2013 00:35
|
|
|
Relative of mine is looking at a divorce. They are in Washington (King county if that matters), what is he looking at in ballpark terms for lawyer costs for this? They have two kids, but not much in the way of assets (a house with probably little to no equity that neither can afford to keep on their own). Neither have a ton of money, but this is turning into a hurricane of drama, and they just need to get the ball rolling. Maneki Neko fucked around with this message at 07:56 on Jul 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2013 07:53
|
|
|
So if you are sent a email about how you have been infringing on X people's copyrights and you need to check out this website to settle should you just ignore it until you get actual mailed letters? Legal notices can't be served via email right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2013 13:50
|
|
|
Maneki Neko posted:Relative of mine is looking at a divorce. They are in Washington (King county if that matters), what is he looking at in ballpark terms for lawyer costs for this? This divorce in my jurisdiction would cost anywhere from 2K-10K depending on the custody issues. That is for one side. Custody is the wildcard. As you know the couple cannot hire the same attorney. King County I don't know, but it looks urban. That could make things more expensive or cheaper, depending.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2013 14:06
|
|
|
anglachel posted:So if you are sent a email about how you have been infringing on X people's copyrights and you need to check out this website to settle should you just ignore it until you get actual mailed letters? Legal notices can't be served via email right? Not right, but you are probably being shaken down and/or scammed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2013 14:11
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:Not right, but you are probably being shaken down and/or scammed. What action would you recommend? It's being forwarded to me from my service provider so I'm assuming it's a shakedown.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2013 14:42
|
|
|
anglachel posted:What action would you recommend? It's being forwarded to me from my service provider so I'm assuming it's a shakedown. This is useful information. The request is probably legit and now you should talk to a lawyer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2013 14:47
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:This is useful information. The request is probably legit and now you should talk to a lawyer. Thanks, I suspected I needed one, just wanted to make sure it wasn't some standard shakedown scheme just designed to scare you. Already got a consultation scheduled for this week.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2013 15:19
|
|
|
euphronius posted:King County I don't know, but it looks urban. That could make things more expensive or cheaper, depending. King County is pretty much just Seattle, which means that the cost of living (and thus a lawyer's rates) will be relatively high, but also means that there will be relatively more young and hungry lawyers who might take on a case for less.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2013 16:27
|
|
|
euphronius posted:As you know the couple cannot hire the same attorney. The couple can, however, approach a lawyer and request an uncontested divorce. The lawyer will eventually ask who's name should go one the engagement letter or something to that effect. The correct answer is "me." The lawyer will be mostly fair to both parties because that's what the client wants. Mostly fair. The lawyer will favor the named client.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2013 17:22
|
|
|
anglachel posted:What action would you recommend? It's being forwarded to me from my service provider so I'm assuming it's a shakedown. flakeloaf posted:This is useful information. The request is probably legit and now you should talk to a lawyer. It depends.... The service provider's contact info might have been the most or most easily available. For future reference, spill a little more info. Facts matter. For example, who is the alleged copyright holder? Prenda law gets one response, Getty Images gets another. Regardless, engage a lawyer. There are too many unknowns for anyone here on SA to provide a reasoned response. Side note, my law firm got copyright dinged after a contract "web designer" grabbed an image off the internet and plopped it into our site. We ended up paying instead of fighting even though we have copyright specialists. The point is that even lawyers won't risk their own time and money when the copyright holder is right. Especially when the cost was only a few thousand.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2013 17:42
|
|
|
patentmagus posted:The couple can, however, approach a lawyer and request an uncontested divorce. The lawyer will eventually ask who's name should go one the engagement letter or something to that effect. The correct answer is "me." The lawyer will be mostly fair to both parties because that's what the client wants. Mostly fair. The lawyer will favor the named client. This is radically unethical. What the christ.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2013 17:46
|
|
|
anglachel posted:So if you are sent a email about how you have been infringing on X people's copyrights and you need to check out this website to settle should you just ignore it until you get actual mailed letters? Legal notices can't be served via email right? Absent anything else, notice served through email is generally not valid. There has been a push towards electronic service, but that generally involves third party service providers. A judge can order that email is valid service (or the parties can stipulate), but that would generally only be after a properly noticed motion and hearing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2013 18:44
|
|
|
patentmagus posted:The couple can, however, approach a lawyer and request an uncontested divorce. The lawyer will eventually ask who's name should go one the engagement letter or something to that effect. The correct answer is "me." The lawyer will be mostly fair to both parties because that's what the client wants. Mostly fair. The lawyer will favor the named client. It's all fine and dandy until someone decides to start fighting in the divorce and if a divorce is turning into a "hurricane of drama"...
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2013 19:02
|
|
|
euphronius posted:This is radically unethical. What the christ. Yeah, that's pretty much the example of how to get in trouble with the state bar in every single ethics CLE.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2013 19:22
|
|
|
A couple can pay for divorce mediation together but that is not the same thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2013 19:56
|
|
|
xxEightxx posted:Absent anything else, notice served through email is generally not valid. There has been a push towards electronic service, but that generally involves third party service providers. A judge can order that email is valid service (or the parties can stipulate), but that would generally only be after a properly noticed motion and hearing. What the proper Form of Notice of a claim is depends on what the notice is for. Telling someone that you have a Deceptive trade practices act claim in my state can be presented via email, for example. Notice of suit must always be by personal service, by certified mail, or by publication in special circumstances. A threatening email is usually legally meaningless, but copyright claims may have special rules concerning the recovery of attorneys fees or exemplary damages dependent on presentation of the claim. I don't know.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 02:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:11 |
|
|
euphronius posted:This is radically unethical. What the christ. Yes it is. And it happens a lot. Particularly in low income communities.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 02:58
|
|