|
Kalman posted:Like most such hypotheticals, it's not "report and get fired" that triggers liability, it's "report and get fired for being a whistleblower." If they have documented reasons for dismissal, you won't recover anything. They might have to spend money on the lawsuit, but you might have to also. Related hypothetical: Let's say I have an employee who is paranoid about getting fired and thinks the whistleblower thing will protect him, so he reports something spurious every couple of months or so. He is an otherwise good employee, but I am sick of dealing with this. What happens if I fire him?
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2014 20:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 10:05 |
|
|
Betazoid posted:Okay, I'll try to provide all necessary information in timeline format to make it easier to follow. Nobody going to touch this one? I would love to get this resolved. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 06:35
|
|
QUESTION
|
He lives in China and you live in Virginia? He's essentially judgement proof in my not-lawyerly opinion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 06:38
|
|
|
So, to update my earlier post: On December 27th I filed for a disclosure of my former landlord's assets and liabilities. It was mailed to and received by him on January 8th. On December 30th, he filed a Motion to Overturn Default Judgement, consisting of 2 paragraphs stating basically " I couldn't come to court a month ago due to my mom's medical emergency and also I properly deducted damages from [my] security deposit". I filed an Opposition to his motion on January 8th, stating that A) He did NOT properly deduct any alleged damages, being that he did not send me any kind of bill until 6 months after I moved out, with his claims being falsified and B) The center he claimed he went to for emergency medical service is actually a by-appointment-only center ( I did Nursing Clinicals there), along with 11 pages of evidence on how he did nothing properly and how he must've had an appointment to go to this certain doctor. I guess my question is if he doesn't respond to the Assets and Liabilities form, when I go to file the Show Cause for Contempt papers....what happens then? Is he technically not in contempt due to his Motion, or does the original judgment still stand until overturned? Do we both go to court and I try to prove he is in Contempt for not paying the original judgement and then refusing to answer the questionnaire? Then he gets a Bench Warrant even if he shows up or what? Then, once he gets a Bench Warrant, what do I do?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 07:58
|
|
|
Betazoid posted:Nobody going to touch this one? I would love to get this resolved. You would have to take him to small claims. First you would need to serve him which sounds from your narrative almost impossible. Both filing a claim and paying to have him served will cost you money. Assuming you actually manage to serve him it sure doesn't sound like he is going to show up to court so you'll probably win. But that doesn't get you your money. He's not going to start paying you just because you have a judgement against him. So then you have to start whatever process your state allows to recover an unpaid judgement. In California anyway that also costs money and you have to file more paperwork with the court. Now having done all that what assets does he actually have that you can take? Nothing within the US it sounds like. So like Ricola said the guy is basically judgement proof. Having said that all that I don't know anything about lawyering I'm just some dude who went through small claims and then had to set up a wage garnishment when the person wouldn't pay. Maybe an actual lawyer will chime in but from what I know I don't see the point of you actually hiring a lawyer since the amount is so small and I don't know what they could do any differently than what you would do going through small claims.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 16:17
|
|
|
Queen Elizatits posted:You would have to take him to small claims. First you would need to serve him which sounds from your narrative almost impossible. Both filing a claim and paying to have him served will cost you money. Assuming you actually manage to serve him it sure doesn't sound like he is going to show up to court so you'll probably win. But that doesn't get you your money. He's not going to start paying you just because you have a judgement against him. All this stuff about how the legal system is basically worthless if you need to collect sub-$10,000 personal debts makes me really understand why people hire a guy to hit somebody with a pipe from time to time
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 16:19
|
|
|
The legal system isn't totally useless for smaller claims, but when the person that owes you money is destitute/lives in a foreign country/is a very rude ghost/the dispute is several years old like in most of the questions in this thread, then yeah, you're probably never gonna see that money.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 16:24
|
|
|
Betazoid posted:Nobody going to touch this one? I would love to get this resolved. The best you can do is to try and spread the exact truth about what happened to everyone that comes in contact with him and keep it up at a grueling pace. If you do a good enough job at it, you can hope that he asks you to stop if you pay. And don't make any more deals with him until he pays. Sounds obvious but he could easily do the "Please stop and I'll pay you but I won't have the money for 2 weeks". Until you actually get the money, don't stop.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 16:38
|
|
|
Can anyone tell me what I should be doing if I got a notice that I'm being sued? I'm in connecticut and the letter they sent me doesn't really tell me what I should be doing. I know the OP says not to discuss this stuff but I figure vague details are ok? Its about a student loan thing. I don't have any money for a lawyer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 19:11
|
|
|
Betazoid posted:Nobody going to touch this one? I would love to get this resolved. IANAL though I am a web designer and have seen/help write a bunch of contracts in the past. Unless he comes back into the country and you feel like taking him to court, you're not going to see that money again. He's probably in breach of his own terms depending on how the contract was written so you could probably make a case in small claims. What's more, often if you make a small claims filing and the other party doesn't show up (which this guy surely won't), the judge will rule in your favor by default. However then you have to go about collecting, and how are you going to do that with him in China? He might have assets in the US, but who knows. Your best bet is to write this off and never work with him again. Don't try to get help finding a job from him because he's obviously a skeevy dude. This all comes from my past experiences with overseas freelancers. I will never use a freelancer that's not in the US again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
Betazoid posted:Nobody going to touch this one? I would love to get this resolved. He's more than judgement proof. This hypothetical has jurisdiction and venue problems written all over it. Maybe, just maybe, someone will do the required legal research so that the can write up a law review article. Yes, it really is that bad. Let's see... The contract was signed when Pl lived in TX and Def in FL. Did the contract have any jurisdiction and venue clauses? Where was it signed? Based on the facts so far, it's likely that the only place Pl can file suit and have it stick is in FL 'cause that's where Def lived. So, PL files the claim. Now he needs to serve Def with the papers. In China. Time to pull up the FL statutes for serving someone in a foreign country. Get the drift? You'll likely spend a few grand just to get the suit filed and served. We haven't even touched breach of contract and statutes of limitations yet. tehloki posted:All this stuff about how the legal system is basically worthless if you need to collect sub-$10,000 personal debts makes me really understand why people hire a guy to hit somebody with a pipe from time to time How inefficient. You sell the debt and the guy with the pipe collects. Another option is to sell the debt to a more civilized collection agency, but they only pay pennies on the dollar. blackflare posted:Can anyone tell me what I should be doing if I got a notice that I'm being sued? ... I don't have any money for a lawyer. Find some money and talk to a lawyer. The first thing that sounds odd is that you "received a notice" that you're being sued. Were you served with a court summons or did you just receive a letter in the mail? If you don't know the difference, take the "notice" to a lawyer. patentmagus fucked around with this message at 20:30 on Jan 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 20:12
|
|
|
Arkane posted:I bought a home warranty for 2012 (didn't renew for 2013). I had one of my toilets break in 2012 and I paid the $55 home warranty fee for someone to come out and fix it. So yesterday I get a call from the plumbing company that they have tried to recover $30 from this home warranty company and they have been unsuccessful. They are trying to get me to pay it. Posted this earlier in the small questions thread....I thought "nah I don't have to pay" and two people agreed. Not that $30 is a huge burden, but it's more that I think it's ridiculous that they are requesting this of me. Anyway, that post was a couple of weeks ago. Now I just got a letter of intent to lien my house from this company. For $30. (The certified letter cost $6 to mail, but I digress...) I live in the state of Nevada. The work was fully completed in July of 2012 or approximately 550 days ago. Relevant statutes: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-108.html If I am understanding the statutes right, it has to be an over $500 lien for them to attempt to...foreclose? (108.2214)...or file in the first place? so no potential trouble there. And according to NRS 108.226, an intent to lien has to have been recorded within 90 days of completion of the service. That wasn't done if I am just receiving it now, eh? So I am in the clear here? If and when they file it, I can just petition to get it removed without involving a lawyer? And if I am understanding the statutes right, if I have to hire legal representation, they are liable for the costs in removing the lien (NRS 108.2275). Thanks in advance for any response!
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 21:11
|
|
|
This is not legal advice: Pay them $30. This is legal advice: do not listen to LLJKSiLk.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
Arkane posted:Posted this earlier in the small questions thread....I thought "nah I don't have to pay" and two people agreed. Not that $30 is a huge burden, but it's more that I think it's ridiculous that they are requesting this of me. Anyway, that post was a couple of weeks ago. It's $30. The time you've already spent researching the issue was worth more than that. Cut your loss and pay them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
Arkane posted:Posted this earlier in the small questions thread....I thought "nah I don't have to pay" and two people agreed. Not that $30 is a huge burden, but it's more that I think it's ridiculous that they are requesting this of me. Anyway, that post was a couple of weeks ago. Pay the $30, he did the work and deserves to be paid. Did you ever call the warranty company to find out why, or even if, they didn't pay?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 23:03
|
|
|
euphronius posted:This is not legal advice: Pay them $30. This. I don't know Nevada mechanic's lien statutes and I don't have time to check, but I do this work for a living and you do NOT want to end up with a lien on your property over $30. It will cost you an order of magnitude more to clear even an invalid lien, and in the meantime it will hurt your credit and cloud the title to your residence.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2014 23:17
|
|
|
Thanks for the replies guys.the milk machine posted:This. In your experience, why would it cost me an order of magnitude more? I can represent myself and get it expunged/dismissed as frivolous if it is clearly so...or am I wrong? Or is it too difficult? Time commitment wouldn't deter me...might even be fun. It would appear clear cut to me that they have violated the time limitation statute (90 days) -- and their own documentation reflects that date. As far as my reading of the other statute goes, liens cannot be filed for less than $500. So it is 0/2. To me it's not so much the money aspect as it is the principle of them trying to bully me into money that I do not owe them. They entered into an agreement with a home warranty company, and have been unable to collect. The home warranty company reneged on their agreement, not me. I owed them $55 and they were paid that day. 18 months later, they try to hit me up for this pittance sum and send me an intent to lien. Give me a break. I guess I am just stubborn as to why I want to fight it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 00:29
|
|
|
What does the home warranty company have to say? Did they ever pay the plumber?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
The home warranty company hired the plumber on your behalf, to do work on your home. Ultimately you were responsible for paying the plumber, although you can recover the $30 from the home warranty company if you want. This will likely take many hours, and may cause you to miss work. Over the price of a movie ticket and popcorn.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 00:44
|
|
|
Arkane posted:
If they can't be filed for less than $500, then someone would have stopped it when they were entering one for $30. If the guy wasn't paid for the work he did, he most certainly can put a lien on(barring other restrictions). What costs more to do, pay $30 or take time off work and away from other things in your life to go through this hassle? It's the principle, isn't it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 00:46
|
|
|
Arkane posted:Thanks for the replies guys. Well, first, it won't be fun. It's not like you can just drive down to the court house, walk into the courtroom, and explain that you need to clear an invalid lien. You may have valid arguments regarding notice and the $500 amount, but to make those arguments requires that you initiate litigation (or respond to litigation initiated by the opposing party). You'll spend more than $30 just in court costs. Even though the statute allows you to recover costs and attorney's fees for a frivolous lien, you don't get that until you get a judgment from the court, which you then have to figure out how to collect--the other party won't usually just cut you a check. It's definitely possible, maybe even likely, that the plumber is blowing smoke up your rear end and trying to scare you, and I suspect that if what you're telling us is accurate, the plumber would probably have a hard time finding a lawyer to prepare and file their lien. You may even be able to litigate the lien and have it removed on your own without an attorney. If you need to hire an attorney, the best case is that you're out of pocket a decent-sized retainer, the attorney refunds you whatever he doesn't bill you for, then you get your actual attorney's fees from the plumber after several months to a year (consider also that if you don't hire an attorney and you screw it up, you'll spend even more having an attorney fix your mess). However, there is literally no reason to even risk having to go through any of this over $30. The way I see it is this: assuming their lien would be invalid, even with the possibility of recovering your attorney's fees, you're essentially deciding whether $30 is worth the risk of being out of pocket several thousand dollars for several months. I understand wanting to fight something over the principle alone, but that is rarely a rational decision. Look at it this way: if there was an option to just pay $30 and have the entire situation resolved with no mess and no effort, you'd take it in a heartbeat. (this option actually exists) Edit: chemosh6969 posted:If they can't be filed for less than $500, then someone would have stopped it when they were entering one for $30. I think what Arkane received is a notice of intent to file a lien; I don't believe a lien has actually been recorded yet. the milk machine fucked around with this message at 01:01 on Jan 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
Hey guys, a legit company did legit work for me, and apparently they are still owed a pittance, which they are trying to collect. They think I'm on the hook for it, but I disagree and think I can represent myself in this matter. Should I gamble my house on this? tia
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 00:58
|
|
|
Seriously. Call your home warranty company and explain. See what they say. If they say they paid the guy, ask them to put it in writing. If you don't have it in writing, pay the 30 bucks to avoid the trouble.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 01:09
|
|
|
Dammit. Thank you, everyone. I am just pissed about the whole thing because $1800 is not a small sum to me and it would be great to have it back. gently caress that guy. Wish I COULD trash talk him to everyone, but we didn't run in the same circles and I can't just put him on blast on LinkedIn or whatever. It's horseshit, but that's life.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 05:22
|
|
|
I'm in a similar boat. I did a bunch of work a couple of years ago for a contractor, then they never paid my $9,000 bill (by their offered rate) or responded to any of my e-mails. I put in some calls and discovered that this guy's business folded when his employees left because, surprise surprise, they weren't being paid. And there were multiple creditors having online discussions about how to recoup their money from him. I even referred my case to an aboveboard collection agency, but they never responded. So at this point, I've given up on getting any kind of money out of this. It's frustrating, but it would be even more frustrating to devote more time out of my life to basically banging my head against a wall.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 06:01
|
|
|
I was recently bumped down from FT to a contractor position at my job because of inter-office issues. It was a more or less mutual decision. They don't want me in the office (nor do I want to be there), but they want me to continue working for them. I'm not thrilled with the company or the contract offer, but for the mean time (the next month or so) I'm going to work as a contractor. I signed (perhaps foolishly) a non-compete agreement at the beginning of my employment 4 years ago, and then signed an updated (and more onerous) agreement about 2 years ago. I should have signed these things under protest or at least had an attorney read them and modify them - but I didn't. The one from 2 years ago irked me because my boss made signing it a condition of getting my year-end bonus - which was in my offer letter as something I'm supposed to get anyway. This non-compete seems highly unenforcable to me... it basically says I can't work in the same field for 2 years after leaving the company. To be clear, I work in publishing. There's nothing proprietary here. We sell published work online. That's about it. It's a relatively small world, and I know that even if I don't blab about a new position, it's likely that someone is going to find out and tell my old boss. He is known for making a stink over this non-compete, and even if it is mostly unenforcable, I have a feeling he does this just to dissuade people from jumping ship for a better offer and/or to convince other employers not to bother hiring former employees from this company. I know for a fact he involved lawyers after he FIRED my old supervisor and then heard that the guy went to one of our competitors. AND he has a history of fighting people on unemployment after he fires them... So it's either I get a job or I go on unemployment, and it seems like he might fight me on either one! As it is now, there are a few positions I'm interviewing for in this field, and some of them ask you up front in the early stages something like, "are there any non-compete clauses that prevent you from working for XXX." And in my opinion, this non-compete doesn't prevent me from doing anything, because it's ridiculously broad and more or less pointless from a "proprietary knowledge" standpoint. What am I obligated to tell a potential employer? From a legal standpoint, what's my recourse if I get hounded out of a job by this ridiculous non-compete? How should I answer this question if it comes up? Would it make sense to talk to my old employer about this non-compete - and to ask if they plan on enforcing it? I kind of want to not have to worry about this - but I also don't want to tip my hand.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 15:18
|
|
|
Non compete law is very local. Get a local attorney to review it. Asking us forum lawyers to interpret your employment contract and offer you legal advice as to strategies for dealing with it is asking for a lot, really. Generally, non-competes must be reasonable in their restrictions to be enforceable. I've noticed people have stopped really asking hypotheticals. Please ask your question in the form of a hypothetical if possible. Thank you! euphronius fucked around with this message at 15:29 on Jan 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 15:22
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Non compete law is very local. Get a local attorney to review it. Asking us forum lawyers to interpret your employment contract and offer you legal advice as to strategies for dealing with it is asking for a lot, really. Sorry, I'm wondering about hypothetical legal obligations when an employer asks about a non-compete AND what that person might hypothetically do if they get stymied in their job hunt because employers don't want to go through the hassle of playing lawyer tag with the old employer. Also, would it be prudent to hypothetically have an attorney send a letter to the old employer preemptively to nip any of these hijinks in the bud? edited to make it more hypothetical, for research purposes only. tiananman fucked around with this message at 15:43 on Jan 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 15:34
|
|
|
tiananman posted:Sorry, hypothetically I'm wondering about my legal obligations when an employer asks about my non-compete AND I'm hypothetically asking what I can do if I get stymied in my job hunt because employers don't want to go through the hassle of playing lawyer tag with my old employer. Also, would it be hypothetically prudent to have an attorney send a letter to my old employer preemptively to nip any of these hijinks in the bud? That's not what a hypothetical is!
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 15:35
|
|
|
Hahaha a hypothetical will not have the word "I" in it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 15:39
|
|
|
tiananman posted:I was recently bumped down from FT to a contractor position at my job because of inter-office issues. It was a more or less mutual decision. They don't want me in the office (nor do I want to be there), but they want me to continue working for them. I'm not thrilled with the company or the contract offer, but for the mean time (the next month or so) I'm going to work as a contractor. I lost a job 6 years ago, for refusing to sign an uncompensated non-compete. The company actually tried to hide the agreement inside another document that wasn't titled as anything like a no compete. I actually paid to have a lawyer review it (cost me $400). I wasn't sure it was a no compete. He told me it was, but that it was unenforceable. However, to have the agreement voided, I'd have to go to court. He estimated that it would cost me between 3 and 8 thousand dollars, depending on how aggressive they were in fighting it. Asked them to strike or revise the objectionable portions of the agreement. They refused, ordered me to sign it or be fired, and then immediately fired me when I refused. Then they had the nerve to contest my unemployment! That worked out OK though. I sent the unemployment commission a copy of the agreement, and they responded to the company with a threat to fine them if they contested anything like that again. Uncompensated non-compete agreements are just a bad idea in general for the employee. You should at minimum get a package worth your salary and benefits for at least half the duration of the no compete. Otherwise don't accept it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 15:52
|
|
|
People should also understand that they have no way of knowing any poster's qualifications, so if you actually have a real problem that could affect things like your livelihood, your home, or your family, you should spend a couple hundred bucks and talk to an attorney. Even supposed lawyers in this thread have given advice that is flat out wrong in certain jurisdictions; then there's the assorted non-lawyer posters... Don't ask for legal advice from an internet thread on how to handle leaving your job so you don't get sued. That's how you end up tasting your own pee.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 15:56
|
|
|
the milk machine posted:People should also understand that they have no way of knowing any poster's qualifications, so if you actually have a real problem that could affect things like your livelihood, your home, or your family, you should spend a couple hundred bucks and talk to an attorney. Even supposed lawyers in this thread have given advice that is flat out wrong in certain jurisdictions; then there's the assorted non-lawyer posters... To be fair, it was medical goons who got that guy to taste his pee, not law goons.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
Epic Doctor Fetus posted:To be fair, it was medical goons who got that guy to taste his pee, not law goons. Is there a link to this story somewhere? I always though it was just a joke.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 17:09
|
|
|
Epic Doctor Fetus posted:To be fair, it was medical goons who got that guy to taste his pee, not law goons. And we'd do exactly the same thing as soon as we get someone gullible enough...
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
Soylent Pudding posted:Is there a link to this story somewhere? I always though it was just a joke. I'm sure it's in the goldmine somewhere. It was at least 10 years ago.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2014 17:16
|
|
|
Epic Doctor Fetus posted:I'm sure it's in the goldmine somewhere. It was at least 10 years ago. It is. The SAclopedia article for "Taste Your Urine" has a link to it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2014 06:47
|
|
|
I work in MA at a somewhat early stage company, and recently we've been heard some rumblings from our general counsel about not having any more alcohol at company-sponsored events. For background, we're a relatively smaller company (<500), with ~99% of employees being 21+ (those couple of underage interns are strictly prohibited from having any alcohol), and the 'events' are typically happy hours in the kitchen with a couple of cases of beer - we're not talking about any 'Wolf of Wall Street' type behavior, so no kegs rolling off the elevator or people getting hammered then driving somewhere, more like everyone having some snacks and a beer or 2 before heading home on a Friday after a long week. I realize that it's obviously not my company, and that the management team has the right to impose any office/culture-type rules they see fit, but is there any legal liability that could apply here? I couldn't find anything on google, but admittedly neither google nor I have a law degree. In the past these culture-related decrees have come from our CEO, so I am curious why the GC is now getting involved. I mean if the worst happened and someone did something bad after consuming alcohol on company property is that a significant liability issue? Not that it makes a difference but we've had zero alcohol related events during our company's tenure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 15:54
|
|
|
Probably worried about harassment, dram shop, and negligence. Most likely the commercial insurance provider said "Stop it."
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 16:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 10:05 |
|
|
Google something called "social host liability." It basically boils down to "if you served someone alcohol and then they hurt themselves or someone else, you're getting sued."
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2014 17:03
|
|