|
a cheap mofo is me posted:US Immigration Question 1) Immigration (especially US Immigration) is incredibly complex. You need to instruct a lawyer. 2) Do not make any kind of amateur attempt to 'game' the system before taking advice, the consequences of that range from your wife not being allowed into the country to prison.
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2014 14:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 16:50 |
|
|
Yes, I am aware of your points 1 and 2. But just wondering if anyone here has had a similar experience to go off?
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2014 15:51
|
|
|
a cheap mofo is me posted:Yes, I am aware of your points 1 and 2. But just wondering if anyone here has had a similar experience to go off? There's a poster here who does immigration work, as a legal assistant. He/she knows his/her stuff. Give it a few hours.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
.
goku chewbacca fucked around with this message at 06:56 on Mar 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
joat mon posted:There's a poster here who does immigration work, as a legal assistant. He/she knows his/her stuff. Give it a few hours. There's also this specific immigration thread: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3501527
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 13:24
|
|
|
fordan posted:There's also this specific immigration thread: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3501527 Great thanks for the link!
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 18:25
|
|
|
Edit: ^^^ I also basically curate the immigration thread since the OP vanished, but feel free to crosspost - there are other people who may have advice or insights.joat mon posted:There's a poster here who does immigration work, as a legal assistant. He/she knows his/her stuff. Give it a few hours.  a cheap mofo is me posted:US Immigration Question So, tl;dr answer - Alchenar is right, you need an attorney. I think most people are capable of actually filing immigration petitions on their own, especially stuff like family stuff. But what you are really looking at here is developing an immigration strategy, and this is something that really benefits from an attorney. If your are being transferred for work, see if the company has any in-house immigration and, if not, if the corporate attorney can refer you. A fair number of our family cases are HR referrals. Longer answer - Yes, the processing times you are seeing are what you should expect, and there is no easy way to get around that. Unfortunately many people end up having to spend months apart from their families while they wait for immigration to catch up to the rest of their life. Can your wife enter on a B1/B2 while the petition is pending? Technically, yes, but she is going to be at the mercy of the immigration officer believing that she intends to leave and is not trying to game the system by staying (or filing in the US), and if she gets refused entry it could turn into a complication. If she does get in, she would also have trouble trying to renew her B1/B2 in the US to simply stay until her immigrant petition is approved - I usually only see Bs extended for people with medical problems or other serious commitments preventing them from traveling (ie, you are too sick to travel or you are in the US waiting at your dying mother's bedside). She will also not be able to just leave and re-enter, as CBP doesn't like people yo-yoing like this. So realistically, your good outcome here is that she manages to come into the US for one 90-day period while the petition is pending, and the bad outcome is that she gets bounced at the border and that causes additional problems. If you are scrupulous you can probably avoid any issues of actual visa fraud, but you may still be risking perception of fraud, and a legitimate question of immigrant intent. This is why you need a lawyer to talk to you about your situation, your risk tolerance, etc. - there may be other factors that make attempting the B entry either totally out of the question or a reasonable step.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 19:27
|
|
|
So I live in NYC and married there too. My wife and i have been married for just over a year now and the relationship has gone south quickly. She was an immigrant when we married so she's currently on a conditional residence. When we got married we really were in love but over the course of this year i've watched her basically go back on her promise to look for work. She's essentially given up completely because she thinks her accent is going to keep her from getting hired but this is an excuse because it's honestly not that bad. To compensate she's been working on this idea for a business that she wants to run because she insists that working for herself is the only way she can be happy. Unfortunately while she's enjoying her year long vacation and loosely putting together some business concepts i'm footing the bill for her life and never expected things to end up like this. My income is not really condusive to supporting two people and Imade that clear to her moving into the marriage which is why we agreed she would look for work. When I confront her about how she promised to work she starts crying that i'm basically making GBS threads on her dreams (while she shits on all the money i earn at my job). If i push the subject she starts flipping out and destroying my posessions because she knows it gets to me. Things have deteriorated so badly that i've even had to call the cops on her because she was threatening to kill me and i found her stabbing a picture of me with a kitchen knife . When the cops showed up she even admitted that she wanted to kill me but becasue she's a woman they downplayed it and they took her into to get hospitalized for the day. Since then things have not gotten better so Ibrought up the divorce option and she refuses to consider it and basically says stuff like "you wanted me now you got me and i'm not going anywhere". My biggest fears have become my reality. She's not working at all, and now she's refusing to exit the marriage peacefully so i'm feeling very trapped and emotionally abused by her. It seems clear now that she's only trying to stay in this marriage to complete the conditional residence so she gets her permanent greencard but i'm not trying to play that game and i dont want to be stuck in an ostensibly fraudulent marriage while she pulls on my purse strings even further. Can someone please analyse this situation and help me understand what options i have that could make me feel less cornered/trapped? I'm concerned that because she's not working (by choice) she's going to contest the divorce and try to bleed me dry. THe sad thing is that i really dont have alot of money or assets to begin with, but i'm worried that she's going to leave me even more broke if i try to persue the divorce. Is there a quick way for someone like me to end this marriage under teh basis that it's become seemingly fraudulent despite being entered into under good faith? Will the judge even care about my suspicions or simply condemn me to pay a portion of my salary for whatever reason justified? This girl doesnt deserve any more handouts, she just needs to go back to europe and stop ruining my life but i'm not sure if it's going to be that easy. Really need help here...
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
~you need to talk to a lawyer, nobody here is going to give you legal advice (especially since you forgot rule 1 of lawyerclub)~
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:31
|
|
|
In this hypothetical situation, a divorce would be the thing to do.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
Actually, can I change my answer? You should have a kid and adopt a dog, that will bring you closer together.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:34
|
|
|
Stop working and tell her she needs to support you. Turn those tables on her, that'll make her head spin! But seriously hire a lawyer and get a divorce. Also go repost this in E/N.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:35
|
|
|
EFB: call an attorney, that's all we can tell you. She will be watching your called numbers and wondering where you are. Be discreet with the appointment. Divorce planning is a normal thing. Call a divorce attorney ASAP.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
nephyx posted:i'm not sure if it's going to be that easy. nephyx posted:Really need Ashcans posted:[the cavalry arrives...]
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
nephyx posted:
Yes to the "get a lawyer NOW" crew. Like, tomorrow. File ASAP so that there is a restraining order preventing her from making any further grabs at your assets. Right now, you know where she is and you know where your stuff is. That could easily change in the future, so file. And disclose the threats and emotional abuse to your attorney. If, during the initial consult, the attorney seems to blow it off or to not take it seriously (especially due to gender), then don't take them on as your attorney. Find an attorney who seems to get it. Depending on your state, you may be able to get a protective order, especially since you've started the paper trail with a police complaint. In my state, which is poo poo for domestic violence protection, you would likely be able to get a restraining order (which is not a protective order, but is at least something) preventing BOTH parties from harassment, threats, hiding/stealing assets, embarrassing the other party publicly, etc. You may want to call the domestic violence center in your area. They may be able to point you towards an attorney who gets it. Also, beware. You are in a delicate position. She sounds like a manipulative, unstable liar, and it sounds like you could be one step away from being accused of domestic violence yourself. Keep your phone on hand at all times and know where the video or audio record button is. State laws vary on the legality of recording (my state is a one-party knowledge/consent state), but you could always announce to her that you were recording and, hell, she might behave herself. It seems as if it would be very easy for her to flip things around and claim that you were using and abusing her and holding her hostage via immigration status and financial abuse. [I am not a lawyer, just someone who has gone through domestic abuse insanity and has learned a lot from DV support groups and case outcomes.]
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
This is in California. I was recently in a car accident where the other driver was clearly at fault (merged into me after failing to check her blind spot) and then told the police officer that she merged into me. I immediately call my insurance, give them the name of the officer at the scene, tell them what happened, say let's go after her insurance and get them to pay full damages since merging into someone is of course a 100% at fault action in California. I get a call from my insurance today saying that she is now saying I rear-ended her after she had successfully made the lane change and to wait to hear from them for the next step. The damage to the vehicles proves she's lying and the officer on the scene could also say that she changed her story after the fact. Now, how worried should I be that my insurance will totally gently caress this up and decide to settle on a 50/50 basis or worse?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
pathetic little tramp posted:This is in California. It's good that you had a cop on the scene and it definitely helps. A similar thing happened to me where an older man merged into my car ripping off my whole entire fender and kept driving. I had to catch up to him and make him pull over. He apologized profusely, admitted his fault and said he'll let his insurance take care of it 100%. I notify my insurance company and after a few days they rule it 50-50 because I live in NY which is a no fault state. Apparently it's equally my responsibility to avoid being merged into as it is for another person to avoid merging into me. I didn't agree to it and after a few months of stupid appeals, I finally had enough and agreed to a 75-25 and had to pay an additional $150.00 to the body shop to have it replaced. So yeah, good chance you're coming out of pocket.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 20:01
|
|
|
United Kingdom employment law question: I've worked for this company for nearly three years. My employment contract states that I'm contracted to work 8-5 monday to friday, and 8-12 one saturday in every two. When I first started working there, this was the norm for everyone in my department. Recently, the company has started putting new employees in my department on a contract requiring two out of every three saturdays to be worked. They are now attempting to get me to change to these hours as well. Initially, they told me that my contract actually stipulated two out of every three saturdays, but a quick look at my contract shot that down. They then appealed to me to voluntarily change to the new contract, saying that it made staff scheduling easier (there are 3 of us in the department) and would prevent jealousy (my colleagues have told me to stick to my guns). I was told by the managing director that I would be paid for the extra hours, but the increase in wages works out to be under 30 pounds per month, for which I would rather keep the saturday. I was then told that there was no option to refuse, and that the company could make 'reasonable' changes to my contract with a 1 month notification period. Fast forward a few days, and I get a letter with my payslip. It states that effective the first of April, I will be placed onto a new contract. I can either choose to work two saturdays in every three and remain on exactly the same annual wage as I'm currently on (no mention of any increase in pay for working more saturdays), or work every saturday but have every other monday off (with a paycut of roughly 1050.00 per year due to reduced hours); please indicate which choice you would prefer and sign on the dotted line. If I can get away with it, I have no intention of working two saturdays out of free, but neither am I willing to take a paycut. In my opinion the options being offered to me do not benefit me in the slightest, so it isn't reasonable for me to comply. I'm already somewhat unhappy with how the company has been treating me, so I see no reason to simply shrug and submit. My question is what right if any do I have to refuse to change my contract? If I do refuse, what retaliation can the company take? If they decide to fire me for not complying, would I be entitled to a redundancy payout or to prosecute for breach of contract?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
I'm not a lawyer, or even in the UK, but what does your contract say about changes? If your contract says they can just make you work more hours with no extra pay, why did you even sign it? If it doesn't give them the option to unilaterally make changes, then they probably can't do anything but terminate the contract; just see what the termination terms are, and decide if that route is acceptable to you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
I'm in Cuyahoga County, Ohio. My half-siblings are trying to isolate my dad in a nursing home: So to cut a lot of E/N stuff out of this post, my half-brother and half-sister are conspiring to get my brother and I removed from any sort of legal standing with our ailing dad. I haven't talked to him in years and I just found out that they have him crammed into a nursing home and they have him intentionally cut out from the outside world (can't use the internet per their explicit request, barely leaves his room, etc). They apparently made him sign a bunch of stuff that he wasn't completely aware he was signing (he has dementia) and for all I know I've already lost power of attorney and they've rewritten his will to cut both of us out of it. My dad's always been a little paranoid and from what a third party (family friend) who visited him said to me today, I'm going there tomorrow morning and I'm going to have a conversation with him. He explicitly told the third party that he doesn't want the half-siblings to have any sort of legal control over him and doesn't want them to have any part of his will (which is a considerable, six-digit sum). I'm going there tomorrow to confirm what the third party told me today and if so, I have a number of a lawyer that I'm going to call for legal advice. Nobody knows that I'm in town and that I'm going to visit him tomorrow. Apparently, the operator of the nursing home is a close personal friend of my half-sister, so I fully expect her to try and kick me out tomorrow when I visit him and I start asking questions. I already plan on bringing a copy of my birth certificate to verify that I'm next of kin. I guess I'm just asking for some general legal advice before I go in there tomorrow: 1) What general rights do I have as a next of kin for someone? I'm not sure what he's signed, but would it be possible for me to have my visitation rights revoked without me even knowing about it? 2) If they don't allow me to see my father I plan on immediately calling the police. Can I compel them to allow me to see him as long as I have my birth certificate? (I suppose this ties into question #1) 3) Does his verbal permission trump a legal document, or should I be expecting a legal hellstorm? edit: They're my half-siblings, not stepsiblings.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 23:17
|
|
|
Hi everyone, I have a bill question (adding people without their consent). I've been renting a house for the previous 3 years and it turns out in that time my landlord hasn't paid the water-rates. It doesn't say anything in my lease about paying for the water-rates (just rent) and it's solely in my landlords name... or at least it was. They've been hounding my landlord to pay, so they have gone and added my name to the bill without even discussing it with me. Is it legal to add someone to a bill without their permission? I fear this is about to go to the debt collectors and I'm going to have a massive debt against me...
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 23:45
|
|
|
Business Gorillas posted:I'm in Cuyahoga County, Ohio. I work with Estate, Probate and Guardianship law. There is no reason you shouldn't be able to see your father, especially if he is wanting to see you. You definitely have to contact and lawyer, file a petition and get a proceeding started contesting the validity of the will due to your half-siblings' influence. It will be even harder once your father passes. I am currently working on a similar case in which a son cut out all his siblings from his incapacitated father's will, had the father sign written statements that he's fully capable of understanding the proceeding, etc. and the court still saw through the son's bullshit. All's not lost. Find out who the legal guardian of your father is considering he's in a nursing home and has dementia. It's most likely them, a family society or the nursing home. If you're feeling up to it, you can have your siblings removed as guardians if you can prove they are causing him harm. Toymachine fucked around with this message at 23:59 on Mar 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
SecretOfSteel posted:Hi everyone, I have a bill question (adding people without their consent). You are probably going to need to say where this is happening to get any meaningful answer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 23:55
|
|
|
Ashcans posted:You are probably going to need to say where this is happening to get any meaningful answer. I'm in Australia 
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 00:05
|
|
|
SecretOfSteel posted:I'm in Australia Residential Tenancies Acts are specific to each state, but I think they tend towards the tenant being responsible for utilities unless they're not individually metered for the property (e.g. a block of flats with one water meter for the block). [Renter, but not a lawyer] E.g. http://www.rta.qld.gov.au/Resources/Fact-Sheets/General-tenancy-fact-sheets/Water-charging-fact-sheet http://www.tuv.org.au/articles/files/resources/utility_charges_RT_FS_052010.pdf UrbanLabyrinth fucked around with this message at 00:14 on Mar 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 00:11
|
|
|
Business Gorillas posted:1) What general rights do I have as a next of kin for someone? I'm not sure what he's signed, but would it be possible for me to have my visitation rights revoked without me even knowing about it? 1. No one has visitation rights with anyone against their will. You may have rights to contest a will, or to collect in the event of no will or an invalid will. But you're kinda mixing everything up. 2. I have no idea what you think the police would do. Pretend you don't want to see your kids and make that known to your POA, you go into the hospital and you're unconscious, the hospital denies your kids entry and they call the police. It's kinda crazy. What the hell do the police care? There's no inherent right to visit with anyone against their will that isn't your legal dependent. 3. You are sort of a crazy person. Of course his verbal permission means everything. If you and I are married siblings that live together for 93 years, and then you say "I deny woozle wuzzle entry to my room", why would I have any legal right to enter your room? What "legal document"? Your birth certificate? A parent has a right to cut off their kid. You should consult with a local wills and estates attorney. The nursing home will either let you see him, or not. If they say not, then... that's it, without a court order or changing their mind (through a guardian's approval, not by slick argument). I'm not going into a lot of it, because there's probably a big E/N story behind it. But honestly... your perspective is whack, jack.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 03:31
|
|
|
I think you missed the part where he very specifically explained that it wasn't his father who didn't want to see him; it was his siblings who wanted to keep him from seeing his father. Also, if you're concerned about some new, hidden will that the siblings had him execute, whats to stop you from asking him what he wants, and preparing a new will for him to sign, revoking any and all prior wills and codicils, whether existing or not? (besides how bad his dementia is, of course.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
Disclaimer: this is loving stupid, but I'm curious. I was watching South Park, and in the episode, two characters enter into a written contract where one agrees to suck the other's balls. Is a contract like this enforceable in real life? Does it matter if the location had laws permitting prostitution? Say I bet a buddy on the Super Bowl, my $1K against him sucking my balls. We write up a contract and he loses. What would the consequences be if he refused? Is there any precedent for this? Edit: precedent, goddamit I knew that sephiRoth IRA fucked around with this message at 07:31 on Mar 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 06:38
|
|
|
areyoucontagious posted:Disclaimer: this is loving stupid, but I'm curious. (assuming your contract was legal in other respects and gambling was legal where you contracted) If he refused, you could sue him for money damages, but not for specific performance (the ball sucking) of the contract. I can't think of any direct precedent. Calculating your money damages from not having your buddy suck your balls would be interesting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 06:57
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Calculating your money damages from not having your buddy suck your balls would be interesting. In this situation, suppose you refuse to let your buddy suck your balls when he is contractually obligated to. Can your buddy then sue you on the basis that had he sucked your balls, he would have been mentally traumatized and would have then successfully sued you for therapy/pain and suffering damages? So, the money you could have had to pay him had he sucked your balls and then sued you is now monetary damages because you refused to let him suck your balls?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 07:13
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:I think you missed the part where he very specifically explained that it wasn't his father who didn't want to see him; it was his siblings who wanted to keep him from seeing his father. You're not that bright. I didn't miss that, actually, and my answers are in direct response to his questions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 07:14
|
|
|
baquerd posted:In this situation, suppose you refuse to let your buddy suck your balls when he is contractually obligated to. Can your buddy then sue you on the basis that had he sucked your balls, he would have been mentally traumatized and would have then successfully sued you for therapy/pain and suffering damages? So, the money you could have had to pay him had he sucked your balls and then sued you is now monetary damages because you refused to let him suck your balls? That would have been nullifed as part of the "assuming your contract was legal in other respects" caveat. On the other hand, if your buddy had used a time machine and brought his younger, more experimental self back from the past to sign the contract to obligate him in the future, would you use fair market value of ball sucking in the past or present? If past, could interest be charged, or would the use of the time machine to instantaneously pass through time vitiate the ability to charge interest?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 07:22
|
|
|
joat mon posted:That would have been nullifed as part of the "assuming your contract was legal in other respects" caveat. I get the impression you aren't taking this question seriously, somehow.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 07:35
|
|
|
I told you guys it was loving stupid. I do find it funny that assuming all activities were legal, the contract could be enforceable. Thanks, lawyer friends!
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 07:43
|
|
|
areyoucontagious posted:I told you guys it was loving stupid. I do find it funny that assuming all activities were legal, the contract could be enforceable. Thanks, lawyer friends! Did you miss the part where the enforcement would be in the form of money damages? Contracts for personal services are almost never enforceable to force the person to perform the service.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 08:01
|
|
|
Kalman posted:Did you miss the part where the enforcement would be in the form of money damages? Contracts for personal services are almost never enforceable to force the person to perform the service. Yes, thank you. Did you not see the humor in a contract involving my friend sucking my balls resulting in the potential for real, monetary damages?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 08:14
|
|
|
Kalman posted:Did you miss the part where the enforcement would be in the form of money damages? Contracts for personal services are almost never enforceable to force the person to perform the service. If daytime court shows have taught me anything, the plaintiff should bring at least three ball-sucking estimates to court when he goes before a judge.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 09:54
|
|
|
While we're on ridiculous hypotheticals, what's the bare minimum actus reus required for attempted murder? Suppose Alice fires a loaded gun at Bob with intent to kill him, but misses. If those facts are established, that's obviously attempted murder. Now suppose Alice believes the gun is loaded, but it isn't so it doesn't go off, or that she attempts to fire a realistic fake gun that she believes to be real. That's still attempted murder, right? A quick look on Wikipedia suggests that factual impossibility isn't normally a defence to a charge of attempting to commit a crime -- for example, it mentions a case where a woman "poisoned" her husband with sugar, mistakenly believing it to be arsenic, and was convicted of attempted murder. If that article is broadly accurate, then even if the gun can't possibly be fired in the state it's in, if Alice believes that pulling the trigger will cause the gun to fire, and attempts to fire it with the intent of killing Bob, it seems like that's still attempted murder. So my question is, just how far down the rabbit hole is it possible to go with that line of reasoning? Suppose Alice is a devout adherent of some unconventional religion, and burns an effigy of Bob with the intent of cursing him to die. If the prosecutor can convince a jury that Alice really did believe her actions would lead to Bob's death, is that enough to convict her of attempted murder? After all, a curse isn't really a deadly weapon, but neither is a spoonful of sugar, and the case law seems to suggest you can still attempt to murder someone with sugar if you believe it's arsenic. Or is there some kind of reasonable-person test, where the prosecutor has to establish that the act is one that a reasonable person would believe could cause death? (Bonus question: is it relevant whether Alice believes that Bob's death will come about through the conscious intervention of a divine entity, or through a blind albeit supernatural process of cause and effect?)
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 13:18
|
|
|
Thuryl posted:While we're on ridiculous hypotheticals, what's the bare minimum actus reus required for attempted murder? This is the typical problem posed to students studying inchoate offences. To cut right to the end: in a scenario where someone genuinely believes that their action will cause some else's death despite it being practically and logically impossible and you manage to detect this somehow then that's probably grounds to get a special verdict and have them detained in a mental health institution.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 13:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 16:50 |
|
|
Alchenar posted:This is the typical problem posed to students studying inchoate offences. Yeah, the thought of some kind of insanity defence crossed my mind as I was writing it, too. I imagine in the real world it'd be hard to prove intent in a case like that anyway: even if the accused has been writing in their diary and posting all over the internet about how they totally cursed Bob with death, there's the question of how seriously they really took it all. I'm glad to hear it was a smart enough question that something like it gets asked to law students, at least.
Thuryl fucked around with this message at 13:45 on Mar 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 13:41
|
|