|
BgRdMchne posted:You guys like judicial smackdowns of attorneys, right? that was beautiful.
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 15:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 11:38 |
|
|
BgRdMchne posted:You guys like judicial smackdowns of attorneys, right? Wait... so a court can sua sponte remand a case because the defense's brief blows rear end? there goes my batting average.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 15:28
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:throw in an unfair trade practices claim. Love using that. Esp in a counter claim
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 15:29
|
|
|
does that ever work? I mean.. I imagine it's like when I use laches... fun to gently caress with the other side and waste their time, but usually not going anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 15:31
|
|
|
It works in L T disputes when you counter sue the L
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 15:34
|
|
|
BgRdMchne posted:You guys like judicial smackdowns of attorneys, right? DON'T CUT AND PASTE YOUR OLD BRIEFS WITHOUT REVIEWING THEM, DUMBASS!
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
Random theoretical I was just thinking of (literally a theoretical, this actually didn't happen). Let's say I'm driving at 55mph on a 55mph road approaching an intersection, and someone decides to pull out in front of me in such a way that my only option is to slam on my brakes and come to a nearly full stop. (Can't swerve or I hit the car next to me). This causes whiplash as I go from 55 to about 5 in less than a second, but the accident is avoided. So I have damages in this case, but wouldn't it be basically impossible to go after the other driver without a wreck having taken place?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 01:32
|
|
|
pathetic little tramp posted:Random theoretical I was just thinking of (literally a theoretical, this actually didn't happen). All the damages were caused by you having broken the laws of physics by installing physically impossible brakes. Your passengers are suing you because you did not inform them of the hidden danger.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 01:46
|
|
|
There's nothing that violates any physical laws in his hypothetical. Slowing down from 55 to 5 in 1 second is an acceleration of 2.3 times the force of gravity on earth, or roughly what you would experience on the Disney World attraction Mission Space. That said, according to a cursory search, it seems that some very expensive very fast cars with impressive braking capabilities only manage slightly over 1G of braking force1. So just pretend the OP posed the same question, but with 2.3 seconds instead of less than 1. Also pretend his neck is weak enough that somehow these tame forces have caused him injury. 1 - http://www.motortrend.com/features/mt_hot_list/1112_22_cars_that_stop_from_mph_in_less_than_100_feet/
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 08:53
|
|
|
There's no negligence is the tort 101 answer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 09:29
|
|
|
Which federal agency is in charge of enforcing the laws of physics? NASA or the Smithsonian?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 13:40
|
|
|
pathetic little tramp posted:Random theoretical I was just thinking of (literally a theoretical, this actually didn't happen). Did the other driver act as a reasonably prudent driver? Did he enter a 55 MPH roadway at an unsafe speed? Was he negligent? If a jury of your peers thinks, "yes" then he owes you money for your damages [whiplash]. You can always, "go after him." You can file a claim against his insurance company, bring a lawsuit if they decline to pay, and ask a jury to give you money. The mechanisms that keep people from filing endless, baseless claims are 1) its a crime to file fraudulent insurance claims, 2) If there was no 'accident' the other person isn't going to stop, and even if you write down the license place and call the cops, they're going to lol you off the phone, 3) if you do manage to follow the guy home (without getting arrested for stalking) and get his address, you can send demand letters that he will ignore and if he calls his insurance company they will ignore you. Also, if you took this claim to a jury, they would laugh you out of the loving state.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 13:53
|
|
|
A hypothetical: An independent contractor transcriptionist (work from home) finds a craigslist ad back in October 2014 for openings with a company, signs on, and does a ton of work over the next two months or so until it becomes clear that the payment process is highly suspect. He stops taking any new work in December and has yet to be paid for about $300 worth of work completed between 12 and 16 weeks ago. The documentation given to the contractor at the start of the relationship includes an independent contractor agreement, which doesn't specifically detail the payment process, and an orientation handbook, which states that contractors can expect payments to be mailed within four weeks of individual assignment completion. Communication with the owner of the company has not completely broken down, but has become more and more terse and disingenuous, with the only explanation given again and again being that they are waiting to close projects with their own clients, and only when that happens can 'everyone' get paid. If this hypothetical company was located in Georgia, and the transcriptionist is in Illinois, what practical forms of recourse might there be for the transcriptionist?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
I have a question regarding British law. A customer (lets call her Mrs X) recently purchased a rather expensive item from one of my colleagues. To cut a long story short, she messed up the order to the point that the whole mess was escalated up to her immediate superior (me). I have been making every reasonable effort to solve the problem for Mrs X, going significantly beyond what is contractually required, but unfortunately every time I have one problem sorted, another one pops up. Today, I had to order a spare part for her, which is being posted directly to her home from our suppliers. This is not good enough for her, and she wants the part (which we don't have) right NOW, and is threatening to set up camp in our showroom to warn off all of our customers and would actively sabotage all of my sales appointments if she doesn't receive it. I was tired of putting up with her bullshit, so I told her that if she tried this, I would have her escorted from the premesis by the police. She responded that so long as she only politely told them that we are terrible and didn't cause a scene, the police wouldn't touch her. If she does decide to go ahead with her threat, under what circumstances can I get her rear end kicked out?
Soylent Yellow fucked around with this message at 21:06 on Mar 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
Soylent Yellow posted:I have a question regarding British law. A customer (lets call her Mrs X) recently purchased a rather expensive item from one of my colleagues. To cut a long story short, she messed up the order to the point that the whole mess was escalated up to her immediate superior (me). I have been making every reasonable effort to solve the problem for Mrs X, going significantly beyond what is contractually required, but unfortunately every time I have one problem sorted, another one pops up. Today, I had to order a spare part for her, which is being posted directly to her home from our suppliers. This is not good enough for her, and she wants the part (which we don't have) right NOW, and is threatening to set up camp in our showroom to warn off all of our customers and would actively sabotage all of my sales appointments if she doesn't receive it. I was tired of putting up with her bullshit, so I told her that if she tried this, I would have her escorted from the premesis by the police. She responded that so long as she only politely told them that we are terrible and didn't cause a scene, the police wouldn't touch her. If she does decide to go ahead with her threat, under what circumstances can I get her rear end kicked out? You may want to try cross posting this in the ask a cop GIP thread, there are several regular posters there from your part of the world.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
Soylent Yellow posted:I have a question regarding British law. A customer (lets call her Mrs X) recently purchased a rather expensive item from one of my colleagues. To cut a long story short, she messed up the order to the point that the whole mess was escalated up to her immediate superior (me). I have been making every reasonable effort to solve the problem for Mrs X, going significantly beyond what is contractually required, but unfortunately every time I have one problem sorted, another one pops up. Today, I had to order a spare part for her, which is being posted directly to her home from our suppliers. This is not good enough for her, and she wants the part (which we don't have) right NOW, and is threatening to set up camp in our showroom to warn off all of our customers and would actively sabotage all of my sales appointments if she doesn't receive it. I was tired of putting up with her bullshit, so I told her that if she tried this, I would have her escorted from the premesis by the police. She responded that so long as she only politely told them that we are terrible and didn't cause a scene, the police wouldn't touch her. If she does decide to go ahead with her threat, under what circumstances can I get her rear end kicked out? Dunno about the UK, but in California with that statement it would be a clear violation of PC 602.1(a). Intentional interference with business via trespass has to be a crime of some sort in the UK though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 02:44
|
|
|
nm posted:Dunno about the UK, but in California with that statement it would be a clear violation of PC 602.1(a). Intentional interference with business via trespass has to be a crime of some sort in the UK though. Damaging the queen's property's property?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
DNova posted:There's nothing that violates any physical laws in his hypothetical. Oops, my bad. I assumed the physical laws as they apply to car brakes. I completely ignored retro rockets and driving an iron spud into the road surface.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 21:07
|
|
|
what are the (common) consequences of someone moving out of an apartment (and subsequently not paying the rent) before the end of the term when they are subletting from someone else? State is Illinois, since I'm sure it's relevant. Is paying one month of additional rent and/or forfeiting the security deposit likely to be the extent of what is required, or is it plausible that they could be on the hook for the entire remaining term (8 months in this case)? The sublet agreement is with the original tenant, though rent is paid directly to the building owner.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 03:41
|
|
|
If there's no clause in the agreement for an early termination fee they could be on the hook for the entire term, but the original tenant would be expected to mitigate their damages by trying to find a new tenant. Landlords almost always go after people for this type of stuff, who knows whether the original tenant will want to go through that effort.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 04:13
|
|
|
Soylent Yellow posted:I have a question regarding British law. A customer (lets call her Mrs X) recently purchased a rather expensive item from one of my colleagues. To cut a long story short, she messed up the order to the point that the whole mess was escalated up to her immediate superior (me). I have been making every reasonable effort to solve the problem for Mrs X, going significantly beyond what is contractually required, but unfortunately every time I have one problem sorted, another one pops up. Today, I had to order a spare part for her, which is being posted directly to her home from our suppliers. This is not good enough for her, and she wants the part (which we don't have) right NOW, and is threatening to set up camp in our showroom to warn off all of our customers and would actively sabotage all of my sales appointments if she doesn't receive it. I was tired of putting up with her bullshit, so I told her that if she tried this, I would have her escorted from the premesis by the police. She responded that so long as she only politely told them that we are terrible and didn't cause a scene, the police wouldn't touch her. If she does decide to go ahead with her threat, under what circumstances can I get her rear end kicked out? I don't know about UK law but I would have thought that since your business is run from private property you have the right to refuse entry to anyone, regardless of reason. The owner of the business would be the first to ask, and if your business is in a mall, mall management might have a say (also they'd have security you could call to kick people out).
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 09:55
|
|
|
Lobsterpillar posted:I don't know about UK law but I would have thought that since your business is run from private property you have the right to refuse entry to anyone, regardless of reason. The owner of the business would be the first to ask, and if your business is in a mall, mall management might have a say (also they'd have security you could call to kick people out). UK law is very different on trespass. The more productive approach is likely on grounds of harassment. OP's manager should make an application to the local county court now for a protective injunction on the basis of the correspondence so far (providing it can be evidenced). Breach of that injunction will make the Police give a gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 11:40
|
|
|
adorai posted:what are the (common) consequences of someone moving out of an apartment (and subsequently not paying the rent) before the end of the term when they are subletting from someone else? State is Illinois, since I'm sure it's relevant. Is paying one month of additional rent and/or forfeiting the security deposit likely to be the extent of what is required, or is it plausible that they could be on the hook for the entire remaining term (8 months in this case)? The sublet agreement is with the original tenant, though rent is paid directly to the building owner. They're kind of throwing the original tenant under the bus here, but given enough notice the original tenant should be able to find another person to sublet the apartment to.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 13:29
|
|
|
I'm asking this on behalf of someone else. She placed an online order for an item and paid via Paypal. The order was confirmed and the money was charged, but she never got the item. It was never even shipped, according to UPS. After a lot of back and forth between her and various managers at the company scratching their heads about what happened with the item, she opened a Paypal dispute and eventually she got a refund through Paypal about 6 months ago. Now a collections agency is haranguing her about it. Is this even legal, and can they legally do anything? Pixelated Dragon fucked around with this message at 13:38 on Mar 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 13:36
|
|
|
IANAL, but there is an entire thread on dealing with debt collectors in BFC that would probably be useful in handling this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 14:36
|
|
|
adorai posted:what are the (common) consequences of someone moving out of an apartment (and subsequently not paying the rent) before the end of the term when they are subletting from someone else? State is Illinois, since I'm sure it's relevant. Is paying one month of additional rent and/or forfeiting the security deposit likely to be the extent of what is required, or is it plausible that they could be on the hook for the entire remaining term (8 months in this case)? The sublet agreement is with the original tenant, though rent is paid directly to the building owner. 9 times out of 10, the apartment lease makes sublessors and lessors jointly and severally liable for the balance of any amounts due under the lease.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
There has been a sudden upswing in the 'GUVMINT STAY OUTTA MY HOUSE' idiots on my Facebook group dealing with tropical fish. A few very smart people, using their real names, are advertising fish and animals for sale that are illegal to own in my state. I don't keep any of these animals and always warn people when they are illegal (because our game and fish dept has set up stings to catch people) but if these morons get caught, would Facebook posts and photos, generic stock photos, nothing with their faces in it, serve as any kind of evidence?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
Cowslips Warren posted:There has been a sudden upswing in the 'GUVMINT STAY OUTTA MY HOUSE' idiots on my Facebook group dealing with tropical fish. A few very smart people, using their real names, are advertising fish and animals for sale that are illegal to own in my state. I don't keep any of these animals and always warn people when they are illegal (because our game and fish dept has set up stings to catch people) but if these morons get caught, would Facebook posts and photos, generic stock photos, nothing with their faces in it, serve as any kind of evidence? The facebook posts can provide probable cause for the guvmint to get a search warrant and enter the house.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 23:31
|
|
|
Cowslips Warren posted:There has been a sudden upswing in the 'GUVMINT STAY OUTTA MY HOUSE' idiots on my Facebook group dealing with tropical fish. A few very smart people, using their real names, are advertising fish and animals for sale that are illegal to own in my state. I don't keep any of these animals and always warn people when they are illegal (because our game and fish dept has set up stings to catch people) but if these morons get caught, would Facebook posts and photos, generic stock photos, nothing with their faces in it, serve as any kind of evidence? Yes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 06:31
|
|
|
"is this evidence" is a really low bar. "Is this evidence proof" is a lot higher.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 15:10
|
|
|
Texas employment law question, specifically related to Unemployment Benefits.. My wife's company may be reassigning her to work at another location, which would be very far away and in my opinion a "substantial and adverse change" to the current employment arrangement (I was going to say agreement but there is no actual employment contract as Texas is a right to work/at will state, her offer letter though did specify her job location). The company handbook does have wording that "refusing a transfer or reassignment may be subject to disciplinary action up to and including termination". We have come to terms that if they ask her to change her job location to a location we decide is unacceptable she will need to find new work. I'm specifically focusing on Texas Unemployment benefits, and it seems if the worst case scenario happens the following would be true (from reading various information and statutes) 1: It is best for us to have the company to initiate the separation, as the burden of proof regarding the UI claim falls to the side that initiates the separation. My wife has worked there for 7 years and has consistent company reviews over the past quarters and years as an exceptional employee that exceeds expectations. At this point in time there is no way the company could show any misconduct on her part, other than refusing reassignment. 2: If she voluntarily resigns, they reach a 'mutual agreement', or some other form of voluntary or involuntary discharge she may still have "good cause" for an UI claim. The key point seems to be proving some form of misconduct, and I don't think they could Worth mentioning we're trying to be reasonable, and she's open to reassignment to a location that does not cause undue hardship on our household. Are my assumptions #1 and 2 above somewhat correct? How should my wife best communicate her unwillingness to accept a transfer to a location we can't make work? There are at least 8 other locations we could make work with our household schedule, but outside of those the commute distance and time causes an hardship on the household and would force my wife to quit. Her current location is 5 minutes from our house, potential locations could be over 30 or 40 miles away taking more than an hour to get to in heavy city traffic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
If I told you you could pay a lawyer down the street from you $300.00 to tell you the answers to your questions, and advise you on what to do, would you do that?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:If I told you you could pay a lawyer down the street from you $300.00 to tell you the answers to your questions, and advise you on what to do, would you do that? If the worst possible scenario comes to pass I was going retain someone for the UI hearing with TWC. Right now it's still up in the air and may or may not happen
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2015 22:44
|
|
|
skipdogg posted:If the worst possible scenario comes to pass I was going retain someone for the UI hearing with TWC. Right now it's still up in the air and may or may not happen Yeah, but the workforce commission hearing doesn't happen until they deny your wife's application and she appeals. What you're asking for is essentially advice on "how to get fired/quit". If you could pay $300 for the right answer, you should do that. The other thing is that there may be consequences of how your wife gets fired that you haven't considered. There may also be exceptions under the labor code for transfers that you haven't seen. You've (artfully) phrased your questions in a binary fashion, but where the person answering these questions knows that, 'If I say yes, he will do X", that person is giving you advice.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2015 23:30
|
|
|
I rent a commercial property in Ohio and despite the fact that the lease specifies that the landlord had no right to exercise any legal remedies prior to the rent being due for 10 days, he locked me out of the unit after the rent was delinquent for 4 days via jamming the lock. I called the Sheriff and the Sheriff filed a police report saying that the landlord barred entry to the property on the 5th of March (rent due the 1st, lease specified legal remedies allowable on the 10th). In order to access the unit I agreed to pay on that day, as the landlord refused to open the unit until he received the rent. The rent was late because the landlord was unreachable the day before and the day the rent was due (he only likes to collect rent in cash in person and hand write a receipt on paper) and I had to go out of town the following day. I know that under a residential lease, him locking the unit would constitute an unlawful eviction but since it's a commercial unit I'm not entirely clear on the law. I believe that the relevant laws are here and here but I'm not positive. Since I've had a lot of trouble with this landlord (harassment, showing up and demanding to inspect the premises without prior notification, claiming I underpaid rent despite his own receipts showing the contrary, discussing rent with my employees during business hours, etc) I'd like to cancel the remainder of the lease and find another unit because he's already cost me a lot of money, time, and effort. Am I correct in believing that he repudiated the lease via locking the unit before the time specified in the lease? And if so can I handle this matter without paying an attorney (which would obviously incur substantial costs in addition to moving and lost opportunity cost)? Dolphin fucked around with this message at 23:58 on Mar 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2015 23:56
|
|
|
Is a magnet gun legally a firearm in Canada? The law says it's not a firearm if it's:quote:other barreled weapons designed to have: A muzzle velocity of 152.4 meters per second or less and/or A muzzle energy of 5.7 joules or less The muzzle velocity would be less than 152.4 m/s, but the muzzle energy would be greater than 5.7 joules. The and/or is totally ambiguous.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 00:07
|
|
|
Chamale posted:Is a magnet gun legally a firearm in Canada? The law says it's not a firearm if it's: ... How is that ambiguous at all? If you meet one or the other (or both) conditions, you qualify.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 00:09
|
|
|
Kalman posted:... How is that ambiguous at all? If you meet one or the other (or both) conditions, you qualify. OK, thanks. I was confused because I thought the "and" might be mandatory.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 00:26
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Yeah, but the workforce commission hearing doesn't happen until they deny your wife's application and she appeals. What you're asking for is essentially advice on "how to get fired/quit". If you could pay $300 for the right answer, you should do that. Turns out this was all a moot exercise anyway, ends up her co-worker is being reassigned, and the reassignment is to a location that wouldn't have been a problem. Thanks for taking the time to reply though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 11:38 |
|
|
Chamale posted:OK, thanks. I was confused because I thought the "and" might be mandatory. The "and" is completely superfluous and they should have just let it be an "or" statement. It is needlessly complicated but I bet that comes with the territory!
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 03:46
|
|