|
blarzgh posted:I am laughing out loud. You gotta, I mean the dude fell or jumped out of a truck drunk at 5:00 am on a 55 mph road wearing all black, ended up getting hit by 2 cars, and survived. The truck even had a rebel flag license plate, doesn't get much more florida than that. peengers fucked around with this message at 21:26 on Aug 17, 2015 |
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 14:19 |
|
|
It's all an excellent metaphor for the post civil war south.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
peengers posted:You gotta, I mean the dude fell or jumped out of a truck drunk at 5:00 am on a 55 mph road wearing all black, ended up getting hit by 2 cars, and survived. The truck even had a rebel flag license plate, doesn't get much more florida than that. Of course it did. How many lawn chair extra seats in the truck bed?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 22:50
|
|
|
This reminds me of a case I heard of a while ago where a person got stabbed in the arm, then while going to get medical attention he was run over by two different drunk drivers. He died, but the cause of death was blood loss from being stabbed, not being run over two times.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
Can I sue the television character Daniel Tiger for being the most obnoxious piece of poo poo kids show?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:Can I sue the television character Daniel Tiger for being the most obnoxious piece of poo poo kids show? No. People v. Caillou
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:Can I sue the television character Daniel Tiger for being the most obnoxious piece of poo poo kids show? If this thread has taught me anything it's that you can sue anyone for anything. That'll be $250. Professional courtesy discount, my normal rate is $500.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 01:01
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:Can I sue the television character Daniel Tiger for being the most obnoxious piece of poo poo kids show? I see you are not familiar with the Turbo: The Series. Tashimo posted:
This is the correct answer, though limited in its application to PBS only.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 03:16
|
|
|
So the HuffPo recent headline article has to do with the GOP's desire to repeal the 14th. Now assuming (and yes, it's a massive stretch) they actually got this batshit crazy turd through a Constitutional convention, what would be the legal ramifications? The 14th was SCOTUS' basis for a lot of landmark cases: Roe v. Wade, Loving v. Virginia, Plessy v. Ferguson, Brown v. Board of Ed, etc. Would all of these items be overturned and, in effect, restore the previous state statutes (subject to any subsequent legislative action by the states) if the 14th was repealed?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 08:47
|
|
|
spregalia posted:So the HuffPo recent headline article has to do with the GOP's desire to repeal the 14th. Now assuming (and yes, it's a massive stretch) they actually got this batshit crazy turd through a Constitutional convention, what would be the legal ramifications? The 14th was SCOTUS' basis for a lot of landmark cases: Roe v. Wade, Loving v. Virginia, Plessy v. Ferguson, Brown v. Board of Ed, etc. Would all of these items be overturned and, in effect, restore the previous state statutes (subject to any subsequent legislative action by the states) if the 14th was repealed?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 09:58
|
|
|
Fair enough, but indulge the hypothetical.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 15:04
|
|
|
spregalia posted:So the HuffPo recent headline article has to do with the GOP's desire to repeal the 14th. Now assuming (and yes, it's a massive stretch) they actually got this batshit crazy turd through a Constitutional convention, what would be the legal ramifications? The 14th was SCOTUS' basis for a lot of landmark cases: Roe v. Wade, Loving v. Virginia, Plessy v. Ferguson, Brown v. Board of Ed, etc. Would all of these items be overturned and, in effect, restore the previous state statutes (subject to any subsequent legislative action by the states) if the 14th was repealed? It would depend on how the amendment repealing the 14th was written.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
Very roughly, I think there would be no more individual causes of action for discrimination. It wouldn't undo the basic tenants of consent or false imprisonment, so you couldn't make start making people slaves against their will again. Although people probably won't be running to start hanging up "Whites Only" signs, if they did, nobody could sue them to take them down.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Very roughly, I think there would be no more individual causes of action for discrimination. It wouldn't undo the basic tenants of consent or false imprisonment, so you couldn't make start making people slaves against their will again. Slavery is prohibited by the 13th. I would think the Civil Rights Act would still stand, since it's jurisdictional hook re: the states is the Commerce Clause. If it's a caselaw based constitutional right, it'd probably be voidable by the states (unless the repealing amendment made them void on ratification) joat mon fucked around with this message at 18:15 on Aug 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
Gobbeldygook posted:As far as I know no-one's talking about repealing it entirely, only amending it to end birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants. I hope this fucks over some senator who came from the Mayflower somehow
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Slavery is prohibited by the 13th. Lol, look at this Con Law Nerd. joat mon posted:I would think the Civil Rights Act would still stand, since it's jurisdictional hook re: the states is the Commerce Clause. I think the jurisdiction to enforce 1984, et al comes from the commerce clause; the actual power underlying the statute comes from the 14th and/or 5th. I.e. if the Commerce Clause was repealed (lol) then they could only enforce 1984 claims in Washington DC.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
This is in Texas and about the ongoing small claims case I've talked about in this thread before. We (wife and I) got a judgement against a former friend that we stupidly loaned money to, and then she skipped town without paying us back. We got the judgement and filed an Abstract of Judgement, and here we sit. I'm comfortable to sit on the judgement for a while, but I'd eventually like to get our money back. I think that the best option is going to be a Writ of Garnishment, and I know that it is a separate action from the original small claims suit. Here's my questions: Can a writ include the attorneys fees, or am I only getting the judgement amount? For example: the judgement awards me $1000 and attorney's fees are another $500, can the writ be for $1500? How can I find a brand-new babby lawyer that would take on this collection for me? Call the state bar for a referral or do one of you Texas guys know someone? Should I just sell the debt to a collector? JUST MAKING CHILI fucked around with this message at 17:56 on Aug 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
Where in Texas? There's lots of us who can give recommendations.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
North DFW. Original small claims case was filed in Denton County, the defendant now lives in Burnett County.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
Don't know if this is a genuine legal question or not, but here goes: I live/work in Houston and just outside Houston in Harris county. I've noticed a lot of driveways (for individual companies) that open to a main street (usually two lanes both ways) with cops at them stopping traffic on the main thoroughfare to let people that work at these companies out. Seems to be only around 4pm until maybe 6pm. The guys stopping traffic are in cop uniforms but are driving their own vehicles. Maybe it's just a lovely thing to do, particularly in the med center were traffic is already jacked up anyway, but stopping 4-6 lanes of traffic so a couple of cars can pull out of a driveway? Seems like BS to me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
Totally hosed up. Run them over on principle.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
Have you tried a citizen's arrest
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 01:47
|
|
|
Will a trial end in a mistrial if one of the Jurors doesn't show up? What happens if they are a few Jurors short in the morning with no idea where they are?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 13:51
|
|
|
Nostratic posted:Don't know if this is a genuine legal question or not, but here goes: Do their cop uniforms have a gold fringe?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 13:51
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:Will a trial end in a mistrial if one of the Jurors doesn't show up? What happens if they are a few Jurors short in the morning with no idea where they are? Generally they have alternate jurors. If there is a known issue they can do a continuance. (E.g. Juror 4 has stomach flu. We will resume on Monday) and a juror just not showing up can be held in contempt.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 14:05
|
|
|
I think they're asking if they are automatically declared not guilty if one of the jurors "disappears". Kind of how you automatically get an A+ in all your classes if your college roommate commits "suicide".
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 14:07
|
|
|
EAT THE EGGS RICOLA posted:I think they're asking if they are automatically declared not guilty if one of the jurors "disappears". Kind of how you automatically get an A+ in all your classes if your college roommate commits "suicide". No it was more like two Jurors didn't show up one morning, the Bailiff had everybody wait for a while and finally when they led in the remaining Jurors the Judge announced it was a mistrial and everybody was excused. The Judge said he couldn't specify the reason for a mistrial but being short two Jurors seems like a possible reason to me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 14:15
|
|
|
That judge will be super pissed off.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 15:50
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Do their cop uniforms have a gold fringe? Yes, the jackets look like this (I'm trying to attach a picture)
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 16:49
|
|
|
 Took me a bit to figure out what exactly was going on there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 16:54
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:No it was more like two Jurors didn't show up one morning, the Bailiff had everybody wait for a while and finally when they led in the remaining Jurors the Judge announced it was a mistrial and everybody was excused. The Judge said he couldn't specify the reason for a mistrial but being short two Jurors seems like a possible reason to me. It's possible those jurors were caught doing independent research on the case or something. That's looked upon pretty poorly and could definitely lead to a mistrial.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2015 05:03
|
|
|
Thuryl posted:It's possible those jurors were caught doing independent research on the case or something. That's looked upon pretty poorly and could definitely lead to a mistrial. What's the penalty for Juror misconduct? I mean the Judge has gotta be really irritated since it was all that wasted time and money. Also it's gotta suck paying for a lawyer all that time only to find out you have to do it all over again.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2015 12:34
|
|
|
Defense lawyers are paid once upfront. You don't pay them again for a retrial. Usually. Exceptions exist.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2015 13:16
|
|
|
Really? I assumed that you would pay them for their time, so while they wouldn't have to redo a bunch of prep work, you would still have to pay them for the additional hours you spend in court again. Which, agreed, would be brutal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2015 14:42
|
|
|
No criminal defense is usually flat fee.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2015 14:43
|
|
|
euphronius posted:No criminal defense is usually flat fee. Depends. Here it's a retainer and when the retainer is exhausted it switches to hourly. But most of our defendants have PDs. Penalty is criminal contempt of court.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2015 15:01
|
|
|
I saw a trial where, when jury selection was going, the gallery was basically empty. The jury gets seated and the Court breaks for lunch. After lunch, both the alleged victim's and defendant's families are there when the jury returns. All of a sudden three loving notes come up from the jury box. All three of them knew family members of the AV or Defendant and said that they couldn't be fair, and then they were down to 11 and a mistrial right after openings.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2015 22:49
|
|
|
I have a disability covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act - specifically, Diabetes. My doctor wants me to wear a medical ID bracelet or necklace. A bracelet is far more comfortable for me, especially since I found one that fits on my Fitbit's band. However, my employer is telling me the only "jewelry" I'm allowed to wear is a wedding ring, and that I'm not allowed to wear a Fitbit, or medical ID bracelet - or necklace, for that matter. This same employer hired me with multiple visible piercings, some of them quite large (5/8" holes in each ear), over 2 years ago, and has never said a word about said piercings, which I would think qualify as jewelry. Is it legal for an employer to require that a medical ID be removed during work hours? Particularly since a doctor has stated I need to wear it? I've passed out at work once this year due to a sugar crash, and nobody knew what to do except for the GM (who doesn't work evenings), which resulted in someone finally calling 911 after a lengthy amount of time (after which I was accused of "faking it" by the assistant manager). I think it's pretty important that I be able to wear this. Especially since my doctor is saying I need to wear it. edit: I work in food service, if it matters, but I'm not involved in food production. randomidiot fucked around with this message at 08:49 on Aug 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2015 08:44
|
|
|
Is there a safety issue? If the bracelet could get caught on something, then I could see the reasoning, but if you normally wear your FitBit without any issues then they don't have much of a leg to stand on. I'd make sure that written instructions from your doctor saying this is needed are on file with your company's HR department. Once they are, go ahead and wear the bracelet, and complain to HR if your boss gives you poo poo about it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2015 01:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 14:19 |
|
|
some texas redneck posted:I have a disability covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act - specifically, Diabetes. My doctor wants me to wear a medical ID bracelet or necklace. Without a reason why other than "policy and appearance" this strikes me as the very definition of reasonable accomidation. Not an ada lawyer though. I can't recall, do you work for a corp store or a franchise? If it is a corp store, they'll have a human resources dept whose entire job is avoid getting sued over petty poo poo like this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2015 02:12
|
|
