|
In Pennsylvania, land law like hoas can be murky black magic and a last person really has no chance beyond the most surface issues. It’s confusing for lawyers and courts too A lot of times it’s not even remotely as simple as looking at the hoa instrument
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2019 19:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:34 |
|
|
evilweasel posted:that being a "may" instead of a "shall" is not good for you. one natural reading is that ARC is allowed to veto unreasonable impairments of views, but is not required to - i.e. you can't sue for them not vetoing, but perhaps your neighbor could sue for vetoing arguing the impairment was "reasonable" That all makes sense, thank you. It's really maddening to me that they could pay so much lip service to view protection and in reality it may not mean a single thing legally and on top of that it may all come down to whether or not some boob on the Architectural Committee even bothered to look at the landscaping plans for more than 3 seconds before approving them. That isn't right, whether or not it's how it works legally.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2019 19:20
|
|
|
If the HOA decides not to act on its own, you might consider a coup of the HOA board. You can lobby your neighbors on the basis of "look at how the HOA let my neighbor destroy my view, they'll let it happen to you too unless we fix this" and eventually you might be able to either encourage the HOA board to take action to protect your views in order to avoid getting tossed out in favor of candidates who promise to everyone to actually act to protect their views, or, actually toss them out and put in place a board that will act to protect your views. I mentioned it's a petty government-like entity for a reason, and this is why. If you want to force governments to do things, the expensive way is to sue them: the... also expensive way is to lobby them, and the third also very expensive way is to vote for someone who promises to do the things you wanted, possibly that person being you yourself. If it seems like a huge loving hassle to get involved in essentially a political campaign in your tiny enclave, well, that's ultimately what an HOA is, sorry.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2019 19:29
|
|
|
buglord posted:Cali: yeah, call your lead investigator (whichever cop gave you his card) and tell them your situation. The DA may make some form a restitution a condition of the defendant's probation. However, know that process could take months and months (much like a civil suit) so assume that on the off-chance you ever do get cash out of that deadbeat, it still wouldn't be anywhere in the near future.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2019 19:46
|
|
|
Consider [this] an effort post about why HOAs are generally good things.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2019 19:48
|
|
|
buglord posted:Cali: It makes paying you back a term and condition of probation (though limited by ability to pay). Even if they can't pay, it is non-discharable by bankruptcy so you can come back and haunt them when you have money. Call the DA's office. DA's here love getting restitution because generally if they get you a few grand you'll probably vote to re-elect them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2019 21:12
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:yeah, call your lead investigator (whichever cop gave you his card) and tell them your situation. The DA may make some form a restitution a condition of the defendant's probation. Arcturas posted:Yeah, suing them for the value of the car is a way to make them give you money. If they don't have money, you can't get much out of them. You might be able to garnish their wages. You might be able to get legal authority to take some of their stuff and sell it at auction. You're probably screwed. nm posted:California has a pretty awesome restitution statute.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2019 21:16
|
|
|
buglord posted:Thanks for the info. Considering the details about them that the investigator told me, I don't see myself getting much/anything out of them. Good luck. My brother's store got hit by "The Scooter Bandittm" (a dude riding around on his scooter smashing storefronts and stealing from cash registers) once many years ago, and when he was talking to the DA about restitution, he asked if he could have the scooter instead of the cash but they told him "no." lol.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2019 22:35
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Good luck. My brother's store got hit by "The Scooter Bandittm" (a dude riding around on his scooter smashing storefronts and stealing from cash registers) once many years ago, and when he was talking to the DA about restitution, he asked if he could have the scooter instead of the cash but they told him "no." lol. Someone else probably got to it first. Like the DA.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2019 02:08
|
|
|
What happens if an execution gets botched and the condemned somehow survives? Do they just try and redo the execution or are they considered "executed" but survived?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2019 19:40
|
|
|
Based on wikipedia and some recent articles I saw on Imgur or facebook or whatever, historically they just keep trying until it finally works, like one dude was hanged three times before it finally took? But it was all in relation to a current case where a guy is arguing that because he survived his execution attempt, he has served his sentence and shouldn't be executed again. Which at first glance might seem like he's just weaseling, but in that case, there were actually a couple details that made it potentially a really sensible take. But I forget what the details are. Google suggests it can go both ways in recent years. So the real answer is, I guess, "it depends", probably mostly on how hosed up the state in question wants to be. Bad Munki fucked around with this message at 19:47 on Nov 19, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2019 19:44
|
|
|
I'd say making a second attempt at executing someone is cruel and very unusual. In a sane world I would think a judge would just make it life in prison and let the guy go off to that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2019 19:50
|
|
|
Thread has talked about this before, I'm certain. P sure it has to do with how the sentence is worded. Like if it says we're going to hang you and you don't die, whoops. If it says "hang from the neck until dead" or whatever, then that's clearer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2019 19:52
|
|
|
Yeah, I would assume it all hinges around the legal definition of the punishment. I would have a hard time believing that any judge would interpret "sentenced to death by lethal injection" to mean "we're going to try and kill you but if we fail on that first try, no do-overs". I could see the resultant court case being really sticky, though, with lots of Clintonesque "it depends on what 'is' is" sort of wrangling. IANAL, of course.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2019 20:14
|
|
|
When do you file the appeal tho. In between the attempts ?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2019 20:15
|
|
|
I mean, I can't imagine that most prisons have a brace of lethal injection chemicals waiting on the sidelines in case the first one fails, so, yeah, when they stick you back into your cell, you might have time to file while they figure out what the gently caress just happened. Let's not forget the important question, though: would you get a second Last Meal?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2019 20:28
|
|
|
If a lethal injection gets botched, the convict is going to be in no condition to go back to their cell. He's going to die, it just takes longer than expected and it's more painful.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2019 20:34
|
|
|
I believe the actual answer is that there were some British common law cases where people survived execution but it's not a modern thing any more. A quick Google finds the cases of Anne Green, "half hangit Maggie", Inetta de Balsham. A modern example is Romell Broom, who survived a lethal injection in 2009 and is scheduled to be re-executed on June 17, 2020. He maintains his innocence.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2019 20:37
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:A modern example is Romell Broom, who survived a lethal injection in 2009 and is scheduled to be re-executed on June 17, 2020. He maintains his innocence. Huh, that one is weird. They never got the drugs in his system because they couldn't get an IV going.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2019 20:42
|
|
|
iirc death warrants have a specific day on them, so if you manage to survive the day they have to stop trying to execute you while they get a new death warrant because the old one expired this more commonly comes up with last minute stays, not botched executions
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2019 20:46
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:iirc death warrants have a specific day on them, so if you manage to survive the day they have to stop trying to execute you while they get a new death warrant because the old one expired Yeah, that's why it's usually done in the middle of the night, or in other words right after midnight so they don't run out of time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2019 22:24
|
|
|
Look Sir Droids posted:If a lethal injection gets botched, the convict is going to be in no condition to go back to their cell. He's going to die, it just takes longer than expected and it's more painful. God loving drat just give me a standby like seppuku
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2019 22:25
|
|
|
Similar issue: https://www.sciencealert.com/an-inmate-claims-that-his-sentence-ended-because-he-died-and-was-revivedquote:"Schreiber is either alive, in which case he must remain in prison, or he is dead, in which case this appeal is moot," Judge Amanda Potterfield wrote. No claiming you 'died' and came back to life either.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2019 00:00
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Similar issue: https://www.sciencealert.com/an-inmate-claims-that-his-sentence-ended-because-he-died-and-was-revived "...this appeal is moot," Your Honor, I do not think this word means what you think it means
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2019 01:45
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:
It’s like Schrodinger’s Motion
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2019 03:11
|
|
|
euphronius posted:When do you file the appeal tho. In between the attempts ? Better have your secretary call the court and let them know the motion is coming
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2019 03:28
|
|
|
I feel silly asking this question, but is a university even capable of violating the 1st amendment? Possible wrinkle - school is a state school. https://provost.indiana.edu/statements/index.html tldr; Professor is openly racist, sexist, homophobic on social media, VP/provost states that these views do not give IU standing upon which to violate the constitution by firing him, with a nod to the 1st amendment. Any lawyerly folk out there care to opine on whether there's actually a constitutional issue here, or just misdirection/misinterpretation of freedom of speech/religion?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 06:02
|
|
|
There are cases discussing the first amendment right of a state employee to say things outside of work. I forget the rules, but there are rules and they often get complicated in university contexts.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 06:43
|
|
|
Ratatozsk posted:I feel silly asking this question, but is a university even capable of violating the 1st amendment? Possible wrinkle - school is a state school. Not a lawyer, but there have been some pretty big blowups over whether professors can be fired for their social media posts. My guess would be that the VP/provost doesn't actually know what they're talking about but is buying time for the school legal team to take a look. Also, that they're probably talking about the school's constitution, not the national one. If I were to guess further, this dude is probably tenured so firing him wouldn't be an easy matter anyway.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 06:44
|
|
|
tinytort posted:Not a lawyer, but there have been some pretty big blowups over whether professors can be fired for their social media posts. My guess would be that the VP/provost doesn't actually know what they're talking about but is buying time for the school legal team to take a look. She’s a law professor. IU is a state university in a state run by chuds. Firing a dude for being a chud off-duty would just rain poo poo down on them from the governor and state legislature, who pay the bills. She is being smart imo as a not-lawyer but onetime academic administrator.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 07:22
|
|
|
Look Sir Droids posted:Huh, that one is weird. They never got the drugs in his system because they couldn't get an IV going. That’s because competent medical professionals won’t have anything to do with the grotesque circus that is American capital punishment.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 07:46
|
|
|
Firing a tenured state university professor for anything short of killing a person on campus is drat near impossible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 09:20
|
|
|
So if you have a Doogie Howser, MD situation going on with your kid, and they graduate high school at like 10 years old, would the current collective bargaining agreement allow them to be drafted by the NFL at age 14?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 15:21
|
|
|
mercenarynuker posted:So if you have a Doogie Howser, MD situation going on with your kid, and they graduate high school at like 10 years old, would the current collective bargaining agreement allow them to be drafted by the NFL at age 14? You have to use up all your college eligibility first, unless you get approval from the NFL (which is how juniors etc. get drafted). In your hypothetical, this 14 year old played all four years in college, or has graduated already, in which case he is technically draft eligible. I mean, your real question is, "is there a specific age requirement" and the answer is "no."
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 15:56
|
|
|
I think the real question might be is there an age limit for college football players, from either the NCAA or the college itself. If they’re ineligible to play in college then they can’t use up any requisite college eligibility.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 16:02
|
|
|
BonerGhost posted:"...this appeal is moot," In law, it can mean "theoretically debatable, but of no practical significance." That's where "moot court" comes from: the whole point is academic debate without a real-world outcome.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 16:06
|
|
|
Look Sir Droids posted:I think the real question might be is there an age limit for college football players, from either the NCAA or the college itself. Yeah, but if they graduate without ever having played (or never went to college at all, which does happen) then they are still eligible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 16:07
|
|
|
Look Sir Droids posted:I think the real question might be is there an age limit for college football players, from either the NCAA or the college itself. NFL from 14-18, then you gotta go to NCAA
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 16:09
|
|
|
The other thing to note in the college professor thing is that I've seen just as many attempts, if not more, to drum university professors out of their jobs for mentioning LGBTQ people positively in class or saying that the Palestinians might not universally be terrorists etc. The same laws that prevent them getting kicked out by right wing outrage mobs is also keeping people with racists views in place.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 16:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:34 |
|
|
Munin posted:The same laws that prevent them getting kicked out by right wing outrage mobs is also keeping people with racists views in place. Lest we never forget.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 17:15
|
|