|
Hypothetically one could send them a check with “full accord and satisfaction “ written on the memo line and see if they cash it But you should hire a lawyer and ask them as it depends and you should not rely on internet posters silly The big guns litigation way is to file a for a declaratory judgment but that’s like 5,000$ There are other ways tok I guess
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 03:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 21:47 |
|
|
Late for the Lufthansa Lawsuit Boner Marmot, but as someone who has had a refundable, transferable ticket exactly once when provided for a business trip, you would very much know it was refundable or transferrable A) on the ticket and B) in the massive price it cost
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 03:57
|
|
|
The biggest luck I had was deciding not to pay for refundable tickets, having to cancel the trip and just dreading how hosed I would be on recovering anything, only to find out I hadn't actually clicked "buy ticket" and hadn't paid any money. I recommend using my method the next time you (don't) travel, Gaunab
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 04:02
|
|
|
your best bet for getting money back is to scrutinize your credit card's benefits and see if it happens to be covered by some overlooked travel guarantee
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 04:12
|
|
|
Tunicate posted:your best bet for getting money back is to scrutinize your credit card's benefits and see if it happens to be covered by some overlooked travel guarantee This is how I recovered a majority of the money from my cancelled trip from April 2020, cause I bought almost everything non-refundable.  In the end it helped a lot, thank gently caress. Lesson learned: don’t travel.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 04:23
|
|
|
I had an airline close the doors early, less than 5 minutes after boarding was supposed to begin (they started early, while I was enjoying a $19 cheesesteak or something), and I missed the flight. I was in line behind a screaming banshee who promised to rain death upon all of the employees, and I tried to be nice to the people who get paid a ha’penny an hour to absorb abuse all day, so I got booked on a direct flight about an hour later. I did not require the services of an attorney, although I had a team of them en route to the airport just in case. On Crazydude v. SA: I do wonder what the solution is to insane people filing insane things. I know someone mentioned they do a review of pro se/in forma pauperis filings and throw out the garbage quickly, but there’s surely a non-zero cost of doing that, right? Is there an actual penalty for wasting the quantity of time that this guy wastes?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 04:29
|
|
|
Sonic Dude posted:
The guy seems legitimately insane. What morally acceptable penalty could possibly dissuade him from doing insane poo poo?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 04:49
|
|
|
Yeah given how the colon mongoose responded to people giving them advice, I’m gonna go out on an limb and say they probably could have boarded the flight if they hadn’t been acting like a dickhead.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 04:58
|
|
|
Outrail posted:Crossposting the relevant posts from the DDoS thread. Apparently some dickhead is suing the site for some reason. This post would have been way funnier if it were made by “Jeffery of YOSPOS” and framed as a hypothetical.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 05:04
|
|
|
Outrail posted:The guy seems legitimately insane. What morally acceptable penalty could possibly dissuade him from doing insane poo poo? I don’t know. Just… don’t accept the filings from known frequent-flyer crazypants people without involving a lawyer? That wouldn’t necessarily exclude crazy people who are also lawyers, which I hope is a demographic that is not as common as it may seem on the news. I assume that the level of computerization or automation to say “nope, cram it” before wasting an actual person’s time costs real money and is therefore not yet implemented in any court, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 05:29
|
|
|
Sonic Dude posted:I don’t know. Just… don’t accept the filings from known frequent-flyer crazypants people without involving a lawyer? That wouldn’t necessarily exclude crazy people who are also lawyers, which I hope is a demographic that is not as common as it may seem on the news. I understand what you're saying, but the counterargument is that everyone has an absolute fundamental constitutional right to access to the courts. Constitutional rights don't get suspended just because dude's crazy. Crazy people have rights, and in fact we should be making sure that their rights are secured moreso than some rich person it corporation with easy access to lawyers. I don't have any idea what the Chicago federal court system does for these types of fillings, but yes your instinct is correct in that there is a standard operating procedure in place. I should point out, though, that the procedure for "dealing with" these guys only get out in place after many many frivolous lawsuits are filled. I'm just guessing, but I would imagine the procedure is something like the front line bureaucrat puts the new filling into their case management system, and a flag pops up that they should take the case to a magistrate to review for the standards applicable to the situation. The magistrate is neutral, unbiased, and is deeply concerned that the standard procedure might be overused, so he or she reviews the filling carefully. Did the complaint articulate something coherent? Does it name an actual thing or an actual person as the opposing party? Does it try to articulate a legal principle, even if that legal principle is written with a second grade vocabulary? Did the person even bother trying to serve the defendant? How often has dude filled one of these suits then simply never showed up in the case again, causing it to default and get dismissed anyway? Then, once the magistrate makes that call, I'm sure he sends out an order telling the dude about his decision. This gives the dude an opportunity to correct (if he's serious) or confirmation that he was going to ghost the case anyway. Notice and opportunity to respond are fundamental tenets of access to the courts, so this fulfills the constitutional right. And don't knock pro se litigants. A constitutionalist pro se just won in my state's supreme court in a no poo poo big boy case a few months ago. Pro se litigants have made it up to the United States supreme court before.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 06:05
|
|
|
ChickenDoodle posted:This is how I recovered a majority of the money from my cancelled trip from April 2020, cause I bought almost everything non-refundable. They're also one of the best-rated airlines in the world.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 06:14
|
|
|
Sonic Dude posted:I don’t know. Just… don’t accept the filings from known frequent-flyer crazypants people without involving a lawyer? That wouldn’t necessarily exclude crazy people who are also lawyers, which I hope is a demographic that is not as common as it may seem on the news. Not a lawyer, and it's explained better above, but it sounds like at a certain point you can be declared a Vexatious Litigant, meaning that the court has ruled that you are Officially
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 06:57
|
|
|
Sometimes this thread can be pretty dry as you butthole gerbils throw around latin terms no one understands. But every now an then, you get little sagas like Spoon Guy, the RA who bodyslammed a girl, and travel man here that remind me why I keep this thread bookmarked
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 13:07
|
|
|
Sonic Dude posted:I don’t know. Just… don’t accept the filings from known frequent-flyer crazypants people without involving a lawyer? That wouldn’t necessarily exclude crazy people who are also lawyers, which I hope is a demographic that is not as common as it may seem on the news. It’s not that easy and there are lots of meritorious pro se filings. It’s just part of having open courts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 13:13
|
|
|
I swear this is the only thread on the forums where I can see a flurry of posts happened while I was away and it's always something genuinely entertaining happening rather than some silly derail 
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 14:11
|
|
|
euphronius posted:It’s not that easy and there are lots of meritorious pro se filings. I’m not saying “throw out anything that doesn’t come through a lawyer.” I was wondering what could be done, constitutionally, to shift or reduce the cost of handling situations where the same person files things (which seems to generally be pro se, because unless they’re very rich, it’s probably hard to find a lawyer willing to attach their name to “I don’t visit porn sites often” suits) with the apparent goal of wasting everyone’s time and/or as part of an untreated mental health issue. It sounds like the answer is that there’s not much that can be done. I don’t have any skin in the game (being neither a lawyer nor a vexatious litigant), it just bothers me on principle that time is spent on this stuff, which delays things (even a little) for non-crazy people, whether those non-crazy people have lawyers or not. Thanks for the discussion.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 14:31
|
|
|
Things would be delayed even if the "crazy" people where not allowed to file. And as mentioned above Courts can get real mean with serial filers but then they can just move on to different courts. The "delay" in litigation is not related to lovely complaints filed by "crazy" people. They never get on the trial schedule.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 14:37
|
|
|
Sonic Dude posted:I’m not saying “throw out anything that doesn’t come through a lawyer.” I was wondering what could be done, constitutionally, to shift or reduce the cost of handling situations where the same person files things (which seems to generally be pro se, because unless they’re very rich, it’s probably hard to find a lawyer willing to attach their name to “I don’t visit porn sites often” suits) with the apparent goal of wasting everyone’s time and/or as part of an untreated mental health issue. There is very little time being wasted dismissing his suit. The judge has a junior clerk or intern that's responsible for quickly scanning things and putting it into a queue for the judge to scroll through and check off once or twice every fortnight. The only solution to this particular situation is government provided healthcare for all people so that our friend can get the help and medication he needs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 14:37
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Hypothetically one could send them a check with “full accord and satisfaction “ written on the memo line and see if they cash it Interplead Wells Fargo, pro se Hell Yeah
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 14:57
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:There is very little time being wasted dismissing his suit. The judge has a junior clerk or intern that's responsible for quickly scanning things and putting it into a queue for the judge to scroll through and check off once or twice every fortnight. Do they dismiss them before there is even a hearing, or is a hearing required so the judge can dismisss the suit in court? edit: Sphinctersnake
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 15:06
|
|
|
Kalman posted:Yep. PACER fees are so abusive that the judiciary lost a lawsuit over them and are currently negotiating a settlement. to give a little more context: the fees are basically what sort of, kind of, made sense in like 1997 to cover costs (which is, also, why it looks like it was coded in 1997). since then, they have not dropped the fees one penny (despite that the law says the fees are only to cover costs) because the courts use the money as a slush fund to buy stuff congress didn't give them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 15:23
|
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:Do they dismiss them before there is even a hearing, or is a hearing required so the judge can dismisss the suit in court? No hearing is required. Pro se complaints are all going to get reviewed by someone on the judge's staff. That person will read everything and then send it to the judge with a recommendation. The judge will then go over everything and likely proceed with the recommended action as they have directed their staff to do things the way they want already. Judges are generally very lenient with pro se filers and will squint really hard to make cognizable claims. If there is some underlying claim but the suit is otherwise facially defective, the judge will dismiss with opportunity to file an amended complaint by x date. The guy suing the forums had a few of his suits get that treatment. If it is facially defective and makes no cognizable claim under law, there is nothing requiring the judge to keep the suit alive. One is not entitled to a hearing in federal court just because they filed a suit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 15:33
|
|
|
In state courts the prothonotary/clerk of courts does a lot of work as well sorting things and making sure pro se people file the correct stuff There are usually forms for commons suits
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 15:36
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:The only solution to this particular situation is government provided healthcare for all people so that our friend can get the help and medication he needs. Something something Meads v Meads
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 17:21
|
|
|
Car related question: I bought a car outright back in January from Nevada (I am in CO) and still havent received the title yet. I have been in contact with the dealer and they have been telling me that the previous owner lost the title, they are getting a replacement from the Nevada DMV, its going to be an indeterminate amount of time, etc. The sales contract says they had 30 days to deliver a title and its been nearly 90. At this point I’d just like the money I spent on the car back and ship them the car back, should I contact a lawyer and tell them the situation and see if they can get the ball rolling? If so, what kind of lawyer would handle this?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 21:28
|
|
|
did you by any chance buy a car via Vroom?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 21:37
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:did you by any chance buy a car via Vroom? No, it was an actual brick-and-mortar used car dealer for classics, collectors, etc. I've definitely heard stories about Vroom and Carvana however.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 21:42
|
|
|
Look at this rump rat, he hasn't even insulted anyone yet!
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 22:00
|
|
|
Tenchrono posted:Car related question: i would think anyone who could pass the bar could handle this, to be quite honest. i'd go with a cheap solo practitioner, or just call the dealer up and say it's been 90 days and their 30 days are up, do they want to give you your refund or do they want you to hire a lawyer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 22:03
|
|
|
Yeah, my last firm did that type of work in a different state. I'd start with googling car title attorney cityname nevada and see if anyone overtly advertises that they do that kind of work as a starting point. You might find someone immediately. You might not. If you don't, just look up pretty much any plaintiff's attorney and give them a ring. If they don't handle it, they should know someone who does.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 22:27
|
|
|
I'm normally a spectator here, but I have a hypothetical of sorts: Lets say Party X is trying to sue Party Z for unpaid rent as part of a shared lease. X and Z were roommates. X fronted the rent. Z didn't pay for a few months. X is suing Z in small claims, but cannot find Z's new address to serve them. What is the recourse here?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 22:36
|
|
|
Canine Blues Arooo posted:I'm normally a spectator here, but I have a hypothetical of sorts: How much money we talking here
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 22:37
|
|
|
Also Alice and Bob are nice besides X and Y
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 22:38
|
|
|
Does Z actually have any money?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 22:40
|
|
|
euphronius posted:How much money we talking here $4500 Guy Axlerod posted:Does Z actually have any money? Probably. E: It's hard to know for sure, but there is evidence to suggest the answer is 'yes'. (Has a decent job, has decent stuff/car, etc.) Canine Blues Arooo fucked around with this message at 22:47 on Apr 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 22:45
|
|
|
Canine Blues Arooo posted:Say, $4500 Next question Guy Axlerod posted:Does Z actually have any money?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 22:46
|
|
|
Your chances of recovery are low . Your chances of a judgment are way higher A lawyer may take it on contingency .
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 22:48
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Your chances of recovery are low . Your chances of a judgment are way higher Roger that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 22:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 21:47 |
|
|
That’s a case where a letter from a lawyer may get them to the table where you can get like a couple grand from them in settlement
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2022 22:54
|
|