|
rivetz posted:That's part of it actually, the case is complicated as hell and of the 15 of us there are exactly 3 who haven't written down a thing and come of as thoroughly checked out. It's got me wondering when the alts are selected and is there any discretion in the process. Sounds like that's a nope. Thanks all. I can come back and dish on the case once it's been decided right? Listen to what the judge tells you at the end of the case. They 100% will address what you can and cannot discuss.
|
#
?
May 28, 2023 03:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 08:47 |
|
|
Dear god don’t tell us or anybody anything unless the judge explicitly tells you what you can talk about and when. Lmao got me sweatin’
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2023 03:58
|
|
|
If they were told they’re alternates, everyone should have been told they’re alternates
EwokEntourage fucked around with this message at 06:29 on May 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2023 04:16
|
|
|
Just remember that both 12 Angry Men and Runaway Jury were documentaries and act accordingly.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2023 04:59
|
|
|
therobit posted:Just remember that both 12 Angry Men and Runaway Jury were documentaries and act accordingly. Are you asking them to bring a gun?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2023 23:24
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:Are you asking them to bring a gun? No, maybe a switchblade though.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 08:31
|
|
|
https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/31/entertainment/raven-symone-nda/index.html Is something like this even enforceable at all?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2023 18:33
|
|
|
As much as any NDA is, I guess.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2023 21:10
|
|
|
I got a summons for federal jury duty, but my number is 500ish. Any insight on how likely I am to have to drive my rear end out to the courthouse?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2023 21:30
|
|
|
i rate the likelihood at 4 out of 7 bananas
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2023 22:09
|
|
|
Wouldn’t the NDA require consideration? IANAL
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2023 23:47
|
|
|
Had a candidate miss a job interview today for jury duty. Who can I sue? I want to put the system on trial.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2023 23:59
|
|
|
CerealCrunch posted:Wouldn’t the NDA require consideration? IANAL Sure, as all contracts do. But even for NDAs between companies, there isn't actual money exchanged as the consideration. The receipt of information on the one hand, and the promise to keep that information confidential on the other hand, can be the consideration.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2023 00:02
|
|
|
CerealCrunch posted:Wouldn’t the NDA require consideration? IANAL DAT rear end is sufficient consideration.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2023 05:39
|
|
|
Sorry if this is the wrong thread for this! I have a legal / housing question. I am a tenant, renting directly from an owner of a condo unit inside a condo building in WA. Our downstairs neighbor has complained to the HOA that our dog is causing too much noise throughout the day. They are saying it has nothing to do with barking, but that he is running through the apartment too much and they can hear it. In my view, his running is minimal and whatever noise it creates is reasonable, but they are insisting this is a big issue for them. (If I had to estimate, he gets some zoomies either chasing the cat or playing with us for at most, 1-2 minutes every other day or so. He spends a lot of time out working with my gf so at home he’s mostly lazy). He is only 35 pounds but he is a rat terrier mix so he’s pretty fast to be fair. Our landlord tells us she’s had a long-standing feud with this neighbor as well, concerning them complaining about previous tenants who had young kids. The association gave us a warning and is telling us they could remove our dog. They are citing a rule (that we signed) stating "Noisy animals that disturb other residents are not permitted." This rule seems extremely vague, and there are plenty of dogs in the building that I routinely hear barking at all hours, and our dog never barks. Is this rule actually legally enforceable? Everything I am finding online talks about dogs that bark too much so I’m not seeing a lot of relevant information. The other thing to note is that he is an emotional support animal (we have paperwork), and this neighbor has only complained to us one time about this over 2 months ago. We’ve lived here for 9 months. We had no idea it was an issue for them until we received the official warning yesterday.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2023 19:30
|
|
|
I was watching one of those first amendment auditor videos. He was pulling up to a stop light with a cop behind him. The light turned yellow, so he stopped and the cop had to lock up their brakes to avoid hitting him. Actually, the cop probably would have hit him, but he pulled forward a little ways into the intersection to avoid getting rear ended. Of course, the cop ticketed him for stopping in the intersection. On the driver's rear dash cam, you can clearly hear the cop's tires screeching when they slammed on their brakes. On the cops dash cam, there is no audio until after the cop car comes to a stop, then the audio starts rolling. Could it be considered tampering or destruction of evidence to erase the audio in that case? I have no idea what city/state this was in.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2023 20:10
|
|
|
Skunkduster posted:I was watching one of those first amendment auditor videos. He was pulling up to a stop light with a cop behind him. The light turned yellow, so he stopped and the cop had to lock up their brakes to avoid hitting him. Actually, the cop probably would have hit him, but he pulled forward a little ways into the intersection to avoid getting rear ended. Of course, the cop ticketed him for stopping in the intersection. On the driver's rear dash cam, you can clearly hear the cop's tires screeching when they slammed on their brakes. On the cops dash cam, there is no audio until after the cop car comes to a stop, then the audio starts rolling. Could it be considered tampering or destruction of evidence to erase the audio in that case? That's probably not what happened there. Cop dash cam is *always* recording video, but not always recording audio (due to file size constraints I believe). When the cop turns their big blues on or otherwise initiates dashcam, it starts saving both. . . which means the video should start about thirty seconds *before* the audio cuts in, because the video was always on, but the audio wasn't pre-recording before the lights came on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2023 20:48
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:but not always recording audio (due to file size constraints I believe). Well that sounds like bullshit to me, audio is comically small compared to even a blip of video.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2023 20:49
|
|
|
Bad Munki posted:Well that sounds like bullshit to me, audio is comically small compared to even a blip of video.  I dunno why, it's just how it works. In theory there's usually not much use for dash cam audio -- what we want from dash cam is things like "did he make an improper right turn" "did he signal" "did his brake lights operate" etc. AT least, that's the theory. In practice sometimes cops opening their big dumb mouths is hilarious. I did have one once where the cop was walking up to the car they'd pulled over shouting "i pulled you over because your brake lights were dead" and the brake lights were brightly lit in the dashcam. Case got reassigned tho before I got the chance to make any hay with that Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 21:15 on Jun 5, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2023 20:53
|
|
|
Oh, I'm not saying your report on what they say is bullshit, I'm saying whatever cop agency reports that as a reason is bullshit. In other words, ACAB, including the institutions behind them 🤷♂️
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2023 21:12
|
|
|
The system they use keeps exactly 30 seconds of rolling video. Like, the thirty-first second deletes when the next second records. The audio switches on and the system starts permanently recording when the cop hits "record" or something (activates lights or air bag deploys) causes the system to start recording. The storage alone would be insane to permanently record 24/7 everything out of every cop car.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2023 06:06
|
|
|
Yeah, it's just kind of funny that they're not running a rolling 30 seconds of audio too, given how inexpensive it would be storage wise. I assume that it's so that when the cop says something wildly inappropriate before switching on the sirens it's not captured.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2023 06:13
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:Yeah, it's just kind of funny that they're not running a rolling 30 seconds of audio too, given how inexpensive it would be storage wise. Exactly. "Hey, let's get this [slur]!" *Hits lights* *Recording starts*
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2023 11:21
|
|
|
We moved cross country (out of state) from NC to CA. Our landlord charged us almost a thousand dollars out of our deposit for some bogus stuff like removing pavers in the back yard we didn't install (looks like they've been there for decades) plus some other stuff totalling about $1700 or more than half our deposit. Pretty sure the tiny city in the middle of nowhere does not have a tenants rights group. We're on week... Three? waiting for a response from the property management company Going to look at the rental contract, I'm guessing it has something about using mediation, how do I initiate that? Just pick a mediator out of the yellow pages? Failing that can I just sue him locally in California small claims court or do I need to do that in NC? We still go back there periodically once or twice a year.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2023 19:36
|
|
|
post the contract
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2023 20:20
|
|
|
Hadlock posted:We moved cross country (out of state) from NC to CA. Our landlord charged us almost a thousand dollars out of our deposit for some bogus stuff like removing pavers in the back yard we didn't install (looks like they've been there for decades) plus some other stuff totalling about $1700 or more than half our deposit. Pretty sure the tiny city in the middle of nowhere does not have a tenants rights group. We're on week... Three? waiting for a response from the property management company FWIW, there is a facebook tenant's union for the county I thought you were in (but whose city is not tiny) You've almost certainly got to sue in NC.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2023 20:41
|
|
|
a sternly worded letter from your lawyer might be sufficient for them to give up on stealing your deposit
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2023 21:01
|
|
|
ill send that letter for you $15,000 upfront deposit tho
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2023 21:23
|
|
|
rivetz posted:Here's an interesting one, I think: in currently serving on a grand jury in a class action lawsuit. The trial is lengthy so they went with 18 jurors and will drop six alternates when testimony is complete. Nobody knows who the alternates are. quote:This verdict is believed to be the first time a jury has found a utility company liable to property owners in a wildfire case. When factoring in the damages available to the class, it would be the largest civil jury verdict in Oregon history. I've been on this jury for the last seven weeks, trial wrapped this afternoon. If anyone has any questions about it, judge has instructed all jurors that basically we can talk to anyone we want about anything we want at our own discretion, outside of the "deliberative process" which I'll interpret to mean anything re: discussions held inside the jury room. Overall, quite an experience!
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2023 02:19
|
|
|
How much of the testimony seemed to boil down to "gently caress these guys?" For that matter, did it feel like any witnesses were just full of it? (No need for specifics!)
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2023 02:25
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:How much of the testimony seemed to boil down to "gently caress these guys?" For that matter, did it feel like any witnesses were just full of it? (No need for specifics!) quote:How much of the testimony seemed to boil down to "gently caress these guys?" "gently caress these guys": Pacific Power leadership, to the residents "gently caress these guys": Pacific Power leadership, to the plaintiff's lawyers taking their depositions "gently caress these guys": Plaintiff's lawyers, referring to Pacific Power leadership "gently caress these guys": Residents, to Pacific Power "gently caress these guys": Other residents, to plaintiff's lawyers quote:For that matter, did it feel like any witnesses were just full of it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2023 03:59
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm trying to ask about things that aren't going to be judgement calls you were discussing, like "how much did the smarm and lack of taking responsibility affect the punitive damages" which I would love to know but assume you should not discuss.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2023 04:09
|
|
|
Thank you for serving on the jury. It has been an important case to a lot of people in Oregon and the west.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2023 04:35
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:Yeah, I'm trying to ask about things that aren't going to be judgement calls you were discussing, like "how much did the smarm and lack of taking responsibility affect the punitive damages" which I would love to know but assume you should not discuss.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2023 04:53
|
|
|
rivetz posted:Here's a cool nugget I can share that was unearthed in testimony: one of the execs was VP of Transmission & Distribution, which includes wildfire mitigation; when the fires went down, he was co-director of the EOC (Emergency Ops Center) stood up by PacifiCorp to manage potential ignitions and conduct a coordinated response. It was therefore unfortunate that under repeated direct examination he was unable to produce one example of any specific action taken over the weekend as the fires burned. Nor even one piece of communication with any other employee, save a lone cellphone record showing a call to the CEO in the middle of the night. He retired less than a year later and now owns a small consultancy, with one client: PacifiCorp. Their agreement (which was entered into evidence and is also public record) pays him $5K/mo. for 16 hrs/mo. of wildfire mitigation consulting, strictly conditional on not talking to anybody else about wildfires or PacifiCorp. You may draw your own conclusions as to how this development was greeted by the jury. Gonna guess "gently caress these guys"
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2023 12:11
|
|
|
rivetz posted:I've been on this jury for the last seven weeks, trial wrapped this afternoon. If anyone has any questions about it, judge has instructed all jurors that basically we can talk to anyone we want about anything we want at our own discretion, outside of the "deliberative process" which I'll interpret to mean anything re: discussions held inside the jury room. Overall, quite an experience! What was compensation like for the duration of the trial? It always seems insane to me how little jurors are paid for their time. In my area, you get nothing for the first ten days, and after that you get the equivalent of less than half the minimum wage. You even have to pay for parking! I don't understand how the average person these days is even meant to be able to serve on a jury with the way rent and other living expenses are. A seven-week trial would put a minimum-wage worker over $3k in the red comparatively, not even counting expenses during that time. Gully Foyle fucked around with this message at 16:28 on Jun 15, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2023 16:24
|
|
|
how are you going to feel if/when it gets reversed on appeal
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2023 16:26
|
|
|
Gully Foyle posted:What was compensation like for the duration of the trial? It always seems insane to me how little jurors are paid for their time. In my area, you get nothing for the first ten days, and after that you get the equivalent of less than half the minimum wage. You even have to pay for parking! I don't understand how the average person these days is even meant to be able to serve on a jury with the way rent and other living expenses are. A seven-week trial would put a minimum-wage worker over $3k in the red comparatively, not even counting expenses during that time. Federal court (or at least the Eastern District of Virginia) is $50 per day plus mileage and reimbursement of tolls. Then, after day 10, it goes up to $60 per day. Since I continued to get my salary while I was serving, it actually ended up being a nice little windfall for me. (Jury stipends are in fact taxable income, but not the portion that's a reimbursement for travel.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2023 21:17
|
|
|
[Nuking this out of concerns it could be misrepresented as grounds for a mistrial. That's not my intent, I clearly don't fully understand what can and cannot be shared here. Sorry all.]
rivetz fucked around with this message at 18:26 on Jun 16, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2023 05:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 08:47 |
|
|
God drat reading the compensation part I am so glad my union cba covers jury duty
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2023 05:11
|
|
