|
most importantly, how's bird with big dick's personal injury odyssey going??? I feel like there haven't been any updates in a while
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2023 16:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 14:26 |
|
|
Nonexistence posted:1) Call your state bar attorney referral service and ask for a fiduciary litigator So an update. A lawyer I spoke with worked it out with his partner and gave me the following advice. They said it was an interesting case to puzzle out and that he hates talking someone out of a job but that this is what he would do in my situation. He advised me to just have my probate lawyer recall my application for probate. The exact words he used were "Non-suit without Prejudice". He recommended this because her will from 2017 is a pour over will that sends everything to the trusts. By doing this, I avoid going to court to fight about his capacity for now, and force her to instead file suit against the trusts (the 2017 unamended trust basically leaves everything to her, the 2021 amended version has several beneficiaries). If she does, she risks violating the no contest clauses and gives me the ability to use trust money to defend instead of paying out of pocket. Since the "big" trust is being ran by a large financial corporation serving as trustee, they could use trust money to use their in house lawyers to defend the trust on behalf of the beneficiaries, rather than me paying out of pocket for an estate without a lot in it to work for contingency. Does that make sense? Recalling my application basically says that I don't agree or disagree with her contest and just don't go to court to fight about his capacity?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2023 05:01
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:"beyond the shadow of a doubt" "Reasonable" has to be one of the funniest legal terms around, I'm not sure how many people involved in the legal system are actually interacting with "reasonable persons" or "reasonable doubts" as a rule. Though I suppose the most "reasonable" thing in general is to stay the gently caress out of court if possible, so that makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2023 06:13
|
|
|
Xinlum posted:Does that make sense? Recalling my application basically says that I don't agree or disagree with her contest and just don't go to court to fight about his capacity? Nobody here is going to be able to tell you, because the answer depends on your state's law, the wording of the trust agreements, how your trust company is going to handle this, etc. etc. But generally, taking legal advice from a lawyer you've hired is a good thing to do. In this case just make sure you/she/he has talked to the trust company, knows how they'll respond, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2023 13:16
|
|
|
MadDogMike posted:"Reasonable" has to be one of the funniest legal terms around, I'm not sure how many people involved in the legal system are actually interacting with "reasonable persons" or "reasonable doubts" as a rule. Though I suppose the most "reasonable" thing in general is to stay the gently caress out of court if possible, so that makes sense. “Best effort”
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2023 14:42
|
|
|
MadDogMike posted:"Reasonable" has to be one of the funniest legal terms around, I'm not sure how many people involved in the legal system are actually interacting with "reasonable persons" or "reasonable doubts" as a rule. Though I suppose the most "reasonable" thing in general is to stay the gently caress out of court if possible, so that makes sense. as someone who used to ride the clapham omnibus pretty regularly I know lots of reasonable persons
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2023 15:09
|
|
|
JohnCompany posted:Nobody here is going to be able to tell you, because the answer depends on your state's law, the wording of the trust agreements, how your trust company is going to handle this, etc. etc. But generally, taking legal advice from a lawyer you've hired is a good thing to do. In this case just make sure you/she/he has talked to the trust company, knows how they'll respond, etc. I am not a lawyer, so I feel that I can tell you that the most important thing is to follow up with us, specifically, and let us know whatever happens. Engaging a lawyer or not is secondary to our personal amusement.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2023 17:26
|
|
|
Has anyone found court document systems to be unreliable? There's a guy and a company he used to own stock in, both being sued even though he sold all his stock and apparently gave up on the company. Months later, that company went into ch 11 bankruptcy. But somehow, certificates of notice for the bankruptcy case keep getting filed with the name of that guy, listed as a creditor, and his lawyers. All his lawyers in this notice are the exact same ones as in the other case where he's being sued and I've never found any other evidence he has anything to do with the bankruptcy case or any involvement with the bankrupt company at all anymore. The certificates of notice appear undeliverable to him, noting him as specifically a "bypassed recipient": "The following addresses were not sent this bankruptcy notice due to an undeliverable address, *duplicate of an address listed above, *P duplicate of a preferred address, or ## out of date forwarding orders with USPS." Is there any reasonable way to confirm this guy or his lawyers or their law firms are actually involved in the bankruptcy case as these public documents seem to imply? I imagine you can't just call up a law firm and say "hey, this public document shows you involved in this case, do you actually have anything to do with it or is that some sort of software error?"
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 21:57
|
|
|
If he’s a creditor that means the bankrupted company owes him money for something. Creditors can be involved in a bankruptcy or not get involved at all, but they still get notices because they have a claim against the bankruptcy estate. You have to inform all creditors of what’s going on so they can file proof of claims or whatever I doubt the lawyers will tell you anything if you’re not involved in the case somehow You can still be sued for your involvement in a company even if you sold all your shares in the company or whatever, depending on when the cause of action arose and why you are be sued individually EwokEntourage fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Jul 2, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 22:19
|
|
|
That makes sense, but is it possible he got added to the recipient list of the automated bankruptcy notices automatically just because he was already getting sued in the earlier case? And maybe it defaulted to listing him as a creditor because he's not a lawyer or something? Found someone who claimed to have called the courthouse in that area and talked to someone who looked up the bankruptcy case #: some guy online posted:She says that he's marked in the filings as "Adversary" and as a defendant. I was like Oh that's the lawsuit. She's like I don't know what lawsuit it doesn't show it here because we only get the files for the BK stuff there, she said. But that it makes sense if he's in some sort of law suit currently and she says that the only reason why he is showing up in those dockets is because of the lawsuit. That it's kind of a system leak she called it. Where the system automatically does all this stuff and sends it to be printed and he's showing up as an interested party due to the lawsuit that is still in litigation. This is a meme stock (bed bath) where a whole bunch of people are putting ridiculous amounts of their savings into the stock of a bankrupt company because of pure speculation that this guy (same guy who caused the GameStop pump in 2021 iirc) had a super secret plan to come back and save the company by secretly buying its debt and using it to acquire it at the last minute. Just total bullshit. "He could figure out how to do it! And he hates incompetent CEOs so he definitely would!" And then people start to see this guy's name appears in these bankruptcy transcript notifications as a creditor. "It's real! He's really coming to save us! He's really doing it! I'm buying even more now!" But "GameStop guy plays 4D chess to acquire a company that a bunch of gullible people have become emotionally attached to" seems much less likely than "automated system built by the lowest bidder includes a guy by mistake because his name and the bankrupt company's name have already been entered in the system for an unrelated case". oliveoil fucked around with this message at 22:45 on Jul 2, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 22:42
|
|
|
I’ve never seen pacer connect a non bankruptcy lawsuit to a bankruptcy but pacer does whatever it wants. If there is an adversarial action filed in the bankruptcy, those should be linked but I don’t think that’s make him show up as a creditor unless he was already listed as a creditor. The adversarial action would have to be filed after the bankruptcy
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 22:48
|
|
|
drat, sounds like PACER can be a pain in the rear end but state courthouses probably aren't going to combine data from two unrelated cases just because a couple names show up in both. Guess I'll keep trying to rule it out. Thank you for thinking about it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 23:01
|
|
|
Thesaurus posted:most importantly, how's bird with big dick's personal injury odyssey going??? I feel like there haven't been any updates in a while Waiting for trial at this point. When it’s all over I’ll probably post an A/T or something about what it’s like to be nearly killed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2023 13:30
|
|
|
bird with big dick posted:Waiting for trial at this point. When it’s all over I’ll probably post an A/T or something about what it’s like to be nearly killed. Bird with dangerously low blood pressure
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2023 19:50
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:Just be warned that I'm not a lawyer, but I do dispense bad advice. You are advised not to take it, and best of luck with the new paradox I just gave you. I'm still financially ruined for not being reimbursed for three months. I have a feeling I won't be reimbursed for April because my old insurance adjuster didn't tell me visiting their panel doctors was mandatory until well into May.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2023 04:44
|
|
|
https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/these-are-the-5-state-drivers-licenses-no-longer-valid-in-florida-under-new-immigration-law/3066073/ Florida has stated that they will dishonor certain drivers licenses from certain states, because those states issue them to illegal immigrants. Is this most likely to be challenged on the full faith and credit clause, or interstate commerce? My state also has a green light law where they no longer verify immigration status for "not for real id purposes" id, but we were not added to the list yet. I think they only started issuing real id at all in mid 2020, so I don't imagine many have been issued yet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2023 15:04
|
|
|
Guy Axlerod posted:https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/these-are-the-5-state-drivers-licenses-no-longer-valid-in-florida-under-new-immigration-law/3066073/ Gotta get more creative, OP. Florida's law is also illegal due to federal field preemption and equal protection, too!
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2023 15:17
|
|
|
Well there go my dreams of being a bar exam writer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2023 15:30
|
|
|
I'm not saying any of this to defend Florida. I'm just looking at this and giving my analysis after reading. CT, DE, HI, RI, and VT all have programs where they have licenses exclusively for undocumented peoples. These licenses have specific marking that identifies them. These are the only licenses that are excluded. The class of people impacted is going to be people with no legal immigration documentation. You will have trouble finding a plaintiff that this law actually impacts, as I doubt many people on these licenses in any of those states are in Florida with any type of frequency. Before we can even get to court to challenge the legality, we need someone harmed. Once you have that plaintiff, the first hurdle would be whether or not states have to honor provisional licenses from other states. If so, then you get into whether or not the right travel includes a free right to drive in one state just because you have a license in another state where you have differing levels of driver qualifications, and then finally whether or not these issues apply equally to citizens and non-documented persons. I don't think we'll see the legality of this law challenged anytime soon.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2023 15:36
|
|
|
“Not for Federal Identification” in CT just means it isn’t a Real ID one. Sure there are still a lot of people who haven’t bothered yet given it’s a six or eight year license and the airline requirements has been so delayed. Edit to add citation: quote:Will my license or DMV-issued ID card show if I accept or reject REAL ID? smackfu fucked around with this message at 15:45 on Jul 8, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2023 15:40
|
|
|
I get that. There are a few states that have non-realID compliant licenses like LA and PA. This isn't what the law prohibits. Those licenses are good. For CT, it's these licenses specifically: https://portal.ct.gov/dmv/licenses-permits-ids/get-drive-only-license?language=en_US For the other five states, the programs are basically the same. It's not that they're not RealID compliant. It's that they are programs specifically for undocumented people. Here's a list from the state of Florida: https://www.flhsmv.gov/driver-licenses-id-cards/visiting-florida-faqs/ I don't think we have a whole lot of people in Florida driving on one of those specific types of licenses.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2023 15:57
|
|
|
Unsurprisingly I think Florida screwed up their list. The CT licenses they want to block say “DO” for “drive only” on them rather than “DL”. But they actually blocked “Not For Federal Identification" which just means not Real ID.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2023 16:05
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:I get that. There are a few states that have non-realID compliant licenses like LA and PA. This isn't what the law prohibits. Those licenses are good. smackfu posted:Unsurprisingly I think Florida screwed up their list. The CT licenses they want to block say “DO” for “drive only” on them rather than “DL”. But they actually blocked “Not For Federal Identification" which just means not Real ID. Ahh, that explains how they came up with the list. I was confused why CT's non-realID were singled out. I guess I forgot it's Florida.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2023 16:22
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:I'm not saying any of this to defend Florida. I'm just looking at this and giving my analysis after reading. Can’t you just make poo poo up now? The Supreme Court just set a precedent there. I was harmed because I wanted to go to Florida and drive to Disney world. I can’t, they don’t honor our license, therefore I am harmed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2023 20:44
|
|
|
Some rear end in a top hat is writing stupid letters in the name of multiple state Attorneys General to Target: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/republican-attorneys-general-issue-letter-to-target-about-pride-merchandise/ The article contains a link to the letter: https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/INAG/2023/07/06/file_attachments/2546257/Target%20Letter%20Final.pdf Which contains, in part, the text: quote:Target also sold products with antiChristian designs, such as pentagrams, horned skulls, and other Satanic products. Now, according to the bill of rights transcript from https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights-transcript, the government is not supposed to make or enforce any law about religions: Article the third... Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. And per the below all Indiana attornies are sworn to uphold the constitution of the US: https://casetext.com/rule/indiana-c...unjust%2C%20but Would an Indiana-resident satanist have standing to sue their AG? Alternately, could they get them disbarred? (I am aware the practical answer is no. But theoretically....?)
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2023 18:14
|
|
|
I'm in Philadelphia Pennsylvania and my partner and I are considering moving. Our lease does not have a break procedure. The exact language is as follows: "22. TENANT ENDING LEASE EARLY 205 Tenant may not end this Lease before the Ending Date of the Lease or any Renewal Term unless otherwise agreed to by the parties in 206 writing." Doing some quick reading looks like if I leave, they can sue me in small claims court for up to 12,000$. That's roughly 3 months of rent. Is it possible for them to sue me for some larger amount outside of small claims? Is it legal for them to not have a lease break fee at all? I'd happily pay them 12k as a lease break but what I'd want to avoid is ending up in a bigger court for the remainder of the lease rent due (It's a 2 year lease). I realize this is very polity specific and might have to get a lawyer on my own to help me figure this out however, it seems like it's only handled in small claims so at worst I'd be out 12k.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2023 23:43
|
|
|
jiffypop45 posted:I'm in Philadelphia Pennsylvania and my partner and I are considering moving. Our lease does not have a break procedure. The exact language is as follows: Depending on the rental situation in your area they may be extremely happy to take $12k and be able to rent to someone else (possibly for more than they’ve been charging you.) You could reach out to them and offer $6k for a lease break and see where they stand. They may counter for more, or may say no, at which time you’d have to look up the legal ramifications.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2023 00:05
|
|
|
jiffypop45 posted:I'm in Philadelphia Pennsylvania and my partner and I are considering moving. Our lease does not have a break procedure. The exact language is as follows: IANAL but have you considered just... asking if they would agree to let you leave early? Maybe if you give them 30 days notice they can line someone up. Maybe they have friends or family who happen to need a unit right now (you didn't mention if this is a mom-and-pop landlord or a megacorp, that is an important detail). Maybe they'll let you list it for them and propose a new tenant. Maybe they'll let you sublet it if you find a replacement for the remainder of the lease and pay the $20 yourself to a screening website, with them having the final say. There shouldn't be any harm in seeing if you can work out an arrangement. Tipping them off that you might need to move shouldn't make it worse. After all you're the one who signed up for 2 years; they rightfully have you by the short and hairies. Last time I checked they can sue you for the entire remainder of the lease in a proper court, and if it's tens of thousands you're committed to, then I don't see why they wouldn't. If they don't want to let you out scott-free, and you're saying you'll happily pay them $12k, I think most places would be happy with that if they're confident they can get someone else in there in less time and pocket the difference. A guaranteed chunk of cash for their troubles would be better for them than rolling the dice in court. Don't forget August/Sept are huge move in/out times (students etc). If you agree to pay $X and be 100% moved out a week before Sep 1st with the place boom clean, they might be more willing to cut you a break.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2023 00:09
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:You will have trouble finding a plaintiff that this law actually impacts, as I doubt many people on these licenses in any of those states are in Florida with any type of frequency.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2023 00:21
|
|
|
4k/month rent, gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2023 00:38
|
|
|
jiffypop45 posted:I'm in Philadelphia Pennsylvania and my partner and I are considering moving. Our lease does not have a break procedure. The exact language is as follows: Why do you think it's limited to small claims?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2023 01:43
|
|
|
jiffypop45 posted:I realize this is very polity specific and might have to get a lawyer on my own to help me figure this out however, it seems like it's only handled in small claims so at worst I'd be out 12k. Not a lawyer Generally speaking, you’re only on the hook for the actual damages when leaving a rental early. The landlord has an obligation to take reasonable steps to mitigate the damages by finding a new tenant. Then you’d be responsible for the time it was vacant, and potentially other costs incurred. If you don’t mind spending some money to put this out of your mind, you could come to an agreement to essentially buy the landlord out by offering to end the lease three months early, and pay him some fixed amount, say one month rent, as consideration. Landlord wins because if he’s diligent about re-renting he gets paid double for one month, and you win because you aren’t worrying that he’s just letting it sit empty while he shows his other units first instead of yours, where you could end up on the hook for the full amount.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2023 02:34
|
|
|
If all that fails, there's one weird trick get out of a lease free and legal: join the military.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2023 06:09
|
|
|
Abandon the apartment and flee to the embrace of the sea. They can have your rent money if they can claw it from King Triton's iron grasp.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2023 06:17
|
|
|
Minnesota For the last couple years, when I fill up my tank at the gas station, I will buy a powerball/mega millions lottery ticket if the jackpot is high and pay for the entire purchase with my credit card. It is a visa credit card and not a debit card or a debit/credit card. I found out today that Minnesota prohibits buying lottery tickets with a credit card. Either the place that I get my gas and lottery tickets doesn't know it is prohibited (illegal?) or they don't care. Hypothetically, if I had matched all numbers and won the jackpot, would it be forfeit if the state/lottery office found out that the ticket was purchased with a credit card?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2023 02:42
|
|
|
This is a hypothetical. I am not a doctor, not qualified to prescribe, not planning to mail abortion pills or anything else illegal in the receiving state. Washington Post story on abortion shield laws quote:“Everything I’m doing is completely legal,” the Hudson Valley doctor said, her family’s ping-pong table covered with abortion pills bound for the South and Midwest, where abortion has been largely illegal since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June 2022.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2023 03:48
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:So is this all a brand new legal issue that has to be figured out in the courts, or has it been addressed before? If I, Jane Q. Activist, mail something Federally legal and legal in my state, state A, to State B, where it is not legal, are there precedents on whether State B gets to prosecute me? Or on whether State A gets to refuse extradition? To extremely oversimplify: if you do this from state A I’d suggest never traveling to or through state B again. But the general* extradition principle requires dual criminality, meaning the act has to be criminal in both countries, to trigger extradition treaties. *country / country, not state-state. I’m not gonna bother researching state-state**. Edit: a legit open issue is if state B could prosecute you if they ever caught you for actions purely in state A. Edit 2:** the interstate extradition clause doesn’t seem applicable if you’re charged in state B and never flee from it since you live in state A. ulmont fucked around with this message at 04:06 on Jul 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2023 04:03
|
|
|
I'm not a lawyer but as I understand it: when State A refuses to honor B's laws, what happens is State B goes and whines to the federal government and gets one of two results: either they implement a federal law to enforce it or they ignore the problem and tell B to get hosed. For example, when northern states refused to give runaway slaves back to southern states, this was "fixed" by the south petitioning Congress to pass federal "fugitive slave" laws. Without those federal laws the southern states didn't have the legal power to go out and seize their runaway slaves back from other states who didn't want to give them up. So it'll probably be more of a political question than a legal one. RPATDO_LAMD fucked around with this message at 05:55 on Jul 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2023 05:43
|
|
|
ulmont posted:I’d suggest never traveling to or through state B again. This is a given. The more interesting question is which other states C, D, E ... AW, AX can you also never step foot in because LE there will extradite you to B?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2023 14:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 14:26 |
|
|
Skunkduster posted:Minnesota I can’t answer your question directly but I can give an example from where I live. We have stand-alone lotto booths in places like malls and grocery stores, but you can also buy tickets from convenience stores. If you buy from the former, it’s considered a cash-like transaction and you’re billed cash advance interest. If you buy from the latter, the sale comes up as from that store which is a normal purchase. The difference is the location and the fact one is classified as gambling while the other is a convenience store. That is probably why they allow you to purchase tickets; it isn’t a lottery-only dealer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2023 15:56
|
|
