|
I had never heard of this tree so thanks for sharing!
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 22:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 20:13 |
|
|
ChickenDoodle posted:I know there was a big issue here in the Lower mainland recently regarding defense lawyers and how they defended their client. That particular lawyer is a well known shithead, who doesn't even have the respect of any of his fellow members of the defence bar in BC, and every other defence lawyer I know would never even dream of this line.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2024 23:09
|
|
|
Who pays property taxes on the tree?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 00:14
|
|
|
Is it even possible to have multiple MPOAs for a single person? How would that even work? Like, ‘my brother is my MPOA, and so is my father-in-law, and also my neighbor Susan.’
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 01:08
|
|
|
Nice piece of fish posted:The crime is impossible to defend, but Lippestad did a lot to prevent the guy from getting a insanity verdict (which in Norway is worse and definitely against the defendant's wishes). Similarly, regarding due process, are there any times when the evidence is so clear that a trial is simply not necessary and this can be denied? For example, if someone walked into a police station and had a recording of them commiting a crime in front of multiple police officers, would a trial still be necessary? And if it were so obvious that the crime had been committed, would it better to just make a plea bargain? How does a plea bargain work? For example, if they murder someone in a police station, can they plea guilty to a lesser form of murder (maybe manslaughter instead of 1st degree murder) in hopes of getting a lighter sentence by saving the court the time and expense of a trial for the actual crime.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 15:52
|
|
|
I’m going to marry the tree.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 15:59
|
|
|
Insanity pleas very rarely "work" in the U.S., at least in the sense of avoiding incarceration. The issue is that the legal standard for insanity in criminal cases is extremely high -- functionally, anyone who meets it is crazy enough that they're going to be facing long term psychiatric commitment regardless. That said, having spent a great deal of time in both (as a lawyer), mental hospitals are massively different from prisons, yes. A trial is always necessary unless the defendant chooses to waive his right to trial. Nothing is obvious until proven. That video might be faked, all those cops might be lying. Plea bargains are not given to all defendants. If you shot a cop in a police station, the prosecutor would likely not offer you a plea bargain. You would face trial as charged. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 16:27 on Jan 12, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 16:22
|
|
|
bird with big dick posted:I’m going to marry the tree. Wood that you could
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 16:37
|
|
|
Not Wolverine posted:I thought insanity pleas are like get out of jail free cards in the United States, what makes them bad in Norway? Similarly, what typically happens with an insanity plea in the US, does it just mean you go to a mental hospital instead of a prison, and is a mental hospital really significantly different than a prison? Could a person commit a heinous crime, murder some people, plea insanity, and then eventually get treated in a mental hospital to a point where they can be released? They are absolutely not get out of jail cards, and if you are not only a diagnosed psychotic individual but a dangerous violent psychotic individual you get involuntary treatment for a long. rear end. time. There's theoretically no limit on the duration of stay, unlike prison which in Norway is theoretically limited to 21 years (although Breivik is in indefinite detention). In a prison you get all sorts of rehabilitation and other rights-based nonsense. University-level education, socialization efforts, playstation in your cell, all sorts of crap. Breivik has pets. None of that in treatment, and the other "inmates" aren't as nice to converse with. Also, the drugs aren't as nice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 16:47
|
|
|
Conversely, in America, a criminal conviction is likely to be for a much longer period of time, due to harsher American sentencing. Not to mention the death penalty. Plus you're a lot less likely to be stabbed by another inmate in a psych hospital. And you're a lot more likely to actually get your prescribed medications. No guarantees tho If you want to know how people with mental illness are treated in American prisons, read https://www.mentalhealth4inmates.org/resources/downloads/T_R_et_al_v_SCDC_final_order_and_judgment_for_Plaintiffs_(Richland)_01-08-14.pdf Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 16:58 on Jan 12, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 16:51
|
|
|
Not Wolverine posted:I thought insanity pleas are like get out of jail free cards in the United States, Not Wolverine posted:What typically happens with an insanity plea in the US, does it just mean you go to a mental hospital instead of a prison, and is a mental hospital really significantly different than a prison? To back up what Hieronymous Alloy said, state mental hospitals are not very good, but holy poo poo are they better than prison. Not Wolverine posted:Could a person commit a heinous crime, murder some people, plea insanity, and then eventually get treated in a mental hospital to a point where they can be released? Not Wolverine posted:Similarly, regarding due process, are there any times when the evidence is so clear that a trial is simply not necessary and this can be denied? Not Wolverine posted:For example, if someone walked into a police station and had a recording of them commiting a crime in front of multiple police officers, would a trial still be necessary? Not Wolverine posted:And if it were so obvious that the crime had been committed, would it better to just make a plea bargain? Not Wolverine posted:How does a plea bargain work? For example, if they murder someone in a police station, can they plea guilty to a lesser form of murder (maybe manslaughter instead of 1st degree murder) in hopes of getting a lighter sentence by saving the court the time and expense of a trial for the actual crime.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 18:29
|
|
|
I do some consulting work in meteorology as a side-gig, and recently I was contacted by a law firm requesting that I provide an analysis of weather data relevant to a law suit they were involved in. The purpose was to establish what the general characteristics of the weather were at a place and time as they apply to a particular hazardous condition, and to detail any directives by the National Weather Service at that place/time about that hazardous condition. I generated a report for them with this information for a fee, through an LLC I conduct business through. I am being contacted now during discovery and being asked to provide information on myself - a CV, list of publications, and information on how much case-work I've done for both plaintiffs and defendants in the past. This is the first and to-date only legal dispute I've been involved with as an expert, the other work I've done under this LLC has been outside of the legal system. So this is also the first time I have been contacted as part of discovery. I'm just curious what the appropriate reaction should be to this request. Is it incumbent upon me to work with a lawyer of my own in this? The request seems fairly harmless, but I don't know if there are pitfalls I need to avoid.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 19:01
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:So, yes, the tree "owns itself" in every sense until some entity with the power to challenge that concept actually does so. Given how much I seem to own myself on a regular basis I don't really understand why people might have trouble with this concept
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 20:16
|
|
|
Serious_Cyclone posted:I do some consulting work in meteorology as a side-gig, and recently I was contacted by a law firm requesting that I provide an analysis of weather data relevant to a law suit they were involved in. The purpose was to establish what the general characteristics of the weather were at a place and time as they apply to a particular hazardous condition, and to detail any directives by the National Weather Service at that place/time about that hazardous condition. I generated a report for them with this information for a fee, through an LLC I conduct business through. Ask the lawyer who hired you. This is pretty standard stuff that’s required for expert disclosures, which is the whole point of why they hired you. Also double check the expert agreement they had you sign when they hired you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 21:07
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:This is pretty standard stuff that’s required for expert disclosures, which is the whole point of why they hired you. Also double check the expert agreement they had you sign when they hired you. I suppose this is the part I needed a sanity-check on. The request seems benign to me as a not-lawyer, but I wanted to make sure there isn't a red flag here that I would miss because I don't know the process. If this is standard procedure then I feel fine acquiescing here, I appreciate the verification.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 21:21
|
|
|
Serious_Cyclone posted:I do some consulting work in meteorology as a side-gig, and recently I was contacted by a law firm requesting that I provide an analysis of weather data relevant to a law suit they were involved in. The purpose was to establish what the general characteristics of the weather were at a place and time as they apply to a particular hazardous condition, and to detail any directives by the National Weather Service at that place/time about that hazardous condition. I generated a report for them with this information for a fee, through an LLC I conduct business through. In a court case, witnesses are not allowed to give their opinion, only the state facts that they have personal knowledge of. However, in some situations it may be helpful to a jury, for the sake of understanding a complex issue, to have an expert give their opinion on a set of facts. An Engineer stating how a particular structure is or is not stable, a doctor giving their opinion on whether or not the care provided by another medical professional was reasonable, etc. If you have been made a witness in a case by preparing a report, and turning it over, the other side has the right to examine your opinions and credentials, and even take you up on deposition to explore your report and qualifications. I assume most jurisdictions, like mine, require the party designating you as an expert to turn over your CV and materials, preemtively. Typically, experts charge me and my clients for both their reports, and any time spent being deposed or testifying in a case. If you use a lawyer for anything else, I assume they would be happy to walk you through what to expected, and how to proceed. I have never personally seen a situation where any expert had any pitfalls to worry about other than me embarrassing them. The biggest pitfall is not getting paid!
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 21:25
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:I have never personally seen a situation where any expert had any pitfalls to worry about other than me embarrassing them. The biggest pitfall is not getting paid! This is good to hear, I have no problem embarrassing myself so I'm basically bullet-proof. Thanks for the explanation!
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 21:48
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Only on TV, where it is a plot device written by people who learned about it by watching TV. What about a bench trial?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 21:48
|
|
|
Not Wolverine posted:I thought insanity pleas are like get out of jail free cards in the United States, what makes them bad in Norway? Similarly, what typically happens with an insanity plea in the US, does it just mean you go to a mental hospital instead of a prison, and is a mental hospital really significantly different than a prison? Could a person commit a heinous crime, murder some people, plea insanity, and then eventually get treated in a mental hospital to a point where they can be released? I can answer this for Canada since it's what I do and I'm procrastinating. In Canada, the verdict is 'not criminally responsible by reason of mental disorder'. The offence occurred but due to mental illness the accused was unable to appreciate what they were doing, or that it was legally or morally wrong. The accused is then placed in the care of forensics and jurisdiction is handed to a special review board, and their liberties are reviewed annually. The accused, not being responsible, is entitled to the most liberty possible that is compatible with public safety. That does not mean a get out of jail free card. The review board will review the psychiatric expert reports and other evidence and determine, annually, the degree of risk and what needs to be done to contain that risk before deciding what liberties (if any) the accused can have. If that risk is high, they can be held in custody at a secure psychiatric facility. Treatment and rehabilitation is expected. In Canada, at least, there is no 'sentence'. An accused can be held in this system indefinitely so long as they are still a risk to the public. And if their risk is high enough they are not eligible for conditional discharge (like parole) they will remain in custody. There is also no proportionality to the offence. I have seen accused who committed a murderer come out of their psychosis, feel horrible and remorseful, commit themselves fully, credibly, and reliably to treatment, and earn an absolute discharge (full freedom) in under 10 years. Conversely, I'm seen accused who never get better, refuse to cooperate, or deny their illness still in the system 20-30 years later on minor assaults or verbal threats. It's also worth noting that in Canada, the source of the risk is not just the mental illness leading to the verdict. Substance abuse, personality disorders, bad attitudes and criminal lifestyles could all be sources of risk that need to be dealt with - an accused could be fully treated and be very committed to treatment but still behave narcissistically or antisocially and they will remain under supervision until their pattern of behaviour change for an extended period of time. It's such a difficult system to leave I would not recommend NCRMD as a defence strategy for anything less serious than an aggravated assault.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 21:50
|
|
|
Serious_Cyclone posted:I do some consulting work in meteorology as a side-gig, and recently I was contacted by a law firm requesting that I provide an analysis of weather data relevant to a law suit they were involved in. The purpose was to establish what the general characteristics of the weather were at a place and time as they apply to a particular hazardous condition, and to detail any directives by the National Weather Service at that place/time about that hazardous condition. I generated a report for them with this information for a fee, through an LLC I conduct business through. Who requested the information? Were you subpoenaed? Either way this is routine and you should contact the lawyer who retained you as far as how to respond.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 22:07
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:Who requested the information? Were you subpoenaed? Either way this is routine and you should contact the lawyer who retained you as far as how to respond. For clarity, it is the law office that hired me that reached out asking for this information, referring to it as part of the other party's discovery requests.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 22:13
|
|
|
Not Wolverine posted:Could a person commit a heinous crime, murder some people, plea insanity, and then eventually get treated in a mental hospital to a point where they can be released? Thought I'd expand on this a bit since the might joat did. Yes! Absolutely, and that has happened. The most famous case was a guy in northern Norway who had a highly unusual psychotic break and murdered his kid. He was found insane, and spent 6 months in treatment until the diagnosis became clear and his treatment completed. Free and clear. I mean, his life was ruined and all, but he was factually innocent so... Of course, since then we changed the rules a bit, so I don't know if the result would have been the same today. Probably not. Not Wolverine posted:Similarly, regarding due process, are there any times when the evidence is so clear that a trial is simply not necessary and this can be denied? For example, if someone walked into a police station and had a recording of them commiting a crime in front of multiple police officers, would a trial still be necessary? Not no trial whatsoever, but you are technically guilty with no trial if you accept a fine, also a prosecutoreal waiver (sort of a pardon by the prosecutor) is an admission of guilt and you are held to be guilty, but punishment is waived. Other than that there is a simplified track where if you qualify (so called confession trial), you can have a sort of speed trial that is mostly just sentencing. There's a bunch of safeguards though and one of them is confessing precisely to the judge directly. Other than that you have a right to a trial by norwegian law as well as ECHR. Not Wolverine posted:And if it were so obvious that the crime had been committed, would it better to just make a plea bargain? How does a plea bargain work? For example, if they murder someone in a police station, can they plea guilty to a lesser form of murder (maybe manslaughter instead of 1st degree murder) in hopes of getting a lighter sentence by saving the court the time and expense of a trial for the actual crime. Norway doesn't have plea bargains. You can't confess to a lesser crime to avoid a trial and you especially can't confess to something you didn't do. Lots of cases are dismissed by the prosecutor for various reasons, but if the crime is serious enough you will be tried for it. So these are some interesting differences between us and the US and one of the many reasons this thread usually tells you to ask a lawyer where you live. Every system is same same, but different. Nice piece of fish fucked around with this message at 22:17 on Jan 12, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 22:14
|
|
|
Azuth0667 posted:What about a bench trial? If the prosecutor agrees to it. See also the problem with blind pleas.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 00:21
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:If you have been made a witness in a case by preparing a report, and turning it over, the other side has the right to examine your opinions and credentials, and even take you up on deposition to explore your report and qualifications. I assume most jurisdictions, like mine, require the party designating you as an expert to turn over your CV and materials, preemtively. For reference, the rules on these disclosures are typically in the relevant rules of civil procedure. For federal cases, the attorney is going to need to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 2(b), which requires disclosure of your opinion, the facts & evidence you relied on, your qualifications, cases you've testified in, etc. These rules may be tweaked by the local rules of practice as well. Most states have similar rules of civil procedure, though some states (Louisiana) are super weird.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 00:25
|
|
|
Serious_Cyclone posted:For clarity, it is the law office that hired me that reached out asking for this information, referring to it as part of the other party's discovery requests. That’s totally normal (honestly surprised they didn’t ask for a lot of that stuff before hiring you) and shouldn’t raise any concerns. They’ll push back on stuff that would be concerning. Now, if you were retained as a consulting expert and not a testifying one, and are getting dragged into a deposition or something like that, you ought to be getting paid for the extra work that wasn’t anticipated (hopefully you have an hourly agreement, not fixed fee). And while it won’t affect this time, if you do work as an expert again, rates are typically significantly higher if they want you to testify vs if they just want to consult you. If you’re gonna go through the stress of a deposition, make them pay you for it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 03:23
|
|
|
Kalman posted:That’s totally normal (honestly surprised they didn’t ask for a lot of that stuff before hiring you) and shouldn’t raise any concerns. They’ll push back on stuff that would be concerning. I appreciate the advice - they signed a service agreement that restricted my fee to the scope of the report, so if they come back and want me to testify I’ll keep that in mind
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 04:01
|
|
|
I'm guessing this varies by state. If someone in a death penalty state gets sentenced with the death penalty, and they say that they aren't going to appeal and they would agree to walk straight from the courtroom to the lethal injection chamber, how long would it usually take until they are put to death?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 17:07
|
|
|
Skunkduster posted:I'm guessing this varies by state. If someone in a death penalty state gets sentenced with the death penalty, and they say that they aren't going to appeal and they would agree to walk straight from the courtroom to the lethal injection chamber, how long would it usually take until they are put to death? It was about 6 months after he abandoned his remaining appeals that Timothy McVeigh was executed. (This includes a 30 day delay called by the government when the FBI admitted they withheld about 3000 pages of witness statements and other reports from him before/during the trial)
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 19:31
|
|
|
I appreciate the replies regarding the insanity plea and mental hospitals vs prison. If I understand correctly, it seems like in the US is better than prison, but in Norway prison is better than a mental hospital. Granted, even I. The US, I suspect like minimum security prison, especially with work release, might be easier than a padded cell in Arkham Asylum. That said, is it possible (or common) for someone to be convicted of murder, put on death row, found to be mentally incompetent and/or insane, and then be taken off death row to have a life sentence either in prison or a mental hospital? For reference, this is the fictional scenario that happened to Cyril O'Reilly in HBO's series Oz. Yes, I know that show was extremely over dramatized and unrealistic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 20:36
|
|
|
I'm just going to suggest you do a search with "Texas mental incompetent execution" as the relevant keywords and continue to lose any positive thoughts you have towards humanity in general.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 23:15
|
|
|
Not Wolverine posted:That said, is it possible (or common) for someone to be convicted of murder, put on death row, found to be mentally incompetent and/or insane, and then be taken off death row to have a life sentence either in prison or a mental hospital? If they're "insane" (whatever that is) but competent they get executed. Not Wolverine posted:For reference, this is the fictional scenario that happened to Cyril O'Reilly in HBO's series Oz. Yes, I know that show was extremely over dramatized and unrealistic. Competency is not mental illness or mental retardation or an insanity defense. An insanity defense is saying, "At the time I committed my crime, I was insane and cannot be held accountable for my actions." (It's the definition of insanity that's the big deal there) Incompetence is different. Incompetence has to do with a person's present ability to stand trial (or be executed) - whether they are capable of comprehending what is happening to them and whether they are capable of assisting in their defense. A person cannot be tried (or executed) unless they're competent, so a trial (or execution) waits until they are competent. Once they're competent, everything starts back up. If a person is incompetent and unable to attain competency within a reasonable period of time (in my state, that's presumed after 2 years of trying if you're awaiting trial on a felony) the criminal case is dismissed and the person is civilly committed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 02:33
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:I'm just going to suggest you do a search with "Texas mental incompetent execution" as the relevant keywords and continue to lose any positive thoughts you have towards humanity in general. joat mon posted:Skimming a summary of Oz, it looks like Cyril was executed and incompetence was not an issue. He may have had mental health issues or brain damage, but so long as he's competent... joat mon posted:Competency is not mental illness or mental retardation or an insanity defense. While trying to lookup examples of insanity defense, I found a couple, Richard Rojas and Lorena Bobbit. Frome what I've read so far, it looks like Rojas was on PCP when he drove through times square, but that doesn't exactly seem like insanity. As for Bobbit, she claimed temporary insanity because she had been beaten and raped by John previously, thus she chose to use knife on him in his sleep. If anything, this seems more like defending herself but not self defense because she attacked him in his sleep. I'm sure there are more details that I simply haven't read yet, but thus far those two don't seem like really good examples of insanity defenses. Also, is there a difference an insanity vs temporary insanity defense? Bobbit's case was ruled temporary insanity. Not Wolverine fucked around with this message at 19:30 on Jan 15, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2024 17:04
|
|
|
Skunkduster posted:I'm guessing this varies by state. If someone in a death penalty state gets sentenced with the death penalty, and they say that they aren't going to appeal and they would agree to walk straight from the courtroom to the lethal injection chamber, how long would it usually take until they are put to death? This is a sufficiently common thing in DP states that there’s a term for it - “volunteers” and a somewhat robust body of literature on it. The first post-Furman execution was of a volunteer, Gary Gilmore, and it was only ~three months after trial. But nowadays even for volunteers in an active DP state the wait will likely be a few years - most states take the position that the initial, direct appeal of a DP conviction is not waiveable, because the condemned cannot waive the state’s interest in reviewing the system to ensure* that they’re not going to kill an innocent, if suicidal, inmate. So the actual answer to your question is entirely state-dependant, and even there is going to vary based on which DA’s office handled the prosecution, which court circuit it’s in, etc. Hell, there was a case in Nevada that Vice News picked up a few years ago where a guy had volunteered, appeals over the drugs and method of execution kept pushing back his date, and he ended up committing suicide. *”ensure” here should not be read to imply actual system-wide efforts to in fact make sure no innocents are executed even exist, much less that all parties are good-faith participants in such a process. Looking at you, any state in the Fifth, Eighth, and Eleventh Circuits
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2024 08:14
|
|
Jean-Paul Shartre posted:Hell, there was a case in Nevada that Vice News picked up a few years ago where a guy had volunteered, appeals over the drugs and method of execution kept pushing back his date, and he ended up committing suicide. Who was doing the appeals at that point?
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2024 10:20
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Who was doing the appeals at that point? Probably the attorneys appointed to handle his death penalty appeal. He didn't appeal his conviction and death penalty, but apparently was convinced by his attorneys (and perhaps attorneys representing other people on death row) to contest the new drug cocktail and procedures. While his dropping his appeal of the conviction/death penalty affected only himself, dropping his appeal on the new cocktail/killing procedures would have affected everyone else on death row. So, either to not be a buddy fucker, to be a noble sacrifice, to stay in the spotlight or all of those things, he allowed that aspect of his appeals that would directly affect others on death row to move forward.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2024 18:03
|
|
|
joat mon posted:It is uncommon but possible for a person sentenced to death to be found incompetent to be executed. They will stay on death row until through medication and/or training they are found competent and executed. If they can never attain competency they'll probably just stay on death row until they die. I'm aware of one case (real case, not hypothetical) where an individual, on death row, had been found incompetent to be executed, despite relentlessly demanding his own execution. He was medicated and brought up to competency, at which point he stated that he did not want to be executed after all. So he refused further medical treatment and returned to his insane, incompetent state. Last I heard -- this was many years ago -- dude was just repeatedly cycling that loop. While incompetent he yearns for death, but can't be executed; while competent he wants to live. So while competent he refuses medications, and then decompensates . . .
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2024 18:17
|
|
|
Not Wolverine posted:As a former Texan I believe I have a right to say gently caress that state. When I lived there people used to threaten secession, now I'm sitting on the outside cheering them on. Indicator sure but different points in time and different standards and different mental states. quote:If I understand this right, people might think of Hitler as "insane" but he's not insane, he just had a lot of really wrong ideas thus denying an insanity defense, and he was aware of his actions this denying an incompetency defense. To be competent to be executed you have to understand what execution is. Hitler would understand that, so he would.have been competent to be executed. Imagine someone who commits a murder in full knowledge of their actions, is tried and convicted, then tries to hang themselves out of remorse and gives themselves massive brain trauma, to the point they regress to a functional age of four and no longer understand what a courtroom is, what an execution is, what death is, etc. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 18:24 on Jan 16, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2024 18:21
|
|
|
Hi, I'm in Georgia and had a question about insurance payouts and what people are legally responsible for. My sister died in a car accident in December. It was awful and my family is still picking up the pieces. She was 32. She had no estate and died with $100 in her bank account. I was named the beneficiary of her life insurance and received the full payout. My mom has been dealing with lawyers regarding car insurance, however. My sister was the passenger in a car that got tboned. My mom is telling me she has to contact my sister's creditors, file a tax return, and they plus the hospital she was taken to when she was hit will have access to any payout from the wreck and it's unlikely they will see much money from it. This doesn't fit with the research I've done on the situation. I believe that since my sister had no estate, her debts will go unpaid. I'm trying to encourage my mom to ensure that my sister's creditors don't come after any payout from that but she seems resigned to it. Who is right?
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2024 18:41
|
|
|
Some helpful questions you should ask your attorney are: 1) what are the insurance policy limits 2) why isn't health insurance covering the medical (yikes if she was uninsured) 3) what's the delta between total creditors after 2) and expected settlement value in light of 1)
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2024 18:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 20:13 |
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Last I heard -- this was many years ago -- dude was just repeatedly cycling that loop. While incompetent he yearns for death, but can't be executed; while competent he wants to live. So while competent he refuses medications, and then decompensates . . . That's just life in prison with extra steps, so sounds like competent him is getting what he wants anyway. Cartridgeblowers posted:Hi, I'm in Georgia and had a question about insurance payouts and what people are legally responsible for. This post is just begging for the "you should ask a local lawyer" response. joat mon posted:He didn't appeal his conviction and death penalty, but apparently was convinced by his attorneys (and perhaps attorneys representing other people on death row) to contest the new drug cocktail and procedures. To be fair, if the state actually had an interest in doing this painlessly, they have access to a number of things that would work perfectly well. Even if they don't want to switch to a gas chamber and just use nitrogen, they could give a massive overdose of whatever liquid opioids. But, then they might not sate the blood lust of their constituents!
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2024 19:01
|
|