|
LeschNyhan posted:Civil and family we'd say Meads and Meads, but if Mr. Meads were to be arrested and charged, his case would be R vee Meads for most people. Probably. Unless you're in Quebec. For criminal I have found everyone saying "crown and meads" because R still technically stands for Regina/Rex on all of our cases.
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 14:11 |
|
|
When I was an LEO there was an FBI agent who said they had run into a child pornographer who had a literal booby trapped computer (explosives/incindiaries that had to be disabled by the bomb squad. I imagine some smart person will make a phone version of a hidden OS, if they haven't already.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
Quick question about Washington Tenant laws, are we entitled to reimbursement of rent if the property we are renting said that the house has heat and yet we still don't have heat after 5 months? The contractors are still working on it after the past 3-4 weeks but we're curious about legal action about us paying full rent for a place that is basically inhabitable. We have a repair request that was submitted back in August/September about us not having heat and it's now December and they've barely made any progress.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
Not having read that decision, I'm 95% sure the feds, even with trumps new justice will overturn that. It is counter to every decsion I've see. Giving a password is incriminatory because it tend to prove you have custody of and access to the device.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
I think this got asked here or in Reddit, what if your password is a passphrase that would be incriminating. Like "I-Buried-The-Bodies-In-My-Mothers-Back-Yard-1997"
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
nm posted:Not having read that decision, I'm 95% sure the feds, even with trumps new justice will overturn that. It is counter to every decsion I've see. Yea this is what I am hoping/thinking as well. How much of being an attorney or judge is just pretending to be obtuse?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
nm posted:Not having read that decision, I'm 95% sure the feds, even with trumps new justice will overturn that. It is counter to every decsion I've see. The guy already admitted it was his phone and his phone number attached to it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
ceebee posted:Quick question about Washington Tenant laws, are we entitled to reimbursement of rent if the property we are renting said that the house has heat and yet we still don't have heat after 5 months? The contractors are still working on it after the past 3-4 weeks but we're curious about legal action about us paying full rent for a place that is basically inhabitable. We have a repair request that was submitted back in August/September about us not having heat and it's now December and they've barely made any progress. Not sure on Washington law, but usually withholding rent over repairs is risky business. If you withhold, and they take you to court, you could lose and potentially get evicted. On the other hand, paying full rent for no heat is bs. In Texas at least, landlords have to be reasonably diligent in making repairs. What constitutes reasonable and diligent is a fact issue.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
We've been paying full rent and on time even despite us not having heat. We want to be reimbursed for not having heat when we initially rented this place out the property management company told us the heat worked perfectly fine. When we moved in and tried to use the heat it didn't work at all, which is when we put in our first repair order on the property management company's site.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
ceebee posted:We've been paying full rent and on time even despite us not having heat. We want to be reimbursed for not having heat when we initially rented this place out the property management company told us the heat worked perfectly fine. When we moved in and tried to use the heat it didn't work at all, which is when we put in our first repair order on the property management company's site. It seems your potential options are You can unilaterally terminate the lease http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=59.18.090 You can sue him for the rent you shouldn't have been paying http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=59.18.110 Ask the court to terminate your lease http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=59.18.120 It's up to what you wanna do, there are downsides to all of it (for example, suing your landlord and still living there and having to deal with him). You should see if there is someone you can talk to about this first. Most be cities have some sort of organization that can give better advice on tenants rights under the state's laws.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
spacetoaster posted:I imagine some smart person will make a phone version of a hidden OS, if they haven't already. There are a number of them, yeah.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
Any insurance lawyers in here? Curious about using insurance information to demonstrate knowledge of a risk, not to show ability to satisfy a judgment. California.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 19:55
|
|
|
So is there such as independent legal researchers? I've been kicking around ideas of something I could do as a side gig. I kind of figured there would be somewhat of a demand for it (from sole practitioners or small firms). I have enough free time from work, and I'm proficient at legal research so I thought this might be a good idea.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2016 00:13
|
|
|
Uh, it's called academia.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2016 00:16
|
|
|
Some firms contract hire people for research projects Someone on this forum for a full time job that way I think Do you have a jd?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2016 02:30
|
|
|
The money is in brief writing, my contractors pull in 3-6k per msj. Research only seems to be a tough sell, what can you do for me that Rutter and westlaw cant, especially since westlaw's search engine has left the 18th century so I don't have to take some dumbass intro to westlaw programming class to maximize my results.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2016 04:20
|
|
|
I have an MS (Law and Public Policy) not a JD. So I could do analysis/research, but not any of the technical stuff like document prep. Basically I thought smaller type firms might not have the time or resources to do research. I also figured some people probably hate doing research and wouldn't mind paying someone else to do it for them. More or less I was thinking it was something I could do in my spare time, and it's something that I did like doing too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2016 00:51
|
|
|
To be blunt: no. There's not much you could do for a solo that they can't do for themselves faster and cheaper, unless you can prepare actual court-ready briefs, motions, and appeals. Big firms have armies of associates to do your kind of research, so they're out. You might have luck with public interest groups that do more than legal work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
UrielX posted:So is there such as independent legal researchers? You need to be an appellate badass to pull that off. On big pi cases, we'll pull in appellate badasses to write the msjs because we know they'll be the ones arguing them. Otherwise, as a solo, gently caress it. I'm not going to pay you to do what I can do if I can bill for it
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2016 03:04
|
|
|
CaptainScraps posted:On big pi cases, we'll pull in appellate badasses to write the msjs because we know they'll be the ones arguing them. How do you find someone you'd trust to write a dispositive motion for your case? I can't imagine being that comfortable with anyone outside my case team or at least firm.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2016 03:09
|
|
|
The job you're looking for is "junior associate."
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2016 03:10
|
|
|
ulmont posted:How do you find someone you'd trust to write a dispositive motion for your case? I can't imagine being that comfortable with anyone outside my case team or at least firm. There are specialists for hire who only do this. If you're a solo, even formatting the MSJ or appellate brief takes way too much time. Better to pay some guy to do it. I'd trust them more than myself for paper briefing. Why not? You don't expect your surgeon to treat your depression. It's a specialized skill. The first time I came up against a hired brief writer, I was floored. At first I thought the old bumbling rural lawyer had written it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2016 03:58
|
|
|
Thanks guys. Was just kind of brainstorming some ways to get some practical value out of my degree. I opted to go the MS route over a JD because I was worried about finding a job. Go figure I'm not working with my degree either, but at least I can pay it off doing what I'm doing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2016 05:55
|
|
|
Probably a question heard a million times before, but since my problem came up in the Stupid Questions megathread I'll ask here. In Henderson, Nevada, USA. I was involved in an auto accident in February, and determined to be at fault (which I'm not arguing, given the accident circumstances). Geico is the insurer for both myself and the victims. They covered our repairs (or at any rate mine, I'm sure theirs were too) and that was all I heard about it at the time. Over the last few months the story developed as Geico did their collision forensics and determined the accident couldn't have caused medically significant injury for either party (it was a 10-12mph hit, my front right against their rear left from turning left out of a parking lot). The victims asked for--I now know--US$10K in medical. Geico determined this was bunk and didn't settle. They back and forthed a while, and long story short I was told a month ago by my Geico agent I'd be served suit papers soon, and that as soon as I got them I should forward them to said agent, and they would assign me a defense attorney and we would go from there. Just got the papers today, so I'm forwarding tomorrow (everything was closed up in holiday observance today, and I don't have a fax machine). My questions are two fold: - Why are, besides myself, "DOES 1 through 100; and ROE CORPORATIONS 101 through 200" named as Defendants besides myself? The Stupid Questions megathread response was 'because they can'; what do they expect to get out of that, and should I bother thinking about it? - My claims agent is extremely confident that even if it goes to a full trial I won't be judged to need to cough up anything at all (not guilty? what's the civil equivalent term anyway), and even if I WAS, Geico would foot the bill because my medical liability is $100k per person/$300k per accident. Therefore, she's said, I don't need to retain my own lawyer besides the one they'll retain for me; I'd just be wasting my time and money. Should I be retaining my own anyway? I'm not flush with cash right now, after the holiday. (Merry loving Christmas.) - My poor anxiety- and depression-riddled brain can't take this nonsense, jesus h christ 
Ciaphas fucked around with this message at 03:34 on Dec 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 03:31
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:There are specialists for hire who only do this. If you're a solo, even formatting the MSJ or appellate brief takes way too much time. Better to pay some guy to do it. I'll buy that for formatting. But for briefing a dispositive motion I would want the person that knows the facts inside and out to be writing the thing. Of course, I come from a background where motion practice before settlement was literally the only thing we ever did (seriously, ten years, no cases went to trial in my practice group).
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 03:34
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:Probably a question heard a million times before, but since my problem came up in the Stupid Questions megathread I'll ask here. In Henderson, Nevada, USA. The does 1-100 and roes 101-200 is them making sure they sue everyone that could be involved. In theory what will happen is that they'll conduct discovery and then amend to name actual parties or drop it. Naming 200 other potential plaintiffs gives me the impression the plaintiffs attorney is an idiot and/or doing what he was told/taught without thinking. Not liable would be the more appropriate civil term. The adjuster thinks you'll be okay bc plaintiff is asking for 10k and your insurance covers 100k. I'd hazard a guess that the vast Majority of people do not hire outside counsel bc most plaintiff attorneys won't ask more than the coverage limit. After all, if you have no money, then there is no reason to sue you. However, the decision to retain outside counsel is something you should consider after reading the petition/complaint and speaking to the insurance lawyer. Anxiety- well good luck. Try to remember they want your insurance companies money. Both Counsels will likely have been thru this situation many times, and your case will probably conclude before trial. Preemptive: talk to your attorney about what happens when you get deposed
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 03:55
|
|
|
The attorney is generally your attorney, the insurance company is obligated to defend you and that's why they pay for the lawyer. The lawyer will be clear who the client is if you ask.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 04:08
|
|
|
Does it especially matter whether I or Geico are the lawyer's client? I can't imagine it wouldn't be me since I'm the defendant (well, one out of 201 defendants anyway  )
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 05:15
|
|
|
You actually want to be the lawyers client. That means the lawyer has an obligation to you directly, rather than geico. That always gets a little complicated in insurance cases, since the insurance is paying the bills but isn't the client (technically). There's no downside to being a lawyers client.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 14:42
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:Does it especially matter whether I or Geico are the lawyer's client? I can't imagine it wouldn't be me since I'm the defendant (well, one out of 201 defendants anyway Well if he's your lawyer I can't see why on earth you would be hiring another one at your own expense. Ask him any legal questions you have, that's what he's being paid for.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 16:12
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Well if he's your lawyer I can't see why on earth you would be hiring another one at your own expense. Ask him any legal questions you have, that's what he's being paid for. Neither can I, 's why I asked. Thanks for the answers, much appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:Does it especially matter whether I or Geico are the lawyer's client? I can't imagine it wouldn't be me since I'm the defendant (well, one out of 201 defendants anyway IANAL, and this could vary greatly by state (I'm from Washington, and worked with people who worked in Oregon and Washington). I spent several years working with insurance defense lawyers and insurance companies. I can count the number of times an insured got called into court for a trial when the insurance company admitted fault on one... well, anything, really, because it only happened once, and it was a very unusual case. Your case sounds very typical. How the firms I worked with would generally handle something like that would be to take the paperwork you're served, maybe have a brief conversation with you (but you've probably already talked to your adjuster, so that may not even be necessary), and proceed to send you letters every so often letting you know how your case is going. Odds are, they settle out of court long before trial, and even if they do go to trial, since the only question they'll be dealing with is damages, there is probably not much reason to call you. Your limits are high enough to mean you're safe from having to pay anything barring a massive mishandling of your case. The guys the insurance companies get to do this poo poo aren't the best lawyers, but they're generally very good at not loving things up that badly, or they find themselves without clients very quickly. The lawyers are your lawyers, and required to represent your interests, not GEICO's; that being said, those lawyers probably handle hundreds--if not thousands--of GEICO's cases every year, and they are fully cognizant of which side of their bread is buttered. That being said, in most states, them loving you means a bad faith case against them and/or your insurance company, which is very bad for business. You can probably trust that they will act in your best interests, because that is probably in their best interests. The whole process may take months or years depending on how things go, how fast they can get medical records produced, how fast they can get experts to do reviews, how fast they can get independent medical exams done, how much the plaintiff wants to fight over it, how much the chiropractor who is the actual driving force behind the lawsuit is willing to fight for it, how much the firm defending you is willing to fight the chiropractor, etc. Your best move is to do what your lawyers tell you to do, and document yourself doing that. If you do that, it's really hard for you to get hosed in this sort of case; it's why you have insurance. Ham Equity fucked around with this message at 07:01 on Dec 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 06:58
|
|
|
If it goes to trial, you will most likely get deposed, you will have to attend the trial, and you will get called to testify. Even if it's just to argue over damages, both sides will get testimony about what happened from the involved parties.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 08:25
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:Neither can I, 's why I asked. Also, chill out, you'll be fine. This happens every day, and 99.999% settle and go away, and even if yours is one of the ones that doesn't, you'll still probably win, and even if you don't, Geico will be paying the bill. Talk to your lawyer, do what the people in this thread say, and then go have a cheeseburger or whatever. You can relax; everything will be OK.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 16:46
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Also, chill out, you'll be fine. This happens every day, and 99.999% settle and go away, and even if yours is one of the ones that doesn't, you'll still probably win, and even if you don't, Geico will be paying the bill. Talk to your lawyer, do what the people in this thread say, and then go have a cheeseburger or whatever. Sure hope you're right. I believe you and all but if I'm honest it's probably not gonna stop me stressing out. There's a reason SSRIs and Abilify are in my morning routine Here's a question: if the most likely result is that this gets settled outside the courtroom, why did Geico bother with this at all? It seems like their expense for fighting this would outweigh any benefits from a lower settlement, and it would have been a hell of a lot less stress for me if they'd just settled, hiked my rates and been done with it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:Sure hope you're right. I believe you and all but if I'm honest it's probably not gonna stop me stressing out. There's a reason SSRIs and Abilify are in my morning routine They have hundreds of thousands of claims a year all across the country. They pay the lawyers low rates. They may even be using staff counsel (Geico employed lawyers). The cost of defense at that scale makes up for just paying bullshit claims without investigation. Also they have auditors and shareholders to answer to--they can't just give money away without justification. Finally, they give a very tiny poo poo about your stress level compared to their finances. That's just reality. And don't worry, they will hike your rates anyway. Seriously don't even bother thinking about the case. The lawyer will handle everything.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 19:39
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:Sovcit dissection I've been reading bit by bit at work and holy poo poo I knew these nutjobs were a thing, but I didn't realize it was that bad  What's even the point? Do they really think they can win or are they just trying to make the courts throw up their hands and dismiss a case?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
D34THROW posted:I've been reading bit by bit at work and holy poo poo I knew these nutjobs were a thing, but I didn't realize it was that bad They won in oregon a short while back.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
D34THROW posted:I've been reading bit by bit at work and holy poo poo I knew these nutjobs were a thing, but I didn't realize it was that bad Pick a motivation for any individual to act like an insane dickbag and it applies to sovcits.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 14:11 |
|
|
D34THROW posted:I've been reading bit by bit at work and holy poo poo I knew these nutjobs were a thing, but I didn't realize it was that bad Most of them are genuinely deluded and think that the laws of magic and alchemy apply to courts so if you can correctly invoke a judges true name he will vanish in smoke. Some of them are also desperate enough to grab onto anything that promises results - the are people that actually peddle this crap with claims it works.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 22:21
|
|
