Legal Questions: do not communicate with the demon at all except through your genie

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > Legal Questions: do not communicate with the demon at all except through your genie

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

tehschulman posted:

I don't have a JD and never went to law school, but I'm very interested in the particular field of media law. Atleast I went to school for Journalism, so I've got some media law and ethics backing, but I've had a nagging question that's bothered me for some time.

We all have First Amendment rights in this country, the same standards apply to corporations, who are people according to the law. In the media industry we have, or used to have in any case, a good deal of ethical dilemmas when it came to reporting the news. The job of a journalist is to disseminate truth to the public for the greater good, but in a news world where scandal and hype and controversy guide the decisions of what editors should be running, I wonder if there is any legal precedent that deals with news organizations being charged with something along the lines of "harm to the public" or "malfeasance" or something similar to what a consumer might accuse a company of if their physical product was operating in a harmful and unintended way.

Mainly I'd want to apply something like that to News Corp and FOX News in particular. You can't condemn FOX outright for running with the stories they run with, you can't even condemn Glenn Beck for saying what he says because we all have the right to say such things. What about the aftermath of what's being said though? Does FOX bear any responsibility to the public to work in an ethical context? What if some nut were to pick up a gun and shoot another person and claim that their crimes were motivated because of some anti-immigration screed he heard on the Glenn Beck show?

Is news considered to be a product produced by a company? Would it stand up to the same consumer protections as a physical product? By FOX's own admission, it is not a news organization but instead is an entertainment/commentary channel motivated to get high ratings. Can FOX News even legally use the word "news" in their slogans and network moniker if this is the case?

I think you're asking a few different questions there.

First, you're asking if a commentator can be liable for inciting someone to commit a crime. The answer is (as are most things in the law): "it depends." For example, if Glenn Beck (or whomever) told his listeners to go out and kill a particular person, then he could be found to be both criminally and civilly responsible if someone actually did it.

Generally getting people whipped up into a frenzy over an issue, however, is probably not actionable. So if Glenn Beck railed all day about, say, illegal immigration, and then one of his listeners went out and killed an illegal immigrant, he'd face no consequences. And for good reason - you don't want to chill speech (particularly political speech) merely because some nut case takes your argument to extremes. There are exceptions, however - as you may be aware, Nancy Grace is being sued right now because she badgered a murder suspect the night before the suspect committed suicide. Also, you might remember that the Jenny Jones show was found liable for the death of a guy who appeared on the show and professed that he had a crush on his friend, whereafter the friend murdered him. That case was later reversed on appeal, but it still got to the jury.

Second, you are asking if commentators owe some kind of ethical duty to the general public. That's outside the purview of law-talking folks and you'd be in a better position to answer it, what with your journalism training. Generally speaking, "ethical" duties usually don't carry a criminal or civil sanction, unless they violate some prescribed duty of care.

Third, you're asking if "news" is a product that falls under truth-in-advertising law or is otherwise subject to some kind of consumer protection. I don't have any particular knowledge in this field, but my gut says, "no." As you pointed out, "news" isn't a physical product. It can't be "defective," even if it's untrue. If it goes bad, it can't cause you physical injury. Sure, you can be defamed by a news organization, but you have a specific cause of action for that. Furthermore, every "news" outlet, be it TV, radio, newspaper or internet, makes editorial decisions on what and how something is reported, and sometimes those decisions at least appear to reflect a bias.

# ¿ Feb 12, 2010 21:04

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 2, 2024 15:11

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

Wide Area Network posted:

Is it illegal to skirt immigration law by doing this?

Maybe. I'm not an immigration lawyer, but I do know they conduct an interview with the immigrant and his "wife" to ascertain whether or not it's a genuine marriage. This Boston-area immigration lawyer thinks it's a really bad idea:

http://www.massachusettsimmigrationlawyerblog.com/2009/03/your-biggest-immigration-mista-1.html

quote:

Many people in Boston and throughout Massachusetts mistakenly believe that marriage to someone with U.S. citizenship is a relatively easy and fast way of obtaining permanent residency or green card status and other immigration benefits. Stop by City Hall in Boston, pick up your marriage certificate and you are automatically entitled to a green card. And it is believed that once you get married, a work permit will arrive soon after you put your immigration petition in the mail.

Despite this persistent fantasy, a green card through marriage often proves to be difficult path. For starters, it can be extraordinarily hard to convince U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) at the Boston District Office that your marriage is truly based on a real and bona fide relationship. The immigration authorities will be expecting you to produce extensive documentary evidence that you and your spouse have a shared life that involves love and companionship and that your relationship is not just a sham to obtain permanent residency. At a bare minimum, you can be sure that USCIS will scrutinize all Massachusetts public records to confirm that you and your spouse truly live together in marital union.

Once you get to an immigration interview at USCIS Boston District Office, you may encounter what is called a Stokes interview. If this occurs, an immigration officer will interrogate you and your spouse separately with an identical set of probing, personal questions. In this game, there are no wrong answers. But if the answers that you and your spouse provide don't match, your immigration case will be denied.

Every so often, I'll have an initial immigration consultation in my office in Boston where the potential clients tell me, quite frankly, that their marriage is bogus and then try to enlist my help as an immigration lawyer with the marriage-based green card process. This would be a kin to a criminal lawyer advising someone how to rob a bank! Furthermore, aside from the obvious ethical considerations, an immigration petition based on a fake marriage is very unlikely to be approved by USCIS. The reality is that I have enough difficulty getting USCIS to approve petitions based on marriages that are truly genuine.

Anyone thinking of trying to get a green card based on a fake marriage would do well to remember a line from Mickey Rourke's character in the film Body Heat, which I once heard paraphrased by a Boston Immigration Judge: "when you commit a major crime, you got fifty ways you can screw up, and if you can think of 25 of them you're a genius, and, counselor, you ain't no genius." No matter how smart you think you are, USCIS is smarter. If you can come up with 15 ways to prove that your sham marriage is genuine, USCIS will probably be looking at dozens of other pieces of information, any one of which will blow your cover.

The likely result is that you'll get caught and your immigration application will be denied. But a denial is not your only risk. Marriage fraud is a specific ground for deportation. It gets worse: under the Immigration and Nationality Act, a fraudulent marriage finding may bar the approval of a subsequent immigrant visa petition. To understand why this penalty is particularly harsh, let's imagine, for instance, that after the petition based on fraud is denied, the would-be immigrant gets divorced and remarried to another U.S. citizen. This second marriage is a real marital relationship. This couple continues to live together for 10 years in utter marital bliss and have 5 beautiful U.S. citizen children together. In this scenario, the marriage fraud penalty would generally stop this person from ever obtaining a green card. Immigration waivers for marriage fraud are extremely limited.

And it could be worse! U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents investigate marriage fraud and prosecute U.S. citizens and foreign nationals for criminal violations. Severe penalties for marriage fraud include sentences of up to 5 years in federal prison and a $250,000 fine.

In short, when it comes to marriage fraud and a green card, the risk of getting caught is high and the punishment severe. It's blatantly illegal. And it's unethical. For these and other reasons, my best advice as an immigration attorney is to steer clear of marriage fraud.

# ¿ Mar 19, 2010 14:54

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

excellentcoffee posted:

So far, he seems good. The firm does have some good ratings online, but I don't know if that pertains to all lawyers or just a few.

But what would a good lawyer do in this situation, when his client is a suspect and could be facing indictment?

Well, without knowing the details of your situation, a good lawyer is either going to get you immunity or tell you not to testify. You're not going to explain your way out of an indictment in the grand jury.

# ¿ Mar 22, 2010 21:39

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

kalisperas posted:

About three years ago I was sued by a collection agency in MA, resulting in a judgment against me for about $6000. For a little over a year I made monthly payments to the law firm that represented the collection agency. Since then, I've moved to ME, and due to my wife changing to part time hours for school, we haven't had enough spare money each month to make payments on the judgment, so I haven't made a payment in over a year.

My question is, since I'm now a ME resident, does that change my situation at all in regards to the judgment from the MA court? Can the law firm have my wages garnished using that existing judgment, or do they have to go though a ME court? Also, if I file for bankruptcy, does that affect the judgment?

Yes, they can still collect against you, but they will have to jump through a few more hoops. As for bankruptcy, that would discharge the debt, but that is a very big decision that could have negative consequences for you down the road. I wouldn't declare bankruptcy for such a relatively small debt.

# ¿ Apr 4, 2010 01:53

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

Alchenar posted:

Where are Traffic Offences civil cases?

Lots of places that don't spell "offense" with a "c." In Florida, for example, most traffic tickets (notable exceptions: DUI, knowingly driving on a suspended license) are administrative or civil in nature. That is, you don't face jail time and you pay the tickets so that the DMV doesn't suspend your driving privileges. Other states, however (Virginia and Texas come to mind), treat traffic tickets as criminal matters.

I don't know where PoOkiE! is having his troubles, but I agree: he needs a lawyer, stat.

# ¿ May 3, 2010 17:47

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

Joudas posted:

How long is said useless judgement good for, if you know?

Depends on the state. Some places, as long as 20 years.

# ¿ Jun 25, 2010 18:38

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

SWATJester posted:

Maryland is not really a plaintiff friendly state

PG County and Baltimore City tend to be pretty friendly to plaintiffs.

# ¿ Jul 17, 2010 15:36

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

tishthedish posted:

Texas. Got in an auto accident four months ago. Other guy's fault.

The date of the accident was 4-30. I saw an urgent care doctor on 5-2 and 5-9. I was still in constant pain until the end of May, but I considered myself done with treatment. I told the adjuster this, mostly because I wanted to settle the claim and move on with my life. Thing is, when I get really upset or nervous, my back spasms in the same location and manner that my back spasmed after the accident. Because the adjuster who is working with me is trying to settle for a ridiculously low amount, the claim is still unsettled.

I told her that I was done seeking treatment, but I didn't sign any forms. My back is spasming right now (ironically because I filed a complaint about the insurance company with my state's department of insurance and they cc'ed me on their response to the department of insurance, which is full of lies), and I'm wondering if it's still possible for me to see a doctor about this issue, even though the last time I sought treatment was 5-9? The adjuster said that I had to finish treatment within 30 days of the accident, but she's lied to me many times. I also wonder if there is a certain lapse in time of treatment that would render me responsible for the doctor's visit.

Get a personal injury lawyer. Don't negotiate with the insurance adjuster yourself.

# ¿ Sep 9, 2010 16:30

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

Annakie posted:

About seven months ago I posted about my car accident and asked about getting a lawyer (here's a link to my posts). But basically, the accident was the other guy's fault but I had some injuries and my shoulder was in ongoing pain.

So I went and got a personal injury lawyer. On our first meeting I brought him every receipt and important document including the 4 weeks worth of pictures I'd taken of my injury and the $1500 or so of expenses I personally spent AFTER my insurance paid for most of my doctor's vists (but not $1000 of the $3000+ for a CT scan of my shoulder, co-pays on doctors visits, new glasses, medicine etc.) He seemed really happy and impressed and said "Don't worry, you'll get a lot." but he wouldn't give me a dollar amount.

He also sent me to another physical therapy place. My original physical therapy was pretty normal stretching and excercising and it was okay, my but my shoulder still hurt. This new place did electric shock, massage and chiropractic adjustments and it helped. In the end though, I still can't do things like clean my house for more than an hour without it hurting pretty badly.

Every time I talked to my lawyer, he said not to worry, things are going fine, and kept saying we'll get "a lot" of money, and would never give me an estimate of what that might be.

On Friday he called and told me "Good news! You're getting a check for $1500!" This wasn't good news AT ALL because I'd spent more than $1500 out of pocket. After hanging up, still shellshocked that he thought that was good news, I called back a few minutes later and tried over and over to get him to explain how I was only getting $1500 back. I saw at one point a settlement offer from them for $6500. He said he'd submitted over $8500 in medical expenses. And he said that he was generous and "gave" me $200 more than what I should have gotten out of his part of the deal.

I asked what if we actually sued instead of settled and he said at best, in a year, I'd get maybe $900 more after fees back. Then he also told me that right after we hung up the first time he'd faxed in the acceptance of the settlement offer so it was too late anyway.

Does this sound right to you? Did he just totally screw me or should I have never expected to be compensated for my time, energy, and the fact that my shoulder is probably permanently hosed for the rest of my life? (No, it doesn't bother me every single day but again, it limits me doing things in the long term. I can't hold my nephew with that arm more than a couple of minutes, can't clean the house for more than an hour at a time etc.) My dad thinks he's taking money under the table from insurance companies. Do I have a dirty / incompetent lawyer and if so do I have ANY recourse at this point, or were my expectations too high?

The decision to settle is yours, not your lawyer's. If you didn't authorize him to settle, then you (and your lawyer) have a big problem.

# ¿ Sep 22, 2010 21:50

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

Talibananas posted:

Spouses can testify against each other if they want, but typically courts can't force spouses to testify against each other. It's called spousal immunity or spousal privilege. This probably varies by jurisdiction, but it does apply in MA.

Massachusetts General Laws, chapter 233, section 20:
"...except in any proceeding relating to child abuse, ... neither husband nor wife shall be compelled to testify in the trial of an indictment, complaint or other criminal proceeding against the other"

In some states, the privilege may not apply to communications before marriage. Don't know if Massachusetts is one of those states, but the statute quoted above leads me to believe that she can't be compelled to testify against him at all.

But tell the friend that she made a great decision by marrying a guy who attacked her father. I foresee a long, blissful marriage.

# ¿ Oct 26, 2010 15:24

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

Dr. Kyle Farnsworth posted:

This is for Louisiana.

So, I moved out of my mom's house 10 years ago and have bounced around since. Apparently, the Louisiana Department of Revenue decided I owed them taxes for 2007 through 2010 for no readily apparent reason (Like I said, I haven't lived there for years). She got the letter they sent for me to that address and sat on it for a while, so I just got it today, well past the response deadline. I'm assuming this is going to be a huge hassle to sort out, but would like to have some idea how serious a problem I'm going to have. Should I just hit up a Louisiana tax attorney to make it go away or is this something I can sort out with some reasonable letters (I suspect not)?

I don't know about Louisiana, but I had a similar experience with Maryland, and I was able to clear it up with some letters and documentation (for example, your tax returns for the state you lived in during 2007-2010).

# ¿ Dec 27, 2010 14:35

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

Sounds like you have two situations going on: the traffic ticket and a personal injury suit.

Your attorney is a shyster (and so are your girlfriend's parents). He is insisting that you get unnecessary treatment in order to bring a personal injury claim.

# ¿ Dec 29, 2010 02:01

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

TouchyMcFeely posted:

I'm trying to force Bank of America to send me a copy of the Promissory Note on my mortgage.

I already sent them a form letter requesting the info. They sent back a letter saying, "we don't do that but there's more stuff coming," then sent me a copy of my closing documents and then another letter saying that my loan was owned by Fanny and that they put a hold on my credit and they wouldn't take the negative ding off my report.

I looked through the copies of the closing documents that they had sent me and didn't see anything that said "Promissory Note" or looked like one from the descriptions I've read of them online.

I had also just looked at one of my credit reports the day before getting the letter and didn't see anything listed there as a negative.

What kind of lawyer should I be talking to in order to discuss sending BoA my own, "No, gently caress you!" letter back?

I checked the link to the Lawyer Referral Service and wouldn't you know it, Utah doesn't have one.

A ton of foreclosure defense lawyers have sprung up in the last couple of years. An experienced one will probably know the ins-and-outs of wringing documents out of the mortgage holders and could help you out for a few hundred dollars. And if there is any funny business with your credit report, then they may have some advice for you there, too. Probably cost you a few hundred bucks for the letter, though.

# ¿ Dec 29, 2010 18:33

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

Don't know about Oregon, but mental health history is one of those things that may cause you to be ineligible to purchase a firearm.

I know one of the criticisms about the background check system is that it failed to find the Virginia Tech shooter's history of mental health issues. Oregon might have a way to check, I don't know. But it is never a good idea to lie.

# ¿ Jan 28, 2011 16:15

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

SWATJester posted:

What you're really asking is, would it be an IIED case, and the answer is in MD probably not.

Depending on the facts disclosed and the restrictiveness of the forum on which they were initially published, he might have a case for public disclosure of private facts (assuming Maryland recognizes such a cause of action).

# ¿ Mar 28, 2011 22:26

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

MehtaMar posted:

Newb. But a lurker! Still a newb. I'm in California, for reference.

I lost my job and got unemployment. In order to, well, EAT, I offered my creditors to pay amounts smaller than the minimums in a good-faith effort to pay down my debt.

My checks were returned to me citing "federal law prohibits us from accepting your payment as it is not at or above the stipulated minimum payment on your account."

Nonetheless, I tried to get into a recovery/hey-you're-broke-but-want-to-do-good- plan, but I was rejected. After 2 years of unemployment and not finding a job, these deliquent debts became chargeoffs, then the creditors filed suit against me.

The lawsuit paperwork ended up going to an old address. As I look into these suits, the evidence used to decide against me were as follows: 1)did not show up to court, default judgement entered and 2)a barely-legible and crooked (seriously, the text is copied at a 45 degree angle with words falling off the page) copy of what appears to be a 'statement of accounts' from the credit card company that sold the account to the collections agent.

I started a business and YAY have a job now. I'd like to go to court on my own without a lawyer to vacate one of the judgements against me. I know this is possible.

Does anyone else have experience with...
a)going to court on your own behalf
b).... in order to vacate a collections judgement

or know how one might go about this?

If worst comes to worst, I would prefer to settle for some amount instead of pay off the judgement. But these people who work at UNIFUND, seem like real assholes.

Since you're in California, the self-help books over at Nolo Press might be of use to you.

# ¿ Apr 26, 2011 17:32

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

CaptainPsyko posted:

Bump.

Anyone able to help me find the relevant section of PA code? I have to draft my letter pleading Not Guilty over the weekend and would like to cite law.

Are you required to give an explanation? How about just, "I plead NOT GUILTY and demand a trial?"

# ¿ Jun 17, 2011 21:27

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

Rahtas posted:

The summary: Zoloft is getting sued for birth defects that my daughter has. My daughter's birth defects were always explained away as being attributed to her having Down syndrome. Should I sue the hell out of them?

Well, you actually have a couple of questions here:

First, if there is a class action against Zoloft, should you join it? Without knowing the details of what is wrong with the drug, how it causes birth defects and whether the drug caused your daughter's condition, my general reaction is: NO. Class actions are fine for remedying small wrongs against large groups of people who otherwise wouldn't bother suing. The result is often a huge payday for the lawyers, a small payday for the representative plaintiffs and a pittance for most of the class members.

In your case, if there IS something wrong with Zoloft that could have caused your daughter's problems, then you potentially have some very large damages that a class action isn't going to net you when all is said and done. You should really talk to a lawyer who specializes in cases involving injuries by drugs and medical devices. IF you have a case, it's going to be more complex than most personal injury lawyers can handle. It's going to require some expensive experts and the drug companies are not known for rolling over on these types of cases.

If there is a class action pending that might affect your case talk to your lawyer about it and whether you should opt out.

# ¿ Jun 22, 2011 15:57

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

SmellsOfFriendship posted:

Another question! I have rental insurance through Progressive. It stipulates harm against another person on my property but really only explicitly says personal injury (like medical costs.) Could that cover a libel or defamation suit? Does anyone have any experience with that policy specifically?

No way to know without seeing the policy or knowing the law in your state. Also, your explanation of what your policy covers is pretty vague.

In my experience reading policies, there is a possibility that defamation *might* be covered under the "Personal and Advertising Injury" portion of your policy. HOWEVER, most insurance policies that I have read also contain a number of exclusions and endorsements that severely restrict the circumstances under which you might be covered for defamation.

In other words, talk to a competent local lawyer and bring your policy with you.

# ¿ Jul 14, 2011 19:33

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

joat mon posted:

The physicians would testify. The depositions would be for cross-examination. Which physicians each side expected to call at trial would have been one of the things discussed at the pretrial conference.

My only issue with your answers to his questions is that in my experience, physician and other skilled or expert testimony is often presented by videotaped deposition. Getting a doctor to commit to being at the courthouse on time (and paying him for travel) is a lot harder than setting a video deposition at his office at everyone's convenience. State or local rules regarding noticing requirements vary, but I think most states permit expert testimony to be presented by deposition.

# ¿ Jul 22, 2011 18:16

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

whatspeakyou posted:

I was directed to ask this question here, so hopefully you folks can give me some direction:

My wife and I live in a 2 story home and have 1 small cat. We, on average, consume 4,000 gallons of water per month (give or take 1,000). Yesterday the water company leaves me a note on my doorknob stating that my reading this month indicated a use of 26,000 gallons. Yeah, that's not a typo. I have since had my landlord and his maintenance folks check my home for leaks everywhere from the actual water meter to my home and we have found zero evidence of leaks.

The water company is telling me it's my responsibility since anything past the meter is no long their issue. I've been at this residence for almost a year and the highest we've ever gone is 6,000 gallons. Somehow we've managed to consume 6 or so months worth of water in a 30 day period (which is ridiculous). We have no pool or anything. Again, no leaks have been detected. Our water usage habits have not suddenly changed, either. The water company advised i write a letter to them of "Unknown Water Loss Claim" but that wouldn't change my bill (which pretty much makes it pointess). I'm a fairly honest and straightforward guy and I'm dumbfounded at this. My friend suggested i lawyer up and dispute the utility bill. Since i have zero clue as to how "lawyered up" i need to be for such an issue, i thought i'd come here for goon help.

I'm really not up for paying for 6 months worth of water I didn't use. Halp!

I don't really have any advice for you, but something similar just happened to me and it turned out to be a leak at the meter, which the water company fixed, and they gave me a credit on my bill.

Are you billed by actual meter reading or by an estimate? Sometimes, if it's by estimate, your previous bills may have been low. Then for whatever reason they take an actual meter reading and decide that they want to bill you to make up for all the past low estimates.

# ¿ Jul 22, 2011 18:19

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

wellwhoopdedooo posted:

1.) Can anybody recommend a reputable legal insurance company? I know there's things like malpractice insurance, what about just general insurance? I live in the US, and don't want to sue anybody, I'd just like to be covered from random lawsuits due to bullshit. Although I don't mind something like a PCP, I'd like to have some choice in the matter while still keeping the same insurance company. Having a go-to lawyer I can pay $200/hr to ask for a referral to a specialist lawyer to pay $400/hr for answers to questions like the following would be nice though:

I really don't understand why you think you're going to get sued - "random lawsuits due to bullshit" typically don't happen to individuals. Many businesses do get sued, however, and typically they'll have a general liability policy that covers a limited number of situations. Different kinds of businesses may purchase insurance to cover specific risks.

Unless you have an inkling that whatever it is you do opens you up to the risk of suit, there's no reason to purchase "legal insurance," "pre-paid legal services" (which are almost universally worthless because they don't cover much at all), or to have a lawyer "on retainer."

If you run into a problem (get sued, get arrested, whatever), then hire a lawyer. If you believe that you are exposed to a certain risk of suit due to the nature of your business or something you've done, then you may want to explore whether you can buy insurance to cover that type of risk or pay a lawyer for a consult on minimizing that risk. Otherwise, save your money.

# ¿ Jan 17, 2012 17:32

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

wldmn13 posted:

I am in Texas.

I have an arbitration agreement and a divorce decree. The arbitration agreement came before the divorce decree, and stipulates division of my retirement plan that the divorce decree does not mention.

The company that handles my retirement account will not do the disbursement I need to comply with the arbitration agreement. They will only do so with a court order. The court order only states that I owe two parties a dollar amount, but does not specify where those funds come from like the arbitration agreement does. Since the court order does not stipulate the disbursement, then I'm left owing money to people that I don't have the cash to pay.

What are my legal requirements to comply with the arbitration agreement? What action(s) can be taken against me by the people owed portions of the retirement account if I am unable to comply? I'm not trying to withhold anything from anyone, but I just don't know what to do at this point. It's been 8 months or so since the arbitration agreement was signed.

Not a Texas lawyer, not a family lawyer and definitely not YOUR lawyer, but is your case still open? Can you ask your lawyer to go back and have the court issue an amended order that addresses your concerns?

# ¿ Jan 19, 2012 16:17

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

TrinityOfDeath posted:

So my lawyer friends, what will happen after the arraignment should the original charge be unchanged? Will he be able to return to his parent's home, or will hehave to find somewhere else to be until the trail?

In all likelihood, a condition of his bond will be that he not have contact with the people he threatened (i.e., his parents). That means he cannot live with them, even if they invite him. He cannot talk to them, even if they call him. He cannot email them; he cannot message them on Facebook. No contact whatsoever. If he does, he risks having his bond revoked and possibly new charges - he will return to jail.

# ¿ Feb 13, 2012 16:27

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

nm posted:

I would note that in California, if the parents showed up and said son lives here and we want him to, we (lawyers) would be able to get him a no unwanted contact order, which would just mean he'd have to leave if they wanted him to.

This is correct in most places, I imagine (don't know about Ohio), however a word of warning to TrinityOfDeath's brother in-law: no contact still means no contact until your lawyer obtains an order, signed by the judge, allowing contact.

# ¿ Feb 14, 2012 17:12

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

Old Man Pants posted:

So my fiancee wasnt home when I got here, called jails and hospitals to find her, and found her at a local ER. They wouldnt tell me anything besides that she is stable and they didnt have to take any life saving measures. They also told me she was extremely intoxicated and uncooperative, so I couldnt see her. I cant figure out:

A. why she would be in the hospital instead of detox if it was a drunk in public kind of thing

B. How she event Got to the hospital

C. Why they wouldnt let me wait there for her

Any medical law legal goons in here?

They won't tell you anything because you're not a family member. Marry the poor girl, already, or call one of her real family members to find out the story.

I don't know why they won't let you wait for her at the hospital. Most hospitals I know of have a waiting room

I think you probably have a bigger problem, though. If your first impulse upon discovering that your fiancee wasn't waiting at home for you is to call jails and hospitals, and then you find her at the ER for extreme intoxication, then maybe the two of you need to take a serious look at what kind of lifestyle you're living. Sounds to me like she has a drinking problem, and you aren't helping.

# ¿ Mar 5, 2012 16:31

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

Old Man Pants posted:

Well, I knew she was going out drinking with friends last night, and after not being able to get in contact with them I started calling around to those places.

We just got home from the hospital, and she was going to catch a cab back to our place, someone punched her in the back of the head and she fell and hit her face. She was intoxicated for sure. She was being uncooperative because she woke up strapped down (being held down or restricted is a huge trigger for her, she is also severely claustrophobic ) in a place she didnt recognize. Random act of violence. As far as the drinking problem thing, I dunno. Theres a reason I was so freaked out when she wasnt there, and I couldnt get ahold of her. Its not like her and its never ever happened before.

I still have no idea why they wouldnt let me wait for her though.

Edit: I called people who worked at the bars she had been to first as well (we work in nightlife and know the local spots) before thinking something was really wrong, sorry if I left that out originally, this has been a very scary night for me.

Sorry, didn't mean to get all preachy on you. Hope she's okay - getting hit on the head can be pretty serious.

# ¿ Mar 6, 2012 15:26

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

USMC503 posted:

So I am going to be talking to a lawyer about a potential lawsuit I may be filing in the near future, but I figured I'd just ask real quick in here so I can get poo poo rolling.

Without going into massive amounts of detail, I live in Oregon, the offender lives in California, he ripped me off over the internet, and now I want to sue him. I have all the evidence I need to prove beyond a doubt they are in error and owe me the money, but I am not sure which county/state I need to file the lawsuit in. I have gotten an unsure response of "I think you can do either one," but I'd like to know for sure.

Obviously I'd prefer to file here in Oregon to force the fucker to fly up here for court, but I want to be sure. Also: Since state laws vary, do any of you know if California has a loser pays law (if I have to go down there)? If so, would he be liable for airfare in order for me to attend court (I'm in the Portland area, they are in L.A.)?

Thanks.

P.S. I'll probably be hitting this thread up more after I talk to the lawyer cause I can't afford to actually hire one.

Not a California or Oregon lawyer, definitely not YOUR lawyer, but you generally can't go wrong if you file where the defendant resides. If you want to sue him in Oregon, you're going to have to be sure that Oregon courts can exercise personal jurisdiction over the defendant. This is usually accomplished through a device called a "long-arm" statute and there is no way I or anyone else on the internet can give you advice as to whether any of the defendant's conduct would allow you to sue him in Oregon.

As to loser-pays, the only state in the union that I know of with a true loser-pays rule is Alaska. Most states will allow the prevailing party to recover reasonable costs associated with the litigation, but this is usually small-potatoes type stuff, like the filing fee, copying costs, witness fees, etc.

# ¿ Apr 11, 2012 14:01

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

USMC503 posted:

Looked into the Long-arm Statute, and we do have one and I do believe it would apply in this case, though I am going to verify with my lawyer because legalese is quite cryptic at times.

Another question I had is how subpoenas work in a civil case. The dude who ripped me off, while I have evidence to prove wrongdoing, the dude is hiding behind an internet business and is renting a private PO Box (not USPS) in California, and seems to be paying an office building to use their address as a business location without actually having an office there. I am hopeful I will be able to get information from these places without too much issue, but if it comes down to it, how does one get a subpoena for information on someone renting a place/service? The only roadblock I have in this whole thing is the dude's anonymity.

Yes, you need to go over the long-arm statute with your lawyer because, even though state statutes may be similar, the courts' interpretation of what constitutes doing business in the state can vary depending on the circumstances.

Service of subpoenas is also fairly state-specific and states have different laws about honoring foreign (i.e., out of state) subpoenas. If California has adopted the Uniform Foreign Depositions Act or something like it, serving an Oregon subpoena on a California non-party would be pretty straightforward (although enforcement in the event of noncompliance may still require you to hire a California attorney). Some states, however, will require you to jump through a bunch of hoops in order to serve a vaild subpoena. Your attorney should be able to help you with this, too.

# ¿ Apr 11, 2012 21:48

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

notwhoyouknowiam posted:

Hey guys, I have something of a conundrum I need some advice on. It's kind of a story.

My dad got suckered into getting his name listed as the primary on a loan for a car for my cousin's kid. At the time dad was still grieving over my aunt, and was thinking something along the lines of "oh, this is my sister's grandkid, I'll help him out" when he should have been thinking "this is the kid of that total scumbag who married my niece, I don't think I should trust him." At any rate, the kid has been constantly late paying this loan, and then skipped town with the car. He won't answer our calls to his cell, and we have no means of finding him since we're too broke to hire a detective.

My question is, under Texas law, is there a way to get my dad's name removed from this loan considering we have lost control over this vehicle? Or are we better off reporting the vehicle as stolen?

This is a textbook example of why you never co-sign for a loan. Sorry, but your dad's hosed.

# ¿ Apr 16, 2012 13:53

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

Steve McScene posted:

Questions about affray.

Well, I don't know anything about the UK or its crazy laws, but in my jurisdiction, "affray" is what the police charge you with when they don't know who the aggressor was. So, if you have two people fighting but you don't know if you can make a misdemeanor battery charge stick to either, you charge them both with "affray."

I don't know if self-defense or defense of others would be a valid defense to the charge; I think you probably need real legal advice.

# ¿ May 4, 2012 22:12

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 2, 2024 15:11

King of the Cows: Jun 1, 2007; If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?

NancyPants posted:

Do foreclosure proceedings generally provide for disposal and use of abandoned personal property? If they don't, could that behavior be called conversion or something similar?

Sometimes, but it can get fairly fact-specific. If the bank can show that the homeowner abandoned the home, along with all the personal effects, then the homeowner is SOL.

Every once in a while a bank will clear out a house they think has been abandoned prior to the foreclosure process being complete - but the homeowner then comes back and says they were still living there or were using it as storage or whatever.

# ¿ Jan 30, 2013 23:05

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > Legal Questions: do not communicate with the demon at all except through your genie