|
Richard M Nixon posted:I'm interested to know how a court would handle a case that is really technical in nature. For example, if someone were caught producing malicious code and preforming exploits on a company, how would the judge handle hearing about proof that connections were made between IP x and Y, or a deep packet inspection proved that this bit string was being sent there? How would the jury (if there was one) be taught WTF a packet was and why people were taking a server in the back door? Would a civil suit (e.g. punitive damages from piracy) be different than a criminal suit (felony hacking)? Expert witnesses, a couple computer science professors would get paid an obscene amount of money to explain what happened to the jury. Yes civil and criminal suits are different (at least for standards of proof).
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2010 21:26
|
|
:iamafag:
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 17:04 |
|
|
Richard M Nixon posted:So the entire case could basically rest on how well some CS guy paid to come in can speed teach a judge everything he needs to know to understand if there is enough evidence to prove it? yes, the defense will probably hire someone to explain why what the defendant did was actually legal too.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2010 21:36
|
|
|
Richard M Nixon posted:Wow...that is scary
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2010 21:55
|
|
I wonder why we don't have judges and lawyers who have CS degrees (we rock the LSATs) seeing as technical law has emerged so much in the past decades.
|
Richard M Nixon posted:I realize this will be a silly question, but I've read a few peer reviewed CS journals, and I can't imagine anyone who doesn't Usually you go for clarity + lay prestige + experience. I.e. being a professor helps a lot.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2010 00:54
|
|
to source code to actually read it, much less keep track of who writes on what. Do lawyers or other legal people get subscriptions to journals in different fields to keep a list of current experts, or is it more word of mouth?
|
Vander posted:I thought one couldn't transfer property to themselves... Was I not paying attention in property class when they said you could? Our example where they said you couldn't was specifically with regards to joint ownership too.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2010 18:59
|
|
|
Vander posted:Likely not. Even just getting yourself to Jersey to contest the charge will cost you that much. For laughs sake, could he get diversity on this?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2010 22:09
|
|
|
ODC posted:That's what I thought. I'm just wondering / hoping if there is some magical, secret "thing" that I can send that does something similar without having to physically be in New Jersey. I feel so used over the whole drat experience. Everything was legit about her business and I gave her an EXTREMELY low rate for the work because of the remaining contracts she had on her plate. Was your contract written? If your rate was as low as you claimed it was you can sue under quasi contract for the fair market value of your work. I.e. if you can cheaply prove that your work was worth a couple thousand you may conceivably get that much, especially if you delivered work to her under the auspices of the contract that she violated.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2010 22:13
|
|
|
ODC posted:I'll need to get on my other computer to see, but yes, the contract was written. My general understanding is that for an uncompleted contract, breached by the other party, you can sue for the value of the work done (although the theory of recovery in NJ may also be unjust enrichment in which case the value you can sue for is the fair market value of the work delivered). If you can prove that this value would be over $75k (ha), you can sue in federal court and not have to go to NJ. There may also be other fraud statutes in NJ that you may be able to sue under instead of breach of contract which could give you punitive damages. That said, I'm not a lawyer, and I know nothing of the laws of either state in question.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2010 22:31
|
|
|
Incredulous Red posted:Why can't he sue in Florida? If he can get service on her, I don't know why not. I'd also say that he should aim for quasi contract recovery because he might be able to get significantly more. P.s. you should probably make sure that your state recognizes this sort of recovery.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2010 22:37
|
|
|
Could ODC sue VISA? He DID have a deposit but VISA canceled it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2010 23:54
|
|
|
Nomex posted:I have a question about some of the medical Marijuana dispensary DEA raids that have been happening: No. Entrapment involves the police doing something to induce you to do something you otherwise would not do.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2010 18:58
|
|
|
Incredulous Red posted:If you had a contract for $175, I wouldn't count on collecting $1500 E: although you will be able to recover for more, you will be required to prove the actual value of your work (this may get expensive). The defendant will enter into evidence the initial value of the contract as a counter to your claim of $1500, it will be up to the fact finder to determine the actual value. JudicialRestraints fucked around with this message at 20:47 on Feb 18, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2010 20:43
|
|
|
Solomon Grundy posted:In my state, if there is an express contract, all quasi-contract theories are barred, so don't get all excited about quantum meruit until you check local laws. He should definitely check his local laws, Quantum Meruit in Wisconsin only comes into play with an express contract when the party that is getting discounted work breaks the contract. Basically, it's worth looking into but I know nothing about the law in Florida.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2010 23:26
|
|
|
Grumpy Paralegal posted:Work related, sort of. "Why are you trying to screw with me, I'll show you" kind of stuff. On the plus side you can now probably hold your company legally responsible for any damages your boss inflicts on you during the course of employment. Maybe pointing that out to corporate will help? I think your options are pretty much 'suck it up' or 'quit'
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2010 21:08
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:In Iowa, the unemployment insurance guidelines state that to be eligible, you have to have lost your job through no fault of your own. Worded that way, it seems like the only way to get unemployment benefits in this state is to be simply laid off. Is there some situation I'm not aware of? most states allow you to quit if your boss is asking you to do something illegal/torturing you. You're gonna wanna get specifics for your own state.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2010 07:09
|
|
|
InternetRulesLawyer posted:No, they cannot take your wages away or "set off" your wages against some imaginary debt they're saying you owe. Call the labor board for your state and report what they're doing. They can however fire him for an imagined or nonexistent slight.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2010 07:13
|
|
|
InternetRulesLawyer posted:Well the damages are presumed, but are they nominal? Is it worth hiring an attorney and going through a suit, obtaining a judgment, and then trying to collect it out of state? Does the defendant have any assets at all, or it just some dickhead who doesn't like you who lives in an apartment and drives a 1989 Volkswagon? He can probably get punitive (especially for them impugning him in a professional capacity). In that case all I can suggest is that he make a good impression on the Judge/Jury because they're the ones who decide if he gets more than $1.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2010 09:27
|
|
|
dorkimoe posted:I'm not as worried about being fired as paying them money they dont deserve. I'm not gonna let them have me just make up an amount and pay it. If they have proof, which would require video proof also, then ok Even if they have proof you can force them to sue you. You don't owe them a dime until a court says so.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2010 20:46
|
|
|
Han Solo posted:Earlier today I used my perfect pull ups (they are a pull up bar and handles that you install into your door frame.) As I was doing my first or second pull up, the handles both snapped. I fell on my back and my head whipped into the tile floor. My toe is also killing me but thats no biggie. I'm pretty sure I have some kind of concussion. I didn't get knocked out but I started feeling very weird afterwards and my vision became very blurry for a while. Now I just have a bad headache and I feel like crap. Its taking me much longer than normal to write this. I would go to the hospital but I know there's no point. I've had this happen to me before in rugby games and the hospital does nothing but tell you that you don't have internal bleeding and then charge you a ton of money. Do I have any legal basis to sue the perfect pull up company? I understand that accidents happen as a result of normal living that are no ones fault and I don't like to go around blaming stuff on other people but I only used these pull ups because I thought they were safe and now I have another concussion. I live in New York. If this situation is what is referenced by rule 5 in the first post, forgive me. If you can prove that this is a common problem you might be able to recover for either manufacturing error or product design liability (probably product design). That said, design liability generally requires that you submit a more efficient design (depending upon your jurisdiction). This means you will have to pay an engineer to design a new pull up machine. This will cost more than you will recover unless you end up with horrible disabling injuries. Alternatively, try to get a lawyer to start up a class action suit.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2010 23:25
|
|
|
Dolphin posted:Michigan... 1. get insurance you idiot 2. I don't know for sure about Michigan, but if I were a cop having towed a car without insurance would be enough to give me probable cause/reasonable suspicion to believe that the owner didn't have insurance and drove it. They're either going to charge you or you aren't. Don't be an idiot next time.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2010 17:07
|
|
|
Dolphin posted:It's not my car. The vehicle owner only told me he stopped paying the insurance AFTER the car was towed--but since I need to go pick the car up, I just wanted to make sure I was within my rights to not answer questions about who drove the car when I went to the Police. I opened an insurance policy on the car, but the effective date is today, car was towed yesterday. You're not required to ask any questions a cop asks in any position where you might be a defendant. That said, not answering questions is more likely to get you into a rough spot. Out of curiosity, how are you going to move the uninsured car without driving it?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2010 17:45
|
|
|
nm posted:Yes and no. Pretty sure you can refuse to answer questions, but they just have nasty institutional penalties (i.e. refusing to take a breathalyzer = losing your license in a bunch of states). That's why I said in the next sentence that not answering could land you in trouble. For minor crimes it's arguably better for you to tell the truth and take your licks.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2010 19:47
|
|
|
nm posted:Remember though that it can be a crime, not just administrative penalty. Gonna be honest, that sounds like a 5th Amendment violation to me. I mean, I can see the cops being allowed to CHARGE you for refusal to provide, but making it a crime to not testify against yourself sounds more than a little unconstitutional.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2010 04:15
|
|
|
excellentcoffee posted:So, better question is, if I do get a felony, do time, am I completely and utterly hosed for the rest of my life? Unless you can get your record sealed, yes. Don't get a felony. Hopefully you managed to get a good lawyer!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2010 19:56
|
|
|
IceWolfe24 posted:Unfortunately, it was not a written agreement, but a verbal assessment by them. Nothing legally binding as it is considered speculation on their part. I honestly think they took the first offer handed to them just to be rid of it. If you can prove that they let someone lowball them you may have a case. That said, proving this can be hard.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2010 07:41
|
|
|
invision posted:Yes. There are two stop lights/running lights, and two turn signals, for a total of 4 lighting assemblies. Are you going to listen to what people say this time? Also, whether he's write or wrong you will probably have to hire a lawyer or pay the fine. Enjoy.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2010 01:35
|
|
|
invision posted:A)What? A)I tried to help you last time you came in here. You ignored me. B)Then why is this an issue? Put the lights on your truck.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2010 01:43
|
|
|
Incredulous Red posted:Aiding a fugitive is still illegal regardless of whether or not your married to them. The reporting is irrelevant if she's agreed to meet with and help him. Pretty sure that in Wisconsin there is a 'spouse/family' exemption for aiding a fugitive.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2010 07:47
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:This looks like a 'misrepresentation rendering the contract voidable' civil claim but talk to someone from the US. 'Caveat Emptor' If the seller told him that the car had never been involved in an accident we'd be in business...
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2010 15:25
|
|
|
kalonji posted:Are you a lawyer? or even well versed in the laws of Canada? Go see a lawyer. You don't know what the hell you are talking about and you are in for an entire world of potential hurt. As a board member you owe a fiduciary duty which you may or may not have broken. This is bad. This is 'shouldn't be talking about this with strangers on the internet' bad. Talk to your lawyer, not us.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2010 19:42
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:Was I having a dream, or isn't it completely illegal for cops to set up checkpoints and just pull over X number of cars that are not seen to be performing any violations and request licenses and registrations? I'm not talking about times they set up with five cars in busy areas on summer holidays and they wait for drunks and speeders and whatnot to pull over, I mean pulling over drivers who aren't visibly breaking any laws. Why the hell would this be illegal? This is probably one of the least racist/capricious things that police actually do.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2010 12:39
|
|
|
Petey posted:Two housing questions: Look into Kline v. 1500 Massachusetts Avenue. Where a landlord puts you in a potentially unsafe conditions and renders you unable to secure yourself (by controlling the conditions of your domicile) s/he is potentially liable in tort. Negligence is a beautiful beautiful thing.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2010 08:50
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Eugh, you can sometimes and it depends where you are and what kind of contract. But it's one of those things where you go before a judge on some issue and he says "but the contract says this" and you both say "actually we agreed to change that to this don't worry about it it isn't what we are arguing over". My contracts class was kind of a gigantic joke, but I do remember the professor mentioning a 'parol evidence rule' I'm not sure what the exact content of the rule is and if jurisdictions actually use it, but I thought the jist of the rule was that verbal modifications of written contracts - especially when they directly contradicted written contracts, didn't hold much water (unless we're talking about warranties or something). Again, IANAL (Is there an acronym for "I am just a stupid 1L" yet?) but I think the poster is ok.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2010 13:14
|
|
|
Suppin posted:I recently created a website opposing a new fee from Sprint. Sprint is charging a $10 fee for all customers of one of their new phones, even if they're not in the 4G area, and I've been in contact with Sprint regarding this through email/phone. The first amendment is your friend, you will have to engage in actual malice (namely state something that you know not to be true or that you should reasonably know not to be true). It is sprint's obligation to prove this. On the other hand, Sprint has more lawyers than you can shake a stick at and many people (like myself) would literally gut and skin an orphan for the opportunity to work for them filing spurious lawsuits against people in your situation. It doesn't really matter if the law is on your side when they have a team of 3 lawyers and 4 paralegals filing poo poo at you and forcing you to spend 20-30k in legal fees.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2010 06:09
|
|
|
Chino Rojo posted:This is probably just something I have to let go, but the principle of the thing bothers me. Been an outstanding apartment tenant in Kansas for almost two years, etc. I live in a complex with lots of Section 8 tenants and leaving trash bags around units has been a problem. Where are you? In civilized states landlords can't fine you for anything but late rent payment.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2010 01:35
|
|
|
Alaemon posted:As a general matter (i.e., not state-specific), the threshold for "of sound mind" is Be careful with this, in our state although insane delusions are not considered under testamentary capacity they are a valid challenge in and of themselves. Of course, you have to prove that the ONLY factor in getting written out of the will was the insane delusion. This is hard.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2010 07:07
|
|
|
FreshShoez posted:So in Missouri, the law is that a landlord has to give you a bill with all the things they're spending your initial deposit on (if they don't plan on giving it back entirely) within 30 days of the lease ending. My lease ended 32 days ago, I called my landlord about it, she said she hasn't even walked through the apartment to check yet... and she is going to mail me a bill soon. Aren't I supposed to just get the whole $420 back because of the law? Am I reading something wrong? Should I be a huge douchebag or take her to court or whatever? They've made my last 2 years a living hell, and I honestly just want the entire deposit back. If I take legal action, can they try to sue me for things like replacing the 30 year old carpet or whatever else they try to fabricate? Check your statutes, some states let you recover double damages. Your landlord is an idiot and you may get to enforce idiot tax.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2010 06:30
|
|
|
Hawkgirl posted:This is CA, but I spoke briefly with a lawyer about this issue and he told me that while I'm entitled to triple damages if the landlord is late and won't pay up, I was still responsible for any damage to the place. So the landlord owed me my security deposit back in full, but could also send a bill and expect payment for property damage. Luckily my landlord clearly did not know that and I had no interest in letting them know. Did you do more than $840 in damages? If not you are probably gonna come out ahead. Again, talk to your local lawyer, he knows Californian "Law" and I do not, but around here you can usually recover for the failure to pay the security deposit in a timely fashion.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2010 13:42
|
|
|
Mantis Toboggan. Are you a lawyer or lawstudent? Followup, which school?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2010 01:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 17:04 |
|
|
Dr. Mantis Toboggan posted:Neither; I just know a lot about how the unemployment insurance process works in Wisconsin, which is why I usually comment on anything UI-related that I see. I do unemployment advocacy at UW Law so I figured I might know you.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2010 03:34
|
|