|
Cage posted:Yay, thanks! They didn't know why I didn't receive it yet but now I have it in my possession! I think the exact page you were looking at can help you (and if not, look here: https://www.nycourts.gov/courthelp/AfterCourt/collectionBasics.shtml ) Basically, you probably want to look into either a stop withdrawal notice at their bank or a land lien if they own property. (The other options require you to pay fees to an enforcement officer which probably isn’t worth it, though if you’re just going for spite it’s hard to beat wage garnishment where you’re getting some of the money they work for AND letting their boss know they’re a deadbeat.)
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2024 03:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 18:54 |
|
|
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
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:So the greater of seven years from the event or until the victim reaches 55? The linked page explains it: “Adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse have until age 55 or seven years from the time that they became aware that their trauma is linked with financial harm (a process called “discovery”)”
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2024 22:04
|
|
|
Muir posted:The dick pill bird seems to be independently created, so there doesn’t seem to be a copyright case. As for trademark, Bird With Big Dick doesn’t seem to be using the image in connection with commerce of any kind, let alone the specific goods and services classes around dick pills, so no issue there either. Even if the dick pill guys had seen his username and decided “ooh that’s a great image for our boner pills!” it would still not be a copyright issue. At most, BWBD could conceivably try to claim the phrase BWBD (though short phrases are not typically copyrightable so that’s an unlikely claim to start with); he doesn’t get to own the idea of birds with giant schlongs, only his particular expression of that idea.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2024 22:34
|
|
|
Skunkduster posted:That's a possibility that I hadn't considered. Thanks! Hire a trademark lawyer to search out if there is a mark and who owns it, if you’re serious about this.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2024 04:34
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:This seems extremely excessive It is, but it's also standard for a federal grand jury.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2024 04:42
|
|
|
BigHead posted:It's the district in which you live, not the circuit. Like eastern district of Texas or northern district of California. Alaska has one district, so if you live anywhere in Alaska you can get called to serve. Arizona has one, Virginia has two California has four, and so on. And beyond that, it’s typically (always?) the division of the district which you live in, which basically corresponds to “nearest federal courthouse.”
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2024 08:43
|
|
|
Jean-Paul Shartre posted:There was no federal judicial branch per se under the Articles of Confederation. Congress itself was to be a final court for any dispute between states, with the Articles envisioning the legislature basically appoint learned lawyers as “judges” (more like what we’d think of today as arbitrators) to this court which is more of a legislative subcommittee. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Reports,_volume_1 It’s a bunch of PA state court cases.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2024 18:41
|
|
|
abravemoose posted:I was hoping for a questions about law thread since this one is more focused on questions of... legality or legal service? but I'm trying to put together information on states with filial responsibility laws for the elder care thread in the BFC forum. And it's hard to find answers through the major search engines. Ads, SEO from firms for elder law and the like. I’d probably start by using Google Scholar to look for an article or note that has done a 50 state survey on the topic.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2024 22:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 18:54 |
|
|
Leperflesh posted:parody is a legal exception to copyright, trademark only applies where there's the potential for confusion by customers, and cops are the government and you get to be critical of the government Also, trademark has its own fair use exceptions, in particular for nominative fair use - when you use a mark not as a source identifier for your product, but rather to refer to the trademarked item itself.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2024 23:14
|
|