Legal Questions: I believe the problem is that they need a well, actually

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > Legal Questions: I believe the problem is that they need a well, actually

«‹›2 »

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

entris posted:

Well I think the real issue is the title issue. It will be hard to sell the house because there won't be clear title - someone will have to probate that will at some point, unless you and your brothers plan to keep the house forever and ever amen.

Title should be held by the dead guy, right? Then it's just a matter of forcing it through probate - a buyer from the estate would take clean title to the property. If the brothers want to buy it, they can go ahead.

# ¿ Feb 8, 2011 22:42

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 23, 2024 17:47

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

I am not sure that this is as open and shut as you seem to believe it is. Did you write the plugins? I think "layout," "style," and "idea" are all a bit too ephemeral to warrant copyright protection.

# ¿ Feb 28, 2011 17:40

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

Chouzan posted:

I have a rather simple question... How do motions and briefs work? Are they usually filed together? Do you have to include a brief in support when you file a motion? I'm in Idaho, if it matters.

It depends on local rules. Some places allow just a motion, some require a motion and memo in support of motion.

# ¿ Mar 10, 2011 23:42

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

TheBestDeception posted:

This was totally a case in copyright.

I forgot the answer Maybe EvilWeasel knows

If you don't repeat the questions, I can't imagine them having a claim.

# ¿ Mar 24, 2011 15:25

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

poxin posted:

A "friend" and I signed a 13 month lease for an apartment. He has not paid a single dime for the duration of our stay for anything(admin & app fees, rent, electric and bills). He's just decided to skip town and not pay for anything.

Would this be something I could take to small claims? My tenant says that in order for him to get out of the lease, I would have to sign something as well. Looking for any advice in this situation.

Edit: I live in Raleigh, NC

Generally speaking, you are liable for the entire amount to your landlord, but yes, you can sue the guy for his share.

See if there is a local tenant union. They may have locality-specific information.

# ¿ Mar 24, 2011 18:02

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

psydude posted:

I'm looking for some advice on landlord/tenant law in Virginia.

I'm a reservist leaving for a 4 month TDY at Ft. Leonard Wood for training at the end of June, so I'll need to break my lease per the Virginia Residential Landlord and Tenant Act. The issue I'm running into, however, is concerning a rent "credit" that my landlord has given me. Essentially, for signing a one year lease they gave us a "credit" equal to 105 dollars per month off of our base rent contingent upon our occupying the apartment for the full 12 months. Because I'll be terminating it early, they want to back-charge me for the 5 months of the lease and charge me an early termination fee equal to two months' rent. Per the VRLTA �55-248.21:1, the landlord may not "charge any liquidates damages" against a client who is breaking the lease due to a military obligation. Should I consider taking them to small claims court to fight the rent credit and the termination fee, or is the leaglese confusing me?

Early termination fee = liquidated damages.

But, the way I read, they are authorized to charge liquidated damages (of one month or one half month rent) if you have lived there for less than a year.

What does your lease specifically say about the "credit"?

# ¿ Apr 7, 2011 21:59

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

Arri posted:

I have a question about Arizona repossession law, specifically as it pertains to vehicles.

I was laid off a couple months ago and have very little money coming in. My car was repossessed because I wasn't able to make the payments. The vehicle still has my personal belongings in it. The repossession company wants to charge me a "processing" fee for me to obtain my personal belongings from the vehicle, and they will not release the belongings unless I pay this fee. I want to know if it is legal for them to hold my personal belongings that are not upgrades to the vehicle, nor included in the lien.

Have you tried calling your lender to bitch about the repo company? Based on some forums I browsed, it sounds like it worked in a couple instances.

# ¿ Apr 14, 2011 22:34

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

Loopyface posted:

If there's another party present at a attorney/client meeting, are they covered under privilege? Not an employee of the attorney, maybe a spouse or relative of the client.

Assume the answer is no, and don't meet with your attorney in the presence of third parties.

# ¿ Apr 28, 2011 15:35

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

Recycle Bin posted:

This is in California

My fiance and I have been renting a room in a house for about 2 years now. Over a period of roughly 3-4 months in 2010 we ran in to some financial trouble. Our landlord was accepting of the situation, and allowed us to pay late and over several payments. We payed with multiple checks from multiple accounts as well as (yikes!) paying in cash from time to time. There were no receipts as we were all on friendly terms with one another (a mistake, I know). My fiance and I kept notes of how much we owed and were never more than 30 days behind on any given rent check. By December of '10 we were back on our feet and paying regularly.

We're getting ready to move out next month and the landlord has informed us we're short ~$1000 from the previous year. She notes the checks we've given her during that time but makes no mention of the many cash payments that were made. She seems to be pretending they never happened. We're trying to get things squared away with her, but I just want to get an idea of where we might stand legally here. These supposed shortfalls were from almost a year ago and she's made no mention of them up until now, as we're getting ready to move out.

Are there any e-mails or anything between you and your landlord about your balance, or the cash payments, or anything that would help you?

# ¿ May 1, 2011 22:51

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

Recycle Bin posted:

Nothing substantial. While we made sure to keep track of what we owed, we would frequently try to double-check with the landlord (verbally) that we were current, but she would never give an answer one way or the other ("I'll need to look over my records" she'd say, and we'd never hear about it again). Only a couple of e-mails where the landlord mentions offhand that she's been "very understanding of [our] situation" but no dollar amounts were ever given. At one point she had said that it was our responsibility to keep track of rent payments but, again, this was all verbal.

You have your notes though? Are the notes dated at all? Do the notes match up with her check records? Contemporaneous documents are quite helpful. Sounds like it would be a close call if it went to court.

# ¿ May 1, 2011 23:09

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

Advice posted:

Posted my own thread about this before someone reminded me all legal questions go here in the megathread.

"Okay, so this almost belongs in E/N, but I need advice more than someone to listen, I need to know if I should lawyer up. A little backstory:

I've lived with this girl for the last year or so, and it's been pretty chaotic. Without going into too much detail, she abuses drugs and is frequently living on the edge as far as bill payments and things go. We're usually pretty good friends, but she has a couple episodes in our past where she is completely venemous. Just destructive and threatening (usually under the effects of one or more substances), and I know before we get into it, I'm cutting off all ties with her when our lease is up, and hopefully I've learned my lesson.

The most recent of these destruct-a-thons had her picked up for a DUI, losing her license in the process. Since my car had recently blown the transmission and I don't have nearly enough cash to fix it, she had no problem with me driving her car as long as I took her to work. This system kept up for the last few months, with me doing 100% of the driving, taking her to work when I could and using the car to take myself to work as well. If our schedules clashed, she was forced to find another ride to work or call in. (Without getting into details, it's fine for her to call in pretty frequently, her job is under-the-table[not drug dealing or prostitution]) This inconvenience coupled with depression caused her to spiral further downward, to the point where she didn't go to work for a couple months straight. Bills piled up, and her car (which she's about 25% paid off for) is three months past due. The repo men have been alerted(I'm not sure how this system works) and we're expecting any day for the car to be gone.

It's been a particularly rough couple weeks, and she's considering moving to Hawaii to pursue a job offer there, where she also would have a place to stay and wouldn't need a car. This has prompted her to consider ditching the lease on our apartment (three months left!) and the payments on her car and just fly away to Hawaii. She doesn't care about her credit or anything of that sort.

After talking to her mother(co-signer on the lease, and less than thrilled about having her credit ruined as well) today, I can hear them discussing "that guy who's been driving my car for three months" and "it should be his responsibility", with the mother adding "if we have to take him to small claims court we will, we'll garnish his wages, I've done it before". What kind of case would she have? What sort of responsibility could I possibly have in this situation? Do I need to consult a lawyer?

Thanks in advance.

Ninja edit: Her mother is co-signed on the car, not on the apartment. We're alone on the apartment."

I don't think you would be on the hook for the car. If she bails, the landlord can probably seek full rent from you, and you would then have a claim against her for her half.

# ¿ May 5, 2011 23:38

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

Alchenar posted:

The reference will probably be under oath so don't lie about anything. Other than that there shouldn't be anything bad that could happen to you.

Yeah, this was what I was going to say - just don't lie.

# ¿ May 6, 2011 22:48

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

Pay for the repair, and either view it as a $500 lesson, or take him to small claims court.

Is there damage to his car? If you take him to small claims court, see if you can snap a shot of his car.

# ¿ May 17, 2011 20:03

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

LOLBBQ posted:

TOPIC: Copyright Infringement
LOCATION: Online/AK

Because of what the OP says about posting information on being sued I typed up a general example of what's going on with my Mom. This isn't exaggerated at all, which is the sad part, do huge companies really do poo poo like this?

Say I finger paint some pretty colors on a canvas and decide to sell it online with my other paintings (Sunrise Inspired, Sour Apple Inspired, Winter Inspired). In the title I put �Sunset Inspired� because, well, it reminds me of a sunset being blue/purple and all. A few days later I receive a notice from a huge company saying they have filed a copyright infringement complaint against me because my sunset painting has the same name as a popular movie franchise they own. My painting has no references whatsoever to their movies, that I haven�t even watched, but according to them I�m trying to use their movie�s name to sling my wares for a bigger profit. I didn't finger paint any of the movie's characters, locations, scenes, themes, furniture, rocks, hair or so on. Just a sunset looking finger painting.

Honestly, that's it to the situation on my Mom's side. Besides getting a lawyer can my Mom take any steps to have this resolved herself?

What sort of complaint? A DMCA takedown notice, or an actual lawsuit?

# ¿ May 26, 2011 17:14

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

LOLBBQ posted:

From reading the notice she just forwarded me I�m guessing the take down notice. The movie company contacted the website my Mom was selling her items on and that website forwarded her the complaint. The website also removed the item and threatened to close her account if she relists it, even under a different name. As of now I guess it�s done with as long as she doesn�t relist the item. The actual item was a purple beaded necklace with silver drop charms and blue gems, it reminded my Mom of the night sky so in the title she put twilight inspired. In the notice is stated that the LLC owns the terms twilight, new moon and eclipse. Should she take down the silver bracelet she has on another site she titled Eclipse (it has a moon charm on it)? My Mom has hundreds of pieces, not just these moon/night sky inspired ones.

This is probably trademark, not copyright. And they very well might have Twilight trademarked for use with jewelry (I found a bunch of clothing accessory trademarks after some very brief searching, though not specifically covering jewelry).

Assuming they have trademark rights in jewelry, if she had not put Twilight in the title, there probably would not have been any problems. I think she would have been fine if, in the description, she had said something about the piece being inspired by a twilight sky or something like that.

e: To be clear, the problem is the use of the term twilight, not selling something inspired by a twilight sky - the web site's threat to ban your mother is basically just an overreaction, if they mean to forbid her from even selling the piece.

Wyatt posted:

Trademarks are not protected as broadly, but are resricted to marks (naming, logos, etc.) within a trade (in this case, books, films, maybe as broad as entertainment media in general).

With all the product marketing they've done, they have rights in a ton of poo poo. Luggage, backpacks, band-aids, belt buckles, basically all clothing categories. I didn't do an exhaustive search to see whether jewelry was covered.

e: And I don't think this is actually a DMCA takedown. Those are only for copyright violations, no?

gvibes fucked around with this message at 19:29 on May 26, 2011

# ¿ May 26, 2011 19:25

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

PancakeParty posted:

I am releasing a video game late next month. I'll also officially be hiring a marketing director soon.

I'm originally from Los Angeles, CA -- for the past 8 months I've been living in Fredericksburg, VA. In September I've moving back to LA.

So I'm not sure if I should register now while I'm in Virginia, or wait until I get back to LA. Are there pros and cons to registering my LLC in either place? Better tax benefits, etc?

Ultimately, Los Angeles will be the basis of operations. I'm never planning on coming back to Virginia once I'm out of here.

Should I go with Virginia or California?

I would say just hire a California lawyer so, once you move, your local corporate lawyer would (presumably) be knowledgeable regarding the California law.

# ¿ Jun 17, 2011 02:52

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

srsly posted:

The paperwork is remarkably simple. It's like one page, to begin. All you need is an agent for service of process that meets the requirements. I don't know why you'd fly anywhere for it.

If your LLC paperwork is only one page, something is probably wrong.

# ¿ Jun 17, 2011 15:58

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

TheWordOfTheDayIs posted:

In my state, the bare minimum filing required to form an LLC is a one-page Articles of Incorporation.

And if that's all you have, it's a problem, I thought.

Don't you need an operating agreement?

# ¿ Jun 17, 2011 17:57

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

nm posted:

You need a lawyer in California. Community property's a bitch.
If it is community property, yes, it is 50/50. Is it community property? That's harder.

I am pretty clueless, but wouldn't it be 50/50 on the increase in value since the marriage?

# ¿ Aug 26, 2011 19:23

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

Melting Eggs posted:

Hypothetical question:

Someone downloads a copyrighted song without authorization. The individual is then notified by the RIAA of copyright infringement with intent to sue. They then delete the song.

Assuming the deletion could be proved, could that be constructed as obstruction of justice, or do the courts need to be involved before the deletion is considered obstruction of justice? Can obstruction of justice be applied in civil cases?

In the civil context, it is referred to as spoliation, and yeah, it would probably apply in this case. Courts don't need to be involved, there just needs to be some sort of likelihood of litigation or something like that (not sure of the exact standard). Once there is that likelihood of litigation, you have to preserve relevant poo poo.

# ¿ Sep 9, 2011 01:16

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

zachol posted:

What if someone downloads a song, deletes it, and then a while later receives an RIAA notice? If it went to the courts, could the fact that a song was downloaded but then could not be found on the computer be evidence of spoliation? How could this be distinguished from someone who deleted the song after getting a notice, and from someone who never downloaded the song at all?

Well, proving spoliation is typically somewhat difficult. They are the one that would have to show that you knew about the lawsuit and deleted poo poo anyways.

But if someone does not and should not have known about a pending lawsuit, then based on my understanding of spoliation, they are in the clear. Now, maybe they would have a case if you knew they were suing everybody who did X, and you did X. I don't know.

But my knowledge in the area is really superficial, so I am probably wrong.

# ¿ Sep 9, 2011 14:15

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

I personally don't think a $3500 retainer is at all absurd for a contested custody case. For even a cheap attorney, that's like 15-20 hours of time.

# ¿ Sep 28, 2011 18:48

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 23, 2024 17:47

gvibes: Jan 18, 2010; Leading us to the promised land (i.e., one tournament win in five years)

It is definitely shittily written in a number of different respects. What are your primary problems with the thing?

# ¿ Oct 14, 2011 00:30

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Ask/Tell > Legal Questions: I believe the problem is that they need a well, actually

«‹›2 »