|
Josh Lyman posted:I'm still a little fuzzy on this. Since it's unlikely I can change any sort of legal judgement, why do I have to go to court? Can't I just pay some fine and be done with it, like a speeding or parking ticket? FYI, in my experience (limited), when you go down to Fulton County Municipal Court, the Solicitor will automatically knock your charge down 1 level.
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2012 16:28
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 21:22 |
|
|
Zokari posted:We discovered that it's apparently illegal to rent a house in the town we live in, unless the owner of the house lives there at the same time. We've been renting this house for a little over a month, and just found out yesterday that we may end up having 30 days to move out. I haven't seen it as an ordinance, but I think it's pretty common to have a restriction like that in condo association rules.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2012 18:53
|
|
|
ImperialMartini posted:Why are all of you going for diversity jurisdiction? Depending on the 'contract' signed (especially if it doesn't have a "Works for Hire" provision), then he has copyright in what he did and can sue her under § 1331 jurisdiction. ...after he has a copyright registered with or refused to register by the Library of Congress. $35-ish for the slow boat electronic version, $760 to expedite.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2012 19:38
|
|
|
Incredulous Red posted:I know most states I've been in traffic tickets are usually handled as civil infractions with a preponderance standard, rather than criminal cases. Don't remember if this case was a misdemeanor charge or what. Really? In Georgia all traffic tickets are technically misdemeanors, although bench trials (meaning, iirc, a constitutional max of six months in jail).
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2012 04:13
|
|
|
Thermopyle posted:
It happens all the time (most commonly, siding against an atheist parent), and it's probably unconstitutional. Here's Eugene Volokh on the topic from 2006: http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/custody.pdf And 2009: http://www.volokh.com/2009/10/12/more-discrimination-in-child-custody-cases-against-the-less-religiously-practicing-parent/ And 2011: http://www.volokh.com/2011/03/09/judge-grilling-parent-in-child-custody-case-about-the-parents-secular-humanism/#more-43656
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2012 23:27
|
|
|
JamSessionEin posted:Aside from the obvious hurdles involved in actually getting the PTO to accept the trademark filing, which was what I was initially asking about. It's pretty easy to file for a trademark. The suck bits come in responding to the USPTO when they say "your proposed mark is rejected because: 1) It's a surname 2) It's misdescriptive 3) It's generic 4) It's descriptive and you have no secondary meaning 5) GE (or Ford, or Kellogg, or whathave you) got there first. See also: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/teas/tutorial.jsp Oh, right, how much work: a small amount in setting up the online application form, then nothing for several months, then possibly up to a few days (depending on the rejection and how much you want to fight) in responding to an office action. Put another way, there's a reason a lot of places do all their trademarks in-house.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2012 21:42
|
|
|
Dogen posted:How do you get around SoF if you are most definitely outside of it? (agreed performance date more than year after formation) If the work could have been performed at any time but not later than October 1st, performance within one year was not impossible.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2012 18:16
|
|
|
Patent ownership stays with the inventor in the United States, barring other contractual arrangements. Unless a contract says "I agree to assign" or "I hereby assign," any inventions the inventor conceives and/or reduces to practice during their employment are theirs, subject to shop rights and other things I'm not getting into. Generally, employers keep interns away from those sorts of items, but it certainly shouldn't impact wage standards. Further, the vast majority of patents are a net economic drain on the patent owner. Only every so often is one worth anything. The above is generic observations; I am not your lawyer.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2012 05:25
|
|
|
woozle wuzzle posted:(Actually I guess it has no legal bearing as magic words, but it'd help if the check was ever used against the employer as an admission) In some jurisdictions (mostly in the tax or UCC context), a payment made "under protest" cannot be considered a "voluntary payment" for application of the voluntary payment doctrine, which otherwise has a nasty tendency to stop recovery of an overpayment. See: http://www.cityofsanmateo.org/index.aspx?NID=375 http://www.qcode.us/codes/redondobeach/view.php?topic=5-2-2-5_2_213&frames=on http://www.tax.ny.gov/pubs_and_bulls/orpts/legal_opinions/v6/09.htm http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/article1.htm But see: http://www.lexisnexis.com/community...-agreement.aspx
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2012 04:23
|
|
|
HUGE SPACEKABLOOIE posted:Isn't defamation stupidly hard to prove in the US? Or am I thinking of libel and slander? Defamation is libel and slander. However, the reasons it's normally tough to prove defamation are: 1) For public figures (or figures who have injected themselves into a public controversy), you have to show actual malice; and 2) You generally have to prove actual damages as a result of the defamation. In our hypothetical, however, it appears there could be an accusation of criminal activity (child molestation and/or child porn, based on the "pedophile" bit), and/or accusations tending to harm a profession/business (same) of a private individual without a public controversy. So defamation would be an easier case to prove in this hypothetical than usual.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2013 01:02
|
|
|
Omerta posted:However, let's assume that Project Paperless sues 500 different defendants, all of whom are accused of violating the same patent, in 30 states. Each state would likely consolidate the disparate actions under a single judge PER STATE using some federal procedure rules that I can cite if you care. After getting all of the claims by Project Paperless in front of the same judge, the state judges would issue two procedural rulings: Just one big quibble here. Patent infringement lawsuits are subject to exclusive federal jurisdiction, so they would actually end up consolidated in front of a single federal judge pursuant to the MDL procedures, which wouldn't exactly end up in a stay or an anti-suit injunction.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2013 18:59
|
|
|
Omerta posted:Poor word choice on my part. I assumed all claims were brought in 30 federal courts in different states. From there, some claims could be consolidated; however, you wouldn't be able to consolidate all of the claims unless there was a proper venue for all claims, so some claims would end up stayed if they couldn't be consolidated. An MDL isn't a consolidation, though. You transfer all the cases to a single court, do all the pre-trial stuff there, and then transfer back to the original courts for trial to avoid venue and personal jurisdiction issues. ...if you just wanted to consolidate, you could almost always guarantee venue in Delaware.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2013 19:14
|
|
|
woozle wuzzle posted:Just in general, if the officer says "I clocked you going 82", do not dispute them. Saying "I didn't realize I was going that fast" could work out, but don't tell the officer they were mistaken. Oddly, I did actually manage to dispute a speed with an officer successfully. "I clocked you doing 83." "No, sir!" [look of complete disbelief] "I had the cruise control on 75" [10 miles over the speed limit] The fact that this was Wednesday before Thanksgiving and my wife was in the car with our dog in her lap helped a lot, I'm sure, and I wouldn't have given great odds on it working, but hey.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2013 18:46
|
|
|
OneEightHundred posted:So, this Mississippi ricin case got me wondering something why the charges didn't include framing someone else for it, but for some reason an answer to that is really hard to find: What can you actually be charged with for framing someone? Or is that a civil tort? In the process of framing someone for a crime, I'm pretty sure you're going to obstruct justice. e;f,b.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2013 21:10
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Will do. Finally, "Patent Prosecution." Is it just what it sounds like? Enforcing your patent claim against others, and defending your patent claim in PTO court? Or is this a separate part of the process of applying for a patent that I'm not aware of? Asked a different way, would the Patent Application process be analogous to preparing and filing one's taxes, while Patent Prosecution would be challenging the IRS in Tax Court? The process of applying for a patent, dealing with the USPTO, and so on and so forth to have a patent issued is known as "patent prosecution" for reasons that are still unclear to me. Enforcing your patent is "patent litigation." The same split applies for trademark prosecution versus trademark litigation.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2013 20:41
|
|
|
Any of you guys experienced with student loan settlements / workouts? A buddy of mine in Chicago is looking for an attorney recommendation or at least a starting point, and I was realizing I didn't really even have a clue as to what specialty to recommend he look at from the Chicago bar referral service (bankruptcy, I guess)?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2013 19:03
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:I think the issue of damages is pretty difficult to prove for most people, too. No proof needed for defamation per se, of course.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2014 23:08
|
|
|
Oh My Science posted:I just quit my job, without giving notice, and my employer threatened to sue me for "incomplete projects" which were never explicitly part of my contract / hiring package. Having never encountered this before I don't know how to respond to this. Some key points taken from the OP: AreYouIn posted:This thread is for your questions that involve legal advice of some sort. This thread is very helpful for explaining general legal concepts that might apply to your circumstances.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2014 20:19
|
|
|
woozle wuzzle posted:Fun fact: Virginia was the last state to fuse courts of equity and common law. Prior to that, they had to be plead and tried separately. The merger occurred waaaaaay back in ye olde 2006... Fun fact: Georgia's State Court (as opposed to the Superior Court) and Georgia's Court of Appeals (as opposed to the Supreme Court) in 2014 can't hear anything that sounds in equity (including, hilariously, all divorces, which appeal straight to the Supreme Court). Georgia's law of contract remedies defines some relief items as "legal" that other states consider "equitable" as a result... BgRdMchne posted:How does it work in Louisiana? Same as anywhere else; it's all statutory. Although I should note that Louisiana, as a state, adopted the criminal common law of the United States from day 1, while keeping their civil code for civil matters.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
euphronius posted:It applies then. Crime-fraud exception?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2014 03:15
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:America no longer has courts of equity . This is not really true. More accurately, most* court systems have merged law and equity. *Georgia has multiple (magistrate, state) courts that cannot handle equity at all; if you need equity, you have to go to the superior court. And all equitable appeals go straight to the Supreme Court, bypassing the Court of Appeals. As a result, Georgia's concept of what is a legal remedy is broader than most states'. GA Constitution, Article VI, Section IV, Paragraph I posted:The superior courts shall have jurisdiction in all cases, except as otherwise provided in this Constitution. They shall have exclusive jurisdiction over trials in felony cases, except in the case of juvenile offenders as provided by law; in cases respecting title to land; in divorce cases; and in equity cases. ulmont fucked around with this message at 05:10 on Aug 2, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
Centripetal Horse posted:Does a not-particularly-official, non-notarized document like a suicide note have any weight? If a person dies without a will, but leaves some sort of written document divvying up his stuff, will that document be ignored? I'm not talking about land, or brokerage accounts, or anything. Just simple poo poo, like personal possessions, maybe a car and a bank account. The answer depends on the jurisdiction and whether or not the written document is handwritten. Look at the Holographic Will. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_will
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
Queen Elizatits posted:Personal opinion question. Are Home Owners Associations pretty universally terrible unless you are an angry litigious old fucker with too much time on his hands? I don't want to live in one but people keep trying to tell me they aren't that bad. They probably won't bother you if you keep your head down and are white. God forbid you want to have a sign for a political candidate or get a satellite dish, though - then you're hosed.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
euphronius posted:I'm in a case now where petitioner is claiming wife had undue influence over testator husband. What's the endgame there - invalidate the will, go to intestate succession, and the wife gets everything?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2014 02:50
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:In Texas, both libel and slander fall under the general heading of the tort of "defamation." If you're suing someone for libel or slander, you're suing them for Defamation. The practical difference between the two here is that libel has a specific code section dedicated to it, and is easier to plead and prove. To recover for slander, you have to plead and prove "special damages" which are hard to prove/usually related to losing your job, or "defamation per se" where someone has falsely accused you of breaking a law. In Georgia, there are separate code sections for libel or slander. The major differences are (1) as you noted, slander requires special damages or defamation per se (Georgia retains the traditional formulation where accusing someone of loving sheep or having AIDS is enough), and (2) libel (or news radio/tv slander) can't recover anything other than damages if a retraction was not requested (or if a retraction was requested and made). EDIT: Louisiana, by contrast, seems to just have kept the common-law formulation for defamation, but unified the concepts: quote:By definition, a statement is defamatory if it tends to harm the reputation of another so as to lower the person in the estimation of the community, deter others from associating or dealing with the person, or otherwise expose the person to contempt or ridicule. Id. A successful claimant in a defamation action must establish the following elements: (1) a false and defamatory statement concerning another; (2) an unprivileged publication to a third party; (3) fault (negligence or greater) on the part of the publisher; and (4) resulting injury. ulmont fucked around with this message at 18:23 on Oct 21, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2014 18:17
|
|
|
Robo Boogie Bot posted:I'm just curious about whether I'm hearing the whole truth from someone who is known for being ultra dramatic and difficult to work with. Robo Boogie Bot posted:Is it entirely impossible to negotiate a time for his dad to come get his stuff while his mom is out of the house while the restraining orders are in place? Mom, who is somewhat delusional and unstable at the moment, claims her lawyer says it's completely not allowed. My boyfriend and I are very curious about if she's telling the truth or not. http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/dv110.pdf http://www.courts.state.co.us/Forms/PDF/JDF%20398T%20Temporary%20Protection%20Order%20Rev%20(FINAL)%20R6%2013.pdf You can also imagine a restraining order (also like the above) with sufficient exceptions written in to allow your boyfriend's dad to come get his stuff etc. You can also imagine your boyfriend's mom's lawyer legitimately answering "completely not allowed" to whatever question your boyfriend's mom is asking, which may or may not be anywhere related to the facts. etc. etc. etc. If you wanted a real answer to the question, of course, you'd have to engage a third lawyer to review all the papers...
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2014 18:52
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:Since you're an adult who earns less than a thousand dollars a month and are presumably judgment proof, you can refuse to pay and probably nothing will happen to you but some annoying phone calls, maybe a small debt suit. Garnishment sucks, though. On another note: anybody know anything about restraining order procedure in Louisiana? Curious as to whether someone (I know you assholes won't believe this, but not me) served with a TRO and a notice to show cause is risking a bench warrant if they skip the hearing, or just very likely to end up with a permanent restraining order as a result (i.e., more of a default judgment scenario).
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 21:54
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:Yup. So does not getting paid for your work (not that the lowly paramedics didn't get paid, but still). Oh, sure. I was just thinking there might be additional consequences (like only getting 75% of your paycheck) for ignoring the matter.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 23:13
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:But seriously though, your friend needs a lawyer bad. woozle wuzzle posted:In addition to spending the night in the pokey for the show cause, just having a TRO floating around out there is bad news. It basically means they'll end up arrested at the front of a Walmart without knowing why, spending the night in the pokey.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2014 23:28
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:Now, who has a question about their lease?! Just for you: what is the duty of care that a landlord owes to a tenant (call them "A") in a multi-unit dwelling with shared common area regarding verifying that another tenant (call them "B") is not criminally insane before letting them rent a unit? I'll take a 50-state survey response, thx.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2015 23:08
|
|
|
jassi007 posted:even if your magic boils disease would qualify as a disability, though it isn't because boils have never been a disabling condition This part isn't really true. The SSA talks about a number of skin conditions that qualify: http://www.ssa.gov/disability/professionals/bluebook/8.00-Skin-Adult.htm#8_01 Similarly, and I quote the VA Board here: quote:The criteria for a 60 percent disability rating for boils on the buttocks have been met.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2015 04:00
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:Seventeen statutory factors holy hell. Louisiana's "best interest of the child" only has 12 statutory factors, but makes up for it by having all of them be vague as hell: quote:Art. 134. Factors in determining child's best interest
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
euphronius posted:PA has 16 for custody and #16 is a real doozy.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2015 22:50
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:It looks like non-competes used to be unenforceable in Georgia. It used to be a real crapshoot, because they were either (rarely) enforced in full or (more commonly) struck down in full. With the constitutional amendment, the courts are now required to scale back an unenforceable non-compete to something that is reasonable, and then enforce that scaled back version. The OP should still talk to an attorney, though (OP, PM me and I can send some links to people who might be good starting points even if not necessarily the final answerers of your questions).
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2015 22:45
|
|
|
DNova posted:edit: Paying out to defend a case that has no legs is much different than being disbarred or losing your license or whatever career-ending consequences you are afraid of. I'd really like to hear answers to the other questions too. There has to be something if you all feel this way. DNova posted:Ok but remove the idea that I was given extremely wrong advice. The realistic scenario in this thread is that a well-meaning attorney gives some or an opinion that may not be 100% applicable in my location or situation. Is the ethics committee going to sanction anyone for that? Rule 1.1 posted:A lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client. Competent representation as used in this Rule means that a lawyer shall not handle a matter which the lawyer knows or should know to be beyond the lawyer's level of competence without associating another lawyer who the original lawyer reasonably believes to be competent to handle the matter in question. Competence requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation. DNova posted:Again, this is strangers on the internet. Not clients. 196 Ga. App. 318, 319 posted:an attorney-client relationship may be found to exist where no fee is paid and the payment of a fee does not necessarily demonstrate the existence of the relationship. All that is necessary is a ‘reasonable belief’ on the part of the would-be client that he or she was being represented by the attorney. DNova posted:You might not even be an attorney; you haven't provided your credentials or whatever. You could be a fake. EDIT: oh, god, yeah, the anti-moonlighting and conflicts-extending firmwide would totally make any fuckup here career ending (or at least current employment ending). ulmont fucked around with this message at 18:30 on May 4, 2015 |
|
#
¿
May 4, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
DNova posted:But is that really it? Be conservative in your communication? If you interpret this extremely broadly, then you should not post a single word in this thread or in any legal opinion thread. If you interpret it with some common sense, then I think you can stop stressing about being disbarred over giving honest and well-intentioned advice here. Ok, back up. 1) Do you accept that establishing an attorney-client relationship with a stranger on the Internet could result in an attorney being fired for violating firm procedures regarding intake of clients? 2) Do you normally gamble aggressively with your job? joat mon posted:Which is also what attorneys on SA would be doing by giving legal advice to goons in states where the attorney is not a member of that state's bar.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
joat mon posted:The OK attorney could move to appear pro hac vice, which would give GA (or at least a judge barred in GA) a heads up as to what was happening and an opportunity to say no. Oh, sure, but both OK and GA have the more or less standard 5.5, which has a number of carveouts for temporary practice of law across the borders (and a pro hac vice is specifically one of them).
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
BgRdMchne posted:Ha, I've known more than one attorney to get suspended without automatic reinstatement for doing stupid, dangerous, unethical, and risky poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2015 04:08
|
|
|
Kalman posted:"Not less than" means "at least". I don't see why you think those sections don't apply. I'm pretty sure he's saying none of the holdover provisions apply because he has a shiny new 12-month lease just signed in February.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 21:22 |
|
|
Kalman posted:"At any time during the fixed term, notwithstanding subsection (3) of this section, the landlord or the tenant may terminate the tenancy without cause by giving the other notice in writing not less than 30 days prior to the specified ending date for the fixed term or not less than 30 days prior to the date designated in the notice for the termination of the tenancy, whichever is later." You're right. Sweet Jesus, that's an impressive termination for convenience clause by statute.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2015 14:11
|
|