|
LuciferMorningstar posted:My question relates to U.S. immigration law, and I'm hoping someone out there knows of a creative solution that I have been unable to find. Her parents can file for her as their unmarried daughter. I know you mentioned that the wait times were really long on this, which is true. Do it anyway! The wait time right now is eight years. That sucks. You know what the wait time if if they don't file? Forever. More importantly, if they file the petition now, when they file for citizenship the petition would be converted into the new category, which has a shorter wait time and she would get to keep her spot in line. So this should be her definite backup. My question is where is the attorney in all this? He hosed up the paperwork and let her age out? That is huge. I have worked at two different immigration firms, and at both the policy was that if we screwed up, we swallowed all the work and costs to make good on the situation. How is this guy not giving her all the free help he can offer to fix this?
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2012 15:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 04:36 |
|
|
I like to imagine that the immigration question guy REALLY wants an answer that isn't marriage. She's like "the only way to clear this up is if I got married... hint hint...", and he's typing out the question here as fast as his fingers can fly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2012 15:21
|
|
Ashcans posted:Her parents can file for her as their unmarried daughter. I know you mentioned that the wait times were really long on this, which is true. Do it anyway! The wait time right now is eight years. That sucks. You know what the wait time if if they don't file? Forever. More importantly, if they file the petition now, when they file for citizenship the petition would be converted into the new category, which has a shorter wait time and she would get to keep her spot in line. So this should be her definite backup. 1. You're definitely right about the filing, and it's something that is being pursued. The problem comes in to the extent that she'll get her master's degree before that comes through, though, which still leaves us in the position of getting married or having her go back to Germany to sit around for a few years. I realize it's probably wishful thinking, but it would be really nice if there were some method that could work here that most people simply don't know about. I don't begrudge anyone who can take advantage of Obama's executive order or the Dream Act (if it ever passes), but god drat, why can't people like my girlfriend get in on that, too? She's graduated from a US high school, a US college, speaks English better than most native speakers... Very frustrating. 2. The attorney, as I understand it, basically up and left and the company didn't care enough to track him down. It's my assumption that he realized he screwed up a lot of stuff and decided it would be better to run than to try and fix his mistakes. EDIT quote:I like to imagine that the immigration question guy REALLY wants an answer that isn't marriage. She's like "the only way to clear this up is if I got married... hint hint...", and he's typing out the question here as fast as his fingers can fly. No, not at all. I've been with her for over two years and this is the third or fourth time we've considered getting married. Everyone is pretty cool with it. It's more of a matter of us preferring to wait so that we can have a nice wedding. We're college students. We don't have a lot of money, our parents don't have a lot of money. It would be nice if our marriage didn't boil down to signing papers in front of a judge and then getting drunk on cheap liquor afterwards.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2012 15:26
|
|
|
When your girlfriend finishes her Masters she can apply for Optional Practical Training, which will let her remain in the US and work for a year. She should talk to her International Student office about this. If she is in a STEM field and is working with an appropriate employer, she could be eligible for an additional 17month extension on that as well. What she should do is try and use her OPT time to find an employer who will file an H1B petition for her. Its not an immigration petition, but it will let her remain in the US and work for up to six years, and most employers that will petition for an H1B will also start an employment-based green card process. I hope her dad is raking his HR over the coals for hiring some lovely cut-and-run attorney who hosed up his daughters status. Maybe they'll feel bad enough to help out?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2012 15:41
|
|
Ashcans posted:When your girlfriend finishes her Masters she can apply for Optional Practical Training, which will let her remain in the US and work for a year. She should talk to her International Student office about this. If she is in a STEM field and is working with an appropriate employer, she could be eligible for an additional 17month extension on that as well. I wish he would have done so, but it's too far in the past to be of any relevance now. I am, unfortunately, late to this party. I also have to say that her parents aren't exactly stellar, because the case is exactly as it appears. Her parents effectively watched her get separated from them in immigration proceedings and said "Sucks for you, good luck navigating through this." Looks like there aren't any good solutions here, beyond what we already knew. Thanks for your help, everyone.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2012 15:50
|
|
|
terrorist ambulance posted:I'd try to get someone to check or monitor your mail at least occasionally. If you're tough to get ahold of, it's entirely possible you could get served by sub service via regular mail or something silly and end up getting sued and losing your case because you were out of the country and didn't even know about it. That's an extreme (and unlikely) example, but basically your interests could be prejudiced by not checking your mail at all for months on end. Get it forwarded to your mom or something while you're out of the country Point taken. I've gone ahead and set up my mail to be forwarded to my parents every week so they can keep an eye out for any pesky government things that happen to turn up. On this note, is there anything else people would recommend I should do now that I am technically homeless (no permanent residence)? Mail is taken care of but I'm wondering about car title, drivers license or liability insurance. If anyone foresees problems that I'm not thinking of, I would really appreciate hearing about it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2012 19:58
|
|
|
You should just cancel the mail, it's a sham: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hox-ni8geIw As far as permanent residence, you're always a legal resident of somewhere. You just want control over where. So maybe just claim it's your parents address, or something.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2012 20:45
|
|
|
woozle wuzzle posted:As far as permanent residence, you're always a legal resident of somewhere. Could the legal minds here expand on this for curiosity? For a box under the bridge hobo, what is his legal residence? Say the last known address is occupied by someone else legally? How does this work? I mean the government wouldn't list a hobo's address as 123 Under the Bridge St. right?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2012 20:59
|
|
|
Here's a question: I had a year lease going through August 1, 2011 to July 31, 2012. In July I started communicating with the building manager via text message, as I was working out of state and didn't have access to most forms of communication. In my texts, there is an exchange*, verbatim: Me: In August the lease becomes month to month correct? Manager: Correct. Okay, great. I get back to my place in late July, and have papers waiting for me to extend the lease. There are two options, go month to month with a $20 rent increase to $945/mo or sign a 12 month lease extension and get a discount to $900/mo. I was planning on moving out by the end of the year, so of course it'd make no sense to sign a 12 month lease. I turned in that paper, and soon after received the paperwork in the mail and signed it and sent it in. Now that I want to move out, they're informing me I extended my lease through July, 2013. The PDF of my lease extension apparently says so and I didn't look close enough when they switched the contract terms on the final paperwork copy. Thus, the contract I signed says I signed a 12 month extension. Even though it's at the $945/mo rate. loving wonderful. So of course they want to hold me responsible for rent through the end of the lease, even though I want to move out ASAP. This is Seattle, WA for clarification. Do I have any recourse? *I still have this text saved, should it matter
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2012 21:03
|
|
|
wheez the roux posted:Here's a question: Check the lease, is there a clause that says something to the effect that any prior oral or written communications regarding the terms of the contract not mentioned in the actual contract are not valid or to be considered?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2012 21:26
|
|
|
Do you have any paperwork with the correct terms saved? Any letters with options and prices listed? If not, anything you signed off on will trump a text message. Live and learn not to sign anything without reading it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2012 21:29
|
|
bigpolar posted:Do you have any paperwork with the correct terms saved? Any letters with options and prices listed? If not, anything you signed off on will trump a text message. Live and learn not to sign anything without reading it. There is absolutely no way I could afford to pay for the lease. I'm moving out mostly because I can't afford to live here anymore. Is their dirty loving swap-out of terms on contracts to get me to sign something I didn't want seriously going to bankrupt me? I'm going through to see if I have the paperwork.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2012 21:35
|
|
|
wheez the roux posted:There is absolutely no way I could afford to pay for the lease. I'm moving out mostly because I can't afford to live here anymore. Is their dirty loving swap-out of terms on contracts to get me to sign something I didn't want seriously going to bankrupt me? I'm going through to see if I have the paperwork. They don't offer any way to break the lease? Try to find something to back up what you are saying. If you end up in court with nothing to support your story, the judge is going to figure that increasing rent is normal, that you are lying, and your credit will be ruined for a few years. If you have any assets like a bank account that you paid rent out of, they may be able to garnish them. Bottom line, either find something to support your story, get busy negotiating a lease termination with your landlord, or get ready to have your credit tanked over a debt. If you can find anything to support your side, the complex will probably admit that they made a paperwork error rather than chancing court. But if you have nothing in writing you have no chance.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2012 21:51
|
|
|
woozle wuzzle posted:As far as permanent residence, you're always a legal resident of somewhere. You just want control over where. So maybe just claim it's your parents address, or something. Yeah, I knew that much. I really don't want to claim my parents address as they live in California and I've been living in Texas the last few years. If I did claim my parents address as my residence, I would be subject to California state income tax which is one of the reasons I moved out of the state in the first place. From what I can tell, it appears that, for the most part, Texas doesn't seem to have too much of a problem using a mailbox with a street address as my permanent address. All of my mail goes there anyway and it's what I used to register to vote so I think, as long as my banking doesn't need to change, it shouldn't be a big problem. jassi007 posted:Could the legal minds here expand on this for curiosity? For a box under the bridge hobo, what is his legal residence? Say the last known address is occupied by someone else legally? How does this work? I mean the government wouldn't list a hobo's address as 123 Under the Bridge St. right? As best I can tell, if Mr Hobo wants to have any legal documentation, like a drivers license or a passport (you know, when he takes those vacations to France), he will need some kind of mailing address. I think a PO box or a mailbox at a business, such as the UPS store or similar, will work in most cases. It will vary state by state depending on the laws. Other than that, they'll just use his last known address. One thing I've learned after moving several times in the last few years is that the government does a horrible job keeping track of these things. If he wants to have a bank account, he will need to be able to use the address of a residence of some description. There is a requirement in the patriot act I believe that requires all new bank accounts to use a residential address when they are opened. I ran into this exact problem when I tried to use my mailbox address to open a new bank account, they wouldn't let me open it until I gave them a residential address. IANAL, none of my advice should be taken as legal advice as YMMV.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2012 22:09
|
|
|
You could probably get away with using a mail service, because for all intents and purposes they are indistinguishable from an apartment building (i.e, 345 Address Road, #43, Townville, ST). This 'street address' benefit is usually the only thing that makes a mailing service a better deal than getting a PO Box. A lot of homeless people will use the address of a shelter that they stay at regularly or can visit on a reliable basis. Because having an address is so critical to getting your poo poo together and off the street, it's a big help. I think that most of them try to obfuscate it a little so that you aren't filling out job applications with an address of 'Joe Hobo, c/o 4th St Shelter' or whatever. jassi007 posted:Could the legal minds here expand on this for curiosity? For a box under the bridge hobo, what is his legal residence? Say the last known address is occupied by someone else legally? How does this work? I mean the government wouldn't list a hobo's address as 123 Under the Bridge St. right? The answer is yes, they would, but only in specific sort of situations. For instance, the sex offender laws in Florida made it impossible for released offenders to live in Miami - the requirements about staying about from parks/schools/bus stops/places candy is sold/etc. meant there was literally nowhere these people could live without just leaving the county (which was the point). Because of this, they were allowed to provide their official address as 'Julia Tuttle Causeway' and have it on their license and poo poo, because under that causeway was literally the only place they were allowed to live. Not joking. IANAL or anything, but thats at least one case of it happening.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 01:21
|
|
|
jassi007 posted:Could the legal minds here expand on this for curiosity? For a box under the bridge hobo, what is his legal residence? Say the last known address is occupied by someone else legally? How does this work? I mean the government wouldn't list a hobo's address as 123 Under the Bridge St. right? Name General Delivery City, State Zip+9999
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 02:47
|
|
|
nm posted:Name For the purposes of Michigan's state sex offender registry, homeless individuals have 123 Homeless Street listed as their residence. True story
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 02:58
|
|
|
Feces Starship posted:For the purposes of Michigan's state sex offender registry, homeless individuals have 123 Homeless Street listed as their residence. True story Is that at the corner of Fake Street?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 03:07
|
|
|
nm posted:Is that at the corner of Fake Street? I thought it was the corner of Broke and Homeless.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 03:24
|
|
|
Feces Starship posted:For the purposes of Michigan's state sex offender registry, homeless individuals have 123 Homeless Street listed as their residence. True story For the purposes of Anchorage, AK, it's 30 days in jail every time they get caught (max of five years) until they get their rear end in one of our terribly few community housing... things. To be fair, I don't know how they do community housing in Anchorage.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 07:33
|
|
|
BigHead posted:For the purposes of Anchorage, AK, it's 30 days in jail every time they get caught (max of five years) until they get their rear end in one of our terribly few community housing... things. We have a couple of motels just outside of the zones. Motels full of sex offenders. Mission accomplished.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 07:56
|
|
|
BigHead posted:For the purposes of Anchorage, AK, it's 30 days in jail every time [homeless SO registrants] get caught (max of five years) until they get their rear end in one of our terribly few community housing... things. Originally, the SO registration office would refuse to register the homeless. They were actually truthful about their policy, which led to some acquittals. So the legislature changed the law; now you can register as 'transient,' but you have to report in person to the county's one registration office, every 7 days. nm posted:And people wonder why I didn't want to be a prosecutor anymore. We had an area like that, inside a maze of highway junctions that was also a jurisdictional no-mans land. So the local municipality built a park that nobody ever goes to, but now includes the motels within the park's 'safety zone.' Now, in our county, there is some farmland without housing on the edges of the county, and industrial park with no housing, or an old, old money neighborhood of $million+ homes where a registrant can live.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 15:52
|
|
|
IRT admissibility of recorded calls/conversations "1" is person living in a one party consent state, "2" is person in a two party state. They have a phone conversation: If 1 records the call, is it admissable in both states? If 2 records the call, is it admissable in both states? If two people live in a two-party consent state, but they travel across state lines to a one-party state for a business trip, and one person records a conversation, would that recording be admissable if a lawsuit later popped up in their homestate?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 17:52
|
|
|
I received a parking ticket in Michigan. I received this parking ticket in front of my house. You are required to have a parking permit sticker on your vehicle in order to part in the street, which I did/do have. There was a local festival going on in which apparently you needed a special permit in lieu of your existing one. I did not know of this, nor was mailed one, which was what was suppose to happen. Parking enforcement also wrote the ticket up at the address a couple houses down from mine. My options are to request a informal hearing or pay up. I really do not want to pay up, as it is a ridiculous amount for a parking ticket, due to the fact it was during a festival. And the fact that was in front of my own house where I park just fine the other 364 days of the year. Any assistance is appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 19:58
|
|
|
Legal question for legal goons in Oregon and California I got a friend I want to hang out with more who works for a company that abuses the hell out of him; he will frequently work 84+ hour weeks. I have heard that even when you are salaried there is an "expected number of hours" that you work that is supposed to be spelled out in your contract. When he was made salary, he said he didn't get any new contract, just some paperwork saying "congratulations! You're getting a new role <blah blah blah>" and then a place to sign and return to accept the new role. My question is, is this practice of 12 hour days, 7 days a week legal? Are there circumstances when it is legal and others where it's not? I tried looking at both Oregon and California's labor laws, but all the exceptions are a maze of confusing and it would be great if someone might be able to spell it out for me in non-lawyerly terms.  Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 21:36
|
|
|
ganglysumbia posted:I received a parking ticket in Michigan. Were the signs up on nearby trees/telephone poles indicating that a festival was taking place that day and temporary parking restrictions were taking place? That is what I've seen.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 21:39
|
|
|
Winkle-Daddy posted:Legal question for legal goons in Oregon and California It depends on what your friend's job is. Also they are probably just really avoiding you. "Oh yeah sorry Winkle-Daddy... uh... yeah I'd love to hang out but... working..."
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 21:49
|
|
|
Dogen posted:It depends on what your friend's job is. He works in the tech field doing something with servers--we don't talk about work that much other than just bitching. I know a few other people who I don't want to hang out with who have the same job and bitch about the same 80+ hour weeks. Winkle-Daddy fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Oct 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 21:52
|
|
|
wheez the roux posted:Here's a question: At least in Oregon, your old lease turns into a month by month automatically, with the same terms, conditions, and rent amount. By you signing a new lease, you've entered into a new contract with them. So you basically screwed yourself and learned the hard way that you need to read contracts before you sign them. Even if the other party is telling you what the contract contains, you still need to read it because it doesn't matter what they're saying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 22:05
|
|
|
Winkle-Daddy posted:Legal question for legal goons in Oregon and California Winkle-Daddy posted:He works in the tech field doing something with servers--we don't talk about work that much other than just bitching. I know a few other people who I don't want to hang out with who have the same job and bitch about the same 80+ hour weeks. It's perfectly legal for him to work him that long, the question is whether he'll get overtime pay. Oregon posted:Computer Professionals And for California
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 22:44
|
|
|
joat mon posted:It's perfectly legal for him to work him that long, the question is whether he'll get overtime pay. Thanks for the info. When it says: quote:In addition, both federal and state laws provide a separate exemption for employees who perform work in the previously listed categories, and who are paid an hourly rate of at least $27.63 per hour. Because the state exemption was adopted using the same conditions as the FLSA exemption at 13 (a) (17), no degree is required. Is that based on the 40 hour work week, or $27.63/hr for the 80+ hours of work? VVV Thanks! Now I'm afraid to tell him he should bring it up since I think the advanced degree requirement falls under his work category, and I know for a fact all he has is a high school diploma. 
Winkle-Daddy fucked around with this message at 22:58 on Oct 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 22:50
|
|
|
Winkle-Daddy posted:Is that based on the 40 hour work week, or $27.63/hr for the 80+ hours of work? I beleive that exception is for hourly computer folks who get exempted even though they're hourly and not salaried.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 22:56
|
|
|
Isn't there something in California saying most classes of workers don't have to work more than 72 hours of they don't want to? Being a Texas lawyer who knows next to nothing about employment law this is about as much as I know beyond what has already been said.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 01:30
|
|
|
SkunkDuster posted:IRT admissibility of recorded calls/conversations Might be wrong, but I'm p sure this depends on the evidence rules for the court (which state? federal?) in which the action is being brought. *just checked with a friend. Seems like Federal Rules of Evidence shouldn't exclude this. insanityv2 fucked around with this message at 06:04 on Oct 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 03:47
|
|
|
Buckhead posted:Were the signs up on nearby trees/telephone poles indicating that a festival was taking place that day and temporary parking restrictions were taking place? That is what I've seen. Yes. They said parking permit required, which I have.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 09:04
|
|
|
ganglysumbia posted:Yes. They said parking permit required, which I have. Did you take a picture of the sign? When you contest the ticket it will help to be able to point to the ambiguity of the sign.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 19:57
|
|
|
You guys might remember my problem from earlier in the thread, about my bf who got hit by a drunk driver: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3266659&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=183#post405416923 It's been a while, and poo poo is looking grim. His auto insurance won't actually pay out the supplemental coverage he had because his parents own the policy and list him as the driver for his car, but he doesn't live in the same state so they won't count him as a "household member." Not like it would matter, his health insurance would claim all of it since just his first stay at the hospital was over $120k. He has talked to two lawyers, neither of whom want to take the case. This is bullshit. The little fucker who hit him was something like 10 drinks and a hit of E in. At 8:45 loving pm. His parents apparently own an 800k house. BUT, he lives with his girlfriend and was driving her car and has the state minimum coverage. So nobody wants to even try to go after him. AND his criminal trial just got a continuance. Again. My bf has now had two surgeries on his leg because the bones aren't growing. If it doesn't start growing, there's only one more thing they can try, which is highly invasive and requires bone grafts. If that doesn't work, he's losing the leg. So far, he's been able to barely deal with the out of pocket costs by getting discounts, but it's wiped out his savings. He can't work because the pain meds make him loopy/outright hallucinate. He's already applied for some Texas victim's compensation fund, but hasn't heard back yet. Meanwhile, the turd that hit him is back hanging out at bars. Sorry for the E/N  If any Dallas area legal goons know of someone who might actually seriously consider his case, please for the love of god let me know. I'd try the Dallas bar's referral service, but he's in no shape to be going around to a bunch of different lawyers in the hope that one of them might consider it. And I'm 2000 miles away desperately trying to finish my dissertation. I have PMs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 20:41
|
|
|
2deg, the actual lawyers probably feel too bad to tell you, but as some who was involved in a similar situation, but not quite as bad, the prognosis is bad. This guy sounds effectively judgement proof. He has no assets and no income. State minimum coverage won't get you much, and anything you do get you will lose in subrogation to your health insurance since they have paid out. Unless this guy has a actual trust fund, or some hidden assets, he has nothing to recover. You can't go after his rich parents because he is an adult. And realistically, even if you get a judgement against him, with no income his parents will probably just pay for him to file bankruptcy and you will have done all that for nothing. That is the real reason no lawyer will take the case. They don't want to work for free, and even at 50% of the state liability minimum they would probably get an hourly rate of $30. And after all that effort, your significant other will get nothing. If you really want to find a lawyer to sue him on contingency, you'll have to find some sort of assets to go after. You could maybe hire a private investigator, but it is probably not worth it. It is an unbelievable, lovely situation, but there is not really much you can do right now. I sorry, and I really hope things turn around, but I don't have any encouragement to offer.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 20:58
|
|
|
bigpolar posted:And realistically, even if you get a judgement against him, with no income his parents will probably just pay for him to file bankruptcy and you will have done all that for nothing. But you forgot my FUN FACT: personal injury caused by an unlawfully intoxicated driver is not dischargeable in bankruptcy.  2DEG: It is kinda grim right now, but I'd say to keep pushing. While the kid seems like a deadbeat now, judgments last for virtually a lifetime. He might not be judgment proof in 20 years when his stupid parents die and leave him some cash. It's totally worth it to your BF to pursue it. The attorneys might turn it down because they want cash in hand now. They don't want a 40% cut of future potential maybe. But it's worth it to your BF to not let go. Keep pushing. Call the cheesy numbers, and keep him trying. It might take a decade to pay off, but in a decade it's still a life-changing amount. It's too late to sue at that point, so he's got to sue now and shake the kid down later.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 21:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 04:36 |
|
|
woozle wuzzle posted:But you forgot my FUN FACT: personal injury caused by an unlawfully intoxicated driver is not dischargeable in bankruptcy.  Thanks for this. I understand why most attorneys wouldn't want to touch his case. Still, I'm naive enough to think somebody will take up his cause. You know, for justice and all that. Got a couple of names, gonna start nagging again
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 23:47
|
|