|
IAmNotYourRealDad posted:So I'm growing up in the world and it looks like I'm about to score the place of my dreams! It's a two bedroom apartment in the DC metro area that I can actually afford on my meager salary. The catch is that I will be assisting with caring for the property in exchange for a cheaper monthly rent. The one thing holding me back is some of the wording on the lease. Legalese gives me a headache and so I'm hoping someone here will be able to provide some insight before I sign my life away. Need more context, what is section 2bi, and is equine a horse? You are going to be caring for a horse? Generally I would want some language in there that the owner shall provide reasonable notice to the resident alleging any failure to perform the tasks, and the residents shall have 3 or so days to cure the defect.
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 18:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 12:23 |
|
|
In addition to what xxEightxx said about notice to cure a defect, maybe alter the penalty clause a bit. You could propose an increase in monthly rent in lieu of unsatisfactory care (the residents' monthly rent shall increase by $50 or $100/month).
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 18:56
|
|
|
IAmNotYourRealDad posted:So I'm growing up in the world and it looks like I'm about to score the place of my dreams! It's a two bedroom apartment in the DC metro area that I can actually afford on my meager salary. The catch is that I will be assisting with caring for the property in exchange for a cheaper monthly rent. The one thing holding me back is some of the wording on the lease. Legalese gives me a headache and so I'm hoping someone here will be able to provide some insight before I sign my life away. Unless you've been the landlord's stable bitch for at least a month, with at least two weeks of that on your own, you're signing yourself up for a world of poo poo. Are you the resident, or one of multiple residents under the contract? If the latter, there's another world of poo poo, unless you will be the only one doing the work. what is in "section 2.a above" and "table 2.b.i below"? "2.b. The resident(s) agree to provide services as described in section 2.a above and outlined in table 2.b.i below. Resident(s) agree to provide a minimum of ten hours of assistance related to the tasks indicated in table 2.b.i. [so what happens when you do 10 hours but the tasks aren't done?] Residents also agree and acknowledge responsibility of providing primary care to equine [is 'primary care' defined? does it include paying the vet as well as calling the vet, if necessary?] while owner is out of town. If the RESIDENTS do not keep up the terms of this agreement or do not perform the task in a satisfactory manner (determined by discretion of owner) [Danger Will Robinson! How about confining the discretion to the duties in section 2.a or table 2.b.i?] the RESIDENTS shall be liable for breach of contract [this means money and not just eviction] and will be required to vacate the premises immediately [this is probably an illegal term anyway, but 'within 30 days of notice by landlord' should work] as the breech [riding pants are breeches, broken contracts are breaches] occurs. The RESIDENTS will be liable additional months’ rent if termination occurs as the result or request of early release or breech of the contract." [maybe add something making an independent party (a local vet? a stable owner, not buddies with the landlord?) the determiner of whether you were "perform[ing] the task in a satisfactory manner"?] Not advice, but comments of various risk points. If you already know the landlord well and he/she isn't crazy, you risks are lower. If you're answering a Craigslist ad, BEWARE. More details? bigger picture view of the deal, type/length of relationship with landlord, your horse/large animal experience, details of what/how you'll be caring for, etc. joat mon fucked around with this message at 19:06 on Jun 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 19:02
|
|
|
bigpolar posted:That's a scary looking lease to me. Rewording that goes beyond what I would consider reasonable for the attorneys in this thread, because it is so specific it looks like giving legal advice (at least to a layman like myself) Game, set, match, trophy. Read the Tell thread about horses in this very forum to learn about some of the wonderful things that can happen to experienced, diligent horse owners and picture what would happen to you if a horse took a rock in the eye, or fell over dead, or ended up with a cough, or the owner came home mortified that its eyelashes were combed to the wrong side or etc. etc. etc. A contract that requires you to assume custody of someone else's prized possession and care for it in accordance with its owner's arbitrary standards is already very perilous ground. When that possession is a living thing that can injure or kill itself through no fault of your own, I would seriously question your wisdom for signing it even if your contract did have a painfully explicit explanation of exactly what you must do, how success is measured and exactly what sort of perils you are not responsible for.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 19:05
|
|
|
patentmagus posted:I've addressed the licensed practitioner issue in a different post. Since you're an attorney, why are you going limited partnership instead of LLC? No Secretary of State filing requirements or fees, no issuance of stock certificates, no corporate assets other than the IP, no liability issues(if they ever went into production, I have advised them to go Manager Managed LLP) and its the best fit for the ownership/management of the situation. The only objective of the entity is to assign ownership interest in the final asset if there is any value. A simple contract raises issues of performance and reciprocal obligations, and they are basically farting around in a garage, so its best to avoid designating responsibilities. a GP is the most enforceable, least encumbering, simplest way of getting what they want. patentmagus posted:find a patent agent or a freshly minted patent attorney. 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? Thanks. You guys saved me at least 4 hours.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 20:36
|
|
|
I think other posters have covered most of the detail as to the problems in this clause, really, but more fundamentally you have to ask yourself - on what level is a tenancy where you agree to look after someone's horse a good deal? I've never heard of anything remotely like this. Paying for land by providing services in exchange is something that mostly ended when the feudal system died out, unless you include service tenancies where people get free/cheap accommodation that goes with a job they're doing for the landlord, like being the building caretaker. If the landlord has a horse, it should be their responsibility to look after it; if they don't like the idea of it being in a stable on land they've rented out, they should either not rent out the land, find somewhere else for the horse to live or deal with the idea that they're going to have to come back regularly to look after the horse (which, to be honest, would be a pain in itself. You don't have to be a bad tenant to not want the landlord to turn up on a daily basis.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 20:37
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:A contract that requires you to assume custody of someone else's prized possession and care for it in accordance with its owner's arbitrary standards is already very perilous ground. IAmNotYourRealDad posted:[b]If the RESIDENTS do not keep up the terms of this agreement or do not perform the task in a satisfactory manner (determined by discretion of owner) the RESIDENTS shall be liable for 'coming out rear end first' Its spelled "breach". "Breech" is when the baby horse is being born backwards out of the mother. Stupid horse people.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 20:41
|
|
|
ulmont posted: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. Maybe it's actually an ill-conceived portmanteau of "process" and "execution." 
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 20:42
|
|
|
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? Patent prosecution is arguing against the patent office and the Examiner about why they should grant your patent. Go to http://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair and type in 10/957,391 as the Application number, then click on the Image File Wrapper for the best example ever. (okay it's not actually a good example but the Examiner's rejection rules) EAT THE EGGS RICOLA fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Jun 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 20:43
|
|
|
ulmont posted: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. I imagine it's the same reason why MRA types talk about "prosecuting the pussy."
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 20:44
|
|
|
EAT THE EGGS RICOLA posted:Patent prosecution is arguing against the patent office and the Examiner about why they should grant your patent. Go to http://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair and type in 10/957,391 as the Application number, then click on the Image File Wrapper for the best example ever. heh, stamps. those were the days.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2013 21:26
|
|
|
EAT THE EGGS RICOLA posted:Patent prosecution is arguing against the patent office and the Examiner about why they should grant your patent. Go to http://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair and type in 10/957,391 as the Application number, then click on the Image File Wrapper for the best example ever. Excellent - it's now download, OCRed, and in my prosecution example library. By the way, the publication number is 20060072226. I scholar.google searched "20060072226" and it shows that some examiners have actually used this application as prior art. Is this an inside joke? A crap app used to reject other crap apps? I'm really disappointed that applicant failed to respond. Applicant was probably scared off by: quote:Applicant is required to provide a clarification of these matters (i.e., "spiritual eye", "white energy of hyperspace") or correlation with art-accepted terminology so that a proper comparison with the prior art can be made. Applicant should be careful not to introduce any new matter into the disclosure (i.e., matter which is not supported by the disclosure as originally filed).
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 01:26
|
|
|
General Panic posted:I think other posters have covered most of the detail as to the problems in this clause, really, but more fundamentally you have to ask yourself - on what level is a tenancy where you agree to look after someone's horse a good deal? I agree, if anything I'd settle on a rent of $X, then in a separate clause say that there is a discount of $Y that you get by providing specific services in kind. I'd add in a clause that says that either party can terminate the discount clause at any time and just pay $X as rent, prorated to the date of termination. That way there is a fallback if either party isn't satisfied with the labor arrangement.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 12:46
|
|
|
From a few pages back:euphronius posted:A statement made outside if court is not hearsay if the declarant is testifying. How is a prior out-of-court statement, being introduced to prove the truth of the matter asserted, absolved from being hearsay simply by the fact that the declarant is testifying? Even though the declarant is speaking in court, the statement that is itself being repeated originated outside of court and therefore falls under the hearsay definition. If a witness testifies in court "I said to the cop 'John killed Jane,'" it looks like hearsay ("John killed Jane") within nonhearsay ("I said to the cop"). If anything, don't the non-hearsay categories of a witness-declarant's prior inconsistent statement, prior consistent statement to rehabilitate, and statements of identification go to show that a witness-delcarant's prior out of court statements are generally hearsay (subject to those exceptions)? What am I missing?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 13:34
|
|
|
Green Crayons posted:From a few pages back: Because then the question can be put to the witness "Why did you say to the cop, 'John killed Jane'?" and the veracity of his evidence can be put to the test. The background issue is always whether evidence can be properly tested and challenged in court.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 13:43
|
|
|
patentmagus posted:Excellent - it's now download, OCRed, and in my prosecution example library. By the way, the publication number is 20060072226. I scholar.google searched "20060072226" and it shows that some examiners have actually used this application as prior art. Is this an inside joke? A crap app used to reject other crap apps? Any inquiry concerning this communication . . . should be directed to Dr. Leo Boutsikaris whose telephone number is . . . " This means that there is a man with a Ph.D whose job it is to read this dreck and write straight-faced responses to it, then sit by the phone and wait for calls from mentally unstable people who want to explain that a phone booth lets them travel to the astral plane or something. That's going in my "reasons not to pursue a postgrad" box.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 14:06
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:Any inquiry concerning this communication . . . should be directed to Dr. Leo Boutsikaris whose telephone number is . . . " Yeah. The job only requires a BS, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 14:14
|
|
|
Does anyone know anything about constructive discharge/retaliation? Our boss was fired the other day after two coworkers and I submitted sexual harassment complaints, but the company put us in a position where all the other employees would be hostile. My coworker had to be escorted to her car because she felt like she was in danger from coworkers who had shown up specifically for confrontation. There are witnesses to the fact that the company had been ignoring his well known harassments and that they were trying to get us to quit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 15:52
|
|
|
Tell us more about what he company did after he fired he boss.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 15:56
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:Any inquiry concerning this communication . . . should be directed to Dr. Leo Boutsikaris whose telephone number is . . . " This guy has tons of these insane things too. I like to imagine that once you graduate from Patent Agent Academy, if you have the best marks you get to be the one who rejects all the crazypants resurrection machines/perpetual motion machines.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 16:10
|
|
|
EAT THE EGGS RICOLA posted:I like to imagine that once you graduate from Patent Agent Academy, if you have the best marks you get to be the one who rejects all the crazypants resurrection machines/perpetual motion machines. Me too. They're really easy and you can make your quota in your sleep.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 16:53
|
|
|
Konstantin posted:I agree, if anything I'd settle on a rent of $X, then in a separate clause say that there is a discount of $Y that you get by providing specific services in kind. I'd add in a clause that says that either party can terminate the discount clause at any time and just pay $X as rent, prorated to the date of termination. That way there is a fallback if either party isn't satisfied with the labor arrangement. Here's what will happen. The tenant could be doing everything right but the second the horse becomes sick or injures itself through no fault of the tenant, the landlord is going to blame the tenant. The tenant has broken the landlord's little pet horsey and now there's hell to pay.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 18:31
|
|
|
Horse people are loving INSANE. I don't know that I would willingly engage in any sort of services/rent exchange with one even without the horse being involved. With the horse involved? Not for a second. Not even once.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 19:53
|
|
|
Does anyone here have any knowledge / experience with opting out of class actions? It looks like fun. What I'm thinking about are those letters we get saying that we are members in a class action because we bought something and there's a class action lawsuit. I tend to get a little annoyed with these suits. A nice fat check goes to the law firm and I get a coupon for pringles. All I know about it is that the Prenda Law copyright troll messed around with opt outs as a sideline. He's obviously cocked it up due to his general incompetence, but I wonder about the mechanics and procedure. Clue?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 20:56
|
|
|
patentmagus posted:Does anyone here have any knowledge / experience with opting out of class actions? It looks like fun. What I'm thinking about are those letters we get saying that we are members in a class action because we bought something and there's a class action lawsuit. The letter giving you notice that you are, or may be a part of a class, will either in that letter or a subsequent one, give you the option to opt out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 21:04
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Because then the question can be put to the witness "Why did you say to the cop, 'John killed Jane'?" and the veracity of his evidence can be put to the test. Also, doesn't your reasoning (the hearsay declarant can just be cross examined) just extend to any hearsay declarant who is available, regardless of whether they are currently testifying? If I can ask John about something John said out of court, why can't I ask John about something Jane said out of court if Jane is available to be called by opposing counsel?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 21:09
|
|
|
Thank you for looking this over. Though I must say, I'm even more overwhelmed than I was before posting.  I don't know how you lawyers do this every day. xxEightxx posted:Need more context, what is section 2bi, and is equine a horse? You are going to be caring for a horse? Section 2.b.i. is elaborating on how the payment for the apartment will be handled. And yes, "equine" means horses (and a donkey in this case). Brief backstory: My fiancé and I have been on a yearlong + hunt for affordable housing. Having little luck, we finally stumbled upon this here gem on Craigslist. The property is gorgeous and seems like a good fit for us. It's in the area, it's affordable, it is pet friendly, etc. The advertisement on Craigslist offers an onsite 2 bedroom newly renovated apartment (the apartment is on the same land but separate from the main house). There is the option of a reduced rate in exchange for equine care provided by the Resident(s) (so in this case, it would be either me or my fiancé helping with simple tasks like feeding, watering, mucking stalls etc.). joat mon posted:If you're a horsey person, you know how crazy people can get. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 21:11
|
|
|
General Panic posted:I think other posters have covered most of the detail as to the problems in this clause, really, but more fundamentally you have to ask yourself - on what level is a tenancy where you agree to look after someone's horse a good deal? I should have made it clear that it isn't a requirement to help with the land in exchange for cheaper rent. Basically, the landlord made a generous offer to lower the rent in relation to how much work we are able to perform at the rate of $10/hour. Maybe it would be easier to separate the rental costs from services we are paid for?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 21:17
|
|
|
IAmNotYourRealDad posted:I should have made it clear that it isn't a requirement to help with the land in exchange for cheaper rent. Basically, the landlord made a generous offer to lower the rent in relation to how much work we are able to perform at the rate of $10/hour. Maybe it would be easier to separate the rental costs from services we are paid for? Not a lawyer, but that's what I'd do - that way there's no clause in your lease allowing the landlord to throw you out if Chestnut catches the shits. Wait no what I'd do is run the everloving gently caress away, but that's not really helpful I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 21:21
|
|
|
IAmNotYourRealDad posted:Maybe it would be easier to separate the rental costs from services we are paid for? Yes, absolutely do this. Jesus Christ do this. The only reason you'd want to muck them together is if it's going to be an informal arrangement where you can eek out a little more time/rent value than you would if you had to separately keep track of the hours.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 21:22
|
|
|
Green Crayons posted:So why do the rules make the specific exceptions from hearsay for declarant-witnesses testimony? I understand the background issue which was the policy for creating all the hearsay rules in the first place, but I don't see a basis in the rules for exempting all declarant-witness hearsay from the hearsay rules. Is this just a practitioner thing where everyone understands that it's no big deal so they don't object? Your statement as a 3rd party percipient witness has to fit into an exception to the hearsay rule to be admissible. It is not automatically admitted just because you are on the stand. The exceptions are numerous and vary by state, but in and of itself, it is a hearsay statement. If you are asking how can it be admitted, it would really come down to the specifics to see what exception it could fit into or nonhearsay purpose the comment could serve. They hypothetical as posed does not contain enough information to fit it in an exception.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 21:33
|
|
|
xxEightxx posted:The letter giving you notice that you are, or may be a part of a class, will either in that letter or a subsequent one, give you the option to opt out. I guess I was unclear. There's much more to do than simply opt out of the representation. There's the appearing in the suit ( or threatening to ) and various other actions. What I'm wondering is how someone can get at the legal fees part of the settlement instead of just accepting the BS offer that the class members can receive.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 21:36
|
|
|
IAmNotYourRealDad posted:I should have made it clear that it isn't a requirement to help with the land in exchange for cheaper rent. Basically, the landlord made a generous offer to lower the rent in relation to how much work we are able to perform at the rate of $10/hour. Maybe it would be easier to separate the rental costs from services we are paid for? In addition to everything that's been said, $10/hour seems like a pretty crappy rate for being a personal horse babysitter. Jesus, fast food workers make that much and they don't get thrown out of their house if one of their burgers makes a customer puke on the mayor.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 21:40
|
|
|
Yeah as been mentioned, combining land contracts and employment contracts is usually a Bad Idea.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 21:44
|
|
|
patentmagus posted:I guess I was unclear. There's much more to do than simply opt out of the representation. There's the appearing in the suit ( or threatening to ) and various other actions. What I'm wondering is how someone can get at the legal fees part of the settlement instead of just accepting the BS offer that the class members can receive. You were super unclear. I'm still not 100% sure what you want, but you're unlikely to be able to get at the legal fees part of the settlement and not the coupons/pro rata payments. You could intervene and join as a separate plaintiff or try to become a class representative, but class reps don't get the cash, the attorneys do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 21:53
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Yeah as been mentioned, combining land contracts and employment contracts is usually a Bad Idea. Basically, the only good idea is if you're an employee and you're living on the premises that you're working at (au pair, teacher at boarding school, oil rig worker? idk)
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 22:34
|
|
|
Arcturas posted:You could intervene and join as a separate plaintiff We're getting closer... How about : Is anyone here experienced enough in the civil procedure aspects of class action litigation to know how an attorney (or friend thereof) can opt out of a class action settlement agreement and recover against the legal fee portion of the settlement. I know that this can be done but don't know how.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 23:23
|
|
|
patentmagus posted:We're getting closer... It cant be done. You can opt out and sue separately, or you can stay in the class. Or opt out and not sue, I guess. By opting out you have said that you are not claiming against whatever settlement the class (as represented by the lawyers) receives. Because you've done so, you can't lay claim to either the fees (which are taken off the top of the settlement) or the settlement. In exchange, you can sue on your own and keep 100% of whatever you manage to recover. The only way to access the legal fees portion of the settlement is to actually be one of the lawyers representing the class.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 23:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 12:23 |
|
|
IAmNotYourRealDad posted:I should have made it clear that it isn't a requirement to help with the land in exchange for cheaper rent. Basically, the landlord made a generous offer to lower the rent in relation to how much work we are able to perform at the rate of $10/hour. Maybe it would be easier to separate the rental costs from services we are paid for? The break on rent arrangement is doable, but not now; and NEVER if it's tied to the rental agreement. You're actually in a good spot. You can go to the landowner and tell him/her that you don't want to do the horsecare side of the agreement right now because you don't know squat about how to do it ... but you're interested in seeing if it would work out. Just the possibility that the the landlord can get someone (you) to cover for them so they can go on a vacation should favorably dispose them toward you. This gives you a chance to be taught by the landlord what will be required ($10 and hour is fine for what it sounds like you'll be doing) and you can still opt out if he/she is crazy or if scrubbing waterers or breathing hay dust/mold or digging out pee spots or [whatever about caring for a horse] isn't your bag. If the rental without the horsecare agreement is something you want to do, you can eventually add the horsecare agreement... IF AND ONLY IF: -YOUR LANDLORD ISN'T CRAZY. You'll find this out in general by renting from them form a while, and specifically re: horses by being trained by them. -You know, in a hands-on way (i.e., not from table II.(A)(3)(iv)) what's expected of you. -You've done it before, know what's involved, and are willing and able to do it, at the same time every day (feed, meds), every day, rain, snow or shine. -If the deal isn't for all chores, every day, a SPECIFIC delineation of duties by type and duration between you and landlord. -The rental agreement is not tied to the horsecare agreement IN ANY WAY. The ONLY connection between the rental and horsecare agreements should be the clause in the horsecare agreement that says something like, "payment for horsecare duties willaccrue at $10 per hour, to be subtracted from the following month's rent." We showed horses and worked horseshows in MD and NoVa. There are a lot of wonderful, mellow, down-to-earth horse people there. There are also a lot of batshitcrazyinsane horse people there too. If you ease into it, this could be a wonderful, mutually fulfilling and beneficial arrangement. If you ease into it, you could have just a crazy landlord instead of a crazy landlord and a crazy boss.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2013 23:55
|
|