|
Sonic Dude posted:It’s actually not me, just trying to keep it vague for... I’m not sure why really. Upon some thought, I assume no one knows or cares about me or my work friends. Is your friends name on the contract? If not, has he just considered not paying it? If his name isn’t on it, and it defaults, they’ll probably just send it to collections in whoever’s name is on the contract....
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 06:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 1, 2024 02:35 |
|
|
Thanatosian posted:Has your friend tried just calling and explaining the situation to the exterminator? EwokEntourage posted:Is your friends name on the contract? If not, has he just considered not paying it? If his name isn’t on it, and it defaults, they’ll probably just send it to collections in whoever’s name is on the contract....
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 07:54
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:In Texas its often more common to never "close" the probate because there's essentially no point. Once the estate is distributed, anything else will eventually SoL out of existence, so it's pointless to take the extra step of actually closing it. Yeah, the estate hasn't been distributed. There's a PI case in the settlement negotiation stage and creditor claims that haven't been paid. I only found out the estate had been closed because the PI attorney CC'd me when contacting the probate attorney to find out what happened to the creditor claims on Odyssey. I received this at about 5pm today and am pretty surprised.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 08:33
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:Yeah, the estate hasn't been distributed. There's a PI case in the settlement negotiation stage and creditor claims that haven't been paid. I only found out the estate had been closed because the PI attorney CC'd me when contacting the probate attorney to find out what happened to the creditor claims on Odyssey. Weird. Edit: also weird, that the Probate Court didn't go and grab that P I claim. It should have jurisdiction. Your situation sounds complicated. Or maybe I don't understand how probate works up there in that Midwestern hell hole
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 17:45
|
|
|
So i need advice and thoughts on this. I am in North Carolina. I was fired from my job at the start of the 3rd week in January. While cleaning out my desk, the owner of the company said that he would send me a check valued at the average hours I worked for two weeks as a severance pay. I have audio recording of this exchange as well as audio/video from the police officer had had escorting me through the plant to get my stuff. I received the check later that week and deposited it. I just got notice from my bank of a stop payment put on the check. The amount was 926$. Do I have any legal recourse or is this just another level of them loving me over which I can't do anything about?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 19:50
|
|
|
Sonic Dude posted:Yeah, I don’t know if the guy he talked with is a jerk or the place just really wants/needs the money, but it sounds like that didn’t go anywhere. I wonder what the contract says about acceptable reasons for terminating early. It seems like a multi-year contract for treatment of a house would have 'selling the house' as a good reason to end it. Depending on how the conversation went, the exterminator might have inferred that the husband was angling to get refunds, instead of just ending the contract moving forward due to selling the house
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 20:02
|
|
|
AlexJade posted:So i need advice and thoughts on this. I am in North Carolina. I was fired from my job at the start of the 3rd week in January. While cleaning out my desk, the owner of the company said that he would send me a check valued at the average hours I worked for two weeks as a severance pay. I have audio recording of this exchange as well as audio/video from the police officer had had escorting me through the plant to get my stuff. I received the check later that week and deposited it. I just got notice from my bank of a stop payment put on the check. The amount was 926$. Do I have any legal recourse or is this just another level of them loving me over which I can't do anything about? Did you, like...ask them about it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 20:08
|
|
|
Bad Munki posted:Did you, like...ask them about it? I haven't yet because I did not want to make contact before understanding where I stand in this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 20:16
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:Weird. You are bang on the money about the situation and the hell hole. Protip for everyone: don't die in South Dakota. I know they try to lure folks in with the ~*~no income tax~*~ thing but it's not worth it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 21:20
|
|
|
AlexJade posted:So i need advice and thoughts on this. I am in North Carolina. I was fired from my job at the start of the 3rd week in January. While cleaning out my desk, the owner of the company said that he would send me a check valued at the average hours I worked for two weeks as a severance pay. I have audio recording of this exchange as well as audio/video from the police officer had had escorting me through the plant to get my stuff. I received the check later that week and deposited it. I just got notice from my bank of a stop payment put on the check. The amount was 926$. Do I have any legal recourse or is this just another level of them loving me over which I can't do anything about? Sorry I can't be helpful--the answer is "you'd have to ask a lawyer but generally verbal promises aren't enforceable and just getting a lawyer to send a threatening letter would cost most of the money that's in dispute so you're hosed"--but man, you and your boss must have really had issues for them to go out of their way just to gently caress you over like that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 01:14
|
|
|
If they straight up gave you a check that bounced though..
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 01:21
|
|
|
Return reason was Stop Payment which tells me he's screwing me over. Also he always hated me for being a queer with dyed hair and piercings.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 01:49
|
|
|
How is the term “until” interpreted in congressional legislation, and why? I’m trying to understand the meaning of the current Continuing Appropriations Act, and when it expires. HR 195 amends PL 115-56 (Division D Section 106) to read “appropriations and funds made available and authority granted pursuant to this Act shall be available until whichever of the following first occurs: [...] February 8, 2018.” To me, that means the appropriations expire the second the day is February 8, i.e. midnight the 7th. Black’s law dictionary says that “until” is most often interpreted that way, to exclude the date specified. But reading the news, it actually means the appropriations expire midnight the 8th? What am I misreading? E: after thinking about it for a minute, is “occurs” the operative term here? That is, for February 8 to occur the entirety of February 8 must have occurred. Kolodny fucked around with this message at 04:27 on Feb 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 04:19
|
|
|
Kolodny posted:How is the term “until” interpreted in congressional legislation, and why? Usually it includes the day mentioned, so until February 8 means up to and including February 8. This is also the common usage when a certain time isn’t specified. For example if you said you have until Tuesday to pay me back most people wouldn’t interpret that to mean Monday at 11:59pm Also no one gives a poo poo what blacks law dictionary says anymore
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 04:31
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:You absolutely have a leak underground. Call a leak detection service asap We did. It’s on the towns end of the pipe, huzzah. They’re going to adjust the bill. To what, I don’t know.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 00:57
|
|
|
obviously I hosed it posted:To what, I don’t know. They'll adjust it all right...to the original $300 plus whatever it costs to fix it, itemized as, "Uhhh...'county service re-establishment fee,' yeah, that'll work" For real, though, I have to admit I'm puzzled by this: obviously I hosed it posted:It’s on the towns end of the pipe 
Bad Munki fucked around with this message at 01:14 on Feb 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 01:10
|
|
|
Verbal contracts are generally enforceable not unenforceable . Statue of frauds is limited
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 14:32
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Verbal contracts are generally enforceable not unenforceable . Statue of frauds is limited To a non-lawyer, this reads like you're having a stroke
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 16:37
|
|
|
He might be, you never know: lawyers are into some kinky poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 17:01
|
|
|
Verbal contracts are generally enforceable. They are not generally unenforceable . The statute of frauds, which in part limits the enforceability of verbal contracts , is only applicable in a limited number of cases. There is no general reason that verbal contracts are any less enforceable than written ones.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 17:07
|
|
|
They're only "less enforceable" in that unlike written contracts, their terms are often more ambiguous, more subjective, and must be proven by testimony.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 17:09
|
|
|
Phil Moscowitz posted:They're only "less enforceable" in that unlike written contracts, their terms are often more ambiguous, more subjective, and must be proven by testimony. Unless there's a recording and they're in a one party consent state, right?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 02:11
|
|
|
Modus Pwnens posted:Unless there's a recording and they're in a one party consent state, right? I’m not sure you’d win a privacy argument for a verbal contract if it were made for the purpose of invalidating the contract. Second the recording itself is what would be at issue not the existence of a contract, two separate analysis.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 18:46
|
|
|
So I just saw a thing where a private citizen was being sued by a company several states away. My question is: If you get sued by a company do you have to actually travel to wherever they're suing you? Or do they at least have to sue you in your state?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 23:49
|
|
|
spacetoaster posted:So I just saw a thing where a private citizen was being sued by a company several states away. Depends on whether the court in the state has jurisdiction (and maybe venue). It’s fact specific to an extent, and depends on the type of the lawsuit. A lot of times you can sue someone where the events giving rise to the lawsuit substantially occurred. So if you drove a few states over and trashed a store, that store could probably sue you in that state and count t where the store is. Some statues grant jurisdiction/venue and/or have mandatory venue rules, so it depends on the suit
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 23:55
|
|
|
spacetoaster posted:So I just saw a thing where a private citizen was being sued by a company several states away. Depends on a whole host of specific factors, but forum non conveniens would be a good place to start reading for general information.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2018 01:56
|
|
|
This is the part of the thread cycle where the laymen and lurkers realize that legal system is incredibly expensive to access and designed to totally gently caress over anyone without money.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2018 02:15
|
|
|
Yeah You hire a lawyer to represent you in that locality or eat the default judgment.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2018 02:17
|
|
|
Pancakes posted:Depends on a whole host of specific factors, but forum non conveniens would be a good place to start reading for general information. Don’t start with FNC. FNC is a doctrine that says “I could be sued where you sued me, but it’s so inconvenient that it should be moved elsewhere.” The question of whether you can even be sued in a place in the first place is whether the court has jurisdiction over you; first, whether they can exert personal jurisdiction, and second, whether they have subject matter jurisdiction - whether the subject of the suit is within the power of the court to hear. For the question you’re asking about, personal jurisdiction is the starting point for your reading. Once you understand that topic, you can read about FNC.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2018 02:19
|
|
|
And although the court SHOULD make inquiry into service, personal jurisdiction, etc when they're presented with a default judgement - they never do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2018 02:21
|
|
|
Is it realistically possible to unfuck the American Legal system (assuming both Parties would cooperate) without burning it all to the ground and starting over? I was under the impression that the reason you need big bucks to get poo poo done is because it's labyrinthine.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2018 02:50
|
|
|
sleepy.eyes posted:Is it realistically possible to unfuck the American Legal system (assuming both Parties would cooperate) without burning it all to the ground and starting over? I was under the impression that the reason you need big bucks to get poo poo done is because it's labyrinthine. The system is not hosed. The civil system at least. Why would you say it is. Criminal system whoa boy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2018 02:52
|
|
|
There's a whole shitton you could do to make it more poor-friendly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2018 02:53
|
|
|
sleepy.eyes posted:Is it realistically possible to unfuck the American Legal system (assuming both Parties would cooperate) without burning it all to the ground and starting over? I was under the impression that the reason you need big bucks to get poo poo done is because it's labyrinthine. Burning it all to the ground would just wind up making it worse.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2018 02:55
|
|
|
I meant the criminal system.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2018 03:03
|
|
|
End racism and capitalism and then you could get a good criminal system.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2018 03:05
|
|
|
sleepy.eyes posted:I meant the criminal system. Many of the rights of the accused we enjoy now were greatly expanded over the last 70 years or so. The criminal system is still seriously hosed up, but there is hope for progressive reform. The harder problem is the entanglement of the justice system with private capital, which is a travesty and also is very difficult to solve in a way that is remotely politically feasible. Also good ol racism, the problem that never goes away.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2018 03:09
|
|
|
euphronius posted:The system is not hosed. The civil system at least. The civil system is actually even more stacked against the non-wealthy than the criminal. You just have to sit in unlawful detainer court for 5 minutes to figure that out. They'll actually give you a lawyer in criminal. Civil could be fixed to a large degree with a civil public defender, but lol if that will ever happen.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2018 03:10
|
|
|
There are pro bono civil defense in many states especially for abused women.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2018 03:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 1, 2024 02:35 |
|
|
I mean I guess you could have the state pay for more civil defense. But that is a more economic problem than legal problem. A problem of access.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2018 03:13
|
|