|
Tab8715 posted:Really, when I got charged with passing a school bus, I called up, gave them my fax and got everything with-in two minutes. You gently caress up the discovery process by not completely understanding and using to your advantage Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 - 37. I suggest you, or any other non-lawyers who are curious why what you said is such horrible advice, look them over. http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/#chapter_v
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2010 22:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 02:27 |
|
|
Zealous Abattoir posted:Can someone explain to me whats up with due process and how it affects how private colleges work with their students? I mean, I tried to read up upon the subject last night to understand her argument, but either I really am dumb (which I probably am) or she is talking out of her rear end. Haven't taken Con Law in law school yet, but I spent several years working with my undergrad institution's office of student conduct. Basically due process has nothing to do with how private colleges work with their students. Public institutions are governed by the due process clauses of the federal and relevant state's constitutions. Your rights with respect to a private institution are governed under contract law with the contract being the school's code of conduct. Even if the school has a provision explicitly allowing disruptive students to remain in class, the case would not be a question of due process but of contract law. In summary, she is completely off base and in for a rude awakening very shortly.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2010 17:02
|
|
|
Slim Killington posted:They failed to provide evidence that their bylaw trumps actual law While I am still a student, my understanding from property class is that bylaws are allowed to be more restrictive than "actual law". If your actions are in violation of the bylaws, courts will probably side with the association. Think of it this way. Your bylaws are a contract between everyone living there, and the fine they want to charge is for breaching the contract, not for violating the state or municipal code. Again, I'm just a law student so you should not consider this real legal advice.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2011 00:19
|
|
|
Just a law student and don't completely know the answer to your divorce question. From what I do know, you really ought to get a real life attorney.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2011 04:12
|
|
|
The heirs being personally liable is different than the creditors getting first crack at the estate. The former means heirs have to pay debts if the estate is insufficient. I don't know of any state which allows this.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2011 19:00
|
|
|
Is the legal profession anything other than a gigantic circle jerk?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2011 22:04
|
|
|
KellyLama posted:Constructive Eviction. GA law student here. As I understand it GA law requires you to move out of the premises before you can claim constructive eviction. Your state may require the same as well. Also, I'm not even a lawyer yet, so this definitely is not legal advice and you should not rely on it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2011 20:00
|
|
|
Fascinator posted:Basic question, but I can't seem to find a straight answer and I'm obviously not going to trust my landlord on this one. This may be helpful: http://www.atlantalegalaid.org/tenrights.htm
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2011 20:04
|
|
|
MrHyde posted:I have an idea that I think has the potential to be a great product. I searched patent records and found that someone patented the exact idea already but they haven't used the patent at all as far as I can tell. There are no items like what I want to make for sale. I'm just a law student, so I have not yet passed the bar, much less the patent bar. So far as I know, there is no rule requiring actual use to maintain patent validity. The patent will last for 20 years from the filing date of the earliest non-provisional U.S. application to which priority is claimed assuming a filling after June 8, 1995. I don't recall the rule for before that day.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2011 04:40
|
|
|
MrHyde posted:So basically (as far as you know) if I made and sold this thing, the person with the patent could sue me even if they have no intention of ever using the patent? Yep. A patent is a limited monopoly in an idea. The theory is that by granting a temporary right we preserve the incentive to invent. Use in commerce is irrelevant under this theory and it is entirely possible the most economically productive use for the patent holder is to refrain from actually practicing the patent.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2011 06:45
|
|
|
kinkster posted:How should I best go about this so that a judge would throw out his case? The best way to get the case thrown out is don't loving fight him. Why do you feel that violence is the appropriate response here? You're asking this question because you seem to already know it is illegal, so I wonder why you feel this is the best course of action. What wrong have you suffered that calls for this? What is your ethical justification? Why is the law incorrect in not respecting that ethical justification. Second, you're asking a bunch of lawyers and law students how to go about violating a law when your conduct has a reasonable chance of inflicting serious bodily harm on a third party. We are ethically obligated against helping you.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2011 20:52
|
|
|
kinkster posted:[Y]ou guys could have figured out that this wasn't a huge deal from the beginning. The point is that this is a huge deal, legally and morally. Legally you are in the wrong. You can be held criminally and civilly liable for what you want to do. You claim that the courts aren't really going to care. I don't know how busy your local prosecutor's office is, but do you want to take that risk? For that matter, even if they drop the case, do you want the charges hanging over your head for the rest of your life? I don't know your district so I can't really predict how likely this is. However, he threatened to sue and you said his dad might try to sue you. This suggests he might press charges, and a prosecutor is more likely to do something if the victim actually pushes for prosecution. As for the civil suit, a judge just isn't going to dismiss it as boys will be boys. At a minimum you'd be looking at lots of money in court costs, and possible a civil conviction and judgment against you. While not a criminal record, it will still cost you or your family far more money than a childhood squabble is worth. As for our profession, we are ethically obligated not to help you break the law. I don't really know why that surprises you. I also mentioned that because it has legal consequences. First, none of us are your lawyer; you should not rely on this as legal advice. This means that none of us have a duty of confidentiality regarding what you have said. Any of us are free to try to internet detective you and use the information you posted as they see fit. Might be worth keeping that in mind. Ethically, you are even further in the wrong. Your replies show a very low level of moral development. You're in high school so that is to be expected. You're calling your friend a pussy because he might not fight you, which indicates that fighting is the masculine behavior here. No it isn't. If you can't talk to your friend, the manly thing to do is to loving talk to him. You're acting like a little boy and taking the easy way out. This is not a matter of pretending to be a grownup, but a matter of whether you want to grow up. You don't just magically wake up one day as an adult, you become a man because you don't cop out by saying you're "only" seventeen when confronted with a real choice. If you're old enough to drive a car, you are old enough to try to use words, even if it's hard. Your other arguments about why this is acceptable also betray childish morality. It is not OK just because you will not be punished. Likewise, everyone acts this way is not any sort of justification. The point is that this is wrong, regardless of how anyone else acts. How will fighting your friend make it easier to talk to him afterward? I get it, he stole your girlfriend and you want him to pay. All of us have been there before (despite the neckbeards. My first girlfriend used to braid mine, until she started cybering in WoW with some pansy elflord. That whore.). Anyway, part of growing up is learning how to accept it and move on. It's hard. We know. You want him to admit he's wrong. You want to punish him for taking your property Getting into a fistfight isn't the answer. His behavior might not be that of a good friend. That's something to talk about, and if necessary stop treating him as a friend. As for your girlfriend, she's not your property. You don't just get to claim no trespassers. That might not make what she did right, but fighting your friend doesn't address whatever issues led to this situation in the first place. There are thousands of ways for you to ignore our advice. We don't understand because we're lawyers, or nerds, or from the city, or adults, or left handed, or whatever the gently caress. Or you can recognize that everyone here, from all sorts of different backgrounds recognizes what you're doing as wrong and juvenile. You can claim it's OK to be juvenile because of your age, but that's a cop out and we both know that. It's easy to change the past if you start in time. If you ever want to grow into a man, you need to start acting like the man you want to me. Normally that's hard to figure out, but here a bunch of adults have shown the way. Don't do this bullshit fighting stuff and just loving talk to him and your girlfriend if things are still tense.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2011 23:48
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:That's a big effortpost for someone who's clearly either troll or a sociopath. I saw a lot of kids who thought like this when I was a student justice back in my university days. I still feel the urge to help them figure out they're being dumb little shits, so at least I can feel morally justified when they ignore me and the schadenfreude sets in. Here there is a chance of serious injury to one or both of them and this shithead is all set to ruin his life and possibly his friend's (depending on what sorts of injuries happen). His friend seems to be avoiding the fight, and I feel like I should make an effort to help him out even if I would love to see our poster get his rear end kicked.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2011 00:03
|
|
|
Hillridge posted:Corporate stuff. It also helps if you tell us what state. If nothing else we can make referrals once we know where you live. It also makes it easier for us to stare at you through the window while you sleep. I assume this is why more people don't give their location. \/\/\/\/ I'm a little cranky today. Looking back I see you did explain it. No offense ment. Soylent Pudding fucked around with this message at 21:08 on Apr 21, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2011 20:04
|
|
|
probably drunk posted:Move along citizen, nothing to see here. I am not in Oregon, and I am not a lawyer yet (or might never be if I don't finish this paper instead of browsing SA). It looks like you have three possible issues. The first is whether or not this is legally your child. The DNA test is a step in the right direction, at least for your own information. Once you get the results you should have some idea which of the second issues you face. It is your kid, and you want custody. Based on what I know about my county, you should have a good claim for custody. However, as the mother she will likely share custody in some form or another unless you can articulate compelling reasons why she is a danger to the well-being of your child. Any actual evidence would be helpful. It would be a very good idea to hire an attorney. On the other hand, it may not be your child. If she claims you as the father you will have to contest paternity. I have no clue how this process works in my jurisdiction, much less Oregon. In this case, you really want to hire a lawyer so you don't get stuck with 18+ years child support. The bottom line is that these are both hugely complicated issues, with serious legal consequences. Family law is always tricky, complicated, emotional, and high stakes. You should absolutely talk with a lawyer in your area. If you have no clue how to find one, this website should be a good start: http://www.osbar.org/public/ris/ris.html#referral Soylent Pudding fucked around with this message at 07:36 on Apr 25, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2011 02:50
|
|
|
Solomon Grundy posted:It is thinking like this that led to the legal services market meltdown from 2008-present. Everyone should always have lots of lawyers on retainer and consult with those lawyers before every major or minor decision in their personal and business lives. It might get expensive for you, but hey, I have student loans to pay. You may be on to something here. The world would work better if things were like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f--u_puzhGs&feature=youtu.be
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2011 18:21
|
|
|
Brennanite posted:AZ Tenancy and Trustee's Sale questions: Just a law student, but I have done some Landlord-Tenant work through a clinic. As always, if you want real legal advice, talk to an AZ lawyer and not some guy on the internet who may or may not currently be wearing pants. As I understand it, a trustee's sale is the sale of foreclosed upon assets in a bankruptcy. The federal Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act states that a tenant's lease does not end when property is sold at foreclosure. This means that they must allow you to remain for the duration of your lease. The only exception is if the purchaser seeks to occupy the property as a residence, in which case they must give at least ninety (90) days notice, even if there is less than 90 days remaining. This means you are guaranteed at least 90 days, or more likely the remaining time on your lease. Practically speaking, if the new owners want to continue leasing the property you should be ok. In this case you may be able to lease the unit again next year. They are not obligated to keep the same lease terms. Once your current lease expires they can offer any lease terms not void under federal, state, or local law. If they do not wish to lease, then they do not have to lease to you next year. If they don't like the current lease terms they may also be super anal about all your lease provisions. Thus, whoever your new landlords are, it is a very good idea to understand all your obligations under the lease and make sure you do not breach. One of the most common fact patters I saw was a new LL taking over and doing everything in their power to claim the tenants breached, just so the landlord could rent the units out under more favorable terms. I believe the inclusive means that the building is being auctioned off as a whole. It would be strange to sell off units individually unless they were freestanding. Still, it's probably the building as a whole unless AZ does something weird. You could always call up the auction people and ask though. Again, I am not a lawyer, I am not in your jurisdiction, and I may not be wearing pants. You would get much better advice talking to a lawyer in your area. Also, most states have landlord-tenant groups than can provide information if you do not want to talk to a lawyer.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2011 04:19
|
|
|
Brennanite posted:Now, my lease specifically states that "in the event of foreclosure on the premises this agreement shall be terminated. Agent shall return applicable deposits to tenants. Tenants hereby release agent from further responsibility or liability." That says to me that it's void. HOWEVER, it sounds like this Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act supersedes the termination clause in my lease. Is this correct? That's really important information. I've never had to deal with that sort of provision before. Make that appointment with student legal aid. Make sure you bring a copy of your lease and copies of the notifications you have received.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2011 20:52
|
|
|
On the practical side, have you tried talking with your neighbor and/or your family member? Most legal problems can be solved much more easily if both parties are willing to talk it over like reasonable adults. That is a very big if though.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2011 07:04
|
|
|
fordham posted:I'm in Connecticut - I think I cut down my neighbor's tree, mistakenly believing it to be mine. It did have multiple branches overhanging my driveway and is by best guess about 1 foot over the property line. I believe the general rule is that you can trim back limbs over your property so long as you do not hurt the tree itself. First, you should figure out exactly where your property line is. Also, what sort of damage did your car suffer from the tree? If you can document damage to the car and repairs it will improve your position. They may be less likely to sue or more willing to settle it quickly if you have a counterclaim for any appreciable damage. Also, what made you change your mind about whether it is your or your neighbor's tree? Have you considered just talking with your neighbors?
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2011 18:38
|
|
|
Advice posted:Stuff Unless you signed a contract involving the car and the debt, you have no obligation to pay. The Statute of Frauds ought to block any claims of an oral agreement to buy the car, guarantee the debt, etc.. Did you ever agree to pay any money for the right to drive her car? If you did, they can hold you liable for what you agreed to pay for the right to use the car. As for your apartment, you need to check the lease. Most leases hold the tenants jointly and severally liable for the rent. This means that in the event of non-payment, the landlord can recover the full value from either or both of you. You are responsible for ensuring the total rent is paid in full each month. You may also have the right to hold her liable for her unpaid rent. Actually enforcing that may be difficult if she moves to Hawaii though. Edit: Also. Not a lawyer yet, just a law student. This is not legal advice and you really ought to be careful before following the advice of anyone whom might not be wearing pants.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2011 01:47
|
|
|
Serash posted:Are there any lawyers in the NJ/Central Jersey area on here? I have some questions about a DWI case. Get a laywer.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2011 19:23
|
|
|
|Ziggy| posted:Quick apartment lease question: Can you explain this in more detail please? Did you ever talk with them about the new rent rates or did they tell you anything about which rate applies? It sounds like you're renewing your lease, they raised the rents and you are grandfathered in with your old rent? Also, what state are you in?
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2011 02:07
|
|
|
|Ziggy| posted:This is in Texas. I'm renewing my lease and the rate is going up $30 per month and they just mistyped the new lease agreement. I'm not grandfathered into anything. It's not terribly important if you don't know, I was just curious. The addendum made it sound like you were being grandfathered in at the old rate. If there were any conversations suggesting that you could keep the old rate, that may be important. I'd call them up and ask them if they meant to charge you the old rent amount or the new rent amount. Worst that happens is they say the new rate applies. If for some reason they let you keep the lower rate, get that in writing and keep it on file. Disclaimer: Still just a law student. Like everyone else on the internet, I may or may not be wearing pants, and you should consider my comments accordingly. Soylent Pudding fucked around with this message at 07:49 on May 9, 2011 |
|
#
¿
May 9, 2011 03:02
|
|
|
hooah posted:My unit just had a briefing for what policies will/won't change whenever Don't Ask Don't Tell gets repealed. Part of the brief was information on what benefits same-sex spouses will NOT get, supposedly because the Defense of Marriage Act won't let the military provide those benefits. Is this indeed the case? I thought DOMA was regarding states' treatment of weddings from other states. As I understand it, the law does two main things. First, it gives states the option of not recognizing same sex marriages granted by other states. Second, for the purposes of federal law, it defines marriage as between one man and one woman. We needed this law to protect American families from The Gay. If gay men weren't tempting other  From wikipedia: Section 2. Powers reserved to the states No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship. Section 3. Definition of marriage In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word 'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife. Soylent Pudding fucked around with this message at 04:14 on May 11, 2011 |
|
#
¿
May 11, 2011 04:12
|
|
|
InfoAficionado posted:Dallas County, TX Just as a heads up, finding one lawyer to represent both of you may be slightly harder. Even though things seem to be friendly, you are still adverse parties and lawyers run into all sorts of ethical issues because of that. If they're any good they will have you waive privilege and confidentiality with respect to each other, and they still probably have to withdraw from representation if you end up disagreeing about something. I'm sorry things didn't work out for you, but good luck with everything.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2011 23:31
|
|
|
InfoAficionado posted:I was under the impression that sharing a lawyer isn't uncommon if there's no disagreement in splitting stuff up. FWIW, I've basically told her she can have whatever she wants and I'll take what's left (except for the bank account, which we already split). We're both pretty stupidly young and just want it to be done with. Sharing can be done, especially in situations like this. You just have to waive a whole bunch of stuff.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2011 00:05
|
|
|
Dradien posted:Usury If they loan charges interest beyond what the usury statute permits, you may have a remedy. What the remedy is may depend on state law. It would probably be worthwhile to at least get a quick consult with a local attorney, you probably can get a cheap consult here: http://www.pabar.org/public/membership/lrsblurb.asp As always, I am not a lawyer licensed in your jurisdiction, and you have no guarantee that I am even wearing pants. Treat my advice accordingly.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2011 08:58
|
|
|
singe posted:Can a landlord legally force me to pay for his legal fees if he decides to sue me? It seems kind of weird, there's a line in my housing contract that I'm slightly concerned about. Really need to know what state. Different state laws may say different things. Where I live, leases may only provide for recovery of attorney fees if the both the landlord and the tenant may recover fees. Soylent Pudding fucked around with this message at 22:42 on May 20, 2011 |
|
#
¿
May 20, 2011 18:01
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Your friend needs a lawyer now. Furthermore, none of you should tell the authorities anything until he talks with a lawyer. Your friend has the right to remain silent and he should use it until his lawyer tells him otherwise.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2011 22:53
|
|
|
srsly posted:The prosecutor is already operating from the assumption that he did it. This thread doesn't change poo poo. Internet detective bullshit can indeed suck but this isn't a time to be worried about it. You're probably right, but this is a good occasion as any to teach people to think before they post stuff on the internet for the world to see. Better to practice good habits when you don't need them than try to learn good habits when you do.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2011 10:18
|
|
|
Electric Apathy posted:I have a question about workplace safety, if an employer does not provide proper personal protective equipment when working with machinery or chemicals, if there a case for compensation? even if there is no apparent health effect (yet), im talking things that could in the future cause birth defects or cancer, and that are listed as harmful substances in chemical databases and manufacturer specs I know almost nothing about employment law, but my first thought would be to check here: http://www.osha.gov/html/Feed_Back.html They have a number and as well as an E-mail address for workplace safety questions. Might be worth a call to see if you are in an unsafe working environment. You should have the names and info on the chemicals handy if you call. It's way too late and I didn't check the next page. If people are starting to feel sick definitely contact someone at OSHA or a local attorney, or both. If this stuff is really that dangerous you need to talk to an expert quickly. Soylent Pudding fucked around with this message at 11:09 on Jun 9, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2011 10:59
|
|
|
InfoAficionado posted:State is Nebraska, Douglas County. Step 1: Go get a criminal defense lawyer for your brother right now, preferably yesterday. Step 2: Do nothing, say nothing to anyone until after your brother's lawyer speaks with you. If you have no idea how to find a lawyer, your parents should call a lawyer they've used in the past and ask for references.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2011 22:21
|
|
|
InfoAficionado posted:This is awful to say but my parents have paid a ton of lawyer fees for him in the past (and they can't afford it) so they cut him off several years ago. I'm sure he's got a few lawyers in his cell phone that he's used in the past. Suffice to say that this type of thing isn't uncommon. I'm sorry to hear that. If your brother hires a lawyer, you should go talk to her. If not, well, you will still have to answer the summons. I'm still a law student and do not know if you have a right to remain silent here, but perhaps some other legal goon can answer that. The one thing you should never do is lie while testifying, no matter how much you want to protect your brother.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2011 22:34
|
|
|
frobert blamble posted:I'm in Ohio and this all happened in the same county. In 2009 I was involved in an auto accident. The other person filed a lawsuit against me last month right before the deadline ended for unspecified damages in excess of $25,000. The sheriff deputies that responded to the accident found drugs and paraphernalia in his vehicle and he ended up being charged with possession of cocaine. I was looking online at his court records and it turns out he didn't show up for sentencing last October and has a felony warrant out for his arrest. I doubt this will actually go to trial, but will his warrant affect the case at all? He has an attorney, but will he actually have to show up to court himself as well, at which point he'll be arrested? Is there any chance I can just get this case dismissed? I also suspect he used a fake address in a neighboring county when he filed the case if that matters at all because it's different from his old address in previous cases. What do your insurance company/lawyer say?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2011 21:28
|
|
|
candywife posted:We already had the city building inspector guy come look at it. No supporting beams were damaged, and we were told to just brace the area with 2x4s in case an earthquake happens before we can get it repaired. Besides, the garages are separate from the house itself, so there's no danger of a collapse. Do you have any sort of insurance for anything?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2011 22:33
|
|
|
When going to court make sure to dress nicely. No T-shirts, ripped jeans, shorts, tennis shoes, etc. You don't need your Sunday best, but at the very least a collared shirt and slacks. If you're a lady, wear at least whatever the female equivalent of that is. Be polite, punctual, pithy, and don't do anything your mother wouldn't approve of. This applies to everyone going to court. You would think this is common sense. If so, you've never seen traffic or misdemeanor court. If you can do this you're 90% of the way there just because you will be such a pleasant break from the usual.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2011 03:14
|
|
|
El Ste posted:I have a question about getting out of a lease before having actually moved in. First she could just ask if they will let her out of the lease. If not, what does it say about subletting?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2011 00:51
|
|
|
SmellsOfFriendship posted:I did. Their message line referred me to the Oregon Bar, who sent me to a lawyer that specialized in business litigation. Call the bar again and see if you get a different guy? Also ask the richest people you know (or the kids of the richest people you know) who their lawyer is. Then ask her for a recommendation.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2011 01:44
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 02:27 |
|
|
Propagandalf posted:I live in Nebraska. I recently re-signed my apartment lease after living here a year. Previously, I paid $710/mo, plus a garage and pet fee, totaling $795/mo. This amount was written on my old lease in the "Propagandalf agrees to pay us $_795_ per month" line. There are no lines on the lease for additional fees, just the 'agrees to pay us ____ on the first of the month' line. Talk with a local landlord tennant attorney, but based on the facts you have provided it sounds like they are asking for fees not covered in the lease. Are you sure the new lease doesn't have any language giving them the right to charge additional fees? Also, google some combination of Nebraska Landlord Tenant Help. Just a few seconds led me here: http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/states/nebraska/renting/tenantrights where there are some seemingly useful links.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2011 01:49
|
|