|
So if the uncle is judgement proof, could he have a case against the (ex) girlfriend for negligently exposing him to a serial violent offender? If he's going to break up with her anyway he has nothing to lose, and may as well try to get something out of the situation.
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 18:23 |
|
|
Schedule two meetings. Have the official one with this tedious woman in which you only discuss fairly banal stuff, and then go to the pub afterwards with the more sensible members in which you can discuss how dreadful she is and anything else you and the others would rather not have recorded.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:It's always better to tell the truth. Is this legal advice?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2017 23:42
|
|
|
I like your cup, and feel you deserve some credit for it. However, I have no legal advice.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 14:38
|
|
|
Hypothetically speaking, if you were to be arrested buying street drugs, how much of a defence would it be that you are doing it with the blessing of a medical professional? Could this cause any legal problems for said professional?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
Doesn't one of your amendments give you the right to not answer?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2018 15:51
|
|
|
What if the suspect refuses to request or accept immunity? Could the government just impose it on them, thereby removing their option to not testify?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2018 16:25
|
|
|
How would a jury selection be done for trump if he ever went to a real trial? With such a polarising and uniformly known political figure, how could unbiased jurors be agreed on? Wouldn't each possible one have at least some political opinions and baggage that one side could reasonably object to?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2021 09:03
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Well yes. Marvel handed Sony the rights to Spiderman and as long as they keep releasing Spiderman films Sony can keep the rights forever. Even Disney's army of lawyers couldn't find a way out of that contract. I choose to believe that the op is in Disney's army of lawyers and is posting here to get advice for that very situation.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2021 14:45
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:what is it your lawyer is doing for you Very little, it seems.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2021 06:11
|
|
|
Nice piece of fish posted:I think this lawyer is actually loving them pro boner Wouldn't that make it payment in kind instead?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2021 00:21
|
|
|
pseudanonymous posted:Jokes are funny. hth. There's no legal precedent for that in this thread.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2021 07:40
|
|
|
EKDS5k posted:No, in practice what happens is I get sent to a facility where some dipshit lackey makes me pee in a cup so he can test it in front of me. Depending on if a square changes colour or not, then they call my boss and tell him I've been naughty, and then I get labelled an addict and treated as such, complete with forced counseling and unpaid time off. For something I might have bought from a government run store and used on my own time. But it's not arbitrary. They have a contract with a company that for perfectly legitimate reasons do not want druggies on their site. It is quite literally their business to ensure that people who may reasonably be sent to that site will are clean. I don't quite follow why you consider this so outrageous?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2022 07:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 18:23 |
|
|
EKDS5k posted:Right. This is why everyone is giving advice that is the opposite from the actual legal advice I got from my union rep, with no links or resources to back anything up. I'm sightly confused. Where is the contradictory advice? Are they actually forcing you? I thought you said that the union told you that you could refuse, not that the company can't ask you to take it. As far as I can tell, that's all they've done so far so that they can adequately plan for this particular job. Where exactly is the wrongdoing?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2022 17:37
|
|