All Activity

This stream auto-updates   

  1. Today
  2. What's the deal with the microscopic font? Please don't do that. All of them? Yes. See this and this. It is impossible to opine intelligently about the legality of a document we haven't seen.
  3. I need to know the rules on Power of attorney in Louisiana... Does it have to be notarized and witnessed? It is dated, hand written an and signed by person in 2002.Does there need to be anything more for it to be legal ??
  4. Thank's for everyone's input, appreciate the assistance its an eye opener, most of this back and forth has been both therapeutic and helpful, just laying out my generalized questions alone has managed to reveal the real key to the question. Yes, believe I familiar with hurdles, I've managed to clear a gauntlet of hurdles and obstacles over the years for documents anyone in my position would normally be entitled to by law under these circumstances. . . This has been helpful. .
  5. Something doesn't add up here. A "deferred sentence" only "comes off" your record once ALL the terms of your probation are complete and your fines have been paid. It sounds like yours have not? If so, it is still a "conviction" on your record and fair game. If your probation is entirely complete and ALL fines paid (and 10 years later I would think they would be, but ...), check the records in the jurisdiction where you were charged and tried. Contact your attorney to see if your case was not handled appropriately.
  6. You haven't even told us where this is, aside from the state. If the codes haven't been updated, no one here would have any way of knowing what might be done by some unknown council at some unknown future date. Again, Right to Know has nothing to do with anything you posted. For the benefit of future readers, "right to know" involves communication regarding chemical exposure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_know
  7. I think you misread what I wrote. I said that the government filed the motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and then before the court ruled on that motion it dismissed the case for failure to state a claim, exactly what you have said here. No, thats the way it's supposed to go. The agency has to justify its reasons for withholding the documents to the court but only once the issue is properly presented to the court. If you do not properly serve the defendants or if your complaint is not well drafted then the case ought to be dismissed. Why should a defendant have to do the work to defend the case when you haven't done your end of getting the complaint right and/or serving the agency properly? I realize that you really want to get to the point where the agency has to explain its reasons for withholding the records, but you have to get your part right to get there. And with the long history of this you have accumulated a set of extra hurdles to try to get there.
  8. This sentence is a grammatical mess, so I'm not really sure what you're asking. I think what you might be asking is whether the boss who "ignored" the employees who reported the alleged "abuse" could be "held accountable." If that's your question, it's not clear what "held accountable" means. Without any factual details whatsoever, the only possible answer is maybe. In addition to the questions asked in the prior response, you should also provide some temporal context and explain whether there is any evidence of the alleged "abuse" other than the reports made by some employees.
  9. My borough's CODES are outdated. Thanks to The Right to know law, research and education and SPEAKING UP two interviews were run with myself and Borough officials both by Fox News and ABC News concerning this PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARD which now turns out, is NOT limited to one block! As a result, Violation Notices were sent and CODES WILL BE CHANGED at the first Council meeting to address this serious public health issue. LESSON: DON'T LET so called "experts" minimize your problems when their understanding is limited or wrong and the way of approaching your problem unkind for no reason! TRUST YOUR GUT! I don't have time to delete my posts and membership right now, but could NOT believe how downhill this has gone!
  10. You are going to need to provide a lot more detail. What kind of abuse? What specifically was reported? On what basis/for what reason was the employee abused? Was that reason/basis shared with the supervisor? How many employees are there? What has the employee done to remedy the situation beside report it to the boss?
  11. I am quite familiar with "Right to Know", however, in its most universal context it has nothing to do with your situation. If there is some local ordinance that uses this language (which would be unusual at best as typically legislative entities seek to avoid using commonly held terms for uncommon purposes), you will need to cite it. There is not a universal "licensing" process for rental properties in PA. I know this as my family has held rental properties in various parts of the state for decades. If your borough/township/county has some sort of procedure in place and your neighbor has not followed it, you can report it to whatever agency is responsible for enforcement. Any remedy or enforcement mechanism lies with them. Same with adoption of the regulations of any kind. That doesn't solve any of the problems that you complain of, however. You might still have a reptile living next to you (ironically, its diet should decrease the rodent population, not increase it, but I digress). Codes for habitability can be abysmally lax, particularly with older properties which are often grandfathered (true everywhere- not just PA). You have a means of keeping the rodent population under control at your residence; namely monthly treatments. It may have nothing to do with your neighbors at all. In fact, if they are getting into your physical dwelling, that isn't your neighbor's fault at all.
  12. If a boss ignores employees when they report abuse by another employee be held accountable for not taking action against the employee being the abusive one. If more info needed, I can provide.
  13. The restatements are all well and good, but they're not the law. If a plaintiff sues for unpaid monies pursuant to a contract and obtains for judgment, there would be no question that the judgment would include prejudgment interest.
  14. Further, you mention arrears, which means at some point you failed to pay what was ordered. That never goes away, no matter how old your child is or what their medical situation becomes. Even if your child were now much older and perfectly healthy, you would still owe the other parent the money you failed to pay under the old order. You *can* seek to modify it for good cause and a judge *can* modify it if they agree. That has little to do with the child's health or age and more to do with getting blood from turnips.
  15. Civil Code section 3304 provides that "[t]he detriment caused by the breach of an obligation to pay money only, is deemed to be the amount due by the terms of the obligation, with interest thereon." Civil Code section 3289(b) provides that, "If a contract entered into after January 1, 1986, does not stipulate a legal rate of interest, the obligation shall bear interest at a rate of 10 percent per annum after a breach." However, Civil Code section 3290 provides that "[a]ccepting payment of the whole principal, as such, waives all claim to interest." As a practical matter, I would expect that very few persons would willingly pay statutory interest if the contract does not expressly provide for same. In your case, that would put the onus on the licensor to file suit to recover interest.
  16. You cannot charge interest (or anything else) that isn't specified in your contract. That's basic contract law which you can study at: http://www.lexinter.net/LOTWVers4/restatement_(second)_of_contracts.htm If you find unreported royalties and the other party won't pay, you sue for it. When you get a judgment, you would be entitled to post-judgment interest on the award until it's paid. You can seek pre-judgment interest as part of your claim, but getting it is iffy.
  17. Its the other way around the government filed the motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction then days later the court dismissed sua sponte failure to state a claims. . . Well in this case the IFP screening process flipped the script in turning the table on who was to sustain their actions in FOIA, its always on agency. . res judicata was brought the court found it didn't apply. . .that's not the issue that concerns me. . when the sua sponte ruling occurred the request was originally filed with ICE when it referred request to USCIS for processing (even though withheld documents predated USCIS existence), therefore ICE's participation was limited to its referral to USCIS and ended there, when the sua sponte order issued. ICE's referral policy has kept them from justifying its original withholding. . . .
  18. LLC Licensor and LLC Licensee has a Intellectual Property Agreement. The Agreement has a provision to pay royalties in month after the calendar quarter but does not have a provision for late interest if licensee is late in paying royalties due to Licensor. Is there a California law which permits Licensor to charge interest for late payment? If yes can you cite the law and reference #? If no, what happens if Licensor performs audit of Licensee and finds under reported royalties were not paid to Licensor. Can Licensor charge interest for late payment in this case? Thank you
  19. That’s not quite it. The government apparently filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction because it alleged improper service by the OP. But prior to the court ruling on that, the court dismissed the case sua sponte failure to state a claim. Even though the government evidently did not file a Rule 12(b)(6) motion the court dismissed for failure to state a claim because the OP (IFP) was proceeding in forma pauperis (IFP) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) directs the court to dismiss an IFP filed complaint at any time it finds it fails to state a claim. And of course, with the dismissal for failure to state a claim the government never had to defend the FOIA/Privacy Act appeal and thus never had to justify withholding the documents that the OP has been trying to get for years. That's the whole idea of a dismissal for failure to state a claim — end the litigation before the parties have to expend much time and effort. And now the OP faces the problem that a dismissal for failure to state a claim presents a res judicata problem for his next efforts to get this information, among other hurdles. I’m not convinced that switching defendants from ICE to USCIS will solve that problem.
  20. According to your original post, the defendants advised the court that it lacked personal jurisdiction over them. Based on that the court issued an order dismissing the case; If that is correct, the defendants did respond and the court found their response persuasive. Obviously whatever they alleged was sufficient to convince the court. We have no indication who you alleged were the defendnats in the case so have no way of considering whether the defendants' response was proper and sufficient. The court obviously felt it was.
  21. The pleading is drawn up like "notice of service defect" the contents inside the notice is more of motion to dismiss although it doesn't contain formal language regarding that particular case but it did contain memoranda of law supporting a dismissal based on lack of personal jurisdiction based on defective service. . . I understand that I provide generalized information, the order was a sua sponte order that issued a few days later the plaintiff. After defendants a complained that the court lacked jurisdiction to move forward. However, the order was in their favor. They were never made to justify their actions.
  22. Yesterday
  23. Well..."a contract for land purchase" is presumably between a seller and a buyer, but it's not clear to whom "you" refers in this sentence. Of course, a contract generally cannot be amended except by agreement of both parties, so it would make little sense to suggest that "you" could refer to either the buyer or the seller. As far as "los[ing] the right to pursue legal action," I can't even conceive why an amendment to the contract might have that effect. Ok...so Seller had a contract with Buyer #1 to sell Property. Buyer #1 failed to pay (within the time provided in the contract, presumably). Seller "didn't notify [Buyer #1] correctly," but it's not clear what Seller didn't notify Buyer #1 about. In any event, despite not "notify[ing] [Buyer #1] correctly" (whatever that means), Seller then "placed [the Property] for sale with an agent," which apparently has resulted in a contract between Seller and Buyer #2 (you). Whose broker? Your broker or Seller's broker? Who are "we"? Why might you "end up not purchasing the land"? Failure to disclose what? With all that said, anyone can sue anyone for anything. Whether the amendment to which you have referred would have any impact on a lawsuit you might file would depend on what exactly the amendment says and how you answer the questions I asked. Of course, if you're concerned about this, you would be wise to consult with a local real estate lawyer.
  24. I am a buyer. The seller failed to disclose that he had a previous agreement for the sale noterized 4yrs ago and the individual did not pay so he placed for sale with an agent, but he didn't notify that individual correctly. After we made a deal and 6days into our contract this information came forth. Our broker wants us to ammend our contract to close at later date and place verbage in regards to this situation. If we do this and we end up not purchasing the land can I then pursue legal action against seller for failure to disclose?
  25. You have certainly burdened us with a wealth of facts. Therefore the answer is maybe or maybe not, depending.
  26. If you ammend a contract for land purchase, do you lose the right to pursue legal action if purchase doesn't go through?
  27. Or how about jogging your own memory as to WHO you borrowed the money from, and contacting them. Obviously it's went to a law firm for collections, but if adjusterjack suggestion of trying at the courthouse for documents doesn't produce what you're looking for, consider the original source.
  1. Load more activity