Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 12/19/2018 in all areas

  1. 3 points

    Diving Accident

    Sure it would have, but the question will be whether it was a reasonable option. I think pretty much anyone would agree that making an indoor pond at a bar 8-feet deep would be an extreme and unexpected thing to do. And, as I commented earlier in this thread, no reasonable person would behave so carelessly as to dive head-first into a two foot body of water. Moreover, and possibly most importantly, what if a person who didn't know how to swim accidentally was pushed into the 8-foot deep indoor pool and drowned? Making the darn thing 8-feet deep would be far more likely to result in injury or death. I'll bottom line it: if you get any recovery beyond the no-fault medical payment coverage that the bar owner's liability policy presumably had, it will be a stark illustration of everything that is wrong with the tort system in the U.S.
  2. 2 points
    I read it that the landlord served the eviction summons 1 day after serving the non-pay termination notice, not 15 days after serving the non-pay termination notice. Eric, am I right about that? If so, you'll need to file an answer to the eviction complaint, moving for its dismissal as being premature. If you can't afford a lawyer I suggest you look for a local legal aid office or tenants' rights organization for help. Another way of getting the eviction dismissed is to pay the rent within the 14 days and bring proof of payment to the court if the LL doesn't voluntary dismiss the eviction.
  3. 2 points
    What does "automatically called" mean? Are you asking if there's some sort of nationwide surveillance system that "automatically" summons the police anytime someone "nearly drowns"? Whether a "near drowning" will result in anyone being called obviously depends on the facts and circumstances of the incident and whether anyone involved is inclined to call someone (police or otherwise).
  4. 2 points
    What he is booked for doesn't mean anything. It's the DA's office that files charges, not the cops.
  5. 2 points

    Same name usage in logo

    Those two entities have been at each other since 1984 according to the case decision that summarizes the history: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1:2013cv07147/418541/44/ There are several other cases that involve the Polo Ralph Lauren Corporation. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=806&q=polo+ralph+lauren+corp&oq=polo You don't put your foot in a bear trap to see if the bear trap works. You already know that the use of "polo" in a clothing brand generates lawsuits. Do you think that PRL Corp won't hesitate to flatten you the minute your product hits the market? Figure out another way of naming your brand rather than a risky infringement.
  6. 2 points

    "applicable laws"

    Just for giggles I took out the phrase about easements and other interests and what is left does suggest that a lot may be subdivided if that subdivision complies with whatever county or city laws apply to subdividing lots. Next question: Is there anything anywhere in the CC&Rs requiring HOA approval for any modifications of a property?
  7. 2 points
    I want to thank you again for convincing me to call our insurance company again. They are handling the issue and so far we are extremely pleased! One of the attorneys came out to the house to take tons of photos and discuss the case. They filed a spectacular answer with a dozen defenses and requested a jury trial if the judge won't dismiss.
  8. 1 point
    If you feel your medical records are not accurate, you have a right to request that the doctor correct them. 45 CFR 164.526. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/45/164.526 The regulations include: --a procedure for requesting a change, --the time periods for a health care provider to respond to a request, --what health care providers are supposed to do if they agree with the request, --the bases upon which a health care provider can deny a request for a change, and --the procedural requirements for a denial.
  9. 1 point

    Diving Accident

    Good luck with that. Have you received your Darwin Award yet?
  10. 1 point
    Just for clarity's sake, my opinion isn't any better or worse than any other anonymous stranger's opinion. With that said, I think what you're wondering is whether, regardless of the circumstances (including where the events take place), would a lifeguard or paramedics or hospital personnel call the police. The answer to that is absolutely and unequivocally no. The only reason to contact the police would be (1) if a crime were suspected; or (2) some law requires it. There are lots of circumstances in which a boy might "nearly drown" without any reason to suspect a crime. I'd be curious to know why the person in your writers' forum believes that the police would "have to be involved." To the best of my knowledge, the only time mandatory reporting is required is if the crime suspected is domestic abuse. There is no absolute rule that applies everywhere in the U.S. and regardless of circumstances that would require this. Concur.
  11. 1 point
    Not necessarily. I've read many stories and have seen much TV and movies were police aren't necessarily involved. However, if somebody calls 911, and paramedics are dispatched, it's likely that police will be dispatched at the same time. If the paramedics were dispatched from a 911 call, the police were likely already called. If, say, the paramedics came across a drowning boy, rescued him and took him to the hospital, it would be a matter of routine and probably mandatory procedure to radio for the police, too. Bottom line, though, it's fiction. You can write it any way you want.
  12. 1 point

    Successor In Interest

    Unfortunately, your medical condition is irrelevant. As a non-owner you are in no position to contest any irregularity in the foreclosure. You are simply a tenant and probably a tenant at sufferance. That means you are only a tenant until the owner decides to terminate your tenancy, which will probably not be long. You need to focus on finding someplace else to live.
  13. 1 point

    3rd degree retail fraud

    This article, published by a Michigan law firm, seems to do a good job discussing Michigan shoplifting laws. One additional point: If you were shoplifting in 2011 and again in 2019, most folks are going to assume that you were also shoplifting during the intervening time and simply avoided getting caught.
  14. 1 point
    There is no way to predict the outcome without being familiar with the sentencing judge's practices and policies. Any of the options you mentioned are possible.
  15. 1 point
    You are a special ed math teacher. How about you teach math.
  16. 1 point
    What would possibly make you think this has anything to do with the Americans with Disabilities Act? Certainly your post provides no reason to think it has anything to do with it. If the company agreed in advance to pay the $150 in expenses associated with your interview and hasn't done so, you're free to sue in small claims court. You missed one -- in the second e-mail quoted in the original post.
  17. 1 point
    Yes, I've removed names, phone numbers, addresses, and email addresses from the OP. Please continue the discussion.
  18. 1 point
    I’ve removed the pictures since these are public boards. Please continue the thread!
  19. 1 point
    Just submit the claim to your insurer, either through UM (ghost vehicles are always considered uninsured) or collision, whichever is less expensive. There is no hope of solving the crime with a private investigator.
  20. 1 point

    Pregnant Teen Marriage

    Before 2018, Florida law allowed judges to issue marriage licenses to people under the age of 18 if the female was pregnant or if the couple had already had a child. The wording of the old law seems to indicate that parent consent may not have been a strict requirement in those circumstances. But in 2018 the Florida legislature amended the statute as I described above, and the amendments completely eliminate the ability of anyone under age 17 to get married in Florida under any circumstance, and only allows 17 year olds to get married in Florida in limited circumstances. There is no longer a provision for judges to issue marriage licenses to people under 17.
  21. 1 point
    If the mother is a resident of Pennsylvania the divorce can be filed there. If the child also resides in PA the court will apply PA law, as should have happened all along.
  22. 1 point
    Even if your lease is with the property manager, the property manager acted as agent for the owner and was authorized to sign the lease on behalf of the owner. It's up to the owner to get the deposit from the property manager and the owner would be obligated to refund you the deposit on move-out even if the owner never gets the money from the property manager. Here is the CA security deposit statute: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=1950.5.
  23. 1 point
    Unless your lease is with the management company, you have no contract with the management company and cannot bring suit against them. The management company is holding the funds in trust for the property owner and the owner is the only one able to sue for the deposit.
  24. 1 point

    Vehicle Impound

    This: https://az.aaa.com/?zip=85022&stateprov=az&city=phoenix&devicecd=PC
  25. 1 point

    Nanny quit now is taking me to court

    This is small claims territory. Involving a lawyer would be a terrible idea (and taking money out of your 401(k) for a lawyer would be an even worse idea -- especially when that same money could be used to pay what you owe). Until you've paid this person for time worked, you're susceptible of being sued. The sooner you pay what you owe, the sooner you can put this behind you.
  26. 1 point

    retaliation after reporting abribe attempt

    It depends on what you mean by "compensation". If by compensation you mean lost wages, maybe. If by compensation you mean a big judgement against the company with penalties for them and a windfall for you, no.
  27. 1 point

    retaliation after reporting abribe attempt

    If you get a judgment in your country, you probably can get a U.S. court to recognize and enforce that suit. I say "probably" because it depends on what your country is and the laws of the U.S. state where you are seeking recognition. What's "fair" is in the eye of the beholder, and compensation that a U.S. court might award to an employee based in the U.S. would not necessarily be "fair" for a person based in some unknown foreign country. One thing you need to understand is that, just because your employer is U.S.-based doesn't mean you're entitled to everything that a U.S.-based employee would be entitled to. In fat, it's possible that your retaliation claim might not be actionable at all. You haven't identified your country and, even if you did, no one here is likely to know anything about that country's employment laws.
  28. 1 point
    If you receive a judgment against the company in your home country, that judgment would ordinarily be enforceable against whatever assets the company had in that country. There are procedures available for you to take a judgment issued by a court in your home country and transform it into a US judgment that would then be enforceable against assets the company has in the US. That might be what you're asking about.
  29. 1 point

    Need advice for a friend - California

    Sure. If/when she moves out, the landlord will be required to comply with the security deposit law. Off the top of my head, I think it's section 1954 of the Civil Code (or somewhere around there).
  30. 1 point

    "applicable laws"

    You got it right. However, the County Zoning Ordinance and Building Code Ordinance are also laws since they were authorized by a statute creating the County or City.
  31. 1 point


    The sentence you have quoted says that an owner of a building lot (or any interest in a building lot) may not subdivide the lot or interest unless he/she/it complies with applicable laws. That is not the same thing as "subdividing is permitted as long as you comply with all applicable laws," but that seems to be the implication. One would need to read the entirety of the CC&Rs to know for sure.
  32. 1 point

    2 years later

    If that's the case, then why would the lease say this: ??? It's not illegal. Your options are to pay or not to pay. But here's a question: if your understanding was "that there was nothing gas in the house," then you presumably did not use any gas appliances (e.g., heater, stove, oven, gas clothes dryer). Right? Or if you did use such things, where did you think the gas was coming from? A statute of limitations is a law that says how long after accrual of a cause of action a plaintiff has to file a lawsuit. Statutes of limitations vary widely from state to state, and you didn't identify your state (despite the prompt that you do so). However, I don't know any state in which the SOL would be less than two years, and it's much longer in most states. First, nothing in this quoted paragraph says "that the gas should have been cut off 3 days after [you] moved in." Is that statement in a different part of the lease, or did you mis-type when you wrote that in your original post? Second, the statement that "utilities are defined [to include] . . . gas" completely contradicts your statement that you were "told that there was nothing gas in the house." Third, this quoted language makes it clear that it was your obligation to have utilities, including gas, put "into [your] name . . . within three days from commencement of the lease." Should the landlord have made you aware of the situation before now? Yes. Does the landlord's failure to make you aware mean it has no claim against you? No. Should the landlord give you time to pay the charges? Yes, but it isn't legally required to do so.
  33. 1 point

    Desperately need help

    Fallguy, Work Comp lawyers are a dime a dozen. If you can't get one to take your case there is a reason for it and that reason is most likely you don't have a case.
  34. 1 point
    Yes, it was about a government entity. In the case of the Colorado baker, the Colorado Civil Rights Division, (CCRD) a Colorado state agency, took enforcement action against the baker because the baker allegedly violated Colorado state law in refusing to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple. The baker then appealed the decision of the CCRD claiming that the CCRD violated the baker's Constitutional rights, a case that eventually was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. So you see, the case was all about the government's alleged violation of the baker's constitutional rights, not about whether the baker had any constitutional obligation to serve the gay couple. Indeed, there was constitutional obligation on the part of the baker; the obligation to not discriminate against gay couples was imposed by Colorado statute, not the federal Constitution. The lawyers responding here do know the law, and if you were willing to step back and realize that perhaps you don't know the law better than lawyers do you might learn something. 😁
  35. 1 point

    Speeding ticket

    Show up on the court date. If the officer doesn't appear, the court will dismiss the case. I'm assuming that you were in fact driving faster than the speed limit when you got pulled over, because if you weren't and can prove it, then you'd have an argument on the merits of the charge. You could also try the usual challenges to the accuracy of the speed measurement device [search these on the internet or consult with a local attorney who handles traffic cases] but the police are usually well prepared to respond to those challenges in court. If the officer does show up [and, in most jurisdictions most of the time, the officer will show up] and assuming you really were exceeding the speed limit by approximately the amount that the officer claimed that you were -- then all you can do is tell your story to the judge and hope the judge is inclined to be lenient. Depending on how fast you were going (how far over the speed limit), and depending on your traffic ticket history (how many you've had before and how recently), and depending on how sympathetic the court is to your situation, the court might be willing to let you do traffic school, or probation before judgment, or some other kind of diversion that, if successfully completed, would either eliminate the ticket entirely or just reduce the resulting points and fines. Suggest discussing your situation with a local attorney who handles traffic cases who can give you guidance on the particulars of your matter and on what the particular judge/court is likely to do with your specific facts.
  36. 1 point
    No. Reporting it right away would have been ideal, of course, but better late than never. She needs to get to a doctor right away both for treatment and to help provide good evidence of the damage that was done. Reporting it late will increase skepticism that the incident occurred at the hotel rather than someplace else, but that is not necessarily impossible to overcome. The hotel insurer might pay any way to avoid the costs of litigating it out. The employer isn't going to care about a complaint to the hotel unless the employer happens to own the hotel. She can't get into any real trouble for not having health insurance now that the Congress a year ago repealed the individual mandate. Her risk is that she'll have a medical problem (like this one) that she cannot afford to pay to get treated while she lacks insurance. She has a number of options to get subsidized or free health insurance if she has little or no income, including the state medicaid plan. Any health insurance would likely be better than having nothing.
  37. 1 point

    Eating in Grocery Stores

    You guessed correctly.
  38. 1 point
    It doesn't sound as if this involves a simple failure to appear for custody. It sounds more like parental kidnapping. Is it the case that there was a court hearing for custody and rather than appearing in court she took the children and fled to Nevada? I suspect the court then awarded custody to the husband who then filed charges of parental kidnapping. If all that is the case, your friend has made a very serious mistake and may go to jail for it. Her best bet at this point is to waive extradition and allow herself to be transferred to California ASAP. There isn't really a case in Nevada.
  39. 1 point
    She can ask for a public defender on any criminal charges.
  40. 1 point
    Big cases cost big money in attorney fees. They have no interest because nobody has the money that it would take to pursue it for a year or more. If you or your girlfriend were willing to hand a lawyer a $10,000 retainer, one would take the case.
  41. 1 point

    Eating in Grocery Stores

    It's not as simple as yes or no. Thus the questions. You may believe you gave enough detail, but you were wrong. And some of the responses you got were from attorneys.
  42. 1 point

    Eating in Grocery Stores

    And the problem with you is that you provided no context for your question, thus making it next to impossible for anyone to provide any kind of meaningful response.
  43. 1 point
    I'm guessing you mean the organization is tax exempt under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) section 501(c)(3), often called § 501(c)(3) organizations for short. There is nothing in the federal tax code or treasury regulations that govern § 501(c)(3) organizations that prevent them from discriminating against a member using its resources to sell a product the organization does not approve of or that the organization may have concerns about the legality of selling. Nor does any other federal law make that illegal, either. And so far as I can see, Arizona law does not prohibit that either. You are selling a product that is still controversial so you have to expect that you'll get resistance and push back from some people concerned about that product.
  44. 1 point
    The answer to the literal question you asked is no. Once you sell the property and get the proceeds you realize the gain and reinvesting the proceeds into some other property will not allow you to defer the gain. However, there is a better way to approach this than deferral of the gain. The sale of that vacant lot (once you divide it from your principal residence) may still qualify to be included as part of the sale of your principal residence, allowing you to use the capital gain exclusion under Internal Revenue Code section 121 for both sales. Since it sounds like your total gain here would be less than the $250,000 limit for the gain exclusion, you may be able to cover the gain from both sales. To qualify, you must meet ALL of the following: Treas. Reg. § 1.121-1(b)(3)(i). While you have two separate sales, for the purposes of applying the gain exclusion rule under § 121 it is treated as though it was one sale — so the maximum gain you may exclude is $250,000 total for both sales. It sounds like your total gain here for both sales would be just $170k given the figures you provided, in which case you may be able to exclude the gain entirely, assuming you lived in that home for the entire 3.5 years you have owned it.
  45. 1 point

    appeal issues

    The OP has been banned from the site for threatening another member. Locking this topic.
  46. 1 point
    Who did you call at your insurance company? I'll bet it was your agent (clueless). Any insurance person with half a brain should know that your deductible applies to damage to your property under Section I of your policy and does not apply to defending you against a lawsuit under your Section II Liability Coverage. Take out your policy papers and look for a toll free number for reporting claims. Call up and say "I am being sued. Please open a claim under my liability insurance." Then you'll be assigned a claim rep to whom you can forward the summons and complaint by fax or email. Once you get the claim rep's name and phone number, don't wait until he/she calls you. You call and keep following up. Claim reps handle hundreds of files and get 5 - 10 new ones every day. A lawsuit gets priority but he has to know about it to do something about it. Do this quickly as you typically don't have much time to file an answer.
  47. 1 point

    Death of Spouse without a Will

    I think I interpreted "at which point" was when his father signed the POA. Reading it again I'm beginning to think otherwise. Either way, the son did bad and the stepmom has remedies available.
  48. 1 point
    Hi all, Metoo... I totally agree with you. We've been in Waushara for 60+ years seasonally, and past 20 year round, and I do NOT understand the seasonal RV zoning AT ALL. It's overly restrictive and unintelligible. Can you elaborate on what happend with Waushara Board when you applied for "seasonal" or "unclassified" permit? You said they said no... will u add some more detail here? about what happened in your case?, bc we will probably have to try to do the same, and need all the help we can get with all we're facing! We too are wondering about an RV as seasonal use in Waushara under whatever the requirements of WI Uniform Dwelling Code are (but I'm not finding them), for a variety of very significant hardship issues, including elderly age--can't rebuild, and other conditions. I am an attorney and I will apply/petition for unclassified or conditional use, given our circumstances. We have a heated building on 2.5 acres, so the zoning/land use ordinance is very unclear. Arguably, we can use RV connected seasonally, then store it bc it's within 300', but I don't understand the OP's issues with leaving it connected to utilities unoccupied? I just don't get it... if you're building or converting structure to dwelling, then u should be able to leave RV connected, under cond. use permit? Makes no sense that you'd have to disconnect if you're just gone a week. If any one has anything to add in experience with Waushara Board of Adjustments, please do comment. Thank you.
  49. 1 point
    Proof of what? This is perhaps one of the dumbest conclusions that you've made thus far. ...and your point is what? By the way, in case you missed it, the law of every state requires that the operator of a motor vehicle who drives on public roads must be appropriately licensed in order to do so legally. No matter what garbled, unreliable, out-of-context statement that you have posted or continue to post, you always fall short of providing any logical arguments to the contrary. Anyone can find the s**t that you spew by conducting half-assed web searches. Your problem is that you are ignorant to the notion of finding objectively reliable resources that support your position and are actually on-point. Otherwise, you'd have proven all of us wrong by now.
  50. 1 point
    Sorry, but there is no known document entitled, "The Constitution for America". So no one here is likely to be able to tell you "WTF happened" to it. Also, "Corpus deleti" is not a term that anyone here has likely ever heard of. There is something called corpus delicti, but a great legal mind like yours would have specified such term if that is what you meant. You've long since established your severe lack of intelligence in this thread, so there's no need to spike the ball.
  • Create New...