Jump to content

Muffuah

Members
  • Content Count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Muffuah

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. That didn't answer my last question, but thank you for replying.
  2. At the risk of beating a dead horse (I'm just thinking out-loud and I'm sorry for keeping this in the hypothetical): The patient in the scenarios mentioned in my reply to PG1067 should have been compensated for the loss of their foot. // Assuming that I am their only heir, I would be entitled to proceeds of a lawsuit that the patient *Would* have won had they lived long enough to file the suit. // Am I not "un-whole" as a result of that coincidence?
  3. Not that it's important, but the question was a broad one; not meant to point to any individual or gender nor to a specific instance of civil 'wrong'; "they" and "their" was correct. I don't want to describe my case specifically, but for illustrative purposes let's say that a nurse negligently drops a piece of equipment, severing a patient's left foot. Then, two days later, that patient dies from pneumonia- completely unrelated to the severed foot. This is the sort of scenario with which my question was meant to refer. <--- (Beautiful grammar, don't you think?) What about an instance where the patient doesn't die in the hospital, leaves said hospital and immediately heads for an attorney's office and dies in an automobile accident on the way? In these cases, it seems wrong that those who would normally be legally responsible would, by virtue of the death of the one injured, lose their civil liability. If this is a crack in the system, it should be plugged up. <--- (I know I ended that sentence with a preposition; I apologize).
  4. [You again?] Only? ...What if they died before having the chance to?
  5. Assuming that the deceased could, had they lived, won a suit for negligence, pain and suffering, etc. (really, for any tort), can the executor sue on their behalf? The particular incident I have in mind did not cause or contribute to the death.
  6. You didn't offend, though your reply doesn't address my question. You are right in that titling is an issue, too. I thought it was implied that I understood the contents of the rest of that paragraph, hence I also understand that I am the one who incurred the fines. Should I pursue this suit, the object would be to nullify the rule/law as I don't think it's fair. I don't think the MVA notifies offenders in a proper manner (In my case- waiting until the penalty was un-affordable and the situation un-correctable [the car and tags probably didn't exist as car and tag by then!]), the alleged offenders should have a means to address the claim(s) and since the fine grew out of the lack of insurance, the fine shouldn't apply since the tags had expired, which means the car couldn't be driven, therefore I shouldn't need insurance. Whether I pursue this or not, this is my position and it is why, unless I somehow get a very large stack of free money, I'm never going to give them any of mine. I do thank you for your time and your post.
  7. Thanks. That works as an answer for me. I appreciate your help. Tip-O-The-Hat.
  8. Brilliant!! Just what I was looking for! Thanks for you insightful guidance! ...Long live your ego!!!
  9. ***If this is posted in the wrong place, feel free to move it to the correct one.*** I have been snared into a rule/law that I believe is mal-conceived and is being applied in a way that is contrary to its intent. This rule/law is intended to cause folks to keep their vehicles insured, a goal that I am personally supportive of. In this state they expect you to return tags when they expire and/or if you take the vehicle "off-the-road". As you might imagine, I was not aware of this and I gave my car, which was inoperable, to the kid next door to tinker with. If you don't abide by this rule/law, the penalties are exorbitant to begin with and I wasn't informed of my non-compliance for many months (about 13). By that time they said I owed $3300! I tried to argue several points to the Motor Vehicle Admin (MVA): that I wasn't aware of the rule/law, that I didn't have possession of the car, the car wasn't and hadn't been on the road, they were penalizing me for this when my tags were actually expired. Their response was that there was no way appeal this and my only remedy was to pay. I tried for several weeks to resolve this to no avail and I couldn't register a newly bought car. My solution was to register the car in my wife's name, which worked, but she passed away a couple of months ago and now I can't register our cars in my name again AND they now want $4400! Again, they are also saying that there is no way to appeal so... What I'd like to know here is: To what court do I file a complaint for injunctive relief? If I decide to try this, I will do it myself vs. hiring a lawyer as I imagine a lawyer would cost as much or more than paying the "fine". My only other option is to move out of state and I'm not sure this doesn't "follow" me anyway. Before you offer advice here, consider that I DO understand that one of my options is simply paying the "fine". Unless I win a PowerBall jackpot, I won't be choosing that option. Also, PLEASE... Don't frustrate us with an answer that is not likely to be helpful; I just want to know what court to file a complain with. If you know of an alternative available to me, please share. I say this with the hope of averting the occasional answer that is more designed to stroke an ego than answering the question. Thank you in advance.
  10. We live in Maryland- Some months ago, I got behind on my monthly rent by about two weeks (which was brought up-to-date at that time) During the arrearage, the landlord parked an unregistered/unlicensed car in an unused portion of my driveway, claiming that he had the right to do so, since I was behind on rent. To tell the truth, it wasn't in the way and had he asked, I would have probably given him permission to park the car on the property anyway. The car remained there for the remainder of my lease (another 4 months [?]) and I vacated at the end of the lease. I've been trying to get my deposit back, to no avail, and Friday I received notice that I was being sued for damage to the property. I'm not worried about that... I'll easily defend against the suit in court but I'm fairly peeved about this lawsuit business. Here’s my question: If I filed a counter suit asking for the return of my rent during the time the landlord’s car was parked in my driveway, is there any likelihood of my winning the case? I’m not concerned with what’s reasonable; I know it’s not, and I may not pursue this even if you folks think I might prevail, but right now I’m pretty ticked (and slightly amused) about the situation.
×
×
  • Create New...