Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by adjusterjack

  1. Once the TOD's are recorded, the houses don't have to be mentioned in the will because they will no longer belong to you (your estate) at the moment of your death. By law they will automatically be owned by the transferee at that moment.


    6 hours ago, Karen in Cleveland OH said:

    When the attorney drafted the will, the only language in the document specifies that all my real and personal property is willed to my spouse, and if he predeceases me, all of my real and personal property goes to my daughter.  In addition to the risk of my death before the TOD is recorded, there will be an instrument (the will) out there saying my spouse inherits everything


    I suggest you change that wording to omit "real property" and just have the will address personal property.


    Then, when you have signed the documents, pick them up and take them with you. Take the TOD's to the county recorder and record them yourself while you still have the will in your possession.


    5 hours ago, Karen in Cleveland OH said:

    He seemed angry that I was bothering him - 


    Well, TS on him. You're paying him good money for his services. He works for you. He should be cheerfully addressing your issues. If it takes more work, you can be sure he will bill you for it.



  2. Unfortunately, unless you have a disability, discomfort doesn't obligate your employer to accommodate you.


    Now, if you went to a doctor and got diagnosed with Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (which may actually account for your wrist and hand discomfort), you would likely be entitled to the accommodation under the Americans With Disabilities Act.


    Do any of your fingers get numb? If they do, it could very well be Carpal Tunnel or Radial Nerve Impingement, depending on which fingers. Look it up.


    I worked in insurance all my life, typing on a typewriter back in the day, then on a computer keyboard in later years. I had mild Carpal Tunnel for decades.

  3. 10 hours ago, CB1 said:



    I contacted my cousin. He said the police can put a geofence around a house, see what devices are there, and see a map of where that device has been, even outside the geofence 


    The word "can" denotes the ability to do something not whether it's done rightly or wrongly. The police certainly CAN do all of that but if they do it without a warrant (as in the Andrews case) any evidence that was obtained could be suppressed.


    2 hours ago, CB1 said:

    He’s just a friend of a cop


    His friend may just be stringing him along. Heck, I tell people all the time that I'm related to a famous baseball player. I'm not. But I tell a convincing story and they walk away believing me.

  4. 6 hours ago, AugustRush said:

    Do you have an idea of what this would cost to have a lawyer represent me? (I've seen anywhere from $400 to a few thousand)


    At about $300 per hour my guess would be in the $1000 to $2000 area for a review, research, and court appearance.


    But it would be worth it to avoid conviction on those charges.



  5. Now you know. Car dealers are liars and thieves no matter who or what refers them.


    That disclaimer is likely unenforceable (except for the one year limitation) if AAA actually did anything wrong.


    AAA is no more responsible for your car purchase than the AARP would be for any problems I had with the Hartford Insurance Company on auto insurance that is touted by the AARP.


    By your own admission you bought the car AS IS without having a mechanic check it out.


    Couldn't hurt to run this by an attorney to see if you have any options. I don't see that you do.

  6. 2 hours ago, AugustRush said:

    My main goal right now is getting the crash report corrected, it is filled with errors.


    That's not likely to happen. The police aren't going to "correct" the report. At best they will ask you for a written statement and it will be added to the file. It will mean nothing because the police report is not admissible in court. It's only a piece of paper and can't be cross examined.


    If the officer testifies at your traffic hearing, everything he says is based on information and belief and what he was told by others. All of which can be easily impeached by a lawyer. You won't know how. Anything you say will just be treated as biased and self serving and won't be given much credibility by the judge.


    2 hours ago, AugustRush said:

    I talked to the driver that was ahead of me this past week, i'm sure he would be willing to testify.


    Don't be "sure." Give them the time, date, and place and get their agreement to be there. If they don't show, your goose is cooked.


    2 hours ago, AugustRush said:

    I'm not sure how valuable this is, but Statefarm is going to try an pull the black box (EDR). If they are able to get this, it would clear up any doubt. 


    In court? Only if the evidence was property authenticated and admitted. Do you know how to do that?


    Here's why you need a lawyer.


    1 - To properly question the officer and eliminate his testimony as soon as he opens his mouth.

    2 - To properly question the witnesses to elicit testimony favorable to you.

    3 - To properly present the evidence from the black box.

    4 - To keep you from talking because whatever you say is guaranteed to be used against you. The government has to prove it's case, you don't have to do it for the government.

  7. 1 hour ago, CB1 said:

    Does picking apart every word a person says in an attempt to make them feel stupid make you feel better about yourself?


    I sort of got that impression too. In all fairness though, I think the picking was an effort to obtain more information on a subject that is confusing. Confused me. That you are relying on potentially garbled second hand information from your cousin makes it more difficult.


    But you got me curious so I did two things.


    1 - I googled Geo-fence and came up with a Wikipedia article that explained the basics. You can read it for yourself at:




    2 - I went to Google Scholar. Google Scholar is a search engine for appellate case decisions on federal, state, and local levels. At first I searched for Smith v. Maryland 1979. As you can imagine, the proliferation of Smiths and Maryland made that impossible so I took a chance and searched "Third Party Doctrine" and found State v Andrews 2016 that not only explains the "Third Party Doctrine" but, coincidentally, addresses the use of a device that you describe (Hailstorm) and cites Smith v Maryland.


    The Andrews decision does not say that the device can be used without a warrant. It said that the warrant was invalid because it did not specify the use of the Hailstorm device. Evidence obtained from the use of the device was suppressed. This decision implies that the use of the Hailstorm device might have been legal if it had been properly specified in the warrant application based on probable cause.


    4 hours ago, CB1 said:

    The Third Party Doctrine states that people who voluntarily give information to third-party companies have "no reasonable expectation of privacy." It came about in 1979 in Smith v. Maryland. 


    That's true. The Andrews decision summarizes the Smith decision. In Smith the court ruled that Smith had no expectation of privacy when he voluntarily gave his phone numbers to his phone service thus making his calling history subject to subpoena without warrant which is the gathering of information that is already out there just as your banking history can be subpoenaed without a warrant. Thus the Third Party Doctrine did apply to Smith.


    In Andrews, the Hailstorm device detected a location signal when Andrews' phone was off. This signal was involuntarily produced. Other methods of location were specified in the warrant but the Hailstorm device was not. The court refused to accept the Third Party Doctrine in the Andrews case.


    Please read the entire Andrews case. It explains a lot.




    By the way, your fear that we all live in fishbowls with no privacy is well founded.


    Try googling your own name on the internet. You may be astounding about what's already out there about you.





  8. 1 hour ago, AugustRush said:

    If I knew that the limited tort wouldn't stop me from getting a lawyer and having my costs covered,


    In Pennsylvania limited tort only prevents you from recovering compensation for pain and suffering. You can still recover your medical bills, property damage, and lost wages that are unpaid by your PIP Coverage. Trouble is, without pain and suffering in the claim, it is unlikely that any attorney will take the case on a contingency.


    There is an exception. To recover for pain and suffering the injury must be considered a "serious injury."


    In Washington v. Baxter, the PA Supreme Court adopted the following criteria for determining "serious impairment of body function"




    The "serious impairment of body function" threshold contains two inquiries:

    a) What body function, if any, was impaired because of injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident?

    b) Was the impairment of the body function serious? The focus of these inquiries is not on the injuries themselves, but on how the injuries affected a particular body function. Generally, medical testimony will be needed to establish the existence, extent, and permanency of the impairment.... In determining whether the impairment was serious, several factors should be considered: the extent of the impairment, the length of time the impairment lasted, the treatment required to correct the impairment, and any other relevant factors. An impairment need not be permanent to be serious.





    Unfortunately for Mr Washington, the court found that he did not have a "serious injury." But that's not the important part of the decision. The important part is that limited tort can be overcome.


    You would be wise to consult a personal injury attorney who can demonstrate success in overcoming the limited tort limitations and see what he says about your case.


    As for the traffic citations, you'll have to pay a lawyer to defend you against the texting and careless driving charges. It would help if those witnesses appeared in traffic court to testify in your favor.

  9. 6 hours ago, pg1067 said:

    What was the cause of the mother's death?


    The cause of death is not always the issue in a contestability investigation. Any misrepresentation on the application that is material to the underwriting of the policy can be used to deny the claim and rescind the policy.



  10. The police report doesn't count because it's inadmissible in court. You can file whatever you want with the police but it isn't likely to do you any good because your statements will be biased and self-serving.


    What absolutely DOES count are the witnesses that said they "saw everything."


    It's imperative that they be identified and their written statements obtained if that has not already been done.

  11. 13 hours ago, Atlanticstorm said:

    Is it legal for the insurance company to request such information and demand the beneficiary to sign ?


    Yes, it's legal. Here's why. Every life insurance policy has a contestability provision. Generally, and to put it simply, if death occurs within two years of policy issue the insurance company has a right to determine if the insured lied on the application. After two years the policy becomes incontestable.


    Who best to  ask all the questions of? The beneficiary who wants the money. Once your daughter fills out (with your help) and returns all of the forms, an investigator will be engaged to verify all that information by getting the insured's medical records, insurance records, pharmacy records, etc.


    The contestability provision is in the policy. All you have to do is read it to find it.


    14 hours ago, Atlanticstorm said:

    Is it legal for the insurance company to demand the beneficiary to sign such a form?


    Yes, it's legal. Same reason as above.


    3 hours ago, knort4 said:

    It's curious why the insurance company didn't ask your wife to sign the health history information at the same time she submitted her application.


    She was asked, and did so. Her application with the answers is part of the policy.



  12. It's legal because there is no law prohibiting it.


    By posting bail you guaranteed your friend's behavior.


    Make no mistake, YOU posted the bail, not the bail bondsman.


    YOU handed over your credit card information without knowing what you were getting into until it was too late.


    I suggest you keep tabs on your friend and make sure he complies with the conditions of his release.





  13. I strongly suggest that you talk to a personal injury attorney who handles dog bite law. You may have more rights than you think and a pre-emptive strike against the therapist by your lawyer may make her think twice about throwing you under the bus.


    And report the incident to animal control. There is no excuse for what happened and the therapist needs to take some heat from it.

  14. 1 hour ago, GoBigOrGoHome said:

    in North Carolina if your child support has been stopped because of the age limit has been reached and you only owe the arrears can North Carolina still imply and still arrest and make a person serve active jail time for not being able to pay the arrearage payments when they don't have a job.


    Maybe not. The criminal statute doesn't appear to distinguish between arrears and current obligation but see 14-322(d):



    (d) Any parent who shall willfully neglect or refuse to provide adequate support for that parent's child, whether natural or adopted, and whether or not the parent abandons the child, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be punished according to subsection (f). Willful neglect or refusal to provide adequate support of a child shall constitute a continuing offense and shall not be barred by any statute of limitations until the youngest living child of the parent shall reach the age of 18 years.


    1 hour ago, GoBigOrGoHome said:

    And is there any way to get the total amount of arrearage done away with or either reduce significantly when the non-custodial parent that owes the money doesn't have means of pay


    Get the ex to agree to waive or reduce the arrears. Good luck with that.


    1 hour ago, GoBigOrGoHome said:

    what would be the proper procedures of doing that if one was to do yourself


    Ask the ex. The court won't help you.

  15. You're overthinking this. It doesn't make a bit of difference whether there is a reporting requirement or not.


    Your daughter was bitten by a dog. You report it to the local animal control office.


    Then you sue the dog owner for the personal injury of your daughter if it was relatively serious with medical bills incurred.


    If your divorce decree mandates that you be allowed to attend therapy sessions then it's your ex wife that you have to take back to family court to enforce that. That has nothing to do with the dog bite or any reporting requirements.


    Like I said, you are overthinking this and you are not going to get anywhere with this quixotic quest for reporting requirements.

  16. Someone is bound to come along and tell you to start your own thread. Please don't. Because then it will be in two places and that gets annoying.


    You don't say what state you live in. The majority of states in the US allow for 30 days notice of termination of tenancy. There are some exceptions. Some allow less, some require more.


    Assuming for the moment that 30 days notice is legal notice in your state then you have no choice but to find another place to live by the time the 30 days are up unless you make other arrangements with the daughter. There is nothing wrong or illegal about the daughter acting as agent for the owner of the property.


    Understand the difference between termination of tenancy and eviction. Eviction is a judicial process that involves the court. It's like a lawsuit. If you remain beyond the 30 days the eviction gets filed with the court. In some states it takes only a couple of weeks for the court to issue a writ of possession and have a sheriff put you and your belongings out. Worse, you get an eviction on your credit report which makes it more difficult to find quality rentals in the future.


    This may seem bleak but it's the reality of the situation. It's possible that the daughter is compelled to sell the property to clear her father's estate and/or get money for her mother's care.


    You might ask the daughter what it will take to let you stay another month. Maybe pay more money. But don't count on it. Your rent has been incredibly low for a long time, especially for a house, and I'm afraid those days are over.





  17. 14 hours ago, Lucille Tamayo said:

     If the rent is 1,000 a month that means I would have to come up with 3000.00 to move in. I sure would like to known if that is a law.


    It's not the law that you have to pay $3000 to move. It's that the law doesn't prohibit the owner from requiring you to pay $3000 to move in. That makes it legal as there is no limit in the Colorado landlord tenant statute:





  18. 2 hours ago, Retired vet said:

    the settlement agreement


    That's where you look. You read it carefully and thoroughly and see what it says about the division of assets.


    That's the agreement you present to the court as evidence. Case law won't help you.


    If she did not address the pension during the divorce then it will be her burden to prove that she's entitled to it now.



  • Create New...