Jump to content

pg1067

Members
  • Content Count

    56,344
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    161

Everything posted by pg1067

  1. It would certainly be legal for you to grant the right of way/easement, but it's up to you whether or not you actually do it. I also agree with "RetiredinVA's" comments.
  2. There's something called "search incident to lawful arrest" that likely will justify the search of your purse. I suggest you retain the best criminal defense lawyer you can afford and also seek treatment for your drug problem.
  3. The conduct you're describing likely justifies the dismissal of this secretary, so if I were your husband, I'd be souring the by-laws to find out how to make that happen. He also can and probably should consult with a local attorney.
  4. The intent of my question was to ask on what basis or bases the secretary is refusing to give your husband access to the records.
  5. Under what circumstances would a court disregard precedent?
  6. On what basis/bases? I don't really understand what this question means. We obviously have no way of knowing (but your husband should know) if the HOA's by-laws cover this issue.
  7. The law you quoted (which I assume is from one of the Texas codes, but it's not clear which one) expressly says that an animal control officer "means a person who . . . is not a peace officer." That said, I agree with "PayrollHRGuy" that "there may well be ACOs, especially in smaller jurisdictions that are also peace officers" (although it would not be unreasonable to interpret the quoted law to preclude a person from being both). Anyone with the ability to communicate can represent anything. If your intent was to ask whether such a representation would be illegal or unlawful, it depends on the specific facts and circumstances and the intent behind the making of the representation.
  8. The case was settled for something in the nuisance value to cost of defense range. The federal precedent had no application since my case was filed in state court pursuant to state law.
  9. Of course you could. Did you really think the answer might be "no"?
  10. Just to be clear, I defended that suit; I would never in a million years have filed such a cockamamie thing. 🙂
  11. I once defended a lawsuit brought on behalf of consumers who bought a return address stamp based on a claim that the defendant's ad falsely represented a reduction from a higher price that was never an actual price. It was, in essence a quasi-class action brought by a person who had, herself, never even seen the offending ads or bought the product. While I don't really think this was a suit brought "on behalf of the social good for issues or "overall social betterment," it certainly goes beyond a "claim[] in which a private person stands in place of the government and brings a claim that the government itself otherwise would have brought."
  12. I'm uncertain why the prior response is assuming this happened in CA. Nevertheless, I don't know any state in which a landlord can legally make a rent increase retroactive for a month-to-month tenant. No, the landlord's husband does not have to provide you with a power of attorney.
  13. Are you hypothecizing a scenario in which two different people are "pleading the fifth"? You wrote, "you plead the fith [sic]," and then wrote, "I plead the 5th." That sounds like two different persons "pleading the fifth." It is unlikely that Person B would be arrested or charged with conspiracy (to do what?) solely because both Person A and Person B have "pleaded the fifth." However, it's impossible to know without a thorough understanding of all relevant facts. Additionally, assuming "sapinaed" is supposed to be "subpoenaed," it sounds like Person A has been called in a witness in a case against someone else. Is that case against Person B or is there a third person involved. Needless to say, it would be easier to understand your posts if you made an effort to use something that resembles proper capitalization and punctuation.
  14. I disagree. Some states have laws that allow a person to sue on behalf of the general public even though the plaintiff did not personally suffer any damage. They are known as "private attorney general" laws. They are very few and far between and, in at least one state, have been significantly curtailed in the last decade or so.
  15. This has nothing to do with any law. It's the lender's decision, so the lender gets to decide who is and isn't a "relative."
  16. Who are "they"? Probably true, although you'll have to pay a deductible. Why do you think a not-at-fault incident will cause your rates to go up? You either pay out-of-pocket to repair the damage to your car or you make a claim against your comprehensive coverage. Whom would you sue and on what basis. Your description of the incident does not suggest that anyone has liability for the damage to your car. You'd have to prove that the damage resulted from someone's intentional act or negligence. All you told us was that "a basketball hoop became a projectile in a storm and hit [your] car." That doesn't sound like an intentional act, so who do you think was negligent, and in what way was this person or entity negligent? Damage resulting from a weather event is not typically something for which anyone is liable, but I'll reserve judgment pending a better explanation of relevant facts.
  17. Please don't read anything into my prior response other than what I wrote: the law does not govern what does and doesn't violate your employer's internal policies. That's entirely up to your employer to decide.
  18. For starters, the term "community property agreement" is vague. It doesn't describe what the purpose of the agreement was. And, of course, no one here is in any position to speak intelligently about the motivations of people we don't know.
  19. This raises no legal issue whatsoever. It's entirely up to your employer to decide what does and doesn't violate its policies. That said, just because your co-worker is behaving like a child doesn't mean you should do likewise.
  20. Why would a search warrant have your (or someone else's) date of birth on it? What things were sought by the search warrant? It's impossible to assess this fully without having all relevant facts and actually reading the warrant, but it's likely that your date of birth is completely irrelevant.
  21. Why? And why were you in a position to be asking a court for this? We have no way of knowing what some unknown person is physically capable of doing, but it's unlikely that she will do anything "to physically remove" you.
  22. That's a rather strange metaphor given your comment that she's disabled. While I'm not sure what you mean by "any leg to stand on," but just because a landlord asks a tenant to leave "that day" doesn't mean the tenant is obligated to do so. The landlord has to go through the proper eviction process, which, in the absence of cause for terminating the tenancy, requires several days' to a month's notice (as explained in the prior response). Unfortunately, it sounds like your sister moved as requested. If that's right, there's nothing she can do about it now. P.S. This has nothing to do with gaining "resident" status.
  23. In a cocktail bar? No anonymous stranger on a message board is in any position to assess whether you should or should not be worried about something. All I can tell you is that nothing in your post suggests your sister has any valid legal claim against you. I assume you can do lots of things. If someone is disturbing your sleep by sending text messages, the rather obvious solution is not to keep your phone close enough to where you sleep that it will wake you up.
  24. I doubt there is any sort of objective answer to this question or any statistics on it.
  25. That's not what these boards are for. That we might be able to provide, but you need to describe what you're talking about in some coherent manner. You were told multiple times that your reference to "6500 motions" was unclear. I flat-out asked you if "adjusterjack's" guess was correct, but you ignored that question. See also "adjusterjack's" comments immediately above.
×
×
  • Create New...