Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by pg1067

  1. In any future posts, please make an effort to use proper punctuation (and capital letters at the beginnings of sentences). Doing so will make it easier for others to read and understand what you write. Huh? Like everyone else, I didn't see a question in your post, and it barely made sense (even aside from the near complete lack of punctuation).
  2. I'm sure you can do any number of things, but I doubt you have any ability to get your HOA to undo what has been done just because you don't fancy the lights that were used. I supposed you could try and find like-minded neighbors to vote out the current board and who will vote in a new board that spends even more money on this. Whether you can take any legal steps beyond that will depend on the CC&Rs of the community.
  3. I suggest you review a few of these search results.
  4. More likely than it not being a crime is that the police are likely exercising their discretion not to deal with it (and, instead, trying to catch folks speeding down Hill St. toward Obispo Av.). Unfortunately, sometimes folks make your life difficult and you have no effective way to deal with it without spending money. It's a reality of living in a community.
  5. If something isn't illegal, the "how" is because there's no law that makes it illegal. In your case, it's either not illegal or it is illegal and the police are exercising their discretion not to deal with it. Your post indicates you already know this.
  6. Always good when folks resurrect five-year old threads to spout nonsense. Putting aside your misuse of plural pronouns in this sentence, this sentence is not completely wrong -- as it relates to the federal government. However, it has real truth as it relates to state governments. The federal government was intended to be limited. Not the case for state governments. The rest of your post makes no useful points -- especially as it relates to the subject of this five-year old thread.
  7. Ok...and? If you don't like the conditions of bail, you are free to surrender yourself and wait in jail for your trial. Of course, the restrictions imposed on you in jail will be significantly greater than the conditions of the bail. You could also appeal.
  8. What does this mean? Are you supposing that we'll know what this acronym (or the other acronym you used in your follow up post) stands for? I also can't figure out what you're talking about. You need to provide relevant facts. If you don't want to do that, consult with a local attorney.
  9. I completely disagree that you'd have legal liability, but you could get fired.
  10. In any future posts, please make an effort to use proper capitalization and punctuation. Your original post has almost none of either, which makes it unnecessarily difficult to read and understand. Please explain what "conduct supervised bond" means. Beyond that, there are virtually no laws that regulate what a person may tell another person. Who is telling whom where he or she can and can't go? I'm guessing what you described are conditions of bail imposed by either the court or by the bail bond agent who sold the bond. Correct? The purpose of a bond -- from the court's perspective -- is to provide incentive for the defendant to appear for trial while on pretrial release. It also provides revenue in the event the defendant skips bail. Conditions imposed on bailed out defendants have existed for decades (probably as long as bail bonds have existed). Among other things, some bail bond agents require the defendant to wear an ankle monitor and not to leave the county in which the case is pending. The notion that any of this "contradicts [your so-called] right of innocent until proven guilty" is ridiculous. The presumption of innocence is something that applies in one place and one place only: in the courtroom during the trial. The jury (and only the jury) must presume the defendant to be innocent until the prosecution proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Everyone else is free to assume that the defendant is guilty as sin.
  11. Second time today I've done something like that. Ugh....
  12. There would be no need to hire an attorney for this purpose. An investigator would be much cheaper (and probably do a better job). Of course, that assumes the information is public record that an investigator could access, in which case you might be able to do it yourself.
  13. No one said that. If the judge signed it, it is presumptively illegal. As mentioned in one of the prior responses, you can appeal the ruling. This is not a coherent sentence and I'm not sure what you're saying. Don't know what most of this means, but as I wrote previously, you have dozens of legal rights.
  14. FYI, the word is "statute," not statue. That said, I'm not aware of any state that has a law that says what you wrote. Why do you think South Carolina has or might have such a law? It's not uncommon for court orders to say things not said during hearings. Creating or trying to create a list of the dozens of legal rights you have would serve no useful purpose. No one on this or any other website will be in any position to explain a court order we haven't read that followed a hearing we didn't attend and don't have a transcript of, and which was presumably based on briefs submitted to the court that we haven't read, and which occurred during a lawsuit you've told use precisely nothing about other than that it apparently concerns your neighbor wanting to build a fence between your properties and encroach on your property to do so. Did you sue your neighbor or did your neighbor sue you? What causes of action were alleged in the lawsuit? Were the hearings you mentioned trials or something else (e.g., motion hearings)? Who filed what motion(s) that led to the court ruling as it did?
  15. Yes, but these questions merely ask, very abstractly, whether something is possible, so they're not terribly useful questions -- especially if your goal is to ascertain whether a particular marriage is or isn't valid. It means that the marriage complied with the laws of the jurisdiction in which it took place. And now we've shifted from very abstract questions to details about a very particular situation. If you have questions about a particular situation, why not explain those facts and then ask your questions? For example: "Dave and Juanita were married in 2017 in Arizona and have lived in Arizona since then. Dave is a U.S. citizen but Juanita is an illegal alien," etc., etc. Please note also that the legal validity of a marriage is a very different thing from whether U.S. immigration authorities will recognize the marriage as legitimate for the purpose of legalizing an otherwise illegal alien.
  16. While the terms of his homeowner's policy require him to report it, the only consequence of not doing so is that his insurer won't provide him with coverage, so it's entirely up to him if he wants to pay out of pocket rather than report it to his insurer. If you didn't incur any medical bills, then you might be able to get a few hundred dollars for your pain, but most of what you have written here is not compensible or just downright absurd. Just because a couple of bystanders "turned their backs" on you doesn't entitle you to anything. Whether he turns it over to his insurer is, frankly, none of your concern. If he isn't willing to pay you an amount you're willing to accept, you're free to sue the guy.
  17. Rather obviously, it's up to the parties whether they're willing to negotiate.
  18. The portion of the deed that you quoted indicates that the three of you owned the property as tenants in common. However, since the other two joint owners were married, the marital property laws of the unidentified state where the property is located may alter that somewhat as between the two of them. Does the mortgage encumber the entire property or only your interest? Why do you have the word "stuff" in quotation marks since you're not likely quoting anything? Does this mean that your father had a pourover will that left his entire estate to the trust in question? If not, what does this mean? You have no ability to remove anyone's name other than your own from the title unless you're the trustee of the trust that you mentioned and/or the executor of your father's estate. Are you either of those things? Seeing as how no one here has read the existing agreement, there is no way for anyone here to opine intelligently about this. Do you think you and your mother should enter into a new agreement? If so, why? Whether "adjusterjack's" description of how your father's interest in the property should be handled is accurate depends greatly on the state in which the property is located.
  19. What does "a new late 2017" mean? Before I say anything, how did this issue come to your attention? Has someone (a neighbor, maybe) claimed that your driveway is on his/her property? You've apparently lived on this property for over a year. When did this issue come to your attention? Also, did you obtain title insurance when you bought the property? Also, FWIW, the excerpts from the title maps don't tell me much of anything, and I'm unable to line up the overhead photo with either of the maps. Is the reference to "San Diego" in the bottom map to the City of San Diego? San Diego County? "San Diego Freeway"? Something else?
  20. Are you saying that, because your wife refused to sign something (not clear what she refused to sign), you abandoned your effort to get a divorce? You realize that your wife wasn't required to sign anything in order to get a divorce, right? I assume this is because you're trying to do this yourself but don't have the competency to do so. Correct? Divorce? No, not wishful thinking. Back child support? Good that you don't want it because you have no entitlement to it because you didn't seek it when you were entitled to it. Not sure what you mean by "claim to my disability retirement." Whether your desire for a walk-away is realistic depends on your wife. If she's going to fight you for a share of some asset, she might get it simply because you chose to remain married to her for over two decades after separating. Given that you filed for divorce and the case is still pending after two years, that suggests she may be fighting for something. I strongly suggest you retain the services of a local family law attorney.
  21. Sorry for being so blunt, but this is just stupid. You spent a whole paragraph whining about how you barely get to see your ex-girlfriend's child, but you've taken none of the simple steps to ensure that you can see the kid. "Unnecessary"? Of course it's necessary. Without it, the child is not legally yours. No, you don't. Unless you spent 24 hours a day, seven days a week with the mother around the time of conception, you don't know that she didn't have half a dozen other sexual partners who could have impregnated her. Then you'd better get moving on a petition to establish your alleged paternity. To give yourself the maximum possibility of success, you should consult with a local attorney for advice and assistance.
  22. In the abstract, virtually anything is possible. Get yourself an attorney. I suspect you misunderstood and/or misinterpreted just about everything that happened. Beyond that, there's not much anyone here can tell you since we haven't seen any of the relevant documents.
  23. While I realize that this is practically heresy in this day and age, you realize that there is no requirement for your daughter to use social media, right? Nor is there a requirement to have accounts that allow others to identify her. Also, all social media that I'm familiar with have the means to block unwanted contact. I don't understand what you're asking. You're free to send all the letters you like to whomever you like. The way it works is that you type or write the letter, stick it in an envelope, address the envelope and drop it in the mail or hand deliver it. Since I doubt that's what you intended to ask, please clarify what you did intend. I don't understand this question either. What does it mean for a letter to be "upheld in school," and how would you contemplate a letter you write being held against the child? Well...you told us that your child's school has "a zero tolerance policy on bullying," but everything else you wrote suggests otherwise. Assault is a crime, and there's probably some sort of criminal harassment law. However, for whatever reason your local law enforcement doesn't seem to want to enforce those laws or consider what's happening to violate those laws. It may very well be that the only viable solution to this problem is to transfer your child to another school. You didn't say who told you this, but if you just accept it as true without actually talking to the prosecutor, then it becomes true for you even if it's not. If the principal isn't doing his/her job, then the school board/district is the place to address it. If you don't bother because you don't think anything will happen, then, again, you've created a truth that might not otherwise be truth. A cease and desist letter is nothing but a letter that makes a demand. It has no legal effect.
  24. Which is one of the reasons why, after the problem was not fixed after a week or two, you should have sough an alternative billing solution. Assuming your business is organized as a corporation or LLC, there's nothing that inherently obligated you to pump personal funds into the company. Again, your company likely has a valid claim against the software provider (although, as I mentioned previously, and as "PayrollHRGuy's" comment brings into sharper focus, a lot depends on what the contract says), but a lot of the consequential damages you're talking about seem to be of your own making.
  • Create New...