Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for 'traffic citation'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Bankruptcy, Debt, and Taxes
    • Bankruptcy, Debt, and Taxes
  • Consumer Issues
    • Car Purchases & Repairs
    • Retail Purchases
    • Consumer Services & Disputes
    • Medical Treatment & Insurance
    • Archive
  • Criminal Law
    • DUI & DWI
    • Crimes Defined
    • Investigation, Arrest, & Trial
    • After Sentencing
    • Archive
  • Employment
    • Hiring, Firing, and Discrimination
    • Wages & Hours
    • Workplace Safety & Injuries
    • Archive
  • Family Law
    • Child Custody & Support
    • Education
    • Guardianship & Adoption
    • Marriage & Divorce
    • Archive
  • Immigration
    • Immigration
  • Injuries, Accidents, and Torts
    • Auto Accidents
    • Other Accidents & Injuries
    • Defamation & Identity
    • Personal Property & Money Disputes
    • Professional Malpractice
    • Archive
  • Legal Research How-To
    • Legal Research How-To
  • Real Estate & Landlord-Tenant
    • Buying & Selling Homes
    • Landlord & Tenant
    • Neighbors
    • Property Law
    • Archive
  • Small Business
    • Business Organizations
    • Running a Business
    • Trademarks, Copyrights, and Patents
    • Archive
  • Traffic Violations
    • Licensing Issues
    • Non-Injury Accidents
    • Traffic Infractions
    • Archive
  • Wills, Trusts, and Estates
    • Wills, Trusts, and Estates

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Found 7,298 results

  1. A little over three years ago, my spouse of twenty years was mowed down by a 16 yr old that had only been driving a couple of weeks. We were living in Oklahoma at the time and were on our way home from eating out when my husband began to have a TIA (transient Ichemic attack). We pulled over to a gas station to get fuel when I told him that he should not drive the remainder of the way home. Shortly before turning into the station my husband was driving down the middle of the road. An argument ensued and while trying to fill the tank up my husband was having difficulty so I took over. After refuelingI realized he was already on his way home walking on foot. My husband was a fragile diabetic and as a result had a prosthetic on his right leg. I pulled over to insist he get into the truck but he became very abusive verbally and I was forced to try and get help from the local police. I did not know where the local police station was located but I noticed three police cars in the gas station parking lot. I went inside and interuppted three officers having there coffee and begged them to go get my husband because walking down route 66 where the speeds were anywhere from 55 up, I knew how it might end. They called another officer out that I had to wait for and that officer stated that he saw my husband and that my husband had flagged him down and asked him for a ride to the county line but that officer told him he was on his way to a traffic stop for someone that had been speeding and could not take him, (shortly after the incident I was told that officer was relieved of his duties). Supposedly three cars went out looking(it WAS daylight) but could not find my husband and I was told to go back to the town that I lived in and file a report so I did while on the way home looking for my husband all to no avail. Upon attempting to file the complaint in the one horse town I lived in I was told NO that I needed to return and file in the town where it took place. I had to wait for dispatch to call a sheriff so time was wasted when I could have been looking for my husband. Upon driving back to the gas station where I had initially spoken to the police I came upon many cars pulled over to the side of the road and when I asked "If the person sitting in the back of the squad was my husband" I was told to follow to the end of the line, shut my vehicle off and WAIT. I was not permitted out of my vehicle and they even placed a person next to each door to prevent my attempting to exit and I was not told for several minutes that my husbands body lie there. It was not untilI tried to get out of my truck that they stopped me and told me that the area was being treated as a crime scene and that my husband was DEAD! Long story short.....it was a hit and run but I was told that the police recognized the mirror from a truck that lay near my husbands head and that they knew who had hit him. Nothing was done until the following morning when they went to the boys school and pulled him out. I was ALSO told what a GOOD boy he was and that he was working towards a football scholarship, good grades and all. From what I was told there was not even an overnight stay in the local jail, license taken away or nothing! I was not permitted to come to the police station for nearly one-two weeks later when they would be "ready" to interview me. I was in a state of shock and did not realize that they may be covering thier own butts. There was no insurance money that my husband had so I was forced to hire one of the places that only charge you if they get you funds. They SUED MY insurance company! Long story short do I have anything to file a civil suit against the police department of this small town? Should I have? I felt at the time it was wrong but since then I have been told that this boy also had a close relative on the department.I was even call by the District Attorneys office and told I should "forgive" him so that he could go on with his life. What about MY life WITHOUT my husband? What about the daughter and three grandchildren he left behind? What about HIS mother? What about his three stepchildren and those grandkids?
  2. The problem is that you had violated the seat belt law and the officer needed to have adequate indentifying information to complete the citation. You can quibble about whether the officer really needed the SSN but the officer is allowed by law to require you to provide that information in this kind of circumstance. If you don't the officer may detain you until the officer can verify your identity. Had you simply complied with the officer's request for the SSN you'd likely not have been arrested. So I'm not seeing a good case here to make against the city or county
  3. You're proud of that? You may be dead or in jail before you get that doctorate. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxGgnI6kCrs And foolish enough to believe that all an attorney will cost you is 50 bucks. Why not? They will be happy to do it for the $1500 to $2500 that they will charge you. With your record as an habitual offender an attorney could keep you out of jail. As I said earlier, a $1500 to $2500 fee which is typical for handling traffic cases. If you don't believe me, call around and ask how much the fee is to defend you on a traffic ticket. Made me laugh. At you, not with you. As for the $25 in that ad, that's just for the class, for which you need authorization from the court first. That doesn't cover attorney representation.
  4. I get a lot of traffic tickets. Speeding mostly. I've taken a lot of Defensive Driving courses. Two more classes and I'll have my Defensive Driving Doctorate. Anyway, of course I get a ton of postcards in the mail from defensive driving schools AFTER i make the request to the court for defensive driving. Like THIS ONE...my new favorite.. I just noticed, NOW i get postcards from attorneys IMMEDIATELY after i get the ticket, but BEFORE I make the request for defensive driving. Whats up with these attorneys? If I were to use one of them, I'd just pay to request defensive driving for me? I don't really get this at all...Don't get me wrong...I like the idea of just giving an attorney 50 bucks and letting him/her handle the paperwork. I don't like going to court, and paperwork gives me a headache. I've always actually GONE IN to the court to fill out my paperwork, I just can't imagine someone going to school for 7 years, becoming an attorney and driving from municipal court to municipal court requesting defensive driving. Texas is a big State...If i get a ticket in Dallas, but live in Houston, do I need to contact a Dallas Ticket Attorney to handle it? What is the benefit to me- of hiring an attorney who offers this service? And what is the benefit to the attorney? I guess it would work if the attorney had a bunch of clerks who filed the requests to the court, then kept in touch with the client. Is that how they do it? Also..This happened... Luckily the construction guys got me out before the cops got there.
  5. Ok, I called around... It is, in fact around 50 - 75 bucks. (Checked with 3 law offices: Jim Lawler, Jack Byno, and James Mallory) All 3 of those attorneys are in the North Texas area, my ticket was in Austin, and all 3 law offices said they would have no problem handling the ticket. They are, in fact, just handling the paperwork for me...probably more like their STAFF is handling the paperwork for me, and 1,000 other people who got their postcard in the mail. They don't actually go to the Court, in almost all cases, to get a traffic ticket dismissed. They don't need to. According to one of the law firms- the Dallas Municipal Court is the only court that requires the person who received the ticket to actually GO to the court to request defensive driving (or, deferred disposition- if I wasn't eligible for defensive driving). The benefits for me - you're basically getting a $50 secretary- they fill out the paperwork for you, send it in for you, let you know what you owe the court, when the defensive driving course, and driving record is due, etc. Its a little more convenient. Heres what ill be spending on this ticket 50-75 for the attorney 250 to the court 25 for ThanksForSpeeding.com 10 for the driving record There you have it. I wanted to make sure this thread had a definitive answer with the sources of the info included. Hope this helped someone.
  6. My son was pulled over for a "traffic violation" . I was with him when this happened. He had syringes in a sharps container, to return to the needle exchange program. He was arrested and charged. I read the police report and the officer lied about a number of things in his report. I know why he did it. It was the only way he could show probable cause. He states that he gave my son his ticket before the needles came into play. I know better. Neither one of us have the money to hire an attorney. He was appointed a PD. His PD told him he couldn't get the body cam footage. I disagree. Besides my testimony, which the PD hasn't even discussed with either of us and he is very aware of the situation. The cam footage will prove he is lying about what happened and how it happened. Can I try to get it if he doesn't? Just a side note if it helps. He is due for pretrial next month. Should this be done asap? Thank you
  7. Doucar....Indiana..That's why I tagged the state...My son told him he needed to get it. He looked at him and said you can't..that's it...mind you he is a Public defender and the prosecution has already tried to get him to sign a deal.. Tax_counsel....I just might be able to under the open records laws here. I'm not giving him legal advice, being his mother I do however have the right to tell him questions to ask his attorney..I was a witness in this case..I was also read my miranda and told I could be arrested also..I know what his PD is suppose to do..It took me going above the PD's head just to get him to visit my son and then for him to be disinterested in his case..I think not..Under the law he is entitled to the best defense as if my son was paying him and I will make sure it is done. Most PDs in Indiana DON"t do their job..I know..overworked..not my problem.. The PD is not discussing anything with me.. He just said he couldn't get it...I know why..state will have to pay 150.00 fee for it..that's why..I never said he didn't have a right to pull him over..I just know we were driving really slow..so that's why I questioned the speeding..that is all.. The needles were behind the drivers seat and were in a bag and in the bag they were in a SHARPS box for DISPOSAL..The cop played the game of phishing...and my son told him they were there and the officer opened the door and brought them out...opened the bag..raised the container up and smiled...then put it in HIS vehicle all before he wrote the ticket...He said in his sworn statement..that my son got them out for him...no he did not..I was there..why should anyone let this go and for him to take a charge for doing what was and is the right thing to do..I think not... His attorney has not spoken to me...He was charged with possession...I am a witness to the case and his PD should be calling on me, just for that reason..He doesn't want to hear what my son has to say...and he is suppose too!! We was there for an hour...for a traffic stop...
  8. What traffic violation? Why did he have syringes? Is he a drug addict?
  9. PizzaHutDayton, First of all, you are two and a half years late with your response. Second, your citation of the statute is not relevant. The statute refers to an employee refusing to operate a dangerous vehicle provided by the employer in the course of his or her employment. For instance, refusing to operate a semi tractor that has bald tires or bad breaks. The poster's problem is that he or she can't get to work because his or her own car in inoperable .
  10. I live in Pennsylvania, after being gone all night I come home a police officer is in my house and he tells me I was being charged with Child neglect, because my 3 year old grandson got out of the house and he brought him home. When I left my house around 7:30 the night before and I got home around 7 AM the boy's mother was there. this is the second time this has happen. How can I be charged when I left there was a legal adult who knew I was leaving and I would not be back. I do not have custody of my grandson, I just live with his parents and his sibling. when do I know if I have been officially charged when the officer tells me I was going to be charged or when I get a citation or arrested.
  11. The police do not determine liability. A police officer prepares a report based on the statements of the individuals on the scene and on a usually cursory examination of the crash. The purpose of the report is to document the crash, not determine who was at fault. Although the officer may issue a citation to one or more drivers that is not a determination of liability. In fact, in crash cases, the officer,s report is inadmissible as evidence since it is hearsay. He or she was (usually) not present and did not see the crash and prepares the report according to what he or she is told. In many, if not most, cases the ticket can be contested since the officer cannot testify as to any of the elements of the ticket. The ticket only sticks if a witness appears at the hearing.
  12. Sunday night I was stopped at a red light. I was going straight. The light turned green and I'll admit, I went as SOON as it turned green but I did not start moving when the light was still red. As soon as I started moving, my car was barely even into the middle of the intersection, I was hit by another car going well above the speed limit who ran a red light. They were most likely trying to beat the yellow and didn't. Completely destroyed my car and you can see by the damage that they were at least 60mph, and the road is 45mph. As soon as my car stopped spinning and rolled into the pole, I got out of my car (my airbags did not go off) and this young man came up to, he came from the car that hit me, and asked if I was alright. The only thing I could say was "you ran a red light you ran a red light you could have killed me". They were 1 foot away from completely tboning me. The man admitted to me that the light just turned red when they crosses it. I'm 18, apparently this guy just also turned 18. But he was not the driver according to them (although I think he was driving and they're trying to say he wasn't because it was not his car). The person driving was a 17 year old girl who just got her license a few days before (as far as I'm aware I could be wrong on that). They had a total of 5 people in their car and it was only me in mine. When the ambulances and the firetrucks and all that jazz got there, no one separated this kids. They all changed the story to "it was a steady yellow". There is no such thing as a steady yellow as far as I'm aware. IF you have a yellow light, you slow down. It's called proceeding with caution. Doesn't mean go faster and try to beat it. I do have other witnesses but they didn't see the whole thing. There was a man behind me who owns the gas station across the street and he called me and told me those kids ran a red light. I asked him if that meant my light was green and he said he didn't see if my light was green he only saw that their light was red when they ran it, he looked down at his phone and when he looked up then he saw that they had hit me. I know I did not run a red light. I gave the police all my witness info, he went around to the business and none of them have video cameras that see the stop light. I'm really afraid that they're gonna say it was my fault when the investigation is over because they had 5 witness and it was only me in my car. I was also at work delivering a pizza and I'm really afraid the police are gonna think just because I'm a delivery driver I must be in a rush, which I wasn't. It was my last delivery of the night and I could have cared less if it was late or not. I would rather drive safe and risk having to give someone free food because their order was late than risking my life to give someone a stupid pizza. You can also tell by the impact on my car and theirs that I was going well below 10mph and they were going above. I don't know if that sort of forensic info helps determine anything but why would I be going that slow through a stop light unless I had be previously stopped at a red light and it turned green and I had just started moving. Why would I sit there at a red light for 2 minutes and decide to just run it? Idk if also because this girl was 17, only had her license for a few day and had her car stuffed for of 4 teenagers (which is against the law with a junior license) would help me at all. I can't afford to buy a new car, and if the investigation concludes it was my fault then I'm gonna have to drop out of school because I won't have a car to get to class. Also if they conclude it's my fault I'm taking it to traffic court because I know it's not. Do I have enough evidence with the witness behind me and if they act out the accident to beat the case? it doesn't sit well with me that just because a car has more passengers than me then their word means more. Other driver took ambulance to the hospital, I think she just has whiplash? I had my mom drive me to the hospital and they told I also just have whiplash. I do know that because I did not have commercial insurance I'm gonna have to pay out of pocket if it was my fault. I also know that PA is a no fault state so doesn't matter the outcome of the report, we both pay our own medical bills.
  13. Not sure exactly what your question is. First, your post indicates you are in PA, so any answer I give could be inaccurate based upon the fact that I am not licensed to practice law in PA. Whether you were going straight or making a left turn, you had the right of way, per the witness, whose statements will be more heavily weighted than your own, or the statements of driver/passengers in the other car. The duty to yield on left turns means that you don't have the right of way; that another vehicle is entitled to pass through the intersection before you. That clearly doesn't apply to someone who has a red light while you have a green light. While not really clear, your post suggest that the other driver was coming from your left or right, and not from head on. You are entitled to rely on the good conduct of other drivers on the road, so that should minimize your comparative fault. However, just because you have the right of way, doesn't entitle you to pull in front of cross traffic. A prudent driver still looks left and right before entering the intersection, particularly immediately after a light change. As a result, you may have some comparative fault. Perhaps more importantly, if you were delivering pizza at the time of the collision, your own insurance will probably exclude this collision from coverage. Your employer's general liability or automobile liability insurance may extend to protect you from claims of the occupants of the other vehicle, and may provide collision coverage to get your own vehicle repaired. This would be much easier than attempting to go through the insurer of the other driver. In the absence of insurance coverage, your employer might be obligated to compensate you for property damages you incurred pursuing business on his behalf. Consult with PA attorneys about that. Further, since you were in the course and scope of employment, any injury you sustained would be covered by workers compensation. If you were hurt, you should contact a PA workers compensation attorney to discuss your potential claims. Finally, if your own insurance doesn't apply, and your employer is also uninsured or his insurance doesn't apply to you, then you must pursue the other driver/owner. You can recover up to $12k in Small Claims in Pennsylvania. Consult with a PA attorney about what evidence is admissible, but bring your witness, your photographs, and your estimates/receipts for repair and rental car during the period of disrepair. If your car is totaled, bring evidence of its fair market value pre-collision. You might be able to use kbb.com, edmunds.com, autotrader.com, craigslist.com, etc.
  14. Here's your problem in a nutshell. When you make a left turn you MUST yield to oncoming traffic. Getting hit while making the turn means you didn't yield because if you had yielded you wouldn't have been hit. That's negligence. The presumption is always on the left turner and if you don't have any eyewitnesses to the other driver's wrongdoing you buy the accident. In this case you have a witness who says that the other driver ran a red light. That may be enough to get you out from under this and put the fault on the other driver. I suggest that you contact your witness and personally get a detailed written statement from him to present to your insurance company and the other driver's insurance company. Worse, you may lose your insurance because you concealed your pizza delivery use from your insurance company. Hard lesson from the school of hard knocks.
  15. Ok i just parked my truck in a walmart parking my mission was just to grab a gallon of milk when 2 police cruisers pulled up in front and behind me and started asking questions when my truck was turned off then the officer noticed something in the door trim above my head then searched the truck my question is is it legal or not for them to have made contact with me and then send the suspected drugs to the lab and then issue an indictment for my arrest...?
  16. North Carolina and New Jersey are both participants in the Drivers License Compact -- an interstate agreement in which most states participate. https://www.carolinaattorneys.com/files/north-carolina-drivers-license-compact.pdf The law as adopted in each of the participating states generally requires states to share information about traffic offenses with other states in the case of a driver of one state being convicted of a traffic offense in another participating state. Some kinds of offenses must be reported; other types of offenses may be reported. It is up to each state on what penalty, if any, to assess against a driver licensed in that state as a consequence of a traffic violation in another state. So in this situation, if you are convicted in New Jersey of doing an illegal U-turn, New Jersey might report that information to North Carolina (because improper U-turns are not one of the offenses that must be reported). If New Jersey does report it, it is up to North Carolina to decide whether to put points on your license and if so how many. You would need to consult with a lawyer in North Carolina who handles traffic matters to get a definite answer to your question - some quick google searching was inconclusive. Based on what I did see, my best guess is North Carolina would not give you points based on an out-of-state conviction for improper U-turn, but as I say that is just a best guess.
  17. So they can sit back and hope he gets in trouble again for the duration of the statute of limitations for the sole purpose of not having enough evidence initially? After asking other people that had been arrested in this county, it appears they never press charges after people Are arrested and released. They wait for a year then mail them the charges in a letter. Sometimes they dont get the letter (if they moved, for example) and a warrant goes out for their arrest when they miss court. They dont realize it until They are pulled over for a traffic violation and are arrested. And these are for very basic crimes: possession, felon with a firearm, etc. Should be open and shut cases. No ethical reason to wait on the charges because the evidence is there or they wouldnt have been arrested.
  18. I recently received notice that I was issued 4 traffic citations that were not paid and guilty in absentia. Failure to maintain proper control of vehicle, expired registration, expired inspection and no operators license. These infractions were in Virginia where I used to live and I have moved to Texas since then and was working in Texas the date and time of the infraction. When i I got the notices in the mail, I immediately called the va court to contest, they gave me the troopers contact to discuss with him. I got hold of the trooper and he FaceTimed me and immediately realized I was not the person he had issued the citations to. Since he knows that it wasn’t me, does he have a legal obligation to go to court and clear my record of those violations before any further harm is done to my record?
  19. Diagnosed with terminal cancer, whereas the Dr. predicts approx. 2 - 3 weeks to live. Bench warrant for past traffic infraction. Will I be locked up?
  20. Howzabout providing a citation or link to the ordinance so we can look at it?
  21. 1 - You didn't have to exceed the speed limit to get to the rest area so the citation was proper. 2 - If you didn't pay the fine then the fees and hold are also proper.
  22. We found out that my husband supposedly received a ticket for no insurance on 23 Aug 1997. That became a arrest warrant on 8 Mar 2008. It is now Feb 2015! My husband has been stopped since then, he went to take his state inspectors test, has had a couple of background checks and the Navy has done a security search for his security clearance. At NOW time has this thing showed up. Can they do this?
  23. U.S. SUPREME COURT AND OTHER HIGH COURT CITATIONS PROVING THAT NO LICENSE IS NECESSARY FOR NORMAL USE OF AN AUTOMOBILE ON COMMON WAYS Thompson v.Smith, 154 SE 579, 11 American Jurisprudence, Constitutional Law, section 329, page 1135 “The right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, in the ordinary course of life and business, is a common right which he has under the right to enjoy life and liberty, to acquire and possess property, and to pursue happiness and safety. It includes the right, in so doing, to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day, and under the existing modes of travel, includes the right to drive a horse drawn carriage or wagon thereon or to operate an automobile thereon, for the usual and ordinary purpose of life and business.” – Thompson vs. Smith, supra.; Teche Lines vs. Danforth, Miss., 12 S.2d 784 “… the right of the citizen to drive on a public street with freedom from police interference… is a fundamental constitutional right” -White, 97 Cal.App.3d.141, 158 Cal.Rptr. 562, 566-67 (1979) “citizens have a right to drive upon the public streets of the District of Columbia or any other city absent a constitutionally sound reason for limiting their access.” Caneisha Mills v. D.C. 2009 “The use of the automobile as a necessary adjunct to the earning of a livelihood in modern life requires us in the interest of realism to conclude that the RIGHT to use an automobile on the public highways partakes of the nature of a liberty within the meaning of the Constitutional guarantees. . .” Berberian v. Lussier (1958) 139 A2d 869, 872, See also: Schecter v. Killingsworth, 380 P.2d 136, 140; 93 Ariz. 273 (1963). “The right to operate a motor vehicle [an automobile] upon the public streets and highways is not a mere privilege. It is a right of liberty, the enjoyment of which is protected by the guarantees of the federal and state constitutions.” Adams v. City of Pocatello, 416 P.2d 46, 48; 91 Idaho 99 (1966). “A traveler has an equal right to employ an automobile as a means of transportation and to occupy the public highways with other vehicles in common use.” Campbell v. Walker, 78 Atl. 601, 603, 2 Boyce (Del.) 41. “The owner of an automobile has the same right as the owner of other vehicles to use the highway,* * * A traveler on foot has the same right to the use of the public highways as an automobile or any other vehicle.” Simeone v. Lindsay, 65 Atl. 778, 779; Hannigan v. Wright, 63 Atl. 234, 236. “The RIGHT of the citizen to DRIVE on the public street with freedom from police interference, unless he is engaged in suspicious conduct associated in some manner with criminality is a FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT which must be protected by the courts.” People v. Horton 14 Cal. App. 3rd 667 (1971) “The right to make use of an automobile as a vehicle of travel long the highways of the state, is no longer an open question. The owners thereof have the same rights in the roads and streets as the drivers of horses or those riding a bicycle or traveling in some other vehicle.” House v. Cramer, 112 N.W. 3; 134 Iowa 374; Farnsworth v. Tampa Electric Co. 57 So. 233, 237, 62 Fla. 166. “The automobile may be used with safety to others users of the highway, and in its proper use upon the highways there is an equal right with the users of other vehicles properly upon the highways. The law recognizes such right of use upon general principles. Brinkman v Pacholike, 84 N.E. 762, 764, 41 Ind. App. 662, 666. “The law does not denounce motor carriages, as such, on public ways. They have an equal right with other vehicles in common use to occupy the streets and roads. It is improper to say that the driver of the horse has rights in the roads superior to the driver of the automobile. Both have the right to use the easement.” Indiana Springs Co. v. Brown, 165 Ind. 465, 468. U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely YHVH.name 2 2 “A highway is a public way open and free to any one who has occasion to pass along it on foot or with any kind of vehicle.” Schlesinger v. City of Atlanta, 129 S.E. 861, 867, 161 Ga. 148, 159; Holland v. Shackelford, 137 S.E. 2d 298, 304, 220 Ga. 104; Stavola v. Palmer, 73 A.2d 831, 838, 136 Conn. 670 “There can be no question of the right of automobile owners to occupy and use the public streets of cities, or highways in the rural districts.” Liebrecht v. Crandall, 126 N.W. 69, 110 Minn. 454, 456 “The word ‘automobile’ connotes a pleasure vehicle designed for the transportation of persons on highways.” -American Mutual Liability Ins. Co., vs. Chaput, 60 A.2d 118, 120; 95 NH 200 Motor Vehicle: 18 USC Part 1 Chapter 2 section 31 definitions: “(6) Motor vehicle. – The term “motor vehicle” means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways…” 10) The term “used for commercial purposes” means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit. “A motor vehicle or automobile for hire is a motor vehicle, other than an automobile stage, used for the transportation of persons for which remuneration is received.” -International Motor Transit Co. vs. Seattle, 251 P. 120 The term ‘motor vehicle’ is different and broader than the word ‘automobile.’” -City of Dayton vs. DeBrosse, 23 NE.2d 647, 650; 62 Ohio App. 232 “Thus self-driven vehicles are classified according to the use to which they are put rather than according to the means by which they are propelled” – Ex Parte Hoffert, 148 NW 20 ” The Supreme Court, in Arthur v. Morgan, 112 U.S. 495, 5 S.Ct. 241, 28 L.Ed. 825, held that carriages were properly classified as household effects, and we see no reason that automobiles should not be similarly disposed of.” Hillhouse v United States, 152 F. 163, 164 (2nd Cir. 1907). “…a citizen has the right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon…” State vs. Johnson, 243 P. 1073; Cummins vs. Homes, 155 P. 171; Packard vs. Banton, 44 S.Ct. 256; Hadfield vs. Lundin, 98 Wash 516, Willis vs. Buck, 263 P. l 982; Barney vs. Board of Railroad Commissioners, 17 P.2d 82 “The use of the highways for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common and fundamental Right of which the public and the individual cannot be rightfully deprived.” Chicago Motor Coach vs. Chicago, 169 NE 22; Ligare vs. Chicago, 28 NE 934; Boon vs. Clark, 214 SSW 607; 25 Am.Jur. (1st) Highways Sect.163 “the right of the Citizen to travel upon the highway and to transport his property thereon in the ordinary course of life and business… is the usual and ordinary right of the Citizen, a right common to all.” – Ex Parte Dickey, (Dickey vs. Davis), 85 SE 781 “Every Citizen has an unalienable RIGHT to make use of the public highways of the state; every Citizen has full freedom to travel from place to place in the enjoyment of life and liberty.” People v. Nothaus, 147 Colo. 210. “No State government entity has the power to allow or deny passage on the highways, byways, nor waterways… transporting his vehicles and personal property for either recreation or business, but by being subject only to local regulation i.e., safety, caution, traffic lights, speed limits, etc. Travel is not a privilege requiring licensing, vehicle registration, or forced insurances.” Chicago Coach Co. v. City of Chicago, 337 Ill. 200, 169 N.E. 22. “Traffic infractions are not a crime.” People v. Battle “Persons faced with an unconstitutional licensing law which purports to require a license as a prerequisite to exercise of right… may ignore the law and engage with impunity in exercise of such right.” Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham 394 U.S. 147 (1969). U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely YHVH.name 3 “The word ‘operator’ shall not include any person who solely transports his own property and who transports no persons or property for hire or compensation.” Statutes at Large California Chapter 412 p.83 “Highways are for the use of the traveling public, and all have the right to use them in a reasonable and proper manner; the use thereof is an inalienable right of every citizen.” Escobedo v. State 35 C2d 870 in 8 Cal Jur 3d p.27 “RIGHT — A legal RIGHT, a constitutional RIGHT means a RIGHT protected by the law, by the constitution, but government does not create the idea of RIGHT or original RIGHTS; it acknowledges them. . . “ Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1914, p. 2961. “Those who have the right to do something cannot be licensed for what they already have right to do as such license would be meaningless.” City of Chicago v Collins 51 NE 907, 910. “A license means leave to do a thing which the licensor could prevent.” Blatz Brewing Co. v. Collins, 160 P.2d 37, 39; 69 Cal. A. 2d 639. “The object of a license is to confer a right or power, which does not exist without it.” Payne v. Massey (19__) 196 SW 2nd 493, 145 Tex 273. “The court makes it clear that a license relates to qualifications to engage in profession, business, trade or calling; thus, when merely traveling without compensation or profit, outside of business enterprise or adventure with the corporate state, no license is required of the natural individual traveling for personal business, pleasure and transportation.” Wingfield v. Fielder 2d Ca. 3d 213 (1972). “If [state] officials construe a vague statute unconstitutionally, the citizen may take them at their word, and act on the assumption that the statute is void.” – Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham 394 U.S. 147 (1969). “With regard particularly to the U.S. Constitution, it is elementary that a Right secured or protected by that document cannot be overthrown or impaired by any state police authority.” Donnolly vs. Union Sewer Pipe Co., 184 US 540; Lafarier vs. Grand Trunk R.R. Co., 24 A. 848; O’Neil vs. Providence Amusement Co., 108 A. 887. “The right to travel (called the right of free ingress to other states, and egress from them) is so fundamental that it appears in the Articles of Confederation, which governed our society before the Constitution.” (Paul v. Virginia). “[T]he right to travel freely from State to State … is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all.” (U.S. Supreme Court, Shapiro v. Thompson). EDGERTON, Chief Judge: “Iron curtains have no place in a free world. …’Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to remove from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any State is a right secured by the Constitution.’ Williams v. Fears, 179 U.S. 270, 274, 21 S.Ct. 128, 45 L.Ed. 186. “Our nation has thrived on the principle that, outside areas of plainly harmful conduct, every American is left to shape his own life as he thinks best, do what he pleases, go where he pleases.” Id., at 197. Kent vs. Dulles see Vestal, Freedom of Movement, 41 Iowa L.Rev. 6, 13—14. “The validity of restrictions on the freedom of movement of particular individuals, both substantively and procedurally, is precisely the sort of matter that is the peculiar domain of the courts.” Comment, 61 Yale L.J. at page 187. “a person detained for an investigatory stop can be questioned but is “not obliged to answer, answers may not be compelled, and refusal to answer furnishes no basis for an arrest.”Justice White, Hiibel “Automobiles have the right to use the highways of the State on an equal footing with other vehicles.” Cumberland Telephone. & Telegraph Co. v Yeiser 141 Kentucy 15. “Each citizen has the absolute right to choose for himself the mode of conveyance he desires, whether it be by wagon or carriage, by horse, motor or electric car, or by bicycle, or astride of a horse, subject to the sole condition that he will observe all those requirements that are known as the law of the road.” Swift v City of Topeka, 43 U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely YHVH.name 4 Kansas 671, 674. The Supreme Court said in U.S. v Mersky (1960) 361 U.S. 431: An administrative regulation, of course, is not a “statute.” A traveler on foot has the same right to use of the public highway as an automobile or any other vehicle. Other right to use an automobile cases: – EDWARDS VS. CALIFORNIA, 314 U.S. 160 – TWINING VS NEW JERSEY, 211 U.S. 78 – WILLIAMS VS. FEARS, 179 U.S. 270, AT 274 – CRANDALL VS. NEVADA, 6 WALL. 35, AT 43-44 – THE PASSENGER CASES, 7 HOWARD 287, AT 492 – U.S. VS. GUEST, 383 U.S. 745, AT 757-758 (1966) – GRIFFIN VS. BRECKENRIDGE, 403 U.S. 88, AT 105-106 (1971) – CALIFANO VS. TORRES, 435 U.S. 1, AT 4, note 6 – SHAPIRO VS. THOMPSON, 394 U.S. 618 (1969) – CALIFANO VS. AZNAVORIAN, 439 U.S. 170, AT 176 (1978) Look the above citations up in American Jurisprudence. Some citations may be paraphrased.
  24. Driver's licenses, mandatory vehicle registration, excise taxes on things like vehicle title and tab renewal and mandates on car insurance policies....I realize most people would disagree with lifting most or all of those restrictions. I understand that actually making those changes would be an entirely unrealistic goal. I recognize there is a good faith argument to be made about the reasons those requirements exist. But I think there is a good faith argument to me made for getting rid of those impediments I default to a presumption of maximum liberty and of personal responsibility. The person responsible for making sure I am a competent and safe driver before driving in traffic is me. Vehicle registry should be an opt-in situation. Same with car insurance. If my car is stolen and I have chose not to register it which leaves police unable to identify my stolen car that's my problem... And laws requiring mandatory car insurance to pay restitution on a hypothetical car accident that has not occurred and may never occur is a textbook example of bills of attainder, which is deemed unconstitutional for the federal government to enact, according to Article 1 Section 9 Clause 3 of the Constitution. Bills of attainder are also unconstitutional for state legislatures to enact as well, according to Article 1 Section 10 Clause 1 of our Constitution.... If someone chooses not to be insured and causes a traffic accident damaging another car or harming someone else the government should be able to hold that person accountable and make sure the injured party collects restitution for all property damage costs and medical bills....
  25. I was involved in a car accident in which I am not at fault. The car that hit me head on (a white car) was attempting to make a left turn. The other driver(a blue car) was going straight. When the police came to the scene, the driver of the red car was ticketed for failure to obey traffic control device although no one could say what actually happened other than they had the green light. At the intersection, when the turn light is green, the other light is red and vice versa. So it's obvious that one of them ran a red light. When the blue car and white car collided, the white car involuntarily rolled into my car hitting me head on as I sat waiting on the light. I suffered bodily injury and now have medical bills. The driver of the blue car's insurance company accepted 50% liability while the insurance company of the white car accepted 0% liability. My insurance filed property liability arbitration which is set some time in October. The company that accepted 50% liability has been in touch with me about settling the claim, at 50%. If I settle the claim and arbitration finds the company who accepted 50% liability initially as being 100% responsible, will I be able to go after the company to obtain the other 50% portion of the settlement for 100% or am I stuck with the 50% I settled for. I am not sure if arbitration supersedes any prior award settlements.
×
×
  • Create New...