Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Oregon'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • 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


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



Found 56 results

  1. Almost 2 years ago, I rear ended a fellow. No damage to his truck, nothing serious to mine - maybe $500 worth of repairs/parts. I asked him 2 - 3 times if he was ok and each time he replied he was fine. He looked fine, he talked fine. I was fine. My insurance company at the time told me that they asked him if he was ok and he replied he was fine. Naturally, my insurance company cancelled my policy and I found another company. Sometime after that, the previous Ins. Co. received a letter from his lawyer stating they wanted payment for injuries sustained in the accident. Apparently, they didn't think much of it, because I heard nothing further. This weekend, I got copied another letter stating that they wanted 500K or the limit of my insurance at the time (100K) and if they don't hear back within a few weeks, they will proceed with a suit against me for "damages in a much higher amount" then the 500K. They listed hospital care, wages lost, etc of around 65K. Do I need to get my own lawyer to defend myself (once I get a summons I assume?) or can I depend on my previous insurance company that the claim was filed against to really defend this? I'm very anxious over losing everything I have - house, retirement - because maybe the previous insurer won't pay a dime (they and I think this is bogus, but who knows. Maybe I had an accident with a frail human being and that is all there is too it). Can I be thrown into the grinder or can I trust them to defend this? I guess I'm worried that they will want to minimize payout of their money and somehow shove the rest onto me. I just don't know what is possible and it is that ignorance that is causing me to lose a lot of sleep. thank you
  2. My friend has a three month old son. Her baby’s father lives out of state and they’ve never been married. The mom has a history of past drug abuse but has been clean and sober since leaving voluntary rehab. The mom is an excellent parent and she is also breastfeeding her son. The father is accusing her of being high all of the time and even has the police called to her house under these false allegations. He has petitioned the court for an emergency hearing saying that the baby is in danger and he is seeking full custody. My friend is absolutely terrified and she does not have an attorney because she can’t afford one. I keep telling her that she has nothing to worry about. The father I has no proof of any of his allegations. Any opinions are welcome.
  3. 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.
  4. My landlord refuses to do any repairs ever. There are large holes in kitchen and dining room flooring. The roof leaks in several spots throughout house. The patio door leaks and so do the windows. What recourse do I have. Can I withhold rent to force repairs.
  5. I have lived in home for 10 yrs. It has a separate garage. this winter the roof of the garage caved in and it is useless now. I have had to move all the boxes I stored in there into my dining room. I also, can no longer keep my motorcycle in there and have to pay to store it. Can I get back a portion of the rent I have paid for the loss of the garage and dining room. IT is not in the same CONDITION THAT I AGREED TO PAY 700.00 FOR
  6. I own and live on a 3/4 acre parcel in rural Oregon that is part of a private water district that delivers domestic and irrigation water to shareholders ' properties. The association has 5 wells and miles of underground pipe. It maintains all The water facilities. The association has governing documents that provide for a board of directors and bylaws governing the operation of the association. At the recent 2019 shareholders ' meeting the Board proposed a new bylaw that permits water district employees and representatives to enter a shareholder's property without permission and conduct any water district business thereon. The only restrictions are that The association must attempt to contact the property owner beforehand and the work performed may not exceed $25,000 in cost, without full board approval. The bylaw passed in a close vote. Here are my concerns: 1. The bylaw's scope is too broad. At the meeting I proposed an amendment restricting unapproved entry to 3 purposes - taking water samples for analysis, reading the metre and turning off water in the event of an emergency. The bylaw proposer refused the amendment. 2. This amendment forces a property owner to give up all rights to refuse work performed on their property or to negotiate how and when the work would be done and to require the association to repair any damage to the property. My questions: 1. Is this bylaw contrary to Oregon trespass laws? 2. Doesn't this bylaw exceed the authority of a private association? Is this bylaw enforceable? 3. Doesn't a land owner have the right to forbid entry to their land, even in the face of such a bylaw? 4. What recourse do I have now to get this bylaw removed, considering that the board was so unwilling to compromise and restrict the scope of the bylaw?
  7. Police executed a search warrant at my residence but the d.o.b. listed is incorrect. Is it valid?
  8. I'm a 21 year old female from Oregon and an honors graduate. I never imagined myself where I'm at right now and I really need some help. I have never been in legal trouble before and therefore have little knowledge in the nature of such a complex, dynamic bitch we call the system. Therefore I need your help and guidance. Any direction at all is appreciated. Here is my story.. Late March I was traveling 160 miles down the coast with all my belongings in the car packed tightly, ready to settle in Portland, OR to start a new chapter in life. I had a friend in the surrounding area and when they heard I was heading that direction they asked if I could pick them up and give them a ride because home was in the direction I was heading through Oregon. I accepted and on arrival my friend pointed out how exhausted I looked and insisted I let them drive. When asked they claimed to have their license, of course this was BS and my habit of wanting to believe others value peoples lives as much as I do buries me again. I allowed him to drive and as we headed down I5 a West Linn police officer coming from the other direction did a U-turn and pulled us over for the headlights being on (no this was not my friend setting me up and yes the highbeams were intended to be on due to one of my headlights suddenly going out and me improvising and not wanting to get pulled over). The officer approached the vehicle and told us about the highbeams and claiming that to be the reason for the stop, and didn't ask but more so confirmed with the guy driving that he was not licensed. Before walking away he stated that he also ran the plates and saw my Jeep wasn't insured. This is when I piped up from the passenger seat and said in the recent months I went from a 6 month policy to a month to month basis on my dads insurance and I couldn't imagine him not notifying me if something as crucial as my insurance being cut off happened, but apologized and said I would communicate with my dad and correct this before I got on the road again. I had showed him my old paper from 3 months prior showing the 6 month policy to back up part of what I was saying. He walked away and minutes later appeared on my side of the car, asking that I step out and talk to him. I ignorantly did so and was bombarded with questions such as "are there any drugs in the car, do you or your friend do drugs, is that your boyfriend", etc. When asked I told him there absolutely was not any drugs in the car and admitted to once having a prescription pain medication addiction, sharing my views on what toxicity drug addiction can bring in ones life and how my reason for moving to the area was partly to do with wanting to be away from the same surrounding that I was in during such a dark time. He asked the last time I took pills and I told him it had been months, that I had finally conquered my pill addiction. This was true, not that it matters. He asked for permission to search my vehicle. I denied this request but told him "I'm not sure the correct terminology you guys use but you may do the search procedure where you walk around my car and look in all the windows". He replied with "Well if there's no drugs in the car why won't you give me consent?". I told him the car had all my belongings packed tightly inside, it was unnecessary to tear it all apart. Immediately after saying this he tells me to turn around and says false claim of liability insurance is a misdemeanor and for that reason he handcuffs me and detains me in the back of the car. I watch through the windshield as my friend is pulled outside the vehicle and the officer begins searching through my car, so intensely in fact that I watched my stuff fly through the air and land in the dirt. Another officer shows up and before I know it there is 6 police at the scene and my car is being towed. Inside my purse in the car a pouch was containing drugs was found. Heroin, Meth, and a prescription bottle of 15mg Oxycodone. This prescription belonged to the guy with me and was something I was asked to pick up in my hometown before leaving because usually he traveled there once a month to see his doctor and get his pills, due to him not coming to town that month he asked me to pick up the paper script (if you are put on a list you can do something like this for someone) and fill it at the pharmacy so I could bring them to him when I traveled his way. I had this bottle in a zebra print pouch I threw in my purse to head up there and had handed this to him on arrival. The police informed me an array of drugs were found inside a zebra print zipper pouch in my purse. I quickly figure out a few more items had been added to a pouch that once contained just his medicine and was thrown in my purse when I was pulled aside from my vehicle. THIS IS SOMETHING I STILL HAVE NOT CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN THE CASE. I had several thoughts run through my head when I was told what was found, including making the excuse for him that maybe he had these things were in his pocket and he removed them in fear that they would pull him out and search his pockets due to his record and him being the driver. Not thinking it would be bad on me. Despite his name being on the script my fingerprints were on the bottle and probably not his. I didnt know what else was added to the bag exactly but what I did know was that these things were found in my purse and it looked bad on me at that moment. Either way I'm a fairly smart girl and am usually pretty quick to think of many variables on the spot. I didn't say much at all after that point because I wasn't sure what to do, but I did explain to them I was allowed to pick up his prescription and that could be verified with his doctors office, which apparently my friend had said too. They refused to believe us, saying him and I were lying and it wasn't helping anyone. They told me I was being charged with PCS and DCS of Oxycodone (DCS for finding baggies in the pouch), PCS of heroin, PCS of meth, and false claim of liability insurance to a police officer. They were going to give my friend the same charges except for the insurance one. During the arrest they offered both of us the chance to be freed of some or all of the charges in exchange of doing 3 controlled buys. I declined their offer immediately while my friend accepted. I was taken to jail and held for 12 hours before being released due to overcrowding. I had no clue where I was and had no phone because they took mine out of my purse and kept it, which was nowhere on my item inventory list. I was able to get a cab to the place my car was impounded and luckily was able to borrow the portion of the $375 it cost to get out I couldnt cover. The police kept my old insurance paper on top of everything and I had to spend half the day at the tow yard until I had my brother back home 150 miles away break open my safe and take a picture of a document tying my name to the car to get them to release it to me. I found seeral of priceless antiques and other things damaged from this search. The following month at the arraignment, my friend and I were scheduled for court the same day as you could guess. The D.A. dropped his case and all charges completely, while all mine remained. It is obvious he agreed to testify against me, although he denies it to the end. The trial date was set for the following month and was around 4th of July, traffic was so heavy I was at a stop on the freeway many times. I called the courthouse and asked I be put at the end of the docket and explained why I would be a little late. When I arrived I was directed to courtroom 5 where when I entered there was one lady on a computer. I was asked my name and she told me I hadn't even been on the docket that day because a disposition had never been filed on me. I was told to confirm my address with the D.A.'s office and that they could pick my case back up anytime in the next 2 years. 2 and a half weeks later while at my friends house in my hometown, the police had been in the area and had saw my car outside so they came to the door to arrest me for a "failure to appear". I spent just under 3 days in Florence jail, where it was the absolute worst. There was hardly ever an officer there to check on the inmates and I spent the first 24 hours broken out in hives miserable with an allergic reaction due to my allergy to tags on clothing and the jumpsuit material that made it act up. There was nobody there from the time lunch was served until a late dinner finally came on my second day when after I ate lunch I had my toilet get backed up and water pour out everywhere, getting my blankets wet and the bottom of my pants on the jumpsuit (which I was already wearing only halfway on due to the tag causing an allergic reaction). I sat in the cell freezing cold with no blankets and water all over the floor for around 5-6 hours before the sergeant finally showed up with other officers and had immediately checked on me, shocked and appauled by what he found. I was practically happy the next night when I was finally moved to Lane county for 24 hours, and from there I spent 4 days in Clackamas county until I was released last Wednesday after being matrixed out, once again for overcrowding. Between what I believe was improper search of my car, the fact stuff was found in a separate container (my purse) which was also in a separate container which constitutes special warrants, the false arrest for failure to appear, and the foul and dehumanizing treatment in Florence jail don't I have something to work with? Please help, I realize this was ridiculously long but my story has many angles and I want all the help I can get. Thank you
  9. I am a 25% owner of my late parents estate and I am currently living in the house. The administration of the trust has been given to a third party and they are giving me 30 days to leave. I am willing to leave but would rather stay until the property sells. Does the third party have the right to evict me without the consent of the other trustees. At least two out of the other three won't make me leave before the sale of the property.
  10. I am looking to see how frequently people in the western states receive some form of clemency. I am applying soon, and hope that someone can help give me some info on what might help my petition out, in terms of what I could include in that packet. Thanks!
  11. I was sentenced in one county and then in another. Can the one county take my time served credits for that sentence?
  12. Is it required in the state of Oregon, to renew an officiates license to perform a marriage ceremony? And if so would a marriage be valid if the Officiates license was expired?
  13. Can a 911 call be admissible in court as evidence? If so, why would a prosecutor withhold such evidence?
  14. My friend is currently in jail looking at 36 months in prison due to getting arrested 2 months ago for absconding. His parole officer is a joke, and everyone who's been involved with her will tell you just that. She's known for having a serious lack of communication and treating people shes assigned to like garbage, especially ones with drug charges. She put a warrant out for his arrest, claiming he had been absconding for 2 years. The police arrested him after seeing him in my car and running his name. The distasteful, corrupt manner they demonstrated during this arrest was the most dysfunctional dirty police work I ever thought I'd witness. It went from the two cops being there and him in the middle of having a calm conversation with an officer through the window to one of the 4 others that pulled up ripping the back door open and trying to violently grab him suddenly. He had his hands in the air and was complying completely, yet all 6 police drew their guns and tasers and yelled "quit resisting", even when he was on his knees in the gravel following their commands they shoot him with the taser. Anyways! That is a whole other ordeal. However they searched my whole car after taking him out and found a backpack with meth inside. Hes now being charged with distribution too. There was a similar situation less than a year ago when police saw him and found he had a warrant for absconding when he had gone 4 months without talking to his P.O. He wasn't taken to jail but was just assigned a court date. I witnessed several times that he tried calling her office, left messages, etc. No call back or attempt to contact him yet she puts a warrant out.. Following this first incident a court date was set and a fire was lit under her ass where she was forced into meeting with him. I drove him to her office and met her myself. I've wrote a statement and faxed it to the head of Parole and Probation saying everything I know first hand. Tell me, if this is something he was dealing with less than a year ago, how is it he's been absconding for two years? She was probably asked what was going on with him and when she had nothing to say she once again blamed him and made a false accusation and another warrant followed. Please help! Who can I talk to that I havent already? This should be easily proven wrong yet it's like the whole ****ed up law family works together to keep things screwed up.
  15. Any possible reasons why the county of a particular state would deny an inmate his legal work when he was sent back to county on appeal?
  16. Would being forced by the court to be represented by an attorney who the defendant had a conflict of interest with be a post conviction issue?
  17. My boyfriend ( who is incarcerated in Oregon ) was told by his appellate attorney that the transcript of the first trial would not be used in the second trial because it would violate his due process rights. However, in his second trial, they did end up using that transcript against him and decided to uphold his conviction. What I would like to know is who would be in the wrong? The attorney or the court? If the attorney was wrong, would that be grounds of improper counseling for a post conviction case? Thank you for responding.
  18. I was told that there was a "Will" done years ago before my grandfather had passed away & my uncle told me that my grandmother could of redone the "Will" after the passing of my grandmother. My grandmother passed away years ago and I had tried to find out where the "Will" might be but was told by my uncle he was not sure where this "Will" is. After that conversation with my uncle he avoids running my calls, siblings and other family members calls it's like he is completely avoiding the whole family all together. So right now I am just trying to find this "Will" and it should of been registered in Tillamook county she lived in Manzanita, Oregon. Thank you! Oregongrl
  19. Why is it I cannot hold these medical professionals, responsible for their failure to diagnose and treat me for a parasite infection. I have gone too, two emergency rooms, and two different Physicians in clinics, with no help at all. I can't get a referral to a infectious disease Dr. Because the regular doctors look at me like I'm crazy I have brought stool samples of my own, they clearly show parasites, but the doctors don't even get close to plastic bags I bring. The doctors make me feel humiliated, and ashamed and it is not my fault. They have never taken blood, but there is a test, even the CDC is aware of that will show the presence of parasites,yet the doctors tell me there is no blood test. They have taken stool samples, but they order the wrong test. I have suggested to them the correct test that has to be taken oftentimes at least three times with different stool and they just ignore me. The type of parasites that I have are clearly visible, but I cannot get the Dr. to actually look. My boyfriend's Dr. Did look but he immediately said that the worms were not worms they were food. He did give my boyfriend and referral, but the infectious disease Dr. Instructed me to e-mail the picture that you see here, and his reply e-mail which I have, says they are not worms and worms cannot live in humans for more than two days. This was an infectious disease Dr. Folks. I have had a natural path Dr. and a veterinarian look at the same pictures and say they are indeed parasites. So if an infectious disease Dr. Can diagnose over the Internet of the picture and his colleagues can concur, resulting in once again getting no treatment, why are they not held responsible for being wrong. When I do get the proper diagnosis why can't they be sued? Why does a lab get away with messy work mishandling and losing specimens? Why can't I find an Atty. Why does someone have to be sick on their deathbed? How is it the doctors get away with this? I am not crazy I know what I have and their killing me, I have $500 to pay an Atty. yet I can't find one to take my case because there's not enough money in it. The emotional toil that I have been going through alone should be compensated. Wider doctors and attorneys get to set minimums before you can even get any help, Parasites were very prevalent in Americans not too many years ago. They mass treated the schools and children. Well guess what these worms are immune to meds that they formerly prescribed, a pandemic will have to start before I give any help. The labs were careless they mishandled specimens the doctors didn't do their jobs they need to be sued,
  20. We bought a manufactured home and have our handy man handling repairs such as painting, replacing worn siding, and dry wall. A resident in the park spoke with the handyman and got his business card, upon seeing that there was no CCB# the guy flipped out and threatend to report to the building authorities. Is it a requirement that licensed contractors do property repairs?
  21. Hi, My step daughter got a part time job working at American Eagle. She worked there for a short period of time before they stopped putting her on the schedule but was not told as to why she wasn't on the schedule. Thus went on for 2 -3 weeks. Howwever, today she finds out that she is no longer employed at the store. She was not told about being laid off or fired. It seems to me that they should have told her she was fired so she could seek employment else where but not has suffered an income lost and will need to find another job elsewhere. Does she have a case here? Can she seek compensation until she finds another job?
  22. Hi, In Oregon, I'm told that I have to pay child support for 4 kids in the amoutn of $680/month. I have no problem paying this amount. However, I have one child that is now 21 (not going to college) and another that is 19 and is going to college. The other are 15 and 12. I'm told that I have to continue to pay $680/month until my last child is 21 and/or not going to college. Why doesn't the amount get adjusted as the children become of age (21) or 18 if they are not going to college? Is this correct? Because when I read the child support documents and Oregon Law, I can not find anything suggesting that child support payments will stay the same... Thanks
  23. We recently purchased 50% interest in a property we are preparing to sell. However the other owner changed her mind and now refuses to sell. To further complicate matters, she placed a lien on the property claiming for the mortgage payments she made to save it from foreclosure the first time. There was no judgement from the court authorizing her lien. How do I get it removed? Can I sue her?
  24. We bought 50% ownership of property heading to foreclosure. The owner of the other half refuses to sell out of spite and would rather the property be lost to the bank before letting the friends of her ex get the house. She also registered a false lien. Is there an action or tactic to pish her off title?
  25. We rented a 3 bedroom home to 3 adults and 1 child, the tenants are in a fixed term lease. After they moved in, they took on 5 foster children without notifying us. After we found out, we gave them a 30 day notice of termination based on unauthorized occupants. They have since accused us of discrimination due to the foster children being included in the familial protected class. Although we still feel that 9 occupants in a 3 bedroom house is too many, we may be required to allow them to stay. That said, we would like to at lease have the option to increase their security deposit due to the additional potential wear and tear of 6 children and 9 total occupants. Our screening criteria allows a maximum occupancy of 2 per bedroom plus 1 for the dwelling. Being a 3-bedroom home, this would allow for 7 occupants. That said, the home has a bonus room (no door or closet) that the tenant may claim is being used as a bedroom, however, a recent inspection proved that it is not setup as a bedroom. Can anyone provide feedback on our options to increase the security deposit or terminate the rental agreement? The rental agreement clearly states that adding unauthorized occupants is a violation of the rental agreement, however, they are all under the age of 18 and would not have been screened if they had notified us of them prior to moving in. We are in the state of Oregon, thank you in advance for your help.
  • Create New...