Law Questions and Answers

Can i get remunerated for taking care of my disabled boyfriend?

My boyfriend get shot 7 times and he canot use his hands he cant contemplation for himself. Both his parents work and i stay home and take support of him. Hes 17 and im 18 hes gona get on disability but they told me that they could remuneration me for caring for him.
Answers: I believe that licensure is vital to bill the state for caring for a disabled personality. I'm assuming that he is on Medicaid - his case worker should be capable of tell you how to become licensed.
In California, it's call In Home Supportive Services, commonly referred to as IHSS. To qualify, your boyfriend needs to be enrol in Medi-Cal.

To apply, hold your boyfriend contact the social service/welfare/human services office surrounded by the county where he lives. A social worker will conduct a requests assessment and authorize a certain number of hours per week for which a caretaker can provide support service and procure paid.

No, you don't stipulation any specialized training.

Don't contact an attorney. That's a waste of time and money. Just give the name the social services office, and ask for information concerning IHSS.

The above information concerns California, but other states hold similar programs with similar rules and regulations.

When is it Practical to ignore a ruling?

Hillary say's it's practical to ignore imigration law to give "undocumented workers" drivers license, so why stop near...anyone have any other law we should ignore because they are unpractical? I will start...how in the region of the national speed limit...?
Answers: I be going to respond with: When the sacrifice to abide by the law is a greater punishment than to submit.

That is until I read the rest.. All laws can be considered unpractical. A guy who like to kill, for example, would consider the decree against murder to be unpractical.

As far as Hillary goes? If she requests to break the law dispatch her to jail for it resembling any other criminal, whether the law is "practical" or not!
Well short getting into foreign relations between two countries that i have no notion about, i'll only say this roughly a strange Australian law which I construe is practicle to ignore.

Aparently it is private to *NOT* pull a weed out if you are competent to, and if it is safe and practicle to do so. Seeing that most of the introduced plants (from England..grrrr) hold become weeds, I am indebted to ripped out half of spirit..it's silly, but we have silly folks in power!
if it's against their religion. Bible say laws of men aren't of God. It is not until man become aware of the law that he begin to break the law

The best answer to immigration I own heard thus far...annex Mexico. Someone contained by my state is already campaigning for it..I be behind this battle truck for about four miles surrounded by rush hour traffic, when it hit me...WHY THE HELL NOT??? What is their to lose and not to gain???
When your life is contained by danger. In tons places, like NYC, it is almost impossible to draw from a permit to take a hand gun. You fetch one anyway. You have to use the gun to collect the lives of your family and yourself. You broke the tenet, but spending some time in penal complex is a whole lot better than self dead.

The immigration law in the US should be obey. There is no practical reason to close the eyes to them.
Our ancestors came to this country trying to flee from a king and be their own nation, we are not Americans, we in recent times came here and took over. The true Americans (Indians)were forced out most going to Mexico. True Mexicans are pale skinned (not Irish) not dark similar to most of what we know as illegals. If you want to ***** and moan,do so about the leaders, go and get elected to work for the people, hold the ability to vote yourself a incline and still work for (accept large sums of money and gifts from lobbyist) someone else. Not a desperate gig. The illegals are not taking a position from anyone who wants to work, we are newly lazy relations. As for the practical laws I agree (I'm a police officer) next to the seat belt anyone a choice if you over 18, you can ride a motorcycle in most states short a helmet let me choose if I desire to wear my form belt. The system is not run for the propose of being practical, greed have over whelmed the nation. Do a way next to all politicians next to more than 6 years In office and be in motion after corp. crime thats what hurts us all.

If an atheist goes to court...?

do they enjoy to swear on the bible?
Answers: unfortunately, yes
make absolutely no sense to me
NO ONE HAS TO SWEAR ON ANYTHING!!!
Infact, they can't even ask you to "Swear". They can ONLY ask you if you "swear & affirm to relate the truth" or if you "affirm to tell the truth".
It is completely Objectionable if you are asked to swear on ANYTHING. It is also objectionable if you are asked only to "swear"; no 'affirm' word is present.
In the state I live within, it is required in our courts...

How ever, surrounded by the case of an atheist...although they may shift through the motions, it would be a moot point.

The courts would have to rely on the atheist own sense of honesty to prevent them from lying beneath oath.

that and the threat of a perjury conviction.
Swearing on a bible hasn't been a requirement for heaps years. One MAY use a bible if he wants to but it is not offered.

Not even the Presidential oath requires a bible..

Each president recite the following oath, in accordance beside Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the department of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and preserve the Constitution of the United States.

All that bible crapola is simply a matter of choice. It is meaningless to one who doesn't hug to it's tenents.
no they dont they have to lately swear to tell the truth.

I live in CA. I am going to sign my rights past its sell-by date to my two children. Will I have to payment child support?

Answers: Britney, stop it!! Fight for your children!!
Why would you want to do this? You are saying you are not their parent anymore so I do not believe you would own to pay child support. If the simply reason for terminate your parental rights is so you don't have to discharge child support you are an asshole. A selfish shudder. Your kids didn't ask you to have sex and produce them.

Ok, I know I don't know your situation but I really hope you have a better idea than that.
what are u doing??????
and yes u will have to pay cheque child support!
poor kids =S
Unless Mrs. Stupid has a boyfriend who is inclined to adopt your two children, you cannot simply sign off your rights. You cannot divorce your children, and you will be held responsible for child support.

If you want to stop paying support, find the child mamma a good man who is likely to shoulder your responsibility. Until then, buck up and write the check, sporty.
If you of late say, "I don't want any custody or visitation," consequently you would still have to income child support. Even though you gave up your "rights," you still enjoy an obligation to financially support your children.

However, if your children's mother is remarried and her husband requirements to adopt the kids, you can voluntarily terminate your parental rights. In that armour, you would not have to pay packet child support because you would have no rights whatsoever to those children. Termination of parental rights is a court issue and is done in court beside judicial approval. The judge will not (usually) allow you to voluntarily stop midstream your rights unless the children are going to be adopted, as it puts the children at a disadvantage because they singular have one parent to support them financially. No issue what, you're going to need to contact a attorney who specialized in relations law.
You will hold to file next to a court of law to call a halt your parental rights and responsibilities..you cannot just "sign off".

Once the court agrees and terminate your parental rights, you no longer have to reimburse child support.

You obviously are a treasure for a father. I'm sure the kids will miss you when your gone.

Why should the Palestinians suffer for what the Germans did to the Jews during World War II?

Granted the Jews should not suffer in Europe, Israel give them a country where they can hope to be free of ill-treatment. But if that is the answer to why Jews no longer have need of to suffer, what is the answer to Palestinians who continue to suffer from the loss of their home environment to Israel? The answers given so far are: "Might makes right", "it is some one elses fault" i.e. the Romans, Arabs, Zionist etc., "it is the Palestinians fault". In no process does this question presume that it is the defect of Jews. The Palestinians are not at fault any more than the Jews would be at condemn for the centuries of suffering Jews faced surrounded by Europe. Israel is not at fault for acting within its best interest whether wisely or fool heartedly any more than any other population and nations own done throughout human history. Hint! To find the correct answer you must first question the assumption that the creation of Israel is any an ethical or pragmatic solution for the suffering of Jews in Europe.
Answers: What are you smoking?
Why should the Palestinians suffer because Israel is contained by Jeruselum. It is my understanding past the creation of Israel, the Palestinians were warfare among themselves, and no one be really in Jerusalem. It wasn't until Israel come into being when the infighting stopped.

If the Palestinians needed to go live within Israel they can, they can live in arpeggio with the Israelis, lots Arabs already do.

If they would put down their guns and pick up their hoe's they could live in chord with Israel, and the world would be a better place.
If the Arabs put down their ordnance it would end.
If Israel give up its weapons they would be wipe off the map.
One: Are you asking a give somebody the third degree or giving an answer?

Two: What does the Israel-Palestinian conflict have to do next to the Holocaust (a word you don't want to use, apparently?).

Three: Excuse me?! "...the loss of their homeland to Israel" ? Don't you have to 'own' something formerly you 'lose' it?

Last but not least: it is my view, that should a person want to discuss a certain subject, he/she should at most minuscule have some fluency of said subject...if you get my worth.
Since so many be in agreement that the jews should hold thir own country and they wanted it within palestine (their original base), the UN created it from British palestine. The rest of the nouns was as expected for the arabs to utilize as a country or divide etc.

It was the surrounding countries that object to the creation of Israel and attacked on its second day of existance. This cost these countries some nouns. Again these countries attacked and again Israel was the knockout and again gained more domain.

The biggest problem is that the Palestinians have be offered a chance to become a separate state but enjoy rejected every offer. Why? This is the problem that they are cause their own problems by not taking the offers made within the past which by presently they would be a country and have a gov't next to lots of foreign aid and probably some stability.

By not moving ahead and being proactive towards peace the palestinian gov't have caused several problems including the topical securtity wall being built. The corruption within the gov't reduced its effectiveness to govern, control and help out its citizens.

Israel years ago did offer plentiful arabs the chance the return to their homes contained by Israel but many refuse to move there. So the properties become abandoned. You snooze or want too much you lose!

It is not a simple situation and nor are in that just simple solutions to adjectives the problems. It is fair to voice that the palestinians must get together and work for peace to establish a country. Then the world will backing to rebuild it surrounded by to a place that has an up and coming reduction.
Ironical that after the war the authorities know the problems that were going stem from relocating the Jews into a predominately Arab region i.e. why Nevada and North West of Australia where also considered option I wonder how the citizens of these areas would feel if that truly happened and their lands was confiscated
I find it so amusing that family actually consider that no-one lived in or call home this ancient civilization until after WW2.
Indeed they should not have have to suffer. I think greatly of it was because after WW2, the tide of mood following the Holocaust led to the Allies to rush into establishing Israel in need thinking of the interests of the hundreds of thousands of Arabs living there. But we are where on earth history has brought us. The Saudi govt offered Israel classification in 2002 provided they returned to their 1967 borders, but Israel said no. The actuality is that the main roadblock to peace is Israeli intransigence which reminds me of the Unionists surrounded by Northern Ireland and their decades of excuses for not talking to the Nationalists. If Israel requests to get a more bodes well reception in international public assessment, they should talk to the Palestinians. You generate peace with your opponent not with your friend. So lots founders of nation states were once call "terrorists". The reality is that contained by this kind of situation, one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighters and we requirement to look at both sides of the story, rationally and minus being blinded by religion.

If the first ticket was dissmissed can the offier write another ticket 4 months then for the same offense?

Ticket be dissmissed by a judge.. Officer writes another ticket for indistinguishable day and offense four months subsequent.
Answers: I am an attorney. The answer to your question is no, without doubt not.

There's a legal principle call Res Judicata. It basically say that once a matter have been tried and settled, it can't be brought stern before the court. This is a slam dunk for the court. Just variety sure you bring documentation of the first court case.

The cop will be lucky if he get out of the court having merely be scorched by the authority for ticketing you twice. He runs the risk of monetary sanctions for doing something so conspicuously improper. Let the court know that you're missing work for showing up to scrap this.

The fastest way to win it taken care of would be to contact his Sergeant/supervising officer. That'll also probably bring care of it.

This is true solitary if you are being ticketed for alike event (the same offense, day, time, and place).
Not knowing the contravention, I would still say yes. The Judge be just one lenient the first time.

Why do people allow alkys to work along side them?

if someone have an alcohol related problem fair satisfactory, they can deal beside it in their private life span as its none of my business. but when i'm in work and a fella i enjoy to work with is partly cut and reeks of drink apart from that he's a useless wanker even when sober which is a rarity. this eejit have the gall to stir to the company HS (health and safety) man when he was on site and enlighten him! what was wrong beside the site. anyway after i picked my balls past its sell-by date from the deck because i laughed so knotty that somebody drunk and stinking of drink can lay the law down to the HS i go one further i contacted the HSE(health and safety executive) they own the power to shut down shops factories and building sites or anything, even hospitals, when they came he be nowhere to be found, he was moved rotten site. thats 7 alkys i've had to suffer within 20 years. if an alky wants to eradicate himself through drink fair ample but they better not infringe on my right to live in work. am i a cold bastard?
Answers: line em up put em contained by a field and bomb the b*stards!
No...you nouns like you know how the cow ate the cabbage.

Why is marijuana illegal?

I am doing a arts school project. I need links to net sites and other things.
Answers: Marijuana legislation and legal history:
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/LIBR...
www.norml.org

Read things on that website and later join NORML. Everyone that believes contained by freedom should join NORML.

Member, NORML permissible committee
I'm not going to give you links for you to do for your project. That's why it's call research.

But I will enter my own opinion.

I do not smoke marijuana.

But I am for the legalization of it.

The fundamental reason it is not decriminalized is because it grows everywhere, look at it's nickname, WEED, because it is a weed. Unlike tobacco which requirements a special climate to grow in.

Also, near tobacco there is a long process to prep it in the past it can be smoked. This is untrue with marijuana you can pick it dry it out and smoke it.

So necessarily the government can't due it.

Heres a good point, if marijuana be legalized, imagine how much the crime rate would dance down.
The main pretext was because a couple brutal murders committed by infantile people after smoking the stuff. In one crust a young man bludgeoned his mother near a cast iron skillet, the other armour a teenager murdered his parents near an ax.

Both had long histories of mental weakness but little was set about schizophrenia at the time. It be widely thought that smoking marijuana caused this condition.

There are also political reason too. Friction between the FDR administration and the mayor of New York city be one.

The fact that the majority of cannabis be consumed by blacks and Latinos is another one. These folk tended to come from poorer neighborhoods near higher crime rates. Higher crime rates probably because smoking pot turned people into thieving maniac.

Remember the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 wasn't meant to "outlaw" the stuff individual place a tax on it. Of course the FDR supervision never intended on handing out any stamps.

Catch 22 here, the first party busted under the regulation was an honest pot cultivator. He applied for the stamps and was busted for possessing pot in need the stamps but you couldn't get the stamps unless you have the pot first.

The man got 4 years within a federal prison and was fined 1000 dollars.

If government truly assistance about us, why don't they require cameras surrounded by our homes?

Only when we are under total and constant tape surveillance will we be good individuals.
.
Answers: If you want to be willing to help then, put a camera contained by your home and get things started. Send the tape once a week to your local police station for review.
You must be very desperate indeed to require
constant surveillance!

How long do you have to sue for a slip and tip out?

It has be over 2 years, but I NEVER imagined that my problems would be this great, this many years longer.

It is a result of an injury received surrounded by a department store when my shopping cart caught on the door frame due to modifications the store made to their shopping cart. My shopping cart flipped and I caught it because it have my 2 year old son within it.
Answers: I think you passed the hamper to sue, check with a attorney. I just have a car wreck beside the other person at eccentricity I had 1 year to sue...
There is no approach I can answer this question because I do not know if you live within the US. Assuming you live in the US, within are 50 different answers because each state is different.

In Oklahoma the statute of limitations for personal injury is 2 years from the time of injury or 2 years from the time the sufferer discovered or reasonably should own discovered that the injury or condition.

So depending on what you mean when you speak you never imagined the problems (the problems were not discovered?) that may let go you..if in Oklahoma. But I am sure most states hold a similar rule about when the injury be discovered.

More Questions and Answers:
[1496] - [1151] - [2341] - [326] - [2550] - [2127] - [2087] - [2355] - [2296] - [2564] - [1568] - [1454] - [213] - [2475] - [788] - [816] - [1054] - [790] - [2177] - [2317]

The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.

Answer question: