Law Questions and Answers

I have a press concerning visitation?

what rights do i have as the trial guardian of a child regarding visitation next to a man whom i was never married to , have never done anything for his child , just get into her life fully three to three and a partially years ago, . i only give him visitation at a custody hearing three years ago because i be being nice. i agree to my child visit ethnic group out of state and told him numerous times previously before child gone , now he is trying to cart me to court for violating the command and claims he did not know nothing, which is a falsehood. dose anyone have experience next to this type or similar situation, and would like to share their experience? i want to know what i can do legitimately to make sure that he dosent come inside two feet of my child until she reach a certain age, where on earth she can visit on her own short my involvement..childs school is suffering , behavior a short time ago got better through counceling and i want him to stay away. don't i own this right as a parent.he wnt thru drug rehb,am,etc, sum help
Answers: CONTEMPT OF COURT AND CHILD CUSTODY MODIFICATION
Based on the facts you enjoy presented, it sounds like the audible range will decide two issues. 1. Whether you are contained by contempt of the judge's order and 2. Whether the current custody arrangement should be modified.

CONTEMPT ISSUE
It sounds as if you may own had the father's consent since you sent the child out of state and interrupted his visitation schedule. So, you may be capable of successfully avoid being found surrounded by contempt of the original command.
If you and the father tell conflicting stories concerning the contempt issue, it will come down to who the Judge believes. However, even if you are contained by contempt of the order surrounded by that you denied visitation in contravention of said order, most Courts would not modify custody base on this incident alone. In order to modify custody, one or both party must show "a material alteration in circumstances since the entry of the ingenious order and that modification of that writ would be in the child's best interest."

DETERMINING THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD
It differs from state to state, but collectively the Judge will consider factors similar to the following when determining the best interests of the child. 1. stability of the home. 2. continuity of effort 3. employment of the parent 4. mental and emotional age of the parent 5. inclination and capacity to precision for the child. 6. Moral fitness of the parent (Most of the time, stability of the home and Continuity of care fetch the most weight).

SUPERVISED VISITATION
In order to find supervised visitation, you will have to present evidence that the father should not be gone alone with the child. ( You would necessitate to show drug use, sexual impropriety or some other type of evil behavior, violence, mental instability, etc. In command to successfully impose supervised visitation. )

THINGS THAT DO NOT MATTER
Generally, anything that took place prior to the unproved order should not be tolerate in as evidence against any party. eg. The certainty that he has lone been around for the closing three years and the fact that you consented to the visitation.
how ancient is the child now? If child is a minor they can tell the sort out their wishes. If not you can ask for supervised visits. also show the settle proof of grades and ask the counselor to be a witness for you.

Is there a time smudge for a grand jury to indite someone?

a friend of mine be charged with burglary 2 surrounded by ny the case go to grand juryon sept 23 he have spoke to many ethnic group some tell him the elegant jury has 45 days 60 days and 6 months his advocate told him they can make up excusses to post pone any timeline but you would mull over if it takes them this long to brand name a desision they dont have plenty to indite right ?? any links on statues for ny would be helpfull he wants to achieve into the military and this is holding him back gratefulness
Answers: The only shortening on a New York prosecutor's ability to present information on a crime to a elegant jury is the statute of limitations on the offense.
An indictment for a felony charge can be postponed pretty much for as long as the grand jury see fit; the DA/prosecutor is probably trying to gather more evidence and/or round up any possible witnesses to testify against your friend. Your best bet is to contact another, more experienced criminal legal representative (because his attorney should have a better and more specific answer than the one that be given) and find out. NY law is completely sketchy on things like this, and if you don't know the statute, you can get screwed.

Do you think it is right for school to ban adjectives Peanuts from the whole campus due to student allergies?

Schools own banned any point with peanuts from the school where I live,When I be going to school the most economical lunch be PB@J sandwichs at least 3 times a week.Couldn't afford The School lunch,agree to alone dare to eat that DREK!!Wouldn't it engineer more sense to isolate the affected students next to allergies,I guess they dont want to OFFFeeend anyone.
Answers: I think specifically ridicilous to restrict others because some have allergies. I stingy I was allergic to cats, and other kids come to arts school with cat dander on them and I would capture bad reaction, impossible to avoid, does that mean they should achieve rid of their cats? NO of course not.

first you achieve rid of peanuts, then milk, as some are lactose intolerant, consequently you get rid of something else where on earth does it end? You can oblige the special needs kids minus stepping on the rights of others. it is the parents and teachers responsiblity to see that the kitchen is aware and provides label on which foods have the offending substance so the poor kid is not wondering what to drink.

Why should other people's freedoms be restricted because some have to enjoy those restrictions? What if I couldn't eat meat, does that tight-fisted a school (if I be still going) can't have any meat for the others because I might in recent times sneak it?

They don't want to offend the few but don't mind offending the abundant? That is reverse discrimination. I construe this is the social justice entity they are pushing. you can't have it unless everyone else can. You can't guzzle food unless the whole world can get through too mentality. so if a quarter of the world doesn't have verbs drinking water social sprite requires we give them our hose down and go minus ourselves until everyone else has dampen first then we can own any left overs.

Social even-handedness is a oxymoron. you can't have sprite for the group if the individual is denied justice, a group is made up of individuals. Put surrounded by social justice individuals are sacrifice for the good of the group, but who or what determines the devout of the group? another individual(notice individual not group) who set up the group in the first place. do you see the protential for severe injustice here?

RRRR
No, it doesn't gross any sense.

Schools are typically notified of any allergies children enjoy and the kids should know what they are allergic to as well. That rule is ridiculous.
You may find this extreme, but due to the use of a component of peanuts surrounded by some common immunization, many associates are developing a serious reaction to them within their diets. The same holds true for some people and eggs.

My sister cannot drink anything remotely involving peanuts. She becomes extraordinarily ill inwardly an hour of digesting them.

It's not about offending. It's almost liability. The one student is only the public obverse of a larger issue that the medical community is addressing. People enjoy allergies that they are unaware of. For better or worse, we're going to enjoy to put up with change in public dietary issues.
I infer it is amazing that people can be such MORONS, if they own allergies to peanuts the resolution is OBVIOUS.

WHAT KIND OF SIMPLETONS DO THEY HAVE RUNNING THESE SCHOOLS ANYWAY!!!! DO THEY THINK THEY'RE RAISING TODDLER'S???????????????
I agree with you that they should only isolate the students who have peanut allergies. However, it's "easier" for school to simply not allow peanut products at all. So that's why they do it.

I'm glad nil like this be going on when I was a kid...I ate zilch but PB&J sandwiches every morning for 11 years straight. I'd have starved to departure.
I agree it doesn't make sense, and I'm surprised the faster answers are so close to a 50/50 split.
I sympathize with allergy sufferers and adjectives other impediments individuals have, but I don't believe the answer lies surrounded by 'ducking' the problem and making everyone else suffer. What is needed is clarity in liability imperative over what is and isn't acceptable institutional safekeeping. If this doesn't happen we might enjoy Sport banned from school, Books with small print prohibited, Chemistry experiments banned, Computers excluded, Teachers banned, and adjectives other potential risks banned.
If your legislators are so dumb they can't distinguish between responsible and irresponsible behavior, next I suggest your school revoke the peanut forbid, and when they get sued their lawyer argue Jimmy Carter is the real culprit for growing them contained by the first place.
I don't think it is right to impediment peanuts from students that have allergies. It is not fare to everyone else at the arts school.

Pet Custody after a break up?

A good friend of mine basically ended a three year relationship surrounded by which he purchased a dog for his girlfriend, he paid for it, but put the dogs papers within her name, immediately he wants the dog but she refuse to even let him see the animal. According to him, he be the primary care taker of the dog. Does he hold any legal right to the dog?

As a side file he also paid a 1 year lease on the house they shared, and consent to her live there for free after they broke up and he moved out, roughly 9 months total, so he has done profusely for this girl without asking for anything contained by return, except for either custody or visitation of the dog.
Answers: The papers are contained by her name and they are not married so the dog is hers PERIOD. Primary caretaker will not fly as this can't be proved and reasonably the animal is her property.

This is the way a mediate will cut it to the bone (bad pun. dogbone). Sure maybe he totally loves this dog and desires to see it. But how can the judge fail to acknowledge the fact that he may yearning to stay in her energy somehow? This could be a danger or a complication for her. Visitation will appear somewhat hinky and cast doubt upon your friend's motives and later life.. really. She does not want him showing up and it is not a kid.

As far as the lease that would be a seperate thing and not applicable at adjectives. Was he on the lease? If so he had to foot or be sued for breaking it. If not why was he paying after a breakup? Kind of sounds approaching she used him and tooled him and used him and all will vision him as such. He could have cut his losses and broke the lease... far cheaper than 9 months.

Bottom chain the dog is hers. Best to walk away and be smarter subsequent time. Its best that he just get a new dog.
Give me a FKN break , so what she get a free place , that was his dumb @ss reprimand , if he put the papers in her signature it is her dog , same as with a coup¨¦ , if you buy one , and put it in my entitle , you pay for the gas , it is still my motor ,

Tell the judge you want partly of the dog ( just do not consent to PETA know you split it up ) with adjectives the BS going on they are going to fight over a dog , do they not realize how stupid that sounds , I would split that dog right down the middle , and collect the court cost

What is the point of making weird law like these?

I'm reading up on these grotesque laws and contained by Cali, IT'S ILLEGAL TO EAT ORANGES IN A BATHTUB! WTF! And in Hartfurd Connecticut, it's wicked to educate a dog! And surrounded by Florida unmarried women who parachute on Sundays can be jailed. That law seem sexist to me. There's so many strange laws I can't even cross all of them. Why are nearby laws similar to that?
Answers: I've heard this earlier. I'm a Florida attorney and I've never found a law stating it be illegal for unmarried women to parachute on Sundays. It could possibly be a local ordinance, but that it unlikely as economically; it violates too various constitutional rights

It may be that decades ago there be a local ordinance against unmarried women skydiving on Sundays. However, if that ever was a local ordinance, I cannot envisage it being still within effect.

If these laws ever existed, consequently they were almost really local ordinances enact as a reaction to local events that cause a sensation in the community. "Sensation" does not parsimonious illegal; it freshly means it upset some relations in the community. Local leaders react to an uproar in that community and passed what we bid now a stupid directive.
Yeah, there's kind of a grotesque law on files right now. It allows the federal governing body to hold an American citizen for as long as they want without a warrant. It's call the 'Patriot Act'.

The simple fact of the situation is that many times, law get bundled together is a bill. Several up to date laws will transport effect when the legislation passes.

Also, plentiful of those laws be passed in a different time. Such as, the dog decree. Perhaps, at some time, a person tried to enroll thier dog contained by school. There be no law against it, and the entity claimed it was faultlessly legal. So, the city council pass a law for this one specific situation to operation with a nutcase.
One of the downsides to democracy is that you habitually get legislators who are not too bright, even complete idiots, or enjoy hidden agendas. Both of those flaws contained by the system can lead to chance laws.

The not-too-bright legislators will habitually react to a word story with the words "There ought to be a statute!" and then proceed to stir out and get one enact. It provides their constituents with the mirage that the legislator is actually doing something.

The ones near hidden agendas will regularly work on enacting law that benefit nobody except themselves or the business and other interests of their cronies and backers. That will commonly lead to law that make no adjectives sense and spark the WTF! reaction.

Generally speaking, most enlightened and honest legislators (if you can find them) lug the view that the a reduced amount of laws here are, the better. That's working from the principle that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. When you see a lot of legislation human being passed, it's a good hypothesis to look into the motives of those in the legislature who are involved proponents of the weirder laws.

Hope that's not too cynical!

Question about police officers' discretion?

My friend be arguing with me today around officers' discretion. His argument is basically that if something is against the canon, people shouldn't be given warning, but fined, or otherwise punished for whatever crime. I believe officer are smart enough to use discretion - warning are appropriate for such behaviours as women being topless on a sand during spring break, smoking in a non-designated (outdoor) nouns, etc. If officers fined and or arrested for EVERY MINOR crime, we'd be living contained by a Draconian state..What say you?
Answers: Every time you drive one mph over the closing date in the scenery of a cop, you get the benefit of that cop's discretion. Every time you almost stop, but not relatively, at a stop sign. Ask your friend if those crimes should be strictly enforced as well.
Well, I thank glory for Officer's discretion, because I cannot afford auto insurance and I work three jobs to retribution for my food and rent and gas for my car, so when I be pulled over by a cop a few nights ago and have my ID light out on my license plate he asked for my DL, my registration and my insurance card. I consequently told him I couldn't afford insurance and I was working 3 job just to net it in existence, he said OK, let me be right pay for. In ten minutes he came posterior to give me a advisory on my ID light and told me he wouldn't dispense me a ticket for no insurance because I obviously be trying! All I could do was smile and thank the Lord!

Do I have a legal sexual discrimation complaint?

I work in a big telecommunications firm. I have two manly coworkers, both with solitary high institution diplomas. My supervisor, manager and two coworkers are adjectives male and over 50. I am a 35 year out-of-date female MBA. My counterparts and I adjectives started working in this department on equal day. One does exceptional work (closely equivalent to mine), but the other lags far, far bringing up the rear. Despite my knowledge, my body of work and my testimonial, I am still the lowest paid personage in this group. Naturally, I'm rewarded less than the supervisor and executive, but lower than my high academy graduate counterparts as well. From the mediator down, I am the only feminine and I'm the only one below the age of 50. I get the consciousness that if I were a 50 year out-of-date male that adjectives this would be taken care of. Do I own a HR complaint and do I have the reason for a lawsuit?

I feel some nouns when they get together and complain that they can't take ahead because the women have taken the company over. Comments?
Answers: Hon, possibly you show too much negative attitude and that may be keeping you down!
If adjectives the facts are true, you do have a principle for a complaint.

You can submit info about your satchel to www.findlaw.com, and they will help you find an attorney.
If an MBA is working at duplicate level as those near only elevated school degree, they are most likely underemployed. But after they most likely readily accepted that position for doesn`t matter what reasons of their own. Bad available job market or doesn`t matter what.

If the qualifications for the position you work contained by is a high academy degree, consequently while an advanced degree is nice, that does not by itself guarantee you any benefit in salary or promotions.

If the individual supposedly lagging far far losing you has be there abundantly longer and earns more because of seniority, near is nothing you can do something like that.
There may be discrimination going on, but making a baggage is another matter. Since it is a voluminous company, you should try going upstairs about getting a elevate.

If you do not get indulgence, you can file an EEO complaint or sue, but hold another job all set, because if you can't prove your case, you will own shot your career within the foot.
Stop thinking like a heinous feminist. If you sue, you become unemployable, even cleaning toilets contained by subway stations. Who would hire such a lawsuit risk?

If you feel with prejudice treated, peddle your great skills and experience where you are appreciated. That is what a season male would do. With a competing situation offer, reflecting your true worth, run to your current employer with the better donate. Start an auction.

If the current employer refuses to contest it, that his honest opinion nearly your worth, however wrong. Leave. No hard emotional state. They may want you back then.

Anyone wanting to see you suffer for years would say, see a advocate. The lawyer have a vested interest to stir up litigation.
It can't hurt to talk to an Attorney. Sounds to me approaching you've got a pretty solid grip. Good luck with everything.

Question about work related, Can I find fired from being out of work near a sick child i bring docotor notes?

I live contained by texas if it helps next to my question
Answers: Some companies allow sick give up for yourself or family vigour needs. If you grasp vacation time, you may hold to just put it towards that, if it is an issue. Did you notify your manager that you would be out? Did they own a problem with it? Hard to voice since different companies have different policies, but I would say-so the manager can construct it easy or rock-hard for you.
if you are an unreliable worker for any reason you can be fired. it is not your employer fault that you can not acquire to work when you are scheduled.

you should enjoy dependable people taking keeping of you child when he is sick so that you can go to work.

if i could not depend on you coming to work when you be scheduled i would fire you.

sorry
It depends on how long you are out and why you be fired and the size of your company.

By Federal regulations, if you have more than 50 organization at your company, your employer is required to give you up to 18 weeks check out of.

However, they can put you on probation because of the times you didn't show up, or showed up late, and later when you call surrounded by sick with your kid, a moment ago fire you for other reasons.
I will assume you do not own an employment contract or you are not a member of a federation, then the answer is yes, you can be fired for any sense. Or no reason at adjectives.
That is called employment at will.
Company policy may enjoy some way to accomidate you, but you own to talk near your manager and the HR dept.
I'm sure you can be fired for any sense they want. Sad, isn't it. I had a friend who be fired because she had to progress the doctor too much for chemo treatments for cancer.

People used to wonder what unions be good for-apparently not a soul else protects working people.
The familly medical quit act is not designed for regular sick days. Such move out has to be arranged contained by advance. It is not an excuse after the certainty. Sorry to say but unless you hold a contract, you can indeed be fired for being unreliable even if it is not your mistake. From the employer's perspective, they make money by using your labor and paying you smaller quantity than the profit you produce. If you are not there, they are not making money bad you and it doesn't matter why they are not making money.

Is salvia legal or wrong in maryland?

Answers: Sage? I don't deem so... I don't really know.

Ahhh... it contains salvinorin A, the most potent natural psychoactive substance... (searching for info on it)...

check this connect (you better give me the 10 points for doing the research on this)
http://www.salvia.net/en/legality.htm

Illegal

Australia Since June 1, 2002.
Belgium Salvia divinorum be added to a list of "against the law products" in May 2006.
Denmark Since August 23, 2003.
Estonia Since April 2005 Salvia divinorum is timetabled as a medicinal herb that requires a doctor’s prescription.
Finland Since August 2002, unless with a relevant prescription from a doctor.
Italy Since January 11, 2005, the public sale and possession of Salvia divinorum and salvinorin A are illegal.
Japan Salvinorin A is one of the thirthy-three controlled substances that have been said to be expelled under a pharmaceutic imperative that should have taken effect since April 2007.
Norway In 2002, The National Health Council of Norway have listed Salvia divinorum as a medicinal herb that requires a doctor’s prescription.
Spain Sale prohibited since January 28, 2004.
South Korea As of January 2005, both Salvia divinorum and Salvinorin A are controlled.
Sweden Since April 1, 2006.
The United States Louisiana, Missouri, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Delaware, and Maine are the solely states in the USA that enjoy laws prohibiting possession of Salvia divinorum.
Louisiana The bright law, call Act No. 159, went into effect on August 15, 2005 (Strain et al. 2005). Thus Louisiana become the first state in the USA to criminalize Salvia divinorum.
Missouri Salvia divinorum and salvinorin A also become Schedule I substances in the state of Missouri.
Tennessee A bill passed that classifies the knowing production, invention, distribution, or possession of the active chemical ingredient contained by the hallucinogenic plant Salvia divinorum as a Class A crime. It went into effect on July 1, 2006.
Oklahoma On May 26, 2006 Salvia divinorum be added to the list of controlled substances.
Delaware On March 16, 2006, Salvia divinorum be made a Schedule I controlled substance in that state.
Maine A bill be signed into law on May 15, 2007, that regulates salvia within the same route tobacco products are regulated in Maine. Adults 18 and over could rightfully purchase and use the material. Selling or providing Salvia divinorum or salvinorin A to anyone beneath the age of 18 would be a criminal offense.
Salvia is 100% legal anywhere. However, they are trying to impediment it from all shelves due to the effects. I wouldn't want to gain caught with it, regardless of its authenticity or not. It looks too much like Marijuana.

Do any U.S. states use Canings as a punishment for breaking the law?

Answers: No, judicial corporal punishment is off the record everywhere in the U.S.

However, i infer it would be a good concept. Most prisons are overcrowded, and they cost taxpayers millions of dollats each year. Not to mention that they're a bit inhumane wiht all the rape and antagonism that occurs surrounded by U.S. prisons. I think Canings (or some other corporal punishment) could be an excellent alternative. Not to mention that it might be a apt deterrent, especially if they were carried out within public.
you must not live in the u.s. cane in the u.s. would be considered torture.

More Questions and Answers:
[2178] - [2427] - [2456] - [1630] - [1862] - [1865] - [940] - [639] - [1855] - [128] - [564] - [2286] - [368] - [2241] - [103] - [2528] - [2209] - [2155] - [2379] - [586]

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

Answer question: