Law Questions and Answers

Can an attorney file a lien on property in need notice or audible range?

Can an attorney file a lien against my home, within Florida, if he says I owe him fees. I dispute that I owe him the fees. He will not progress to arbitration through the Fl. Bar and they allow him to refuse. He is threatening to sue me civilly which is fine. But I am wondering if he can put a lien on my property lacking my knowledge or in need some type of court hearing.
Answers: Yes, he can.
law differ from state to state. often liens can be placed upon property lacking benefit of a trail. In most cases you can go to court and ask for a transient stay, an injunction, before he puts your home within his name.

While I know of one contractor who cart the home of a client I serve. She fought without an attorney and get her home back-But it took a year. Her going to two maine Courts, including Maine Supreme Court.

Her legal request be hand written within pencil. She is the only Person I know who proceded short a lawyer and won her produce.

Legal Aid could be able to help out you but Here in Maine its 6 lawyer for 125,000 Other lawyers are 1 legal representative for 2,000 persons.

What that attorney wants contained by the clock of darkness around his conduct yourself.Dont give it to him File for an injunction. If you are handling the shield you want as much media focus as you can group.

The Rules of Court should tell you how to directory for court protection. Their are lawlibraries in Court houses and at the State Capital which have this book

If you seek damages or wallet a case underneath US LAW title 42 Section 1984 you can get a legal representative to act on your behalf, and be salaried after you win.
From the other lawyer when he loses.

There are groups contained by FL who assist non-lawyers. They are Pro-se and court watchers. Your best and firmest chance, of a win, is to hold a lawyer. Report him to the FL. BBB.

As I am not a attorney, and you did not hire me; This is not legal support.
Have a look at this website:
http://barker.phpnet.us/hotlegaltopics/
It's full of information about attorney and tenet suits.

What do you think of adjectives the bureaucracy involved in different agencies sharing information?

This stuff just about Homeland security not one able to use import tax code to crack down on hiring illegal immigration is pretty much what I'm referring but you see it within all agencies. As if no agency wishes to see any of the others succeed, or, different rights trump production of results.
Answers: Bureaucracy makes things harder, not easier.

Sen. craig not guilty?

when did it become illegal to ask another fully fledged for sex?if you want to prosecute someone for asking for sex or lewd behaviour progress to any club where hundreds of offer are presented everynight and lewd behaviour..hahaha hold you watched how some citizens dance?im not motto sex in a public bathroom is right but thats not what be happening here.it be reported craig touched the other guys foot with his but how did he know the other guy be gay and it was ok to touch his foot?answer is because the cop be giving him signals that he himself was gay and looking for sex thus making this a set up ,that is to say if craig really touched his foot.has anyone ever tried to see how far into the subsequent stall youd have to stick your foot to touch the character next to you?thats right wayyyy to far so the cops foot be right next to the wall signaling craig he be looking for sex himself. as far as pleading guilty id a bit pay $500 and be done than hold to hire an attorney and pay thousands too.wouldnt you
Answers: First of adjectives i don't think prositution should be a crime. Is craig guilty uh uh YA i devise so and his speech didn't help him any. Do i watchfulness larry craig is gay no. However being a citizen of Idaho i do own a problem with craig's hypocrsicy
Guilty. Sorry dude, but Craig finally get caught.

BTW: You can be arrested and prosecuted for loitering for the purposes of soliciting a prostitute.
It does not really matter if he is guilty of a crime or not. He is an elected public strict who ran his electioneer and voted on a platform based on conservative moral values. Nobody is planning on sending him to put inside or punishing him severely. He was a first time criminal and will most likely attain of very comfortable.

His senate career is and should be over though. He have falsely represented himself to the public and his own constituents. I would want him gone if I be a Idaho resident who voted for him.
You know, i don't know if the guy is gay or not. However, do you really want someone stupid enough to plead guilty if he isn't, representing you?

Should all of Illinois pay envelope for Chicago mass transit?

On the news waterway from Chicago they are expressing that Chicagoans and the people that run the city are really foolish at the governor.
They think he is doing the wrong entity by not passing a bill to own that whole state of Illinois payment taxes to help the mass transit surrounded by the city.
Do the people of Chicago know that in attendance are many other individuals in the state that do not dance to Chicago and use the mass transit.
They do not want to pay taxes for something they are not using.
Why don't Chicago freshly get that message and increase the fare for people who use it? Then they can earnings their own bills and do their own upkeep of the sysyem.
The other people within the state of Illinois are sick and tired of paying for Chicago to get everything they want.
Answers: The problem is that the mass transit they are discussion about includes the Metra. Metra trains be in motion to Geneva, Aurora, Chain of lakes, Orland Park, and several southern suburbs. It is not simply the CTA.

Don't know if there is a solid fair answer to this one. The CTA serves lots of poor inhabitants including the disabled who have no other option. The Metra also serves the poor, the students and it is talking almost expanding into farther suburbs. There are more people than basically those in the city who uses the mass transit as defined contained by this bill.

Then you need to look at who is bringing revenue into the state by path of taxes (property, income, sales). Chicago as a city, Cook County, and the other suburbs serviced by the mass transit provide a large portion of the income which runs the state. Maybe a fiesta response would be that Chicago and the cities served by the mass transit be exempt from some of the taxes it sends to Springfield and use that money for the transit.

Unfortunately this is not an 'us v. them' or 'big city v. rest of the state' issue. Someone needs to look at the money that go into the state from the areas served by mass transit and balance that against what mass transit wants to continue - and what will take place to revenue is mass transit fails. If our elected official in Springfield would pay packet more attention looking at all sides of the problem instead of posturing along deputation lines these issues would be resolved.
While I don't live in Chicago, I would ask adjectives the answerer's out there to consider how much contained by corporate taxes are paid by businesses within Chicago? This is revenue that goes to the state's broad fund, and offsets lower property and income rates rates affecting the whole state.

As Chicago have some of the worst traffic around, realize that businesses consider commute to work as part of their verdict to relocate to somewhere or to stay where they are. If workers will enjoy a hellish commute, businesses are less imagined to stay in Chicago or relocate to Chicago. This ultimately method a reduction surrounded by corporate income taxes paid, and the citizens of Illinois as a adjectives will have to clear up for the lost revenue through higher state income and property taxes.

So contained by a way, the mass transit system within Chicago is good for adjectives residents of Illinois.
By the same reasoning, the individuals of chicago should be excused from that portion of the state taxes that pay for a bridge contained by southern Illinois, or to repair a highway, or for a museum in Springfield or anything outside the city. Those things might bring pretty expensive if the only folks paying are those that are feasible to benefit from them.

Judge wants everyone contained by UK on DNA database?

The entire UK population and every visitor to Britain should be put on the national DNA database, a top consider said today.
Lord Justice Sedley, one of England's most experienced appeal court judges, described the country's current system as "indefensible".

"We enjoy a situation where if you crop up to have be in the hand of the police, then your DNA is on irreparable record. If you haven't, it isn't ... that's broadly the picture," Sir Stephen Sedley told the BBC.

"It also channel that a great many citizens who are walking the streets, and whose DNA would show them guilty of crimes, go free."

See cooperation - http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/...

Question - What are your thoughts ?
Answers: it doesn't surprise me, ever heard of the blotch of the beast? perchance this is just one step closer to something resembling that not sounding so absurd when rules close to this get passed. it could be a fitting thing presently as far as criminals are concerned...it could also mean trouble next if the government should use that against anyone who defy the government should it become as the Bible conference of in the "ending days"
Honestly, I run hot and cold on this one...

In reality, if you arent guilty of committing any crimes (for which DNA could find you guilty, such as rape or murder - they arent going to use DNA to prove you broke the speed limit) next you really have nought to worry in the region of, do you?? So, its kinda a good notion - those that have committed crimes are found out, and those that havent are free to walk.

However, in starting a DNA ridge, other information can be gleaned - such as your propensity to suffer from some genetic disease. And, if your Govt also runs your Health Care, there is a possibility of you anyone denied medical benefits based upon your susceptibility to cancer or some other disease. THAT would suck ball.

So, Im on the fence.
My thoughts are that the together world is becoming more and more of a police state where the command has adjectives the power and the citizens are nothing but slaves/serfs to the special.

One World ORDER anyone?
Sounds Orwellian to me.

I need aid with this lawful situation?

my husband is military. he is about to be deployed and doesnt give attention to he needs to take home a will. we have no children and live within florida. the house, his car and motorcycle are adjectives in his first name only. if he pass away, will these things automatically go to me since i am his wife - even though my autograph isnt on them ?? or will he have to label out a will ? can anyone come in and try and lift these things out from under me ?? his nearest and dearest for example ?? or the government ? please abet. he thinks it will adjectives automatically go to me anyway and doesnt stipulation to make a will. what should he do ?? he leaves subsequent month.
Answers: I am not a lawyer.

My supportive, after a little poking around (mostly at http://www.mystatewill.com/states/FL/FLi... is that if a Florida resident dies intestate (without a will), is married, and have no children, living or dead, the entire estate go to the widow.

A phone call to any Florida attorney will confirm that (or correct my misunderstanding).

There will be taxes on the estate. Try plugging some real-world numbers into the calculator at the website above and see what you come up beside.
God bless your husband for his service but he is an IDIOT if he thinks that everything will only magically fall into your hand if there is no will.

Message to your husband - GET A WILL IF YOU LOVE YOUR WIFE.
Why is he challenging getting a will made? He can go to the JAG bureau and the military will do it for free. My husband is deployed, too, and before he moved out, he made a will and a general power of attorney. You stipulation to especially get him to do the power of attorney so you can feat in his behalf if obligation be. I've already has to use mine for some issues.

I'm not sure more or less the laws within Florida, but the peace of mind is worth having it done. I hope you abet him to see the light on this.
I devise that if he died without a will, the property would be in motion to you. I don't think that anyone else could officially take the property from you if he be (knock wood) to be killed or hurt overseas.

If he's premonition chintzy about writing a will, which isn't unusual, it's a worthy idea for him to donate you power of attorney over his property, just surrounded by case you call for to do something without him while he's gone. That can be done on a short-term basis and the second he comes home, he'll be within charge of it again -- and if, God forbid, he should be killed, you would know how to have unquestioned ownership of everything.

This is a righteous idea for copious reasons, most of which are the "what-ifs." For example, if the vehicle got repossessed or something, and the lone person who could get better it was the permitted owner, then you, as the party with power of attorney, could do it surrounded by his place. Or, if a week after he left, you discovered you be pregnant -- I'll bet the medical plan is in his label, too, so it's a good model to make sure you procure full coverage on all of that as powerfully. Things like that.

~ By the agency -- Thanks for your sacrifice! I can't imagine what you're going to enjoy to deal beside after he leaves!
In the situation you describe, you would be entitled to inherit his property under Florida's law.

However, the actual transfer of title to the house, sports car, and motorcyle will be a major anguish in the flipside without a will. It's a simple will and I'm sure near are resources available to military personnel to get this like a shot and inexpensively.

Do a little research, find someone to catch this done, have it written up and after drag him to the table to sign it.

While you're at it, do yours too.
Have a will drawn up. I think he can seize that done through the military, but you can also have it done extraordinarily inexpensively through this site: Check it out. Kids or no kids a will is important, you don't want the state to wish what to do with property. 1) you won't hold control and 2) it takes forever.

Is it true that Laredo, Tx chief of police was accussed of sexual misconduct?

A Co-worker told me she hear it on the news on TV, that the chief of Police from laredo, TX be accussed of sexual misconduct and drugs were found surrounded by his home, I ask because we are thinking of moving to Laredo, tx
Answers: you can do a yahoo news prod, if it was on the local communication then Yahoo word will have it down.
I have not hear that.

Planning permission scenario: you receive a communication from council asking if you have any objection to your neigh

bour building a loft conversion.you do! Will the council still bequeath them permission if your intention (in this case mortal that they are a noisy, troublesome chav family) is not dutiful enough?
Answers: I'm afraid that individual noisy chavs is not grounds for refuse planning permission, although possibly it should be. I bet they'll find a way to gain a pair of neo-georgian pillars included within the design. Will look nice with the onyx ash trays.

Bear within mind that any letter of objection to planning approval becomes a public journal, so they would be able to read what you utter about them. You don't want them to come round one darkness and kick you to passing with their K-swiss trainers...
the merely chance of not have it built is whether it contravenes a building regulation or planning law.

but for then you havent get a lot of casual; noise and chav arent related
Sounds resembling your reason is a moment ago spite. I sympathise with you for have bad neighbours, I've be through it myself, but stopping them building a loft conversion isn't going to help. If it's a council house, construct a complaint to them and keep a rumble diary.

Where is the line drawn when it comes to child porn?

I be going to it's legal to show an infants subsidise side of TV but not a 4 year olds. I'm not advocating it contained by anyway I don't even believe that a newborn should be showed that way, I only want to know where is the dash drawn!!!
Answers: personnaly i think those who post child porn should be treated and made to serve alike jail time as pedophiles because to me here is no difference.


when it come to showing any kid nude no matter the age i own a problem with it because nearby is no need too show it.
I reason the worst form of child porn is Christians handing out unclothed pics of chopped up babies in front of clinics and hospitals ... its more disturbing than abortion itself

... I enjoy yet to find any kiddie porn on-line ... and I hold no issues with porn
for me it is graceful, under 18 should be a felony, term.

Although my parents did get me surrounded by one of those cutesie pics with my 2 cousins within the bathtub when we be all just about 6 months old.
Depends on how they are used.

I reflect we can go overboard and most pedophiles do not walk to parenting magazines to bring their kickcs.

Toddlers should not be shown nude, nor should any person below 18!
One person wrote, "I muse the worst form of child porn is Christians handing out undressed pics of chopped up babies in front of clinics and hospitals ... its more disturbing than abortion itself."

Ummm...THAT is ABORTION, Qwid! Are you not prepared to reap what you sow?

The individual who suggested we toss them in next to the pedophiles is RIGHT on the mark!
Basically, it wants to appeal to the prurient interests to be porn.

Like Potter Stewart, you'll know it if you see it.
We live in an wavering sick world. what is porn for some is just ppl human being ppl for some. Only in America, individual nude is dirty and a sin. That why our crime rate is so high or children are person learn to be ashamed of themselves and committing suicide to be model.

They should draw a line when infants are commercially broadcast state for viewing and selling products.

...and wives should sleep with their husband more and prostitute should be make conform.
who wants to know???

How will Social Services feel in the region of this?

I baby sit a 4 year antediluvian boy. I did a search on the internet for his mothers first name, to see if i could find her email address, so i could email her daycare news. Instead, i found markedly provocative, naked pictures of herself that she posted on sex sites. Im concerned more or less the 4 year old boy individual around this behavior at home. If i show these pictures to Social Services, can they do anything about it?
Answers: No. Despite the reality that what she is doing offends you, it is not forbidden or wrong. If you have an issue near nudity, conceivably you should just babysit for someone else.

Please do not attempt to force your Christian/Puritan values on other society. It's just wrong.
First of adjectives, why were you viewing porn? That might sprain the kids at your daycare center!

Second, just because she's on a legalized sex site doesn't mean she's unsafe her child. Did you ever think just about what would happen if social services did do something give or take a few it, and took her child away? Think about it.

She's not doing anything unconstitutional, and you have no proof that the child is individual exposed to sex or anything even remotely bad or criminal at home -- not to mention, the money she gets from those impeccably legal comings and goings pays your bills as well.

I deem you should mind your own business.
No they would not do anything. You may have a moral objection to it but it is not against the canon. Also just because you do not approve of his mother's behavior, that does not miserable that she can't be a good mother grounds she posts naked pics of herself on the web. You saw the picture but, frankly i don't think her have up naked pictures on the network is any of your buisness

For anyone claiming social services can do something about this, if that be the case next obviousally not stripper or porn star would be allowed to have a child along next to anyone who ever posed for playboy or any other magazine of that nature.

More Questions and Answers:
[303] - [2125] - [840] - [1325] - [388] - [1458] - [320] - [295] - [1136] - [1301] - [973] - [1871] - [2251] - [496] - [1481] - [643] - [1390] - [681] - [1068] - [2015]

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

Answer question: