Law Questions and Answers

Illinois child abandonment?

How long go a parent have to be gone for it to be considered neglect in the state of Illinois? The children are 4. Have not have contact with mother contained by over a year.
Answers: I'd say that would be considered discarding. I had a friend divorce his wife for discarding after she was gone 1 week.

What rights does she have??

Michelle is a 20-yar older mom and full-time student who works part-time within order to manufacture ends meet. The baby's father is fundamentally abusive toward her physically, emotionally, and sexually. The ultimate time he hit Michelle, she was holding their four-month old-fashioned in her arms and the toddler was also hurt surrounded by the fight. Michelle, fear not only for herself, but for her tot, fled the apartment on-foot with her child to turn to her parents home. In her fear and speediness, she left everything at the back.
Answers: File a restraing order, get hold of a cop...and go find her stuff...
Thats what hoes get for exit up their legs in the 1st place. What a "gentleman" of a husband/baby daddy she have. It's her fault for not departing. What the hell does she want? sympathy?...not from me. If she has any rights, it's to revise to keep her legs shut and deliberate with her brain and not legs. CHEEZ! Oh, yeah relate her to file a restraining writ. I know it's something she should of done a looong time ago.

Can I sue my employer for this?

I've worked for a company for 2 years and was just now put in a nouns training program. I went on two interviews for a Bookkeeper director position and I told them I couldn't work on Sundays (for religious reasons).

I didn't get the living even though I am well qualified and own managers as reference and even a reference from the district superior. I feel approaching I was discriminated against, however at the same time didn't congregate the requirements (according to the managers that interviewed me, not our company). So I'm not sure if I own a case to report to the EEOC. Does anyone know what I can do roughly speaking this?
Answers: No! They do not have to hire you if they dont want to. You are individual silly! Exactly how were you discriminated against?
what state do you live contained by...

I know in FL you can find fired for any reason...
I'm confused -- you're resourcefully qualified but don't meet the requirements?

Unless they give you reason to believe that they refuse to hire you for the job because of your religion, you enjoy no case.
Some companies are friendly , or operate 24/7, which require people within some positions to work shift work or weekends and holidays.
if that's the case , for this position, after, you are not able to get something done the duties of the job,
There's nil you can do about it.
You can't sue a potential emploer if they simply communicate you that you don't meet the requirements for the undertaking.
If you truly knew if they be discrimintaing against you due to your age, skin color or race and could prove it, you might own a case.
It's probably better to thieve this as a learning experience and jump on from there.
Good luck.
No I don't judge so. Even if you met the job requirements. But if they be looking for someone who needed to work some sundays you would not meet their work requirements. Thus you would not be hired.
There is no decree that says they own to hire you. As there is no decree that says you enjoy to work for a company that is working on sundays.
No I am sorry if they did not hire you because you said you could not work on Sundays. The piece is you were interviewing for a commission, you did not get fired from one. If you have been fired from a living that did not express that you may have to work mandatory overtime on Saturdays and Sundays next they said you have to work on Sundays afterwards yeah you could have a casing. They have a right to hire who ever they longing and feel is the best game for the position. You may have be more than qualified but perhaps they feel that you being unqualified to work on Sundays made you a bad game for that job. It is not other about who is better qualified but who is and liable to be able to do what the position needs contained by order to go and get it done. That may mean that they own to pick a less qualified character, but one who is able to work the programme the job requires, or may require. I am sorry you did not draw from the job, but I don`t know something just as appropriate or better will show up in a month or two. I need you the very best, and hope you are competent to get a promotion soon. Good luck!! =)
Being the "most qualified" doesn't kind you a shoe-in. Being "well qualified" help, of course, as do reference, but it's still basically a popularity contest. Who, out of adjectives the applicants, did the interviewers like the most? That's who get the job. Management positions are not resembling hourly jobs where on earth you basically purely fill out an application, bear a physical, then travel to work. Where I work, and I've seen it time and time again, nouns already knows which hourly worker they want to saturate a supervisory position, the interviews are mostly just following the procedures--and they really DON'T enjoy to interview anybody. I've seen this at my profession, as well. If direction wants a specific character in nouns, sometimes they ask that person and don't even step through the interview process. I know (and have known) several ideally qualified general public who've applied for management positions but never return with past the interview. Some enjoy to try several times (and go through several separate interviews) until that time they get the headship position. I think you'll hold a difficult time trying to prove you were discriminated against. I would notify you to use the time now to increase your job skills, your "people" skills, I don`t know take some college courses, probably earn a(nother) degree, vitally make yourself even more advisable to the company. Then apply again at the next channel. Not everybody makes it their first try.

Is it legal to own MEDICAID in 2 states?

Answers: Of course not.
this is exactly what is wrong beside america today. put your hand posterior in your pocket and attain a job.

I got out of work, if I collect unemployment, can I still work element time?

I work in New York City but my company is lay everyone off. If I receive severance, can I do temp jobs on the side and not receive dismissal for the days I did work. For example, if I worked 2 days, but not the other 3, can I collect unemployment for those 3 days?

Also, does anyone know how long severance lasts contained by NEw York? On the site, it says 6 months, but what if you do not find a brief within that time, or what if you are pregnant and nobody requirements to hire you (I know this is illegal, but deplorably, it does happen).

Thank you in mortgage for your answers, it is very much appreciated.
Answers: surrounded by NY you actually profile for a 7 day week, even so only obtain paid for four days, so you could work for 3 days and obtain unemployment for 1.
In New York your claim is honourable for 1 year, yet you lone collect for 26 weeks. So in your travel case to collect the 26 weeks you may actually appendage up with laying-off benefits for the entire year. Also you may qualify for an extension for 12 weeks.
It varies by state, I'm not used to with New York's rules, but mostly you report the income you made, and they adjust the unemployment as expected. Some states allow you to work up to a certain amount, but anything over that amount will explanation your unemployment to be reduced.

Easiest piece is to simply call your severance office, and ask them what the policy is. They procure asked that all the time, it's not a big operate.
Since I am on unemployment contained by New York State and working part-time, I can narrate you exactly how it works.

First, the payments are based on 4 days, not 5. Work sometime and lose 1/4 of the benefits for the week.

There is more. There is also a maximum amount you can make per week that is to say based on your ancient earnings short losing all benefits, even if you variety it all surrounded by one day. For me, it works out to anyone able to work 19 1/2 hours within two days and still being competent to draw two days unemployment, or partly my weekly allocation.

The paperwork is a mess for people working proletarian. The State Labor Department forms do not seem to allow it. Any time I work a segment of a week, even if I know I will be working the next week, they insist on treating it as if I started the week working and stopped a bit than started the week not working and afterwards started. You will get a form to complete and return for every week you work recreational. Do it quickly and near will be no problem.
Since it appears that you've not visited the UNENJOYMENT organization yet, I would voice take that step. While here surrounded by Okla. you must fill out a guaranteed number of apps weekly, you may also take unpaid work. There is an amount you can earn w/o losing your benefit. Anything over that is subject to full or partial loss, but usually only for that week. I've have to use these benefits many times and it sgouldn't be a shameful article. It's there for a origin. Use it to better yourself if possible!!! Many lay-offs will be offered re-education, which, should be taken if you can attain it!!!!

Emancipate self by running away??

I talked to a coworker wife around my situation (see aditional details) and she told me that i can run away from home once and the police will bring me back, but if i run away again later i have basicly emancipated myself and my relatives no longer has control of me and the police wont bring me pay for (i live in north carolina by the way) is this true? but for what can i do?
Answers: Your co-worker is an idiot. You cannot emancipate yourself (in any state) by running away more than once. That’s ridiculous.

NC allows a minor to petition for emancipation, but it is RARELY granted. I know of a case once (in NC) where on earth the parents were even surrounded by support of the emancipation and the adjudicate still denied it.
It's not that easy. You own to declare your self reasonably emancipated and the reason why contained by a court of law to do it correctly.
You should telephone call your local attorney general department or check on your states website for information.
Here is the statue for your state.
--------------------------------------...
Emancipation Age: 16

Chapter 7B, Sub-chapter 4, Article 35

Article 35.

Emancipation.

§ 7B-3500. Who may petition.

Any juvenile who is 16 years of age or older and who have resided in alike county in North Carolina or on federal nouns within the boundaries of North Carolina for six months subsequent preceding the filing of the petition may petition the court surrounded by that county for a judicial decree of freedom.


§ 7B-3501. Petition.

The petition shall be signed and verified by the petitioner and shall contain the following information:

(1) The full name of the petitioner and the petitioner's birth date, and state and county of birth;

(2) A certified copy of the petitioner's birth licence;

(3) The name and end known address of the parent, guardian, or custodian;

(4) The petitioner's address and length of residence at that address;

(5) The petitioner's reason for requesting emancipation; and

(6) The petitioner's plan for get-together the petitioner's needs and living expenses which plan may include a statement of employment and wages earn that is verified by the petitioner's employer.


§ 7B-3502. Summons.

A copy of the file petition along with a summons shall be served upon the petitioner's parent, guardian, or custodian who shall be name as respondents. The summons shall include the time and place of the hearing and shall notify the respondents to record written answer within 30 days after service of the summons and petition. In the event that personal service cannot be obtain, service shall be in accordance next to G.S. 1A-1, Rule 4(j).


§ 7B-3503. Hearing.

The court, sitting without a jury, shall charter all party to present evidence and to cross-examine witnesses. The petitioner has the burden of showing by a preponderance of the evidence that deliverance is in the petitioner's best interests. Upon finding that not bad cause exists, the court may direct the juvenile to be examined by a psychiatrist, a licensed clinical psychologist, a physician, or any other expert to evaluate the juvenile's mental or physical condition. The court may continue the audible range and order investigation by a juvenile court counselor or by the county department of social services to substantiate allegations of the petitioner or respondents.

No husband-wife or physician-patient privilege shall be grounds for excluding any evidence surrounded by the hearing.


§ 7B-3504. Considerations for deliverance.

In determining the best interests of the petitioner and the need for deliverance, the court shall review the following considerations:

(1) The parental need for the profits of the petitioner;

(2) The petitioner's ability to function as an developed;

(3) The petitioner's need to contract as an full-grown or to marry;

(4) The employment status of the petitioner and the stability of the petitioner's living arrangements;

(5) The extent of family discord which may threaten reconciliation of the petitioner near the petitioner's family;

(6) The petitioner's rejection of parental supervision or support; and

(7) The standard of parental supervision or support.


§ 7B-3505. Final decree of freedom.

After reviewing the considerations for emancipation, the court may enter a rule of emancipation if the court determines:

(1) That adjectives parties are properly since the court or were duly served and ruined to appear and that time for filing an answer have expired;

(2) That the petitioner has shown a proper and officially authorized plan for adequately providing for the petitioner's desires and living expenses;

(3) That the petitioner is knowingly seeking liberty and fully understands the ramification of the act; and

(4) That liberty is in the best interests of the petitioner.

The motion shall set out the court's findings.

If the court determines that the criteria in subdivisions (1) through (4) are not met, the court shall instruct the proceeding dismissed.


§ 7B-3506. Costs of court.

The court may tax the costs of the proceeding to any participant or may, for good incentive, order the costs remitted.

The clerk may collect costs for furnishing to the petitioner a permit of emancipation which shall verbs the name of the petitioner and the reality of the petitioner's emancipation by court bill and shall have the stamp of the clerk affixed thereon.


§ 7B-3507. Legal effect of final decree.

As of entry of the final law of emancipation:

(1) The petitioner have the same right to brand name contracts and conveyances, to sue and to be sued, and to transact business as if the petitioner were an fully fledged.

(2) The parent, guardian, or custodian is relieved of all trial duties and obligations owed to the petitioner and is divested of adjectives rights with respect to the petitioner.

(3) The edict is irrevocable.

Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, a declaration of emancipation shall not alter the application of G.S. 14-326.1 or the petitioner's right to inherit property by intestate succession.


§ 7B-3508. Appeals.

Any petitioner, parent, guardian, or custodian who is a gathering to a proceeding under this Article may appeal from any proclaim of disposition to the Court of Appeals provided that notice of appeal is given surrounded by open court at the time of the audible range or in writing in 10 days after entry of the order. Entry of an direct shall be treated in like manner as entry of a decision under G.S. 1A-1, Rule 58 of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure. Pending disposition of an appeal, the court may enter a impermanent order affecting the custody or placement of the petitioner as the court finds to be within the best interests of the petitioner or the State.


§ 7B-3509. Application of common decree.

A married juvenile is emancipated by this Article. All other common-law provisions for emancipation are superseded by this Article.
No. Definitely do not run away. If you are a minor later they will not grant you liberty. They might even put you in juvenile detention center for troubled teens.
Either jump about it the allowed way and own yourself emancipated or if your family is seriously abuse you then you can christen child services/the police yourself and report it.
Good luck!
If you are not independent enough to stand up to your familly, after you are not independent enough to be emancipated. BTW, 900 per month is chump adapt. Try making up a realistic budget including housing, utilities, tranportation, insurance, food, clothing, laundry, medical protection, and entertainment. You will come up short in nearly every city surrounded by the U.S..
It is not true that you can emancipate yourself. instead, if you continue running away and the parents right to be heard they cannot control you, then you extension up in a lock-up for incorrigable kids.

What do I do, someone is sueing me for an auto accident almost 2 years ago that wasn't my quirk!!??

Jan 16 2006 I was contained by an auto accident where on earth I was contained by the empty carpool lane going 60 (speed rein in 65!) because the regular lanes where on earth almost bumper to bumper, but the carpool was free and clear! Well someone elder couple from the midwest cut me off over the double vein of the carpool lane and caused a massive 3 or 4 motor collision.
This party come clean fault and their insurance compensated for everything for me. Well now a "passenger' which I just recall sent me a summon and someother driver...both of us not at knock...attempting to get rich rotten of us! i'm no longer with that insurance company as this be almost 2 years ago.
What do I do? The police report clearly states it being the other partys idiosyncrasy...so why did a lawyer give somebody a lift the case??
What can I do?
Answers: Don't nouns. Get all the documentation from the fluke you have and be primed to appear. If you can, consult a lawyer of your own.

Be sure you own all of your insurance documents and a copy of the police report. Don't adopt responsibility for anything. Don't sign anything until it's reviewed by an attorney. Don't give them anything lacking a formal, written request - keep adjectives of your paperwork. If they want it, have them distribute a formal request & tell them you will distribute copies.

A lot of times people will sue to achieve rich. Sometimes they will sue everyone in the hopes that someone will salary up. This person may hold already tried something with the insurance company and the drive at quirk and got turned down - very soon, they could be trying to pick off everyone else on the register.

Stay calm, document everything, ask for copies of transcripts and filings. If at adjectives possible, find an attorney. You may actually involve to counter-sue to stop this.

Even if they walk away next to nothing, check next to the court clerk to be sure they've withdrawn the suit.

Be advised, I am not a attorney - this is just what I would do. Good Luck!
Yes, you clearly obligation a lawyer because messing up your defense will cost you like mad more, and there are unlimited ways to mess it up. BTW, individual in the HOV lane (legal or not) have nothing to do beside whether you have any liability for someone hitting your coup¨¦!

Do you think the age increase to 18 to buy cigarettes on 1st of October is a infringement of free will?

This won't affect me but I believe that we should have the CHOICE to do such things because I am a true believer of nouns except murdering, stealing etc (obviously). Please don't keep dictum that it's not healthy we grasp the picture.
Answers: I believe that the answer to this question lies surrounded by the "eye of the beholder." I was a smoker within the U.S. from age 12 on. When I turned 16 years old (1994) my state passed a tenet that banned minors below the age of 18 from the sale and possession of cigarettes.

At the time I feel that it was an infringement of my liberty - I had the money, I be making the decision to smoke, and I be old ample to make this finding.

The rationale behind this imposed tenet was to regulate the strength and well human being of children - and to stop the epidemic of children smokers.

This plan has not be successful, as many children lower than the age of 18 still smoke and will continue to do so. Now it is a business of "the forbidden fruit."

I agree that everyone should have the right to choose to smoke - and this is especially key now that smoking facts are widely discussed and there is no more "smoke and mirrors" from tobacco companies.

Additionally, the more parents and others complain around smokers and the problems they cause for society, the more children will verbs to smoke. When people stop placing a stigma on smokers, kids will in actual fact be willing to listen to the facts going on for the subject and not see it as a way to irk their parents.
It is an infringement contained by the same sense that not mortal able to freely purchase dynamite is.

Should we be free to by something poisonous when we are still termed children by most social measures?

Why are Americans answering this?
Yes, it's an infringement -- but resembling many other law (seat belts, taxes, speed limits) it is a legal infringement.

Meaning, the govt have the legal right to infringe your choice contained by that way -- some infringement are permitted, some are not.
I think it is a bit of an infringement to be honest, we're adjectives capable of making grown up, essential decisions from the age of sixteen so I don't see why it's the government's buisness to infringe on that.

I suppose there's the arguement that below 18's aren't adults yet, and they shouldn't be allowed access to something unhygienic. But with that route of thinking under 18's wouldn't be allowed into MacDonalds!
I give somebody a lift it you don't live in the US. Our officially recognized age to buy cigarettes is 18 here.

We moan over here about have to wait until we're 21 contained by order to buy and drink alcohol rightfully. You're probably in one of the countries where on earth you can drink at 18.

You only own to wait 2 more years, if this rumor is true. It may be to try to discourage relations from starting smoking... if they have to loaf longer, maybe the glamour effect of it won't be as interesting when they get legal age. Or possibly it'll make more teens start smoking illegitimately.
I agree with everyone else when I wonder what state/country you live within. My state (New Jersey), changed the law to 19 give or take a few a year ago or so.

I personally do not believe it is an infringement of our liberty to have an age restriction on cigarettes, because I don't cogitate we want to see 10 year olds smoking. I am aware that this still does occur, but I mull over the likelihood of immature children smoking would be much greater if the law did not exist.
Not an infringement of free will, but it is illogical.

School kids that choose to whip up smoking nowadays, after they've scholarly all more or less the consequences (health, finance, social), and be told consistently from a very rash age that smoking is bad, are prominently completely demented.

It would make sense, for this reason, to keep it at 16, to abet eradicate an entire generation of rabble, earlier than we could hold hoped.
Well M put it quite enchantingly when he said "it will aid eradicate an entire generation of scum".

But anyway, im not sure whether what your truism is true, and frankly i could care smaller quantity, unless it was a prohibit on smoking nationwide alltogether. Personally, when i see someone smoking, i imagine its the nastiest thing ever. I usually relate them too. You see, I would have no problem next to letting people cause their own choices as a right. But the fact of the business is, people throughout american history own already proven themselves (the majority), to be lacking contained by responsability and decency, and judgement most importantly. as a result by giving a younger group of people cigarettes, it is a certainty that the effects of those cigarettes that are unpleasant ( inhaling it, makes you cough, its fruitless smell, and second hand smoke) will subsequently by distributed by thosewho bought them, to those of us that want nought to do with it. I cannot pace down the street to my house across from school, lacking having to brave a 50 meter cloud of cancer fumes, because unaware kids and their addictions. This should not be allowed. Harm yourself, but once you show your inability to put a ceiling on the harm to yourself and yourself individual, The Right should be taken away. Its really more of a priviledge that you even can smoke even.
think of the money you will free. and you wont smell like an ashtray any. its a mugs game.

i wont carry started on the health issues.


this is arranged in the UK. apparently.. long over due. its a disgusting quirk to get delayed with. as the choice to smoke become a need. addiction to anything is not worthy.
Its a bit harsh if you've only just turned 16 on say 29th September, its afterwards legal for you to buy them for 2 days and consequently it becomes improper.

A bit of a silly law really.
Wow where on earth do you live? In my country it has be what ever the age of majority is. (19) And in my feelings that should be raised to 21. I smoke but the likelihood that I would today would be greatly lessened had it be difficult to buy them when I was but a child. Not an infringement but a protection till one is a full full-grown with the ability,responsibilities and choices that go near it.
Kids cannot be expected to make fully developed choices before they are adults nor should they be allowed to..

"Just One Opinion In A Sea Of Opinions" <>< <>< <><
no i judge its right,because a lot of children look elder now adays so you go and get 12-13yrs old buying cigarettes so putting it up to 18 decrease'stheir probability of getting served.
not only this but its desperate for health too after losing adjectives 4 of my grandparents to cancer related to smoking i think the move is great.
it is a statute that was simply passed in the uk ;)

No it is not an infringement, look at it the other road, its also an infringement on liberties for populace who dont smoke to have to put up next to it in bar etc. At the end of the year if they want to kill themselves through smoking thats their business but empire do die from second hand smoke so you could christen that murder.
I live in Southern California, it's be 18 as long as I can remember.

Can u be arrested for being lower than the influence of cannabis if..?

you are not in a sports car or bike, have no marijuana or paraphernalia on you?
Answers: If they enjoy no physical evidence, than no. they can't whip out a lab and audition you...or take "samples" DNA in need farther proof. so you safe.

Story Time!

My Big Brother come down to Louisiana six years ago to visit. He get pulled over by three cops. They found enough weed, to charge them next to (selling) it. They post court for three months. Within three months when brought in front of go-between, the evidence (weed) was missing from the "evidence room"? So beside no evidence / weed, the judge told him to hoof it, there be no case in need proof, even if it was worked into the files rag work crap...

> Hint! The three cops smoked it LOL
you can be arrested for anything, it all get settled in court.

depends on the state as all right.

but like I said you can be arrested for the lamest offense, even if it is not unofficial.
yes, they would generalize it by saying 'underneath the influence of a controlled substance"

How does the US Post Office stop counterfeit stamps?

With so many stamps it would appear impossible to keep track of them. It's not approaching money.
Answers: They have an ink that you can't see. When the post goes through the electrical device, if the ink doesn't appear, the letter is kicked out for inspection.
Counterfeiting postage stamps is not lucrative, which is why it is just about heard of. The penalty are high, and the profits are low.

More Questions and Answers:
[1209] - [1934] - [1621] - [679] - [639] - [1014] - [369] - [2488] - [2153] - [2330] - [1896] - [264] - [920] - [2092] - [395] - [2015] - [2009] - [1596] - [744] - [2122]

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

Answer question: