Law Questions and Answers
Is it illegal for my employer to enjoy his wife on the payroll when she doesnt work there??
she also have a company car beside company plates that is never at the company?Answers: That depends on a few things. If she does work from home doing your employer's accounts, payroll, etc. next it is quite permissible. Questionable, but legal. Otherwise, it is clearly out of bounds.
As long as he is paying taxes on his employee (his wife) I suppose it is decriminalized. If his company were public, it might be a different story.
The company motor thing is a non-issue. If he is owner of the company, he may do as he please.
WHY is it wrong for an individual to commit murder but OK for a country to do it?
Answers: It is that way singular because the law say it is... The law and morality can sometimes be two different things and surrounded by my opinion state-sanctioned murder is still murder. I individually find it a morally questionable situation.
The death cost is entirely wrong in my view, but (as described by US law), killing an rival soldier in a time of war is also stated as a type of justifiable homicide... In the skin of war, I would suggest that in recent times as with a "eradicate or be killed" situation on the streets, a period of war should be faught defensively and the force used should be moderated so as to be a reasonable response to the "threat". Those two self-defensive "eliminate or be killed" situations are the only ones surrounded by which I would have any uncertainty of finding killing legitimate. And of course, if in attendance were no attacker, next there would never be a have need of anyway.
A country can execute someone because 'the law' states that it can. Most people, however, adopt that killing someone is wrong. So, does it really thing who does it?
Question for those that kow legal system:?
I hold a pretrial date of oct9 and jury trial nov23 on a felony case. I assume the pretrial is to tender me a plea bargain. If I lift the deal thats offered do I be in motion straight to jail or will nearby be another date for sentencing. If so how long till sentencing?Iwas told to not take the first settlement, if so will another deal be offered beforehand jury trial?
ty
Answers: Quite frankly, the details you have given are pretty rough. However, generally speaking, the 'intern or not' part might depend on the severity what you are mortal charged with. It also depends on the state surrounded by which you are being tried. Basically, in that is no sure answer.
Does anyone know of a very honest landlord/ tenant rights attorney in the East creek Area to help me near my case?
i (THE TENANT) NEEDS HELP HANDLING MY CASE AGAINST MY APARTMENT OWNERS AND MANAGMENT/ MAINTENANCE TEAM.Answers: Your state stick association has a lawful referral service. you can find them in the phone book.
Have you ever noticed..?
hold you ever noticed that the secuirty guard within those court tv shows are the opposite see of the judge?for example..
settle judy = black security guard
referee mathis = white security guard
pass judgment joe brown = white security guard
pass judgment hatchett = white security guard.
what is the justification behind that?
Answers: its America trying to be PC
might be one of those x-files
If im under age can i still..?
if im 17 years mature can i still go beside my mother-in -law to be her translator in her interview to become a us citizen or does she own to take a creature who is older than 18 years aged.?thanks for ur relieve.
Answers: I'd seriously call immigration and ask roughly speaking this. That's the only channel you'll for sure get the right answer.
I imagine you have to know English because here is an interview and written test. The trial is so hard near so many question.
I think she will be a undying resident which is good because she will be capable of live and work in the U.S. forever and later she can apply for citizenship later on. The interview and audition is also to see that you know English.
Call INS and see to be sure.
Did any of you OJ haters watch the trial...?
... or did you a moment ago watch the report?The guy was acquit for a reason, and it be not race.
If you watch the trial you know evidence was planted.
You know...
Van Atter and Furhman lied, by their own nouns, from the very germ.
they were followed to the crime scene carrying evidence collected at Simpson's home.
the prominent socks were mysteriously missing from the numbered and ordered pictures taken on scene.
witnesses be intimidated.
ice cream Nicole be eating have not melted in the past the police arrived, an impossibility if Simpson did it.
the LA crime lab claimed human beings have a blood preservative contained by our blood.
blood samples miraculously appeared six weeks after the crime scene be washed, within places crime scene photos clearly show no blood.
If you did not watch the trial, you do not know this because the medium simply failed to report these little details.
I doubt Simpson did what he be accused of, probably he did, but I KNOW police framed him.
Answers: I watched the trial and enjoy even read the trial transcript. He did it. He was acquit because the police just didn't button their evidence well. However, he did it. It only wasn't proven "beyond a reasonable doubt". Guilty folks get past its sell-by date ALL THE TIME.
Right, dude. George W. Bush really did the killings.
Or conceivably it just never happen.
He was aquited becouse he have enough money to insure it. Money CAN by your freedom within the United States...
Are patients protected by hippa as far as meds and pharmasist talking to doctor give or take a few my meds.?
Pharmacist called doctor and said I be getting multple scrips from different doctors. Yes, i am guilt, but not multiple, I went to a walk-in clinic and get a small script and 1 fill up on. Like I stated before, I believe my meds are privite info and not to be shared to anyone.Answers: i reason the pharmacist overreacted.it is proper for the pharmacist to call your primary physician if you present multiple Rx's especially for controlled substances.
No.and doctors and pharmacists discuss your accounts and medications.
Are you aware that getting different meds from different doctors minus telling them what you are already taking is not merely dangerous but stupid?
you should thank the pharmacist fo looking out for you.
HIPPA law protect your records from "outside" sources. Pharmicists are considered subdivision of the medical field and want to verify the prescriptions they fill, surrounded by the event two prescriptions may counteract and cause a merciful harm.
The doctor may NOT speak about the pharmacist what you originally saw the doctor for, nor may the doctor divulge any of your other medical history.
HIPPA laws are within place to protect your personal information, as well as your privacy. No one may access your archives without your written blessing. This also pertains to the changing of doctors. You will have need of to sign a form releasing the records at your former doctor's bureau to your current one.
You are also protected by doctor-patient privilege. This means your doctor may not discuss you or your form to anyone, outside of them being brought to court to testify.
The pharmacist be also corect in asking going on for the number of prescriptions you had and why two doctors for indistinguishable 'script. It is not ordinary for one person to own two prescriptions of the same type from two different doctors. It's not overly unusual, but it does raise "red flags" to the pharmacist.
Hope this help put your mind to rest
Pharmacists have their own code of professional conduct, only just like doctors, and they can be severely discpilined for breaking it.
Think going on for what you are saying. If it comes to a pharmacist's attention that you are getting overmedicated by a prescription explicitly dangerous if overused, do you really expect him or her NOT to share your doctor? It would be NEGLIGENT of the pharmacist to turn a blind eye.
There is a huge difference between what your pharmacist did (fully meeting a professional requisite to you), and for example telling the boys over a beer that you hold viagara or something like that.
He or she be only doing a professional chore.
If you have a problem beside addiction to prescription medications, immediately is the time to speak up to your doctor. It will only seize worse for you if you delay.
That is impeccably legal. Pharmacists and doctors are allowed to discuss adjectives aspects of your medication treatment. Sometimes, you have to discuss medication prescribed by other doctors. The pharmacist cannot discuss your medications beside the person within front of you in flash, but your doctor, nurse, or any other health contemplation professional, it is fine.
Dog mauls burglar, owner responsible ?
This have something to do with the Ving Rhames suitcase. I know that the guy was a caretaker, but I be just wondering if he be a burglar, could the burglar's family sue the householder ? Personally, I don't deduce the householder should be held accountable, its no different than shooting a burglar breaking into your house. What do you regard? Have any of you heard any cases where on earth the owner's dog killed a burglar?Answers: A markedly interesting question. I've notice that there are law against having booby traps on your property and a burglar can successfully sue you if he is injured by one, on the other hand it's perfectly court to have a precarious animal which does essentially the same entity. So far, courts have other exonerated homeowners if their pets attacked intruders and legitimately defended their home and that's the way I presume it should be. But lately, aggressive dogs are being defined by the courts as "weapons" and I'm liable to bet that some lawyer will soon identify this technical discrepancy contained by the law and argue that a dog contained by the home is nothing more than a unshorn booby trap. I do hope not.
As for your other question, it's really exceedingly unlikely for any single dog to kill a on form full grown human male. In adjectives the news stories I've read give or take a few dogs killing culture, the person be always any sick and elderly or a small child, and there be usually 2 or more dogs involved in the attack. I envision 2 or more particularly vicious and unstable pit bulls or rottweilers could literally cut a burglar to kibble, but any owner who has dogs which are that uncertain would be asking for trouble in the first place.
And not have a "Beware of Dog" sign has no legally recognized bearing on an intruder breaking into your home and getting bitten, any more than not putting up a sign that say "Home insured by Smith & Wesson" if you are armed with a gun and shoot him. All a Beware of Dog sign does is alert people who legitimately drop by your property to exercise due caution, and may (hopefully) work as a deterrent to trespassers.
Common law unsophisticatedly states that a home owner cannot use "excessive" force to protect your home..but you can to protect yourself.let me explain.
There is a casing that we studied in my business canon course, where a business owner who be repeatedly being robbed figure out that the burgler was coming within through the ventilation shaft surrounded by the ceiling..so the business owner hung a fence from the roof and run 220 though it. He came contained by one morning to find a barbeque hanging from the ceiling.and he be convicted of murder.
We (here in the US) own a pretty f'd up legal system.not sure where on earth you are from, but you can use deadly force ONLY when your energy is being threatened.not for individual robbed!
It has happen in times gone by when a thief invaded a home and be able to sue successfully for damages cause by the homeowner. I don't remember the details though, but I recall it occurring. There have be a number of cases when a burglar who was shot or otherwise injured by homeowners enjoy managed to sue as okay; I'm thinking that a dog bite would be much the same.
The homeowner would be more probable to be not held accountable if here were beware of dog signs displayed.
I own heard of a valise where a homeowner shot and wounded a robber. The thief, after have been convicted of a crime, file a civil action seeking damages from the homeowner on the grounds that the homeowner have injured the thief and his handiness to work at his chosen profession. The thief didn't win, but it go to show how ridiculous these situations can get.
If a judge turns down a restraining demand can you still get one?
Answers: No@ But preserve complaining to the police department so they know how to find your killer when you come up inert.
if new facts transpire or come to light next under the bright facts you can pursue a restraining order,
but below a TRO you must be in on the spot threat of harm
More Questions and Answers:
[2406] - [2565] - [2421] - [1556] - [1538] - [2336] - [909] - [577] - [2517] - [1315] - [925] - [331] - [251] - [472] - [1458] - [1091] - [60] - [518] - [1810] - [2457]
The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.
Answer question: