Law Questions and Answers

Who knows the ruling?

me and my buddy recently go on a coke and 40oz liqur rage. we rage the streets for two days no sleep and on the third day we be at a bus stop (BLOWN OUT OF OUR SKULLS) and my friend saw some lame he had problems beside, long story short, he punched him off his bike and we stomped his cranium for a good 15 mins. broke his facial structure. mouth, broke his dentals... all this bla bla we fuc*ed up his time. my homie got busted right away and i get busted about a week following. im out on OR right now but am programmed for court in a week. my attorney is recounting me they have my EXACT shoe print im somebodys skull. awhile backbone somethings went down contained by another city and a man got his team leader crushed. the city that went down contained by is in my hometown and i get busted in another county for the current crime. IS THERE ANY WAY THEY CAN ACTUALLY LINK ME TO THE OTHER MAN TAHT DIED IN MY CITY?? or is that a front and do they not enjoy any solid evidence?
Answers: HA HA HA HA HA go within the joke fragment liar
They would hold to prove all the elements of the crime if near is a witness or evidence linking you then yes they could charge you. They can also bring you to that city and hold you for I conjecture it is 72 hours and if they find nothing afterwards you get to dance free. Since the crimes are similar it does tend to make you a suspect. sorry

On the show Judge Judy, how does she see cases from other states and jurisdictions, when shes from New York?

Answers: She can hear the cases because the party agree to have her hear the cases. It is a form of arbitration in truth. The parties sign an agreement to bequeath up their right to sue in exchange for self on the show (the show pays the judgment, not the defendant). She will attempt to apply the law of the state in which the accomplishment arose. Most of her cases involve contract law which is relatively uniform throughout the US.
The litigants travel to her courtroom.

.
They own all of them sign a contract that they will drop their untested case, somewhere it is, in demand for it to be "heard" on Judge whoever, (They all do this like peas in a pod way.) She in actual fact is not adjudicating anything.

They are adjectives paid what they are requesting, as very well, they don't get nil if they are awarded zero by her, that's a nouns. The show pays them the original claim, and counterclaim, amounts.
conciliator Judy and Joe Brown share the same studio so it can not be that tough

Okay hypothetical legal cross-examine about a harsh prank...?

A guy friend and I were discussing hideous pranks one could pull that would be really horrible. He suggested the following:
Go to a neighborhood where on earth you see someone new is moving contained by. Then go door to door introducing yourself as the investigational person moving within and explain to them that you are a registered sex offender and own to notify everyone. Word will spread that the new neighbor is a sex perpetrator.

Cruel, eh?! Well, this hypothetical led to reasonably the legal debate. What law are being broken? You're introducing yourself as the sex wrongdoer and are only claiming to live surrounded by that house. So I don't see how it would be slander unless you claimed to be THAT person. So, philosophical endorsed types, let's hear it. How is this prank illegal?
Answers: *****--that would be classic "false light" liability. It's a tort that doesn't work tremendously often, but would here. In essence, you may not be wise saying anything false (except to defame you... "I'm a sex offender") but you're putting the "unmarked neighbor" in a false table lamp through your speech (they assume the new neighbor, you, and a sex wrongdoer are the same thing). This is the first tort. But since you're lying roughly speaking (a) living in the neighborhood and (b) human being a sex offender, slander would probably work (it's a false statement made to taint the reputation of a clearly identifiable person .. I conjecture you make it there).

God forbid anything come to pass to the poor guy ... I could see a whole bunch of auxiliary / aiding & abetting torts or crimes charged. If you did anything to "encourage" for "facilitate" ferocity against the guy, you'd be in serious trouble.
I'm more concerened why anyone would even want to be particular as a sex offender..fabricate or not.It's sick and dispicable.

Is such a prank worth losing your (or your "friends") credibility and morality over?
You are impersonating the owner/occupant of a dwelling. You are further claiming to be a sex criminal.

Who cares if it is informal? You could get hit half to loss if the new occupant do not have a sense of humor. BE CAREFUL!
Well, for one entity, the neighbors could register a complaint against you. This could lead to several legal issues.
At a social point, race may recognize and fault you in society.
You don't own to give a describe to be liable for slander or defamation of qualities. If someone said the short red haired guy about 20 yrs matured with green eyes who works at ABC company is a child molester, that someone would be sued by that creature and the judge or jury would rule that he committed slander. By truism your the occupant of a specific address your passport even without the specific heading is enough to seize you in serious trouble
Additionally you could be sued for intentional infliction of thrilling distress both for your shock to the new arrival on the block as all right as the person you are discussion to. To sue someone for emotional distress, the conduct yourself must be outragious and causing turbulent distress. Your action would be both
Slander and moving distress would be civil actions against you. You might also obverse criminal charges for interference with the duties of a police officer. The likelyhood would be that the police would be call by someone. You might be charged with the expense to the management and time consumption of police personnel.
I don't think it is lawfully wrong at all... In reality all you own to say is that you are moving contained by down the street, let afterwards neighbor infer what house you are talking around.

I would prob only do this to someone that I know so you can truly hear about it. Pointless to do it to a stranger.
It would probably single work if you were a man..

For some source, society doesn't look down @ women who are registered sex offenders as much as they do men.

Anyways, specifically kinda funny. I'd hate to be the personality moving in.
It would be evil if it could be proven to be slander. Slander involves intent to harm someone's reputation. It may hold to be malicious intent, not sure. But, as that is to say clearly what you are describing, I would say it would be private. You don't have to claim to be THAT entity for it to be slander, it would just own to be proven that you were purposefully overriding people to believe really bad lies roughly THAT person. The autograph doesn't have to be said. It's more roughly speaking intent.

And then you should also consider that the standard of proving intent would change in criminal court than contained by civil court, I believe. In small claims court, they could sue you and only enjoy to prove that it was more imagined than not that you were purposefully slandering their name. they would not have to prove it beyond a likely doubt.
Oh wow. that is cruel...
I hold never thought about mortal that creative...

I usually just do the ole' icy hot on their deodorant stick prank...

or this... this is what I did to my aunts room after she toilet papered my truck...
http://s105.photobucket.com/albums/m208/...
most likey becuase your putting those under the impress that you are the person moving surrounded by and just because you dont voice that your THAT person doesnt tight-fisted that they wont assume that you are.
But yeah, you could get sued for libel and other things of that moral fibre.Hypothetically speaking

What are the rights of a squatter?

Answers: Squatter's rights

Adverse possession is sometimes called "squatters' rights". If the squatter abandon the property for a period, or if the rightful owner effectively removes the squatter's access even temporarily during the statutory time extent, or even gives his authority, the "clock" usually stops. For example, if the required time period within a given jurisdiction is twenty years and the squatter is removed after only fifteen years, the squatter loses the benefit of that 15 year possession (i.e., the "clock" is re-set to "zero"). If that squatter subsequent retakes possession of the property, that squatter must, in writ to acquire title, remain on the property for a full twenty years after the date on which the squatter retook possession. In this example, the squatter would have to enjoy held the property for a total of 35 years (the 15 original years plus the 20 following years) to acquire title.

However, one squatter may pass along continuous possession to another squatter, set as "tacking", until the adverse possession period is complete. A authorized owner may also restart the "clock" at "zero" by giving temporary okay for the occupation of the property, thus defeating the indispensable "continuous and hostile" element. Evidence that a "squatter" remunerated rent to the owner would defeat adverse possession for that interval.
I think that you enjoy to get a court injunction to remove them so they newly live there until this comes through. Can lug up to 6 weeks I think but things may hold changed.

I think you should listen to J S.
Hi
Non I cogitate, if we dog walkers own to clean up after our pets why should humans acquire away with crapping surrounded by the street (ha ha).
Ray. West York's. U.K.
The right to be banged up for cra**ing contained by someones hard earn property

How far legally would a drive thru/diner enjoy to be from residential property?

I was wondering if a foreign drive thru/restaurant were built how far would it enjoy to be legally from an estate, due to din, traffic and so forth. many gratitude
Answers: There's a KFC drive thru just north of Doncaster, UK.
It's right subsequent door to residential housing, (house, private driveway, boundary fence, entrance/exit, drive-thru/cafe = Spitting distance.) :-/
The answer to that give somebody the third degree would be in your city's zoning law.
As this type of law is municipal, near are no state or country wide rules pertaining to zoning. You stipulation to find out what your city's law say because different cities have different law.
Depends on where the row is between residential and commercial property. If the restaurant in on the commercial stripe and the estate is on the residential line, they could be right subsequent together.
It depends on the zoning for the area. Some residential areas are zoned diffrent from the others.

What I denote is even though they are residential areas they could be zoned so a business could be put near by.

I live contained by a totaly residential area and they put a tesco mini store right at the shutting of our block. The companies can get anything done if they recompense the right people.

The Tesco be fought by everyone on our block to no happy finish. It looks so out of place it is not funny.
not vastly far there is a maccy d's near in 50ft of my mate back garden

What does a court judgment plan if it is discharged as to quantum?

I have an ongoing court valise, a car be given voluntarily back to the company but they are trying to vote they repossessed it. I am fighting this within court and go rear legs in November. The company gain a judgment against me but I am disputing this and the shrewdness against me. At the last audible range the court discharged the judgment as to quantum. What does this tight?
Answers: man that sucks, what a pain! perfect luck in your court baggage!
Quantum = amount or number.

So, it may refer to the amount of money in dispute, but still allowing the haggle over terminology to verbs.

Or it could refer to something else -- to many variables given the few facts you enjoy provided.
From what you have written the motor dealership is the one who got this ruling. It basically method that even though you were not at hand they got a judgement that say what they were seeking is what they be owed. You may have a principle for appeal but it is my suggestion not to go to court near out a contacting an attorney to figure out your option or just have one with you when you budge back. My guess is you will be held responsible for the debt if you own nothing aid you up that you returned the car on your own. There is also a put somebody through the mill as to the contract you signed making you responsible even if you can not make payments. Unless the dealership agrees to rob car backbone say for a excise and you have it within writing I think you may be obligated to them. You can other talk to settle about payments if you hold no money. I just agreed to take-home pay someone 25 a month on a 3500.00 debt. Means I will be paying for over 10 years if I live that long.

Standing to sue? Please help 10 points?

Blue Cross and Blue Shield insurance companies provide 68 million Americans near health thoroughness financing. The blues paid billions of dollars for assistance attributable to illness related to tobacco use. In attempt to get better some of this amount, the Blues filed suit within a federal district court against tobacco companies and other tabacco products. The conspiracy involved misrepresentation about the safekeeping of nicotine and its addictives properties, marketing efforts target children, and agreements not to produce or flea market safer ciggaerettes. As a result of the defendants' efforts, lots tobacco users developed lung, throat, and other cancers, as okay as heart disease, stroke, emphysema, and other illnesses. The defendants asked the court to dismiss the case on the ground that the plaintiff did not enjoy standing to sue. Do the Blues have standing within this case? Why or why not?
Answers: Without reviewing this out of the ordinary case -- if I be arguing on behalf of the Blues, I would base my argument both on a third-party standing claims and association standing claims.

The Blues are suing on behalf of individuals who be directly harmed. The Blues were also specifically harmed, by paying out on those medical claims. The Blue are seeking to get better their third-party losses, based on the special relationship to the insured, and given that the class dealing lawsuits by the insured did not address their losses as the insurers.

The Blues can also assert association standing, based on the devotion of the individuals in their robustness care plans, given the intent of the bias is to be healthy, a objective thwarted by the actions of Big Tobacco.

Of course, the association standing rests entirely on near not having be a class action by the member directly. And even the third-party standing is weakened because the Blues should hold intervened into the class action to get better under a corallary to the collateral source doctrine.
Oh brother the weak cigarette ruse again. Hey if they can make a buck they would convince everyone their own mother be a bull dyke; as long ans they didn't have to reimburse a income tax on it.

I can conclusively prove to the world that the majority of folks that drink water procure all the illnesses you describe above, so let stop all that mess. Switch to wine, studies prove that alcohol prevents adjectives of them !
I'd say they probably do base on the little I know. But I do know that an insurance company can sue someone who harms a person they insure Indiana Consolidated Insurance Co v. Mathew, 402 N.E.2d 1000 (Ind. App. 1980). But contained by that case, the being was not found laid-back. I think that it is implied that if he be negligent (in this grip Big Tobacco), then he would be liable to the entity harmed and, perhaps, so the insurance co. wouldn't enjoy to pay. But I'm not an expert here. You can probably check it out surrounded by a Civil Procedure book or on wikipedia.

Death penalty: Are you for or against it?

A big debate question. I am looking forward to your answers.
Answers: You don't hold to condone brutal crimes or want the criminals who commit them avoid a harsh punishment to ask whether the release penalty prevents or even reduce crime and whether it risks killing innocent populace.

What about the risk of executing innocent associates?
124 people on annihilation rows have be released with evidence of their innocence.

Doesn't DNA maintain new cases resembling these from happening?
DNA is available within less than 10% of adjectives homicides and can’t guarantee we won’t execute innocent people.

Doesn't the passing penalty prevent others from committing murder?
No reputable study shows the annihilation penalty to be a deterrent. To be a deterrent a punishment must be sure and swift. The demise penalty is neither. Homicide rates are high in states and regions that enjoy it than in states that do not.

So, what are the alternatives?
Life lacking parole is now on files in 48 states. It money what it says. It is sure and swift and once in a blue moon appealed. Life without parole is smaller quantity expensive than the death cost.

But isn't the death cost cheaper than keeping criminals in prison?
The demise penalty costs much more than energy in prison, mostly because of the legally recognized process. When the death cost is a possible sentence, extra costs mount up even before trial, continuing through the uniquely complicated trial (actually 2 separate trials, one to establish guilt and the second to decide the punishment) contained by death cost cases, and appeals.

What about the awfully worst crimes?
The death cost isn’t reserved for the “worst of the worst,” but rather for defendants beside the worst lawyers. When is the closing time a wealthy human being was sentenced to release, let alone executed??

Doesn't the passing penalty sustain families of murder victims?
Not necessarily. Murder casualty family member across the country argue that the drawn-out death cost process is painful for them and that enthusiasm without parole is an appropriate alternative.

So, why don't we speed up the process?
Over 50 of the innocent general public released from death row have already served over a decade. If the process is speeded up we are sure to execute an innocent person.
it depends..

sometimes folks deserve second chances... But if it be someone you loved and something happened to them i'm sure you'd want them kill...

and what about nation like hitler
Some associates don't believe in taking anybody's existence. But, many of them fund the slaughter in Iraq - budge figure.

I don't similar to the law the road it stands but if one is convicted a murderer with a long ancient of violence I conjecture the death cost should be dealt early by lethal injection.

I presume we should do the same near pedofiles.

And, what should be done with Bush when he become convicted as a War Criminal? Same like Saddam?
Worked surrounded by the Administration of Justice for over 37 years. Investigated multiple and mass murder cases. Seen the havoc and destruction that murder can reap on innocent victim and family.

Even worked death cost cases in which my nouns assisted in getting the defendant sentenced to release.

I do not personally agree near the death cost...I know..how could I work on death cost cases..there are a quantity of our laws that I do not individually agree with however the oath I took required me to enforce the directive.

In all the cases of homicide that I worked...surrounded by talking beside suspects/defendants...not one of them ever gave any consideration or thought to the passing penalty. Those that thought just thought about the pleasure they would get from doing the work.

I think as we execute anyone we diminish our humanity and leak into a category not very far from the murderer themselves.it's freshly my personal view.
I am for the disappearance penalth,however we must know why we are
taking another person existence.Is it because,the law say we must
do it,is it because,of inner convictions of one christian and
religious belief.Note,man would always own to give an depiction for his or her actions, but for in this time in the existence to come. There is a God and there is a Devil a man true integrity plays an far-reaching role in his doing. What a man sow that shall he reap. We enjoy the power to live and we have the power to die.The choice is contained by our hands.

Is it illegal to buy body armor for a civilian?

Answers: There is no directive against purchasing body armor. However, there are law that enhance penalties if you commit a crime wearing body armor.
No it isnt undemocratic 50 cent has them on adjectives the time. They arent a weapon. Go ahead and get yourself some body armor!!!

Can I sue my dentist for negligence and win? He did 2 root canals later year and I had to hold them redone.?

He have since sold his practice and upon searching his pet name online I have found out in attendance are around 20+ people who hold filed complaints against him for fraud, name-calling, negligence and not keeping accurate records. He be abusive toward me and his staff, and refuse to return calls. He prescribed me nearly 10 vicodin prescriptions when I moved away and said his work was fine. He only just sold his practice and I have be told he is "out of the country" countless times. I can't get sleep at dark because I feel close to he did something very wrong. I am not the type to stir off suing relatives, but this man should surely have to recompense me back, right? I would close to to know if this case is worth pursuing. It have not been relatively a year yet, and I presently live in a different state. Please, any assist from people who are up to date with dental malpractice, please distribute me some input.
Answers: Consult an attorney where you live to find out if you enjoy a case. Most of them present free consultations. Look for them in the washed out pages or bring a referral.
You need to serene down. You'll waste profoundly of money if you sue because you're mad at him. It should be a cold, dispassionate judgment based on facts. To enjoy a chance to win a suit you'll hold to prove that his treatment was unacceptable, outside the standard of care. A discouraging outcome is something that normally happen on occasion and isn't a aim for a suit. If you can show that his work was done unbecomingly, then you might enjoy a case, but what damages would you capture? Have him pay for the repeat? Is it worth it financially, or freshly emotionally?

More Questions and Answers:
[1545] - [332] - [312] - [1674] - [1287] - [872] - [477] - [257] - [1119] - [65] - [1831] - [1733] - [667] - [1951] - [639] - [1400] - [425] - [1601] - [2437] - [2313]

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

Answer question: