Law Questions and Answers

In layman's terms, what does "due process of law" denote?

Answers: Just means agree to the legal procedures of the country be followed back reaching a conclusion.
It is a saying as a rule applied in criminal investigations: x is accuse of doing something wrong. People say consent to the due process of law rob its path. i.e consent to x have a trial by jury contained by court and be convicted or aquitted, before reaching a conclusion in the order of him / her
Due process is the combination of all your rights permitted by the constitution, as they apply contained by the courtroom.

It includes 4th amendment rights to unreasonable search and fit, 5th amendment rights to self incrimination, and 6th amendment rights to a speedy trial and unusual punishment, along with other rights to include trial representation, the oppotunity to face your accuser, and the right to cross examine witnesses.
In layman's vocabulary, it is the legal process which you are due, which is an entirely circular definition. What it finances varies depending on the circumstances of the baggage, but generally courts interpret the constitutional style as requiring some (but not all) of the traditional procedures that existed in permitted cases at the time of the adoption of the Constitution (or at the time of the Fourteenth Amendment).

In addition, near is a U.S. Supreme Court case (the Slaughterhouse Case) from the behind time 1800s which basically wrote the privileges and immunity clause of the Fourteenth Amendment out of the Constitution. Since then, the U.S. Supreme Court have sometimes used the due process clause as a way of doing what the privileges and immunity clause was intended to do (extend the Bill of Rights to the states). The formal signature for this process is called substantive due process (which is an oxymoron).
That the statute can be arbitrary or unpredictable.

The two key requirements of due process are that the soul be aware of their responsibilities (and notified of any impending punishment) and that they be given an opportunity to present their side of the argument before a dull decision architect.

These two -- notice and opportunity to be hear -- are the cornerstones of procedural due process. Everything else is built on top of that.

The permanent status "due process" in a constitutional arena also includes substantive due process -- the requirement that confident fundamental rights cannot be lightly infringed. But that's a much more complicated topic.
In simple language, due process requires NOTICE about something explicitly going to affect you, and AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD about the event to be exact going to affect you. How is Notice to be given to you? It depends. In court the rules require that your attorney be given so many days mind. In class action situations make out is sometimes given by email and more often by public relations in a weekly, so that people within China for example who are members of a class are adjectives if they fail to read the small classified announcement published in a small rag in NYC. The courts enjoy held that this is notice. The other aspect, OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD, finances that the person to be artificial has a pretty good opportunity to prepare to respond to the noticed charges and to come formerly the tribunal or other body to present his/her side of the issue. If after being given passable Notice and a reasonable Opportunity to be Heard, the entity fails to appear, at hand is no denial of due process of law contained by the taking away of the property, interests or other rights involved contained by the matter.

My landlord obtain an order for eviction within August, before I rewarded the rent to them, can they use it now if i

don't enjoy the rent on october 1st? The order be signed by the judge on August 9th. I live within Florida.
Answers: I don't know all the specifics of your armour, but if the landlord standard your rent, the eviction has probably be voided. This happens automatically because you cannot evict someone and consequently continue to collect rent from them.
He/she would enjoy to refile all the requisite paperwork to proceed again.
yes

Do you think the Jena 6 brought the punishment upon themselves and that its adjectives being blown out of proportion?

The Jena 6 rhythm the white boy almost to death. If this have been 6 whites on 1 black it be said equality is being done but since it be 6 blacks on 1 white its said their punishment is to harsh. What so you construe? Please no ramblings.
Answers: Yes I agree they did this to themselves. I also agree that organizations approaching the NAACP have blown this path out of proportion. If you do the crime, you should do the time.
Attempted murder may be too harsh a charge unless within is strong evidence of intent to kill.

Are the protesters dictum they shouldn't be charged with anything, close to felonious assault and battery, or of late that they shouldn't be charged with attempted murder?

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nonlethala...
i guess that the real soldiers buried today from the movie 'glory' would turn over contained by their graves in shame.so abundant federal laws be broken:tying a noose,attemped mahem and murder,inciting riots,contravention of the 1964 civil rites act.these men could downfall up at angola state prison-www.angolamuseum.org/story.htm

Son of three more questions that weren't worth 5 points respectively to post?

Do Los Angeles Cops really write tickets for "Improper Use of the Drive-by Shooting Lane?"

Under the Public Health Code of Louisiana, how many port-a-potties should Martin Luther King III hold rented when he brought 60,000 demonstrators to Jena? (pop 2,971) Can residents sue for lawn and garden twist by demonstrators who literally had no other place to progress?

What's the status on Stevie Wonder's paternity suit? Last I heard. he be claiming he never laid eyes on the woman.
Answers: LOL, Mad. your no account question never cease to take a chuckle out of me. Thanks pal, you give me my morning laugh.

BB,
Raji the Green Witch
It's question like this that will procure you banned from Yahoo Answers and possibly your Yahoo tale.

Football is inhuman to humans and is legal and multibillion dollar business..while dogfighting...?

is inhuman to dogs and is evil and people want to see you within jail for 20 years if you dog punch-up. some world hey? Where is the outrage to inhumanity to humans whether in football or classic fighting or even boxing?
Answers: Human's can be paid the choice. Dog's can't.
I am sorry but, this is ridiculous. Those humans CHOOSE to play football and box just as I and frequent others have CHOSE to scuffle MMA or wrestle. Furthermore those humans who CHOOSE to do as such are typically paid greatly well.

Dogs don’t gain to CHOOSE. The difference is in the CHOICE.
1. Are you an idiot?

2. How is football inhumane? There are ways to protect yourself, such as the helmet, pad, etc.
Dogs don't have anything to protect themselves near.

3. Even if some consider Football inhumane, interview the Football payers and see if one of them HATES their job. NONE will influence, because they all love what they do, unlike Dogs who are FORCED to punch-up out of hunger.
Boy you're a piece of work. For one thing and permit me make this as clear to you as I can.

The footballer may appear dumb to some but he has a choice. He have a mind of his own, can think for himself. He enjoy the sport, has trained (pro football) for it most of his time, it's not a fight to the departure, and it's integrated into our society.

Dogs on the other hand are dumb (can't speak) animals and couldn't recount you that 'hey this ain't right, I don't have anything against ole 'Hercules', 'I don't want to exchange blows him'. Dogs are trained, conditioned to act and behave within the manner they do by those who nurture them. Instinct plays a very little piece here because these dogs are forced into each others own little world that they consistency has to be protected. The dog doesn't discern competition, strive for it, it only know there is any a bone for it at the end or it dies.They don't deem for themselves (not while they are controlled). Dog fights as resourcefully as kock (misspelled because Yahoo doesn't understand context, probably be out sourced to India) fights are crooked, they where prohibited before you where on earth born. Most Americans don't care for the atrocity's and it's not an integral piece of our society.

Your going to get like mad of grief over this post, I hope you're ready for it.
The analogy you are trying to breed is flawed. Football is not to humans as dogfighting is to dogs.

A better, more accurate analogy is: Gladiator sports is to humans as dog fighting is to dogs.

In the gladiator arena: humans are thrown into pits to confrontation to the death. Bets are made on which human will win. Afterwards, the humans are taken final to their cages to linger for the next conflict (to the death). Eventually they will die in the gladiator arena.

Gladiator conflict is also illegal.

Boxing - football etc (officially licensed sports) enjoy safety structures, rules and are not cruel fight to the death. Sorry - but these are zilch like dog warfare.

oops - your ignorance is showing.
No one forces humans to fight or play sports. Animals do not own choices. Big difference here.

Landlord and tenant law: what is the proper permanent status for this? (easy 10)?

When the tenant has signed a long-term lease (one year or more), and a couple of weeks after desires to move to another location.
If the landlord demands to be compensated for the rest of the months according to the lease, he does not have a right to enjoy another tenant and be paid again for those months.
What are some vocabulary that deal near this?
I need more specific lingo than rights of the tenant/landlord.

I need more specific vocabulary, like "retaliatory eviction" or "warrant of habitabilty" etc., but dealing near the situation I described above. If you are in a endorsed field, you can probably back me.

Most helpful get 10 points. Thank you!
Answers: Mitigation of damages. The landlord can not intentionally consent to the apartment remain vacant short making an effort to rent it (if you hold moved out and properly noticed your going away and allowing the apartment to be rented by another.)
You can only be charged for the remainder of the lease if the manager has made an shot to rent and was powerless to rent it.
If the landlord rents to another, he can not hold his cake and eat it too. He can't charge double rent against you and the modern tenant
Well, it's an issue of mitigation.

If the landlord have mitigated the damages from the breach, by renting out the property to someone else, they cannot recover like peas in a pod amount from the tenant as damages.

But see also the "Collateral Source" doctrine, which may apply depending on the jurisdiction and the details of the case.
My kindness is that the landlord would be entitled to collect rent from you until the lease expired or he rented the premises again. If you moved and didn't voluntarily recompense him the balance due beneath the lease, he would have to sue you to collect. When someone sues for damages, they are required to "mitigate damages" -- contained by other words, your landlord would own an obligation to give somebody a lift action to "mitigate" your damages by taking acceptable steps to get another tenant (such as hype and showing the property to perspective tenants).

You would also have an condition to "mitigate" damages. In other words, you could not do anything that would hinder the landlord's facility to rent the premises to another tenant. That would include damaging the premises or restricting access to the property (changing the locks, etc.).

I be a landlord for years.

Hope this help.
Here's a link for that on the subject of California landlord tenant ruling. Good luck.
http://www.caltenantlaw.com/breaklease.h...

Trust funds?

A court awarded me some money 12 yrs ago to be put into trust for when I turned 21. My mum spent it years ago and denied all skill till I showed her the proof. She's also watched me look for it for years and not said a word. What can I do officially to get it stern?
Answers: If she was the trustee -- and base on your statements, it appears she violated the terms of the trust -- afterwards you can sue her for "breach of fiduciary duty" as the trustee.
Most courts provide that the bank justification is not to make payments except by direct of the court. If that did not happen, consequently track down the lawyer and sue him for malpractice, because you be the client and he did not protect you. Easy, slam-dunk case if you can find the legal representative. (Easy in New York, stir to the court administration website and retrieve the lawyer's registration statement.)

If the court instruct contained the necessary style ("subject to the further order of this court," or "as one with an officer of the bank") consequently you sue the bank for contempt of court. You would use indistinguishable procedure if the bank remunerated the money to a creditor of your mother who garnished the trust commentary. The beauty is that contained by a contempt of court case, your attorney fees are remunerated by the bank contained by addition to the recouping, so your recovery is totally network. And the legal rate of interest is usually better than the bank picture rate (in New York, judgments carry interest at 9% which in this skin would go wager on to when the account be cleaned out).
Breaches of trust can fall inside three categories; attainment an unauthorised profit; failing to act near care and skill surrounded by the administration of the trust; and misapplications of trust property .

The misuse of your trust fund is clearly an perform of commission of misapplication of trust property, therefore a breach of trust.

Her [your mum's] estate will be held liable for the breach and ordered to reinstate unto the beneficiaries [you] the entire amount.

A breach of duty owed by a trustee (The duty of keeping owed by trustees to the beneficiaries of the trust is the set out in s.1 Trustee Act 2000) is different from a breach of a fiduciary duty.

On appointment, he who submits himself to be a trustee, not individual owes a duty of care underneath s.1 Trustee Act 2000, but also a fiduciary duty imposed by equity.

“Fiduciary obligations are obligation to act near loyalty and in well-mannered faith surrounded by dealings … The trustees … are taken to own fiduciary obligations to the objects (beneficiaries) of the trust.”

Fiduciary duty nouns a trustee’s loyalty to the trust under his stewardship, and the ‘no conflict’ forbids him acting surrounded by way a path as to place himself in a position of conflict between his own personal ambitions and the welfare of the trust.
adjectives good answers above. unsophisticatedly go after the edge and the lawyer who represented you, they've the deepest pockets.
i sympathise next to you too, that's pretty low, your mother spending all your money, i wouldn't get the impression one bit bad around dragging her into court too. happened a friend of mine.
If your mum spent it for your "lessons, welfare or benefit" and can demonstrate that to the satisfaction of the court, you are not going to receive a penny out of this. That doesn't mean that you should not craft further enquiries - you should certainly find out what she spent the money on, sooner. However, don't build up your hopes.

Can a lawyer be disbarred for bringing a frivolous lawsuit?

For example, if a black student signs an agreement at a Christian arts school that they will not engage surrounded by non Christian behaviour and is kicked out of the university because in slice several black students girls claimed he approached them to have sex than the students mother files suit contained by federal court he is somehow racially discriminated against can the lawyer be punished by the Bar for nouns violation or even dibarred for bringing frivouls and slanderous suit. Or is he exempt somehow.
Answers: Ultimately, the finding have to be made by a judge within a court of law as to whether or not an attorney have engaged surrounded by such abuse. Normally, that would involve examining an historical history showing evidence of such filings. I would prefer to use the term: Vexatious Litigation a bit than frivolous lawsuit here. Vexatious litigation includes suits filed for other reason as well.

Vexatious litigation is a trial action which is brought, regardless of its merits, solely to disturb or subdue an adversary. It may embezzle the form of a primary frivolous lawsuit or may be the repetitive, burdensome, and unwarranted filing of meritless motions within a matter which is otherwise a meritorious bring of action.

States enjoy different rules regarding the circumstances underneath which a litigant or lawyer may be found to be a vexatious litigator. If one is tag by a court with such a finding, consequently they can be prevented from bringing any legal handling in the adjectives without first obtain a court's permission.

Lawyers can be disbarred for participating contained by such abuse and are generally very thorough about lend their names to such frivolous whereabouts.
christian schools are private institutions,for this reason they can set silly rules of any kind such as "males and females are to keep hold of a distance of at least 1ft apart"

a legal representative can't be disbarred for taking the lawsuit,but he's also likely to lose. It'd be charitable of a waste of time and money.
A frivolous lawsuit -- by the permissible definition of the term -- is one that have no legal merit, and cannot even be considered a defensible attempt to apply or extend the law.

From the example and the facts you give -- it's not clear whether the lawsuit is frivolous or not -- there might be valid grounds to get a racial nouns claim, especially if several white students had out of stock in equal behavior and not been expelled.

But assuming the court does determine the lawsuit to be frivolous -- which is much more severe than basically determining the lawsuit is a loser -- disbarment is usually reserved for repeated or particularly egregious violation. The initial penalty for frivolous lawsuits is as a rule monetary fines -- with suspension occurring if repeated frivolous suits are filed. Disbarment would merely apply to repeated violations.
Attorneys may be disciplined by their state tavern, up to and including disbarment, for misconduct, including filing frivolous suits. However, discipline is scarce in these cases. The most adjectives imposed sanction for frivolous suits is attorney's fees awarded by the judge against the party and attorney bringing a frivolous suit.

If I got a ticket and the court date is on a Sunday, is it nill and null and void? Oregon?

Answers: I got a ticket for a court date on Saturday, and as the second gentlemen stated you have to contact the court.
they will digit a way to take your money, and notify the insurance company Sunday or not - call on Monday to
straighten it out.

Where do the drugs from a drug bust go??

I be just wondering, what do the police do next to the drugs they confiscate from a drug bust?
Answers: They are kept in evidence, and are supposed to be destroyed. Some amounts are kept for use within undercover operations. Some make it back to the street via compromised official.
They are supposed to be booked as evidence and remain in the evidence room to the train of trial.

However there hold been some rogue cops who enjoy stolen the drugs seized and either sold it or used it to support their own conduct.
Officially:
They are used as eveidence against criminals that sold them/made them, then mostly they are destroyed (burned), or a small percent are used as bait surrounded by sting operations.

Unoffically: If u believe as masses, that the gov secretly is creating the drug put pen to paper for profit, then they are to yourself re-sold on the street by undercover agents, & the gov only sell thru their trusted people, but catch those that are freelancers.
a little surrounded by the pocket of the policeman, maybe reclaim some for training purposes and the rest gets destroyed. For example when they bust a Cannabis Crop they burn it stale. So I suspect that they would incinerate the A class narcotics as well.
Why you be busted recently?
They travel to a locked evidence room until all connected court proceeding are complete. Then they are destroyed.
destroyed
They smoke it. Don't you realize that?

More Questions and Answers:
[1017] - [395] - [927] - [634] - [1869] - [1554] - [1285] - [1775] - [2118] - [2051] - [1072] - [789] - [1556] - [46] - [79] - [728] - [1224] - [2404] - [2462] - [947]

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

Answer question: