Law Questions and Answers

Lawfully minded people?

Can a research institution fail a student because of a mental impairment that be being investigated at the time that the course be being taken.
Situation: Someone I know be in a coup¨¦ accident and didnt know they have a concussion. Because of this, there be memory loss, where clean information could not be retained no matter how much be studied and covered. They knew the information when they be covering it and grasped the concepts and was competent to relay the information to other students in such a style that they could understand how to do it. But contained by the morning when she went to class, she couldnt remember any of it. After the ruin of the semester, she had gone to finish her neurologist trialling, and it was discovered that she is have post concussion syndrome. Is there anything on paperwork that could help her if she be to appeal the grades she recieved (she failed nearly everything and she is typically a straight A student) to serve her stay in her program of study?
Answers: You hold the first step correct which is to appeal her grades to the dean and have a audible range. She will definitely entail written proof from her doctor discussing her condition and specifically that it could cause her symptoms. She also requirements written testimony from some of her previous professors attesting to her capability as a student in their classes. This is no problem the best route to take initially. There are other steps, however, if she doesn't receive a favorable result from the panel overhearing her appeal.

The next step would be to get hold of in touch next to an attorney who specifically handles disability cases. Her Post Concussion Syndrome may impressively well crash under a disability surrounded by the eyes of the law and a advocate who specializes in disability would be capable of tell you how to proceed if the initial audible range gave an unfavorable ruling. It may also be a suitable idea to try to attain this opinion up to that time a hearing at her college. I'm sure her institution doesn't want to deal near a legal fight and the bad press that victimize a young girl next to a disability would bring (even if that disability was temporary).

Anyway, own a nice holiday and best of luck to you and your friend.
"Can a learning institution go wrong a student because of a mental impairment" - Well, not because of it. However they can fail a student for not ratification the course regardless of the reason for breakdown.

You do not pass a course for acumen the material at one time, you surpass by retaining that information. It would be improper for the erudition institution to pass her if she can not elapse the tests.
If the facts that you own presented out in the unstop is exactly as how you have put it. Then tolerate us explore what you have interpreted.

Can a study institution do?
The discrepencies are in the reality that you used they as to she in the final analysis.
Did the other students founder too? Or was she the solely one to fail?
Post concussion syndrome? If this can be proven afterwards ofcourse she should be allowed to take the examination again.
Accept that the test cannot be duplicate as when she had taken it. And immediately found out she had concussion.
After the certainty is not unjust if it can be proven.
Proof of a straight A student. Proof of attendance. Proof that you can appeal because you can solely with the facts and not heresy.

Good Luck
At the time she did not know. If she did she should own informed the testers. Another time could perhaps after be arranged for her to take the audition.

If a cop arrest you and makes fun of your parents what can you do?

they said your father's first name is funny and your mom is hot
Answers: nothing., it's rude but it's not ample for a jury to find your owed a significant amount of money

unfortunately adjectives you can do is sue and unless it's something more outrageous than that you will only be paying attorney fees even if you win

but yes he is a contract!

Also consider if you have a witness, is it purely your word versus his???? I'm sure the jury will believe him over you and i'm not saying explicitly right

Police very on the odd occasion would do something to one of their own in this situation, more plausible to stir up trouble trying to report him to his own department.
Not get arrested subsequent time.
Q
If someone on yahoo made fun of you what could you do?

A
same deal-"Nothing"-grow up and start taking a little responsibility for your engagements.
Sue him for sexual harassment, libel, and slander.

What percentage of answers here are plain wrong.?

I have notice that in the canon and ethics clause of this site, a lot of answers are plain wrong and the endless majority are incomplete. I wonder if people are really relying on the direction the get here. What portion of the answers do you ponder are wrong or at least incomplete?
Answers: Oh, lots and lots are wrong. There are a few reason for it. As other posters have pointed out, plentiful answerers assume that the asker is a) in their same state, or b) that the imperative is the same everywhere.

Of course that's not the baggage. Questions in this screened-off area not only come from adjectives over the US, but from around the world as well, and 99.9% of the time, the interview will not give you the location.

Answerers also tend to answer the query "should I sue" from their emotional aversion, although for many of these question the answer is clearly "no you should not". The most common misperception that both askers and answerers hold is that you can win a lawsuit even though you have no damages. In the US, to be precise generally not true.

I suppose relations come here asking for legal suggestion because of another great myth--that there are lawyer that will work for free on any kind of grip. The US provides legal counsel for the poor contained by a criminal matter and court aid and other private groups provide assistance in far-reaching family directive matters and next to issues of constitutional importance. But if you want to sue your neighbor over his bark dog, you will not find a lawyer to do that for free.

So inhabitants come here and take their likelihood that they will receive some useful information. The poster of this sound out and several others in this bit do their best to provide answers that are accurate and of general use to the community. There are pretty a lot of question that can be answered in a nonspecific way, base on the common canon theories that are consistently followed in nearly every US state.

But even those answers are deficient for any asker to take management and no one should consider a YA response to be the ending word on their legal problem. Anyone anyone sued, in trouble beside the law, or within the middle of a family dispute should see a legal representative, and be prepared to pay for accurate and complete officially recognized advice.
95%

Wait... permit me think...

99%

There.
wrong = 90%

wrong or incomplete > 99%

But for masses both asking or answering it's just a place to start.

What roughly the unauthorized practice of law by police officer, that troubles me more.
Since this is law and nouns... I would point out that, when it comes to Answers... it's Cavet Emptor in it's purest form and anyone who asks ask on Answers and is then STUPID plenty to act on the answers is also dumb ample to get exactly what they deserve... BAD ADVICE.

This is a FUN place to vent one's frustrations on the internet... here is NO warranties expressed or inferred for the doomed to failure advice given on here.
Probably the majority of them. But surrounded by this section, so much depends on the state the asker is surrounded by. With so many state specific law (that's a good entry, I support the Tenth Amendment), the responders in the other forty nine states, and elsewhere, will feasible not know the correct answer for the asker's state.

And some people are newly plain ignorant, too!
The ones where on earth we give our opinion, which is just to jammy to do.. But there is greatly of good information also.But this is a great give somebody the third degree.
It will help me ,when answering trying to donate the best answer .Thank You and Merry Christmas
There are a very few folks who answer question in the "law" areas whose answers you can trust -- you can count them on the fingers of one appendage, for sure. For the most part, as contained by any legal discussion, the information is one and only as good as the sources cited. I come up with that maybe partly of the answers that actually cite sources are correct. I would estimate that all right over 90% of the answers which do not cite sources are wrong. Of course, I am not citing any sources for this estimate!
Most answers wrong or incomplete? Yes, some of that is because the question asked about a situation is base on incomplete data. This is not the simply board with that problem- the cars/transportation/Motorcycles paragraph has various posters who do not disclose the location/state they are in for license questions, or the spawn, model, and engine they are asking for help on. The 90% amount some other posters replied with probably applies to incomplete question as well as answers for this and other subject forums.

CHL in Texas?

Ok so I am contained by Texas, have a handgun and want to bring back a CHL. If you have a class A misdameanor for petty thieving in another state and it be 2 years ago, can I still get a CHL. I get the handgun legally.
Answers: this should answer your ask..
http://www.texasonline.state.tx.us/txdps...
also you might want to ask bullet trap in plano or some other CHL place roughly this information,happy holidays bud
I believe so. Check beside your local sheriff's dept.

How many days can your available job make your work, within a row before giving your an bad day? By LAW?

Can your commission work you 8 days in a row, even if it is surrounded by 2 separate pay period?
Answers: As many as you are likely to put up with.
1. In private industry, salaried organization have constrained protection but do fall beneath NLRB rules sometimes. But it is often the worst place to be within.

2. In private industry, hourly employees trickle under NLRB rules that govern overtime payment requirements. Here is where it sometimes occur to an employer to allow for days off. See, the employer starts to LOSE MONEY (due to overtime pay) when they work you too much during a reimburse period. For small business, doesn't relief due to exemptions for small business. For larger companies, NLRB rules for hourly employees are significant contained by relation to your question.

3. In senate, the feds and the states usually have rules going on for how much you can work on a project and what holidays you must offer. Again, overtime rules variety it important to shorten your hours on the job. In this bag, because your job is budgeted according to some formula, usually 2080 hours smaller quantity about 20 days (holidays, vacation, and sick time.) If you burn those budgeted hours in command jobs, you budge home when you are out of hours for the year unless they have some slush funds to assign you over that number of hours.

Is it illegal to impersonate someone else over the Internet?

Someone sent me a message claiming to be someone else. I know it is not the party he or she is claiming to be. I just want to know if this is criminal. Thanks!
Answers: Internet identities are habitually fictitious- check the avatars and names. The chief law on identity is you can call yourself anything you want - the unconstitutional factors are fraud, slander, obstruction of even-handedness. Message being sent from someone else? you're gist Emails? Spam generators are using other peoples address books to dispatch sneaky ads and virus's, some to extract info to do Identity burglary and do actual theft by fraud next to false identity- this , the thef and obstruction,is iffy.
no, not really

but.. If they are doing it in an attempt to commit fraud, consequently I would say yes.

Romney is stretching the truth?

he lied about hunting .lied just about marching next to Martin Kuther King , and the endosement of the NRA why can't he be straight with the American society how can you trust a man who is trying to impress you with lies .Please don;t articulate it's not important he isn't even contained by Office yet and already he is lying.I would not hire a man who lies just about things that no one care about anyway. I don;t thought if he didn't march beside Dr King or hunted or anything, he should be quiet.
Answers: I indubitably don't trust him.
I would look a little more at your sources.
Some of the things you nominated are not true, and it looks like your sources of this information may not be the most credible of possible choices.
And Hillary and friends other told us the whole truth??

Check into her involvment contained by the killing of a staffer name Vince Foster.
Mitt's done, so's Rudy.

I LIKE MIKE
I don't see why people return with upset about these things. The biggest tell stories that all politicians detail is that they will represent you or work for you in management. They all work for the roomy corporations--that's where they catch their money to get elected, and that's who they product the laws for.

Work - Final warning sustain.?

I need some suggestion.
Back in Jan 2007 I received a 'Informal Warning' because I didnt show for work. (I booked it sour, but I had no rear up)
This Wednesday just gone I didnt know I be on the rota for morning shift, hence I didnt turn up.
Now, after a small meeting I hold been given a 'Final informal warning' because my bunking off from work was rude.

'A copy of this note will be put on your personnel profile, the note on your report will be of no disciplinary effect after 12 months'
So my first Informal warning will be wipe next months.
Is it me, or own they missed one warning out, or did they spring to a 'informal warning' before the voiced? Are they allowed to do this?
I feel tottally screwed over by these unsullied bosses, been in that 4 years and am starting to hate going to work.
But I will not be pushed out of a profession I once enjoyed.
The scheduled time was adjectives written down, Word4Word, should take it on the chin, but I dont want to acquire the sack over a small thing.
Answers: Legally, even if it is written contained by the employee encyclopaedia that an employee get a certain number of warning, the employer can give the hand any number or zero warning. So you have no recourse on the warning issue.

The bigger problem is why you were warn, and this is really not a "small thing". Tardiness, and absenteeism is a really big deal beneath both federal and state law. It is such a big concord that, in most states, if you are fired for excessive absenteeism you may not know how to get any dismissal benefits. This is the one issue that it is almost totally impossible for an attorney to fight against.

I agree that you should not be pushed out of a opportunity, because being terminated have its own set of problems. What you need to do is to trademark double sure that you are neither late or omitted when you are scheduled. You must net an extra effort to see when you are assigned to an weird shift. Yes, that is a affliction, but you do not want to give your employer any aim to terminate you.

From what you own said it is time to get your resume contained by order and start looking for a contemporary job. Yes, that is to say hard especially when the company used to be a place you loved, but, companies money and sometimes that change is not for the better -- especially when up to date management comes within. For your own employment record it looks better if you give notice a job than if you are fired. Good luck.
Depending on where on earth you work, the severity of the situation, and also what kind of boss/company you work for, a company doesn't necessarily enjoy to give you an "informal warning" beforehand they write you up.

The only aim HR documents these warnings is so that if they want to eventually fire you, you can't come final and sue them for being wrongly fired. I don't know what state you're in but my state (California) have "at-will employment", which means they can fire or lay you rotten at any time without any stipulation. At the same time, you can also give and quit without any alarm.

I noticed you wrote "But I will not be pushed out of a profession I once enjoyed". It sounds to me that you probably don't enjoy your employment like when you first started, and it might be time for you to verbs. Since this company has already "warned" you, it might be perfect to just enjoy your resume ready and start looking for a foreign and better job. It's other good to be prepared and one-step ahead of what they might do.

I have a manager at my behind the times company who once advised me that even if I be happy surrounded by a job, to never stop looking and seeing what better opportunity could be out there.
Louise,
You asked if they could do this. yes they can.

Because they are giving you informal warning instead of disciplinary action channel they are being as f¨ºte as they can.

I believe I would let them know that it won't ensue again.
Whatever it takes, be sure you at work, on the dot and check the schedule every morning if necessary.

On the other appendage, no one should stay within a job they detest.

Someone once said if you have a errand doing what you love you
never have to work again.

I started beside jobs I detested but I loved computers. I taught myself (back then) and did job for little pay as long as I could do it
on a computer. I programmed these experiences with job I applied for,
and eventually got a post as a programmer.
I loved it.

Find what you love to do. Then go for it!

I decision you well.

Can you change a picture so different that it will not violate a copyright?

Alright,

What if you took a picture of a star, and changed that picture in a paint program. Manipulating it.
For example, you changed the eye features/shape/ took out the chops and placed different lips, changed eye color, modified the proboscis to be bigger, and put elf ears on the recognition, even go as far as shifting the celebrities's expression.
To a certain extent of making the recognition not really look like the idol, if anything it would look like a takeoff.
Will that violate that celebrity's copyright if she/she copyrighted their face???
Answers: Altering a picture is creating what's call a "derivative work." The copyright owner (most likely the photographer) have rights not only to the resourceful work, but also to derivative works.

If you take the picture, after you are entitled to alter it, generally speaking. If you are using someone else's picture, consequently you are likely unable to alter it.

As you imply, in that may be other issues involved with using the likeliness of a personality. The law on the subject of the right to publicity is primarily a matter of state canon. So you will have to look to the law of your particular state for the answer.

More information on derivative works can be found within the links below.

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.ht...

http://www.chillingeffects.org/derivativ...

A good introduction to the directive involving the right to publicity can be found in the links below.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/index.php...

http://www.ncsl.org/programs/lis/privacy...
If you nick the picture, you own the copyright. The celebrity may sue you for invasion of privacy, but you own the copyright.

** Note: This is a common discussion of the subject matter of your grill and not legal counsel. Local laws or your exceptional situation may change the standard rules. For a specific answer to your question you should consult legitimate counsel with whom you can discuss adjectives the facts of your case. **
It's improper to create a derivative work of something you don't hold a copyright to. So, no, you can't legally do that.

*Dang it ron_mexi, you cadence me.*
First, a person cannot enjoy a copyright on their face. Copyright applies just to original works, such as photographs, books, painting, music, etc. If you took the picture in public, you own the copyright to the photo and are free to use it surrounded by any way you want. Celebrities may hold some publicity rights, but their lives are generally so public that they own no control over how pictures of them are used, caricatured or otherwise.

If you did not take the photo, voice you took it from a magazine, it is possible to change the picture enough to receive using the copyrighted photo a fair use. This is call a transformative use. Such uses are particularly considered do use when they involve satire or commentary.
Copyright statute mostly deals next to copys that are direct mechanical replications.

A work specifically based on imagination of composition is not considered a "derivitive" work. For example, Tchaikovsky's "1812 Overture" is considered his composition even though it contains some easily well-known melodies that be not his. A hand drawn sketch taken from a published map is not considered a derivative work, an example that is to say stated in the US copyright law. If the imitation clearly does not mischief the commercial value of the untested work, then it is not considered a "copy" underneath the law.

If this is the United States, why do laws differ from state to state?

In the State of California, the official age of consent is 18. In the State of Louisiana, from what I've heard, the decriminalized age is 17. So if the father of Jamie Lynn Spears' unborn child was living surrounded by California, he'd be arrested for statutory rape. Since He lives in Louisiana, the canon can't touch him. So tell me, what the hell's up beside that?
Answers: Even though the states form a country, each individual state is allowed, surrounded by some cases, to make its own law. That's how powers between the federal government and state government is balanced. The states enjoy to have some powers, right?
The United States IS NOT a democracy. It be structured as and still functions as a Constitutional Republic. To answer your question, respectively state is a sovereign entity and all of the states collectively kind up the United States.

The idea is that populations of culture differ in customs, beliefs, and political ideology over distances. If the U.S. was one huge sovereign state with one governing body, then the requirements and wishes of its citizens would not be fairly accredited from one place to another. That's why we have states which enjoy their own giovernments to represent the people who choose to live inwardly their respective state. If you are in CA and you want your age of consent at 17, later you have the remedy to live in a place where on earth your ideologies are best represented.

The federal Government be originally designed to ONLY be the collective voice of the states, but because of loopholes and abuse over the ultimate 200 years, it seems very soon that the federal government have extended far beyond the reach intended by the founding father.
Federalism and the democratic republic.
Start with the concept that adjectives power resides in the society. Then, create a constitution that lists enduring powers that reside in the federal elected representatives (laws about standing armies, fundamental rights, interstate commerce, etc.). The federal management only have the powers stated in the US Constitution.

So, adjectives other powers reside in the associates or states. Each state writes a constitution, which further lists guaranteed individual rights (i.e. a right to an education) and states what powers the state establishment has, beside the remaining powers residing in the relations (i.e. the elected state representatives) who can choose how best to legislate in that state. They can overhaul any law that does not violate the state or federal constitution.

Each state may tailor its own law to fit its own society. If one state wants to trademark the age of consent 17 and another wants it to be 12 (or 18), next they are within their rights to do so. If the family are not happy, they will elect unsullied representatives and tell the brand new guys to change the decree.
Perhaps you should pay more attention contained by American Government.
The States are given rights to make some law and the Federal Government gets to take home certain law.
This is spelled out in the CONSTITUTION AND the BILL OF RIGHTS.
It is Federalism. Both Federal and States enjoy governing power in different areas of imperative. Some areas are exclusively federal or exclusively states power. Some areas might implicate both. In the U.S. the states retain residual power that is to say not legislated by the Federal Congress.

When you look at statutory rape, which is criminal law, it is exclusively regulated by states. There are a few federal criminal statutes, but statutory rape is not one of them. That's why you enjoy different age limit contained by different states.

Also, the idea of federalism is because states should hold power to make tenet over its own citizens or anyone who has contact beside the forum like doing business here.

By the way, this open-handed of system is not exclusive to the U.S.A. For example, Canada has similar system within form, though the details can be quite different.
You must remember, we do not enjoy a national form of government. We enjoy a federal government (as within federation).

This federation of sovereign states ceded some of their inherant power to the inside government for regulating interstate commerce and other affairs which clearly accord with more than one state.

An closer poster said that "in some cases" the states are allowed to brand laws for themselves. In certainty, in most adjectives cases, it is at the state level that a directive will be made.

Why is it this way? Our founding father were incredibly concerned with direct democratic control of governing body, and recognized that the best agency to accomplish this was to bring in the lawmakers directly adjectives to the specific community which they served. South Carolina and Connecticut, for example, have thoroughly different populations, customs, traditions, and heritages, and as a consequence these two different communities of people can be expected to produce somewhat different laws for themselves.

If you ponder, you will realize that your state senator or representative may only represent several tens of thousands of relations. You can call them on the mobile. You can make an appointment within their office, and if you try complicated, there is in actuality a good fate that you can get a regulation passed or changed through them.

Your federal senator, on the other hand, may represent tens of *millions* of population. You have no arbitrariness of walking into their office or even conversation seriously about legislation unless you are a special interest group near millions of dollars. Local representatives are responsive to local demands. This is why the founding fathers determined that primary authority to build and enforce laws should remain next to the states themselves, and these local representatives.

The federal government isn't even set up to support the type of democratic representation which race expect of their state governments. In a state, contained by addition to the governor, the secretary of state, state treasurer, attorney standard, are all elected directly by the society. This is in ornament to local control over the election of sheriffs, law lords, county assessors, etc. Think about the executive branch of the federal affairs of state: the single position in the entire federal executive which is answerable to the family is the President. He selects everybody else, right down to the appellate law lords for the federal circuits.

In addition, judge about the history of our nation. The US have many different cultures and customs. The certainty that it has held together is largely due to the certainty that we operate on the federal system. For example, imagine what would crop up if we tried to impose equal type of gun control legislation in Montana as exists surrounded by Massachusetts, there could enormously well be an insurrection! In certainty, the State of Arizona passed a resolution just concluding year stating that if the federal government attempted to disarm Arizona citizens, that state stood set to withdraw from the Union. Whether or not you find that humorous, it highlights the incredibly serious dangers which this country would obverse if individual states were prohibited to make law for their own people.
Apparently not. It looks approaching he is born on april 29 of 1989 and her in precipitate april of 1991. So they are less than two years.

If they have sex in Lousiana or California, he is surrounded by the clear. I am sure he was smart ample to look that up.


In California consent can be given from a 16 year old to someone no more than 36 months elder than them...


---Last I heard he be 18??? But, I dont really follow along. You maybe right, he I don`t know 19.

In my state - Minnesota - 16 is age of consent.

Many states list 16 as age of consent. Or hold a 36 month clause - meaning one knees-up must be 36 months older than the other.


Think a 16 year aged high arts school junior and an 18 year old big school senior own sex after prom? THAT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME. I bet there are dozens of guys/girls who sleep together at most large schools where on earth one is an 18 year old senior and the other a 16 year hoary junior. You cannot tell me these empire are RAPISTS.

HECK

I bet many associates in this forum would be sexual predators. I know I slept near a 16 year old Junior when I be 18 and senior. I dont think that make me a rapist. We were one order apart and had particular each other for 5 years.

If it happen in Louisiana and age 17 is consent - are you sure at hand is no statute about age separation? I cannot believe the state would charge an 18 year near rape for sleeping with a classmate who is a 9 months, 9 weeks, 9 days younger. AGAIN IT IS THE SOUTH WE ARE TALKING ABOUT - so anything is possible.

--- Looked it up...

If she is 15-17 years feeble and the mail it is 24 months elder and between the ages of 17-19, than it is a misdemeanor.

But, if she is 16 and he is 18, then it is fine if they are not more than 24 months apart.

Lousiana state statutes... 14.80 and 14.80-1


----

I a short time ago read an article that said Spears has be living in California and that Aldridge is individual 18. In California if an 18 year old is smaller number than 36 months older than a juvenile, they may hold consensual sex if they are not related...

http://www.celebtv.com/headlines.aspx?ne...
Each state is different. Yes we are united, but we respectively can make different law.

More Questions and Answers:
[1110] - [426] - [2355] - [223] - [2198] - [629] - [1504] - [754] - [1863] - [2015] - [1184] - [2409] - [1914] - [727] - [90] - [181] - [2462] - [193] - [1962] - [1094]

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

Answer question: