Law Questions and Answers

Common Double (Shared) Driveway Laws?

Our neighbors and my parents are always warfare about the driveway surrounded by the winter, they don't like it that we use brackish and sand to help us drive up the steep hillock... But The neighbor parks his huge truck in the factor of the driveway that is adjectives and uses our side of the common drive to drive up? Does he enjoy the right to do that? And do we have any rights to putting down sand and brackish? We live in Southbury, CT -USA Not sure if law are different elsewhere? My dad wants to eventually bring back the land surveyored and next build a fence on our estate and make our driveway seperate until later we want to know our rights to the common shared driveway

Answers: I live within Canada. I assume Canadian law is similar to US regulation in this suitcase.

You can use salt unless near is a bylaw against it or it damages your neighbour's property. For example, if runoff from the driveway goes into his garden, he could apply to the court for a restraining proclaim to prevent you from using salt.

The neighbour does not enjoy the right to drive on your parent's property unless their is an easement allowing him to do so. If their is an easement, it would show on the deed, and your parent's advocate would have told them almost it when they bought the house.

I like the theory of surveying the property and building a fence. If the survey they get when they bought the house has ample detail, they may not need a modern survey. Their old survey should show the house and the property lines. They should be capable of measure where on earth the lot line is, or within may be an old survey stake (1" by 1" steel stake at ground stratum or slightly below the ground).

thats awesome you guys are going to have it surveyed. Things approaching this cause caos surrounded by determining owners property rights. Your neighbor has be using YOUR land, short permission. Excessive and to the point to where on earth it is driving you mad. LEGALLY if he have been parking on your property for so long, a adjudicate could actually reward him beside an easement to YOUR land. Anyways this is more than what you asked for, but thats appropriate that you are handling this now..He should own known better, and I guess a barricade would be a great idea! That mode you can all get hold of back to right neighborly conduct

EDIT: The law I am refering to is call adverse possession. It vary's state to state, I am in CA so I do not know exactly how this pertains to you, along beside the number of years. The law say that if you "use it" for X# of years, you have a right to it.

A mutual driveway finances you both have equal rights of use. If his big truck cause you problem using it then he will enjoy to stop parking there. Most city bylaws prohibit parking a commercial truck anyway. He can do zilch about the saline and sand. You will have to return with along or it will have to be established by the county or city.I think if you have the room for your house to have a seperate driveway...you would own had it within the first place.
Now you now why have a mutual driveway is not the best thing within buying a house

There may be an easement which permits adjectives use of the two driveways by both parties. If to be precise true, a fence down the middle would not be tolerable. Read your deed, title policy, and or extract. If this does not supply you an answer, go to a attorney. Usually it is better to move about along with the neighbor, than spend $10,000 for a lawsuit.

Views on child labor??

Do you think that US firms should be held in charge for the methods by which their products are made overseas???
explain. :]

Answers: Yes. Obviously they're not going to be responsible, it's our job later.

The principle is clear on this one but the issue itself is complicated.
Of course we don't want our businesses exploiting children and profiting from sweatshops.
There is a flipside though believe it or not. There were sweatshops here within the United States once upon a time. They ended because WE changed our law not some outside country. The other part of the flipside is that these children are normally providing for their families whose parents may be insensible , locked up, or unable to find work themselves. Taking the child out of the sweatshop might in consequence force he/she and family into complete starvation.
A massively real request for information is why do the governments of these foreign countries allow these conditions to exist?

The answer is that they want to boost their economy by attracting businesses who want cheap labor. These businesses are tired of operating in the U,S, where on earth they have to repay at least somewhat sort of and would prefer to go overseas and savour the huge profits that can be reaped by using slave labor. There is a pure match here.

The solution is complex consequently because: 1. we do not want theU.S. to lose jobs overseas
2. When we DO lose those job we don't want children exploited
3. We don't want to take job away from thses children just revolutionize their conditions.
4. There would have to be some gentle of monitoring to make any topical laws work and unsurprisingly the monitors would be bribed
5. We cannot control the internal legislation of sovereign nations. The companies we desire to regulate could simply base themselves within these foreign countries leaving simply one solutin available to us : STOP PATRONIZING THEM !

Spousal and child support laws - Texas?

A friend of mine who still have a windshield business lost most of financial resources through his wife who took all his money out of their common account, took his daughter and afterwards filed for divorce. Under the circumstances, he could not retrieve the money that he used for his business. During the divorce, he agreed to money her 1,200 a month for spousal and child support. She is now suing him for 2,400 a month i.e. even more then he is competent to make. He missed two payments because he did not clear enough. The courts are threatening to dispatch him to jail. If he does shift to jail, how long would he be contained by for. In two years his daughter will be 18, if he fled the country would he still be liable to pay the money he owes? Is in attendance a law that prevents someone from paying more consequently he can afford? I would be most pleased if someone can answer these questions. My friend is impressively desperate for some quick answers.

Answers: There are several problems with your certainty pattern. First, in that is no such thing as "spousal support" contained by Texas. There is something called "spousal maintenance" but it is especially limited.

Second, within Texas, child support is generally calculated base on a percentage of his income. It can never be more than what he makes. If his income have changed since the original child support command was determined, later he needs to contact his attorney to own his child support modified.

As practical advice, I am not sure why you are coming to Yahoo Answers for a stranger's guidance. Your friend's predicament seems amazingly serious, and he needs focused direction that no stranger can provide based on hearsay from you. Your friend requirements to find an attorney ASAP to address his concerns. If he is unhappy near his current counsel, then he desires to find new representation.

You can sue for anything, but that does not be a sign of you will win. Courts usually will look at the finances when changing support agreements. She could be "shooting herself surrounded by the foot" if his fiances are significantly lower than when they divorced.

Is there a canon in the philippines that give previledges to special children?

Answers: hand wat do you penny-pinching by special children? your question is markedly vague. What privileges are you referring to/
?

What is the answer to this contract dispute?

My boss entered a contract to deliver 5000 printers to the department max warehouse on January 10th. On December 15th, my boss called organization max to inform them that the union at his factory only went on strike and that his company would not know how to deliver the printers on time. Office max needed the printers so they ordered from another supplier. On January 3rd, my boss call and said that the strike was settled and that he would know how to deliver the printers after all. Office max said "After you call last month, we established that you breached the contract, so we ordered from someone else. We wont accept the printers from your company." My boss call his attorney and asked, "How could we breach the contract in December if we didn't enjoy to perform until January?" What is the answer to that grill?

Answers: Contracts can be broken if both parties agree.

Your boss advise he could not deliver, and Office Max apparently agreed.

Office Max is under no requisite to wait until the contract expired, once your boss call.

There is no breach.

because your boss informed office max he would not be capable of deliver as agreed. unless there be a clause in the contract
just about beyond his control.. office max have every right to cancel the proclaim.

1) "Force Majeur" unforseen circumstances in supply finances that I cannot fulfill my part of the contract.

2) Perhaps your boss could enjoy entered consultation with labor beside a more good principle attitude and avoided the strike.

3)Or been more liable to shift to more positive attitude after strike vote and delayed force majeur.

4) Perhaps the strike vote was grouping bad hope. By claiming force majeur, your boss may have save Office Max as a client after losing only one mart.

5) If all he lost be money, he came out really okay.

You need to read UCC 2-609 and UCC 2-610, which cover anticipatory repudiation, to find your answer. Office max could be liable surrounded by this situation.

A thorough analysis of anticipatory repudiation requires more than I am willing to type. Read the above section of the UCC, or the section of your textbook that deal with the doctrine. You should know how to figure it out.

What gives my conservatory the right to take away my cell phone?

It seem that the school shouldn't be capable of confiscate personal property. My math teacher, for example, will transport the phone and charge you $10 to get it posterior if you're caught texting in class. Can't put my finger on it, but this sounds resembling it should be illegal to me.

Answers: I find it interesting that children cogitate they have any right excluding to follow the rules set forth by those in officially recognized charged of them.

You are there to revise without devices that would allow you to cheat on a exam.

I used to teach adults within corporate life. I sent race home facing the possibility that they would be fired for not getting the training. Follow the rules or pay the price.

You could move about cry to mommy, maybe she will jump to school and construct a fool of both of you.

Sure, it is very against the law.

But then again you shouldn't article in class. You should remove yourself from the class room if you obligation to use your mobile phone (that's common sense after all).

Back when I be in institution you got hit, later sent down to the principal. Then when you got home you really get in trouble. Don't pilfer your phone to class and you won't get fined.

Maybe Yahoo needs to be investigated roughly its common practices and organization it is affiliated with.?

Answers: I agree near your context. Yahoo seems to pick and choose who is delete and who stays. There seems to be plentifully of fowl language tolerated if it comes from a not here wing point of view. but in attendance is no way to investigate Yahoo, not at smallest from this level, biddable luck.

Maybe you should explain what you are talking nearly. Hard to answer a question next to no facts or explanations.

Are you supposed to be paid for time spent away from home?

my husband is a cell tower tech .he have a company fly him out of ca all the path to boston mass.Iwas just wondering if he should be getting remunerated for his time because of the relocating. he isnt even able to work right know because of the weather .how is he supposed to munch through?

Answers: Only time worked - no special benefits. They must reimburse him for his expenses while away, but no special pay.

This should be included contained by the contract for the job.

When it comes to copywrited material, is it really that times hold changed or are people greedier in a minute?

I remember a time before dvd's, download sites, torrents, etc when ethnic group would put tape over the "protection" on your friends cassette video to copy it for yourself, have two vcr's set up to journal one for yourself. It has other gone on. The only things that hold changed is the medium. In 30 years the movie companies enjoy not folded, nor have the music companies due to copying for personal use. Let's obverse it, most of what is done is done for personal use, not profit. I agree that if you try to sell it -- consequently you should be prosecuted but when it is for personal use, then what have really changed in former times 30 years? Everything says you are not permitted to copy it or even show it to other people--as if. I remember one time a shop decided to enjoy a local video night and show a movie, more or less 20 people showed up and they be fined for copywrite infringment because it had a public viewing short paying a fee to the movie company. Are we so bent on profits that we lost verbs?

Answers: Just because something has gone on for years doesn’t suggest it’s legal or that it should be legally recognized.

You said: “Are we so bent on profits that we lost sight?”
Lost verbs of what? The fact that artists deserve to be salaried for their work? Do you work for free? Would you be offended if someone feel like you should work for free?

As you may hold guessed, I happen to be an artist of sorts. I’m a writer and I not long found one of my books listed on a ‘sharing’ website within ebook form. Now, personally I don’t depend on my royalties as my prime source of income and therefore, I don’t mind if associates share my books--I just want them to read my books. I'm not chiefly concerned with the loss of royalties. However, ‘illegal sharing/copying’ does still affect me, because it decrease my sales and next my publisher isn’t happy, and if they aren’t cheerful long enough, consequently they’ll start rethinking their decision to contract/publish my books.

If you don’t want to rate for a movie, song, book, etc, then don’t, but you don’t hold to right to obtain it for free any, so don’t complain about not human being able to.

I regard as it is probably that too many empire are now trying to profit from pirating that they are clamping down much harder on everyone, even those who are in recent times doing it for personal use.

Also, with the internet, it is easier to track what citizens are doing (downloading.)

OK, firstly, let me explain something to you. Copyright law are different in different countries. Just as an example, in attendance are some pieces of music which are in copyright contained by the US which are out of copyright in the UK and Canada; nearby are others which are in copyright contained by France and Italy which are out of copyright in the US. Also, individual countries hold different national laws when it comes to how copious times you can copy copyrighted material similar to recorded music. In France, you can copy it 8 times for personal use. Personally, I disagree near this (1, 2 copies should be enough!) but I focus having to buy a disc twice because you can't burn a copy for your car is draconian. But the cause for the copyright protection is not so you can copy the CD once or twice for your own use, but so you can't copy it 1,000 times and bequeath 1,000 copies away (or worse, sell them). If the protections be lifted the companies would enjoy no way to control the number of copies made, and I don't blame them for not trusting the public to abide by any agreement to solitary make one or two copies - would you?

The cause you are not allowed to show a movie to a non-paying audience in need permission is because the movie company might own granted those rights to somebody else on an exclusive basis. If they did, and you show the movie, afterwards you are putting the movie company in court peril if they do not enforce their rights. If the video shop had simply get in touch near the movie company and said they wanted to show the movie surrounded by the shop to 20 people, it's promising the movie company would have given them the green light on a gratis (i.e. no-fee) basis, because whoever else they licensed the rights to would not mind it person shown to that small an audience if no admission be being charged. But they would mind if they didn't know nearly it.

What has changed surrounded by the past 30 years is the enthusiasm of copyright in the United States have been extended.

A Felony goes to federal prison?

If someone commits a felony, do they move about to federal prison or state. Which one has the most disorderly offenders?

Answers: It depends on whether it be a fedreal or a state crime. Crimes having to do beside federal property, government official, violations of federal imperative and those comitted whilst crossing state lines are all eligible for federal prosecution. If a personality is tried and convicted by the feds he/she will go to a federal penitentiary NEVER a state one.

The majority of crimes are local and don't involve federal regulation at all unless you include evil immigration which is a FEDERAL crime because it involves illegally crossing federal borders.

State crimes are punished by the state . The convicts run to state penitentiaries or recieve probation or whatever depending on the severity of the crime. Most of the time the passing penalty is carried out it is by the states.

As far as which one have more violent criminals the answer is sheer numbers is the state penitentiaries because near are far more of them. This is also because alot of federal crimes have to do next to corruption, embezzlement, rackateering, bribery smuggling etc. I am not sure what the percentage are though. Murder and assault is usually prosecuted by the state. the major exception would be serial killer and rapists which are also charged by the state but CAN be charged with federal crimes if they be in motion on a multi-state killing,or raping spree.

Hope this answers your ask.

Depends on the court that sentences them.

If you are convicted in Federal Court and are to serve longer than three months (at least possible in my jurisdiction) you do it within a Federal Prison. Earlier than three months and you simply stay in the county jaill

If you are convicted within State Court you go to a state facility.

There are a great deal more people contained by state prisons than in federal prison. Therefore in attendance are a lot more antagonistic offenders within state prison than in federal prison. I believe that most of your federal inmates are surrounded by on non-violent offenses. State prison is where most of your armed robbers, murderers, child molesters, etc. are going to travel.

If it's a state charge they will probably go to state prison.

Some state felony are also against the law on the federal stratum. These are typically things like drug charges, counterfeiting of money, etc. Just because they are also federal crimes contained by addition to state crimes does not necessarily miserable you will go to a federal prison as defiant a state facility. That depends on whether of not the federal agencies pick those cases up.

However, there are some charges that are solely federal charges and those upon conviction you will merely go to federal prison for if you are given an busy sentence at all.

Neither state or federal offenses are an automatic helpful sentence. Whether or not you go to reformatory depends on things like what features of crime it is, the number of counts, and your prior record.

Federal crimes ( duty evasion, kidnapping, bootlegging, interstate flight to avoid prosecution, etc) walk to federal prison. Violations of state law step to state prison

As far as most violent offender, my guess would be state, but that IS only a guess.

All the answers looked apt to me. I will add that near are some misdemeanors that can get you contained by State Prison too, at least here of the not here coast.

Pelican Bay in Northern CA have California's worst. I think Atlanta have the Feds violent offender.

More Questions and Answers:
[749] - [284] - [757] - [534] - [895] - [2234] - [828] - [1636] - [315] - [1332] - [511] - [1272] - [1634] - [1497] - [950] - [1824] - [1474] - [1283] - [1916] - [620]

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

Answer question: