|
|
[ someone (and others in substance) said: ]
>
> In New York a corporation (and perhaps a LLC)
> must be represented by counsel . . . .
. . . except, in N.Y., not any longer necessarily in "small claims"
court (wheter as a defendant or as a plain
|
|
|
My company, a large public sofware firm, has placed me on unpaid
administrative leave. What happened is a law firm secretary told
my employer I had visited that lawyer and provided all that we
discussed. My lawyer has not informed me what I should do
|
|
|
I was involved in a car accident mid September last year. The insurance
companies are threatening to do a 50:50 deal. For several reasons, I feel
the other driver is so obviously in the wrong. One reason is that she failed
to give way on the roundabout
|
|
|
gandoo99-lawsearch@yahoo.com (inder) wrote in message
news:<tmvv205762gmkqqt8obginti5er5ep0fj2@4ax.com>...
> Hi:
> My nephew was working on a bulk carrier with a Hong Kong flag.
> He died due to a gas leak on the ship, and based on the facts we have,
|
|
|
does anyone know if there are any regulations governing online
auctions, other than just the rules of the particular auction site? I
auctioned off multiple items in one auction, and a couple of the
pieces arrived broken, and now I am wondering what wo
|
|
|
"I.E.Z." <iezawils@ptd.net.remove.invalid> wrote in message
news:<pmvv20lda7ovnippqk5ne8g0shssoel3q6@4ax.com>...
> My question is -- does anyone
> have a suggestion to deal with an uncaring postmaster and/or an incompetent
> carrier? We don't know
|
|
|
On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:39:54 -0500, Rico X. Partay <billg@microsoft.com> wrote:
> "Marc Goldberg" <marcgoldberg1962@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:pdrk205ec3nq51kl2k4rrvqq6juplv8lqs@4ax.com...
>
>> What is the best structure to "reverse-liability
|
|
|
My wife is the custodial parent of her two children (15 year old and
12 year old). We have our own personal website where we share photos
of the family. Her children are active in organized sports so most of
these pictures are in fact taken in public
|
|
|
On Sun, 15 Feb 2004, ptsc <ptsc@nowhere.com> wrote re. Ninth Circuit
decides Harlan Ellison v. AOL:
> The [court's] description of Usenet as a "peer to peer
> file sharing network" is particularly egregiously stupid
>. . . [although, in related foo
|
|
|
Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
news:<7p9q20polp7qh47r3cedsc61hrudud5b14@4ax.com>...
> It seems "Arthur L. Rubin" wrote in misc.legal.moderated:
>
> >It may depend on your state (even if, for some reason, there
> >were to be
|
|
|
"Stuart O. Bronstein" <spamtrap@lexregia.com> wrote in message
news:<1lvv20h8jnmp5dm3ilsf59ks0v8dfokk2h@4ax.com>...
> Isaac <isaac@latveria.castledoom.org> wrote:
>
> > In North Carolina, there would still be the risk of adverse
> > possession becau
|
|
|
On 13/2/04 19:40, in article uq9q20lgh4cm708umg88naauq6ppidvitf@4ax.com,
"Chris" <neuroflow@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I'd like to know if this is legal, and if it isn't, how it's not.
You would be at great risk not just for a suit for tax evasion or ab
|
|
|
On 15/2/04 23:23, in article pmvv20lda7ovnippqk5ne8g0shssoel3q6@4ax.com,
"I.E.Z." <iezawils@ptd.net.remove.invalid> wrote:
> My question is -- does anyone
> have a suggestion to deal with an uncaring postmaster and/or an incompetent
> carrier?
Yo
|
|
|
> What happens when the estate of a person (A) sues person (B) for wrongful
> death, and B is A's sole heir (that is, B sues him/herself and collects if
> found reponsible for A's death)? Isn't that profiting from a crime
> (manslaughter or homicide)?
|
|
|
On 15/2/04 23:23, in article vmvv20tk8gdm0m0kuq2t7r6p6tcc3d67gg@4ax.com,
"James Alexander" <jwalex77@comcast.net> wrote:
> That's a pretty arrogant statement.
Sorry you think so.
1) the delete button is your friend.
2) there is a great deal of a
|
|
|
OK, here's the deal:
I think I have a fairly good chance of having my $45,000 in student
loans discharged in a bankruptcy. I'm currently disabled (severe
depression) and unlikely to be able to repay the loans in the future.
But, of course, you nev
|
|
|
On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 14:40:37 -0500, John Penta
<pentaj2REMOVETHIS@uofs.edu> wrote:
>Assume, if you will, that for whatever reason (Suicide plane during
>SotU? I dunno...), the President is killed. As are the Speaker of the
>House, the Pres Pro Tem,
|
|
|
> My mother is 52 and already declared back in Feb. 1997. She is now so
> far in debt again that she (should) declare again. Her yearly income
> isn't anymore than 21K, she has no personal assets, no money in
> savings/bonds/stocks, and a minimal amo
|
|
|
aeiou98764@hotmail.com (Buddys A Gooddoctor) wrote in message
news:<hq9q20hgfnc4vc56s4rmkm37dv8ms177jf@4ax.com>...
> What are the first steps to get an answer to "My doctor
<short version: did X to me. Was doing X>
> within the
> accepted sta
|
|
|
esther8850@hotmail.com (Ronald) wrote in message
news:<0q9q20d8n0eil2vbiviu641mb0q3blh6l5@4ax.com>...
> An 82 year old woman was a "passenger" in a car accident in Los
> Angeles and broke her wrist and knee cap. Her Kaiser insurance plan
> is coverin
|
|
|
Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
news:<7p9q20polp7qh47r3cedsc61hrudud5b14@4ax.com>...
> Can someone explain in laymen's terms the difference between
> ordinary negligence and gross negligence, perhaps with an
> illustrative
|
|
|
On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 18:22:28 -0500, Stuart O. Bronstein <spamtrap@lexregia.com>
wrote:
> Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> It seems "Arthur L. Rubin" wrote in misc.legal.moderated:
>>
>>>It may depend on your state (even if, for som
|
|
|
"Christopher Green" <cj.green@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:5mvv209k630gv9lqb0khn8lon0u9jnqoc4@4ax.com...
>
>
> There is literally no provision for succession beyond the V.P.,
> Speaker of the House, President pro tem of the Senate, and t
|
|
|
On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 18:22:26 -0500, Stuart O. Bronstein <spamtrap@lexregia.com>
wrote:
> Isaac <isaac@latveria.castledoom.org> wrote:
>
>> In North Carolina, there would still be the risk of adverse
>> possession because NC does not require the squ
|
|
|
In article <nkvv20dse2cbhaaeahmkn1ri3l7cid8mqs@4ax.com>,
ptsc <ptsc@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>The finding about Usenet being a peer to peer network is so completely clueless
>I can't imagine any reasoning based on such a factual misapprehension could
>
|
|
|
"Paul Cassel" <paul1@abq.com> wrote:
> Stan Brown wrote:
>> "Paul Cassel" wrote
>>> John Smith wrote:
>>> [rent he paid was stolen from landlord's office]
>>>>
>>>> Am I responsible for paying the apartment office again?
>
>>> I'm unaware of an
|
|
|
cstacy@news.dtpq.com (Christopher C. Stacy) wrote:
> I was in small claims court in Massachussetts the other day,
> and immediately before my case was called, the lawyer from
> the other side went up to the magistrate and chatted with him.
> They t
|
|
|
"Arthur L. Rubin" <ronnirubin@sprintmail.com> wrote in message
news:hmvv20h9vq6i6q8p27dnc04la67tc3o3j2@4ax.com...
> A quick note. I don't know whether it's legal, but some
> former lawyers have stated that one can file as
> "Attorney in Fact", in s
|
|
|
"Christopher C. Stacy" <cstacy@news.dtpq.com> wrote in message
news:8nvv201ss1jr9qop2gc6ltgtu23nerln9m@4ax.com...
> I was in small claims court in Massachussetts the other day,
> and immediately before my case was called, the lawyer from
> the other
|
|
|
In article <skvv20t2p582lhc3ka4deigf8s1p68qh97@4ax.com>,
Paul Cassel <paul1@abq.com> wrote:
>Stan Brown wrote:
>> It seems "Paul Cassel" wrote in misc.legal.moderated:
>>> John Smith wrote:
>>> [rent he paid was stolen from landlord's office]
>>>>
|
|
|
In article <so9q2093t9fg28sipf0qsplsi0kahmq0ng@4ax.com>,
George Hamilton <amchitka@mailexcite.com> wrote:
>A trial court is prohibited from appealing its own decision to an
>appeal court to affirm is decision?
In Massachusetts _state_ courts a judge
|
|
|
It seems "Horrigan" wrote in misc.legal.moderated:
>>Assume, if you will, that for whatever reason (Suicide plane during
>>SotU? I dunno...), the President is killed. As are the Speaker of the
>>House, the Pres Pro Tem, and so on and so forth through t
|
|
|
It seems "Brett Weiss" wrote in misc.legal.moderated:
>Article III establishes the federal judiciary. Nothing in the constitution
>specifically deals with appeals.
"In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and
Consuls, and those i
|
|
|
ptsc wrote:
> The finding about Usenet being a peer to peer network is so completely clueless
> I can't imagine any reasoning based on such a factual misapprehension could
> possibly be correct. It is dead opposite of the client-server paradigm whic
|
|
|
amchitka@mailexcite.com (George Hamilton) wrote in message
news:<so9q2093t9fg28sipf0qsplsi0kahmq0ng@4ax.com>...
> A trial court is prohibited from appealing its own decision to an
> appeal court to affirm is decision? What U.S. Constitution part
> ad
|
|
