|
|
Joe,
>
> My son's case for driving on suspended license was "dismissed with
> prejudice". I have no idea what the "with prejudice" term means. Can
> someone
> tell me?
A court case that is dismissed with prejudice can not be retried at a
l
|
|
|
Darth Ferret wrote:
> My son's case for driving on suspended license was "dismissed with
> prejudice". I have no idea what the "with prejudice" term means. Can someone
> tell me?
The case is closed - cannot be brought to trial again. It's a GOOD
|
|
|
Darth Ferret wrote:
> My son's case for driving on suspended license was "dismissed with
> prejudice". I have no idea what the "with prejudice" term means. Can someone
> tell me?
It means that the charge(s) from that incident cannot be filed again
|
|
|
On Wed, 10 May 2006 11:14:37 -0400, "Darth Ferret"
<noneavailable@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Hi everyone.
>My son's case for driving on suspended license was "dismissed with
>prejudice". I have no idea what the "with prejudice" term means. Can someone
|
|
|
Wed, 10 May 2006 11:14:37 -0400 from Darth Ferret
<noneavailable@hotmail.com>:
> My son's case for driving on suspended license was "dismissed with
> prejudice". I have no idea what the "with prejudice" term means. Can someone
> tell me?
"Dism
|
|
|
"Darth Ferret" <noneavailable@hotmail.com> wrote:
> What does "dismissed with prejudice" mean?
It means (i) that the person or agency suing in whatever is the
lawsuit or other proceeding that was dismissed "with prejudice" will
not be permitted to
|
|
|
Darth Ferret wrote:
> My son's case for driving on suspended license was "dismissed with
> prejudice". I have no idea what the "with prejudice" term means. Can someone
> tell me?
It means the State's case, which they brought against your son, was
|
|
|
On Wed, 10 May 2006 11:14:37 -0400, "Darth Ferret"
<noneavailable@hotmail.com> wrote:
>My son's case for driving on suspended license was "dismissed with
>prejudice". I have no idea what the "with prejudice" term means. Can someone
>tell me?
It
|
|
|
Darth Ferret <noneavailable@hotmail.com> wrote:
>My son's case for driving on suspended license was "dismissed with
>prejudice". I have no idea what the "with prejudice" term means. Can someone
>tell me?
"With prejudice" means it can't be refiled.
|
|
|
In article <mj0462p6boculuhvsj1aof6vivmriamt51@4ax.com>,
Darth Ferret <noneavailable@hotmail.com> wrote:
>My son's case for driving on suspended license was "dismissed with
>prejudice". I have no idea what the "with prejudice" term means. Can
>someo
|
|
|
Son of OP Joe ("Darth Ferret") was charged with driving under a
suspended license. The case was dismissed with prejudice and Joe asks:
> [What is] "dismissed with prejudice"[?]
Case dismissed and person who brought the case doesn't get to re-file
i
|
|
|
"Darth Ferret" <noneavailable@hotmail.com> writes:
> Hi everyone.
>
> My son's case for driving on suspended license was "dismissed with
> prejudice". I have no idea what the "with prejudice" term means. Can someone
> tell me?
It means the pr
|
|
|
"Darth Ferret" <noneavailable@hotmail.com> wrote:
> My son's case for driving on suspended license was "dismissed with
> prejudice". I have no idea what the "with prejudice" term means.
> Can someone tell me?
"With prejudice" means the case is ove
|
|
|
In article <ej04625l62g6fc689844kmdo4dbm55rnrv@4ax.com>,
Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> Sun, 07 May 2006 22:35:56 -0400 from Dick Adams <rdadams@smart.net>:
> > 3) Business may buy them in huge quantities and hold them for
> >
|
|
|
"Barry Margolin" <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote in message
news:9j0462dj4222u784ivnaphohru7r2jmr8p@4ax.com...
>
> The Post Office is betting that some people will lose them or never
> getting around to using them. That's revenue they'll receive now (an
|
|
|
"Dick Adams" <rdadams@smart.net> wrote in message
news:cj0462tvk8slfbda6broq92vpemhuf01ri@4ax.com...
>
> Let's look at a legal aspect here:
> If the postal service were to raise the rate by 3 cents every
> May 7th, Forever Stamps (as an investment)
|
|
|
Dick Adams <rdadams@smart.net> wrote:
>Let's look at a legal aspect here:
>If the postal service were to raise the rate by 3 cents every
>May 7th, Forever Stamps (as an investment) would outperform a
>5% compounded quarterly investment for at least t
|
|
|
>> >The U.S. Postal Service has proposed yet another rate increase,
>> >this one would raise first class postage to 42 cents in May, 2007.
>> >
>> >At the same time they also propose issuing a "forever stamp", which
>> >would also cost 42 cents. This
|
|
|
Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> AIUI, these days the Postal Service is supposed to break even, and
> in particular the cost of a stamp is supposed to cover the cost of
> a letter. While the increases may look large because they're so
|
|
|
OP Phone Frustrated, from Michigan, wrote in part:
>>> If I want to record a conversation, am I legally obligated
>>> to tell the other person I'm recording it?
Meano.Culpa@yahoo.com wrote:
>> Depends on the state. Michigan is a "two-party" state (
|
|
|
Justa Soul wrote:
> I was jailed and indicted for aggravated assault in 2005, based on lies
> of other party, who was also cited for assault. No serious injury was
> involved.
<OP accepted a plea bargain in which serious charges against him were
|
|
|
Stan wrote:
> Joe feels that an action that John took regarding Joe's child was
> inappropriate (it's not anything illegal that I'm writing about) and
> unwarranted, and wants to discuss it with John. His goal is to get
> John to apologize to the chi
|
|
|
In article <ti0462pit5uccljplfcf45t4dp3naersvu@4ax.com>,
Stan <stanleykr@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Joe, of course, feels that when someone takes an inappropriate
>action against his child, he has every right to discuss it with that
>person,
Freedom
|
|
|
In article <ri0462h6atnb5gv3efpejqhiqp0nuaocmh@4ax.com>,
CP <cptrout@gmail.com> wrote:
>I own a home (live in too) in Los Angeles county, CA.
>Property owner next door is thinking of renting to a registered sex
>offender.
>If this happens:
>Do I ha
|
|
|
ob_m wrote (after quoting me):
> >You probably won't find much because such a theory isn't necessary to
> >hold the employer liable for negligent mistakes made by the employee in
> >any event. There is a principle of law called "respondiat superior"
|
|
|
Bob_m <robert@usa.com> wrote:
> 1. I would think that in some cases, it would be harder to prove
> negligence on the employee's part rather than proving negligence
> on the employer's part through scheduling.
It's simply not an issue. If they pr
|
|
|
I'd appreciate some advice.
What is the copyright status of a translation of a translation of a
public domain work?
I often use and study theological works which are French translations
of Syriac texts. If I was to translate the French translation
|
|
|
R,
> If there is an arrearage in child support and the Non-Custodial Parent
> has a will that leaves a specified percentage of the estate to the
> child in the form of some sort of trust which will deal with the
> arreage, can the CP go after other
|
|
|
In article <ji0462h503h35d1rkbgvqnp7rgn2d52moh@4ax.com>,
R <rburdick@mcihispeed.net> wrote:
>If there is an arrearage in child support and the Non-Custodial Parent
>has a will that leaves a specified percentage of the estate to the
>child in the form
|
|
|
On Wed, 10 May 2006 11:14:21 -0400, mcnick62@yahoo.com wrote:
>I live in Nevada which has a one year statute of limitations. I just
>found out that California also has a one year limit. I believe there
>are some states with two year limits. My one
|
|
|
<mcnick62@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I live in Nevada which has a one year statute of limitations. I just
>found out that California also has a one year limit. I believe there
>are some states with two year limits. My one year is up in less than 3
>weeks,
|
|
|
mcnick62@yahoo.com wrote:
> I live in Nevada which has a one year statute of limitations. I just
> found out that California also has a one year limit.
Are you sure? I heard CA recently amended its tort SOL to 2 years.
> I believe there
> are
|
|
|
mcnick62@yahoo.com wrote:
> I live in Nevada which has a one year statute of limitations. I
> just found out that California also has a one year limit. I
> believe there are some states with two year limits. My one year
> is up in less than 3 wee
|
|
|
Barry Gold wrote, in part:
> "That means that the cost of forging a stamp -- labor,
> materials, capital cost of presses, value of time you might
> end up spending as an involuntary guest of the US
> Government, etc., goes up in proportion with the
|
|
|
Dick Adams <rdadams@smart.net> wrote:
> Let's look at a legal aspect here:
> If the postal service were to raise the rate by 3 cents every
> May 7th, Forever Stamps (as an investment) would outperform a
> 5% compounded quarterly investment for at l
|
|
