|
|
John F. Carr wrote:
> The concept [of the legal status of "outlaw"] goes back at least
> as far as ancient Rome, with different details.
***
> Would it violate the constitution to declare a person an
> outlaw after trial and conviction for a capita
|
|
|
In article <16iag217m4vnrqdt0shfosgqmfmp5hqa07@4ax.com>,
Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>Sun, 10 Sep 2006 08:30:36 -0400 from Mark A <nobody@nowhere.com>:
>> However, neither the states nor the US federal government have any
>> juris
|
|
|
John F. Carr wrote:
>
> Would it violate the constitution to declare a person an
> outlaw after trial and conviction for a capital crime?
> Say, if somebody escaped from death row. The constitution
> permits courts to terminate the appeal proces
|
|
|
Allan Adler wrote:
> If you see a poster in the Post Office saying that a
> certain person is wanted dead or alive, does that mean
> that anyone who encounters that person has the legal
> right to kill him, no questions asked?
I always interpreted
|
|
|
unknown8866 wrote:
> If you invite someone to your party, can you sue him/her for intruding
> assuming he appears in the party?
I'm assuming you're asking about USA law. Such a suit would be
frivolous, of course, if nothing unusual happened at the
|
|
|
Mon, 11 Sep 2006 07:32:36 -0400 from unknown8866 <unknown8866
@hotmail.com>:
> If you invite someone to your party, can you sue him/her for intruding
> assuming he appears in the party?
No, on two grounds.
(1) "Intruding" is not a cause of action
|
|
|
In article <t5iag2lkrd9ch7tf9ucglc9alhpv7bb8ed@4ax.com>,
unknown8866 <unknown8866@hotmail.com> wrote:
>If you invite someone to your party, can you sue him/her for intruding
>assuming he appears in the party?
Anybody can sue anybody else for anythin
|
|
|
"John A. Weeks III" <john@johnweeks.com> wrote:
> johnny long <johnnylonglong@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> I do not need a discussion what I SHOULD have done, which I am
>> quite aware now. It doesn't help me if my request to find an
>> attorney. Regards
|
|
|
JMW <jmw@event.horizon> wrote:
> "Stuart A. Bronstein" <spamtrap@lexregia.com> wrote:
>
>>Actually they can. What they're not allowed to do is to elicit
>>incriminating statements from you while you are under arrest
>>unless they have read you your
|
|
|
In article <k5iag2p02gg3jn8sku1v7unh4v26iqc620@4ax.com>,
Seth Breidbart <sethb@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <h718g21ik0gv1f3809ogornt3b69j6u001@4ax.com>,
> <decemberelement@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I thought a lease renewal was renewing the expiring le
|
|
|
"Seth Breidbart" <sethb@panix.com> wrote in message
news:k5iag2p02gg3jn8sku1v7unh4v26iqc620@4ax.com...
> However, in your case, they apparently accepted the new lease (since
> they accepted payment under it after the old one expired). That would
> m
|
|
|
decemberelement@gmail.com wrote:
[You signed a new lease after your old one expired. When you
complained to the manager you were told that the new lease was wrong,
that it should have included terms that it did not, and that you had to
sign a ne
|
|
|
>>Jeff Wisnia <jwisnia@conversent.net> writes:
>>> I assumed they did that to embarrass the writers of those checks into
>>> paying up, whereupon their "bad checks" would be removed from the display.
>Christopher C. Stacy <cstacy@news.dtpq.com> wrot
|
|
|
sethb@panix.com (Seth Breidbart) wrote:
> Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>Bzzt! Your First Amendment right peaceably (not "freely") to
>>assemble is a right you have against the government, not against
>>your employer. You never ha
|
|
|
If a borrower puts my name on a vehicle title as collateral for a loan,
am I liable for that vehicle and any damages a driver may cause? If
so, how can I protect myself?
Thank you.
|
|
|
>Barry Gold wrote:
>> But the insurance company's attorney can still be there, coaching the
>> other driver how to present his case. If they really think it's worth
>> it to spend that kind of money to defend a small claims case.
jack <jthree911@ya
|
|
|
Hector Polector wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Currently living in Brooklyn, third month at same apartment. No lease
> was ever signed. Monthly payments are cash only. (Yes it's that type of
> place, please spare me the "never rent a place without a lease..."
|
|
|
"Hector Polector" <iamthespam@gmail.com> wrote:
>Currently living in Brooklyn, third month at same apartment. No lease
>was ever signed. Monthly payments are cash only. . . . .
>The building is a house with three apartment units.
>The landlord has
|
|
