|
|
Mike Anderson wrote:
> Morely Dotes wrote:
> > "Stuart A. Bronstein" <spamtrap@lexregia.com> wrote in
> > news:ait9i292u0s428a8l9mde7aql6laehjbe0@4ax.com:
> >
> >> Here's a quote from a US case:
> >>
> >> " United States jurisdiction extends to a
|
|
|
Morely Dotes wrote:
>
> Spamhaus has not stated any intent ot deprive spammers of income. Indeed, I
> suspect that, were it possible, Spamhaus would gladly help spammers find a
> *legitiamte* source of income in exchange for the cessation of spammi
|
|
|
Morely Dotes <morelydotes@spamblocked.com> wrote:
> Mike Anderson <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote
>> It could also be argued that they "intend to deprive the spammers
>> of income"
>
> It is very difficult (on a scale of 1 to 10, it rates about
|
|
|
Martijn Lievaart <m@remove.this.part.rtij.nl> wrote:
> Stuart A. Bronstein wrote:
>> So when someone who commits a negligent tort in one country that
>> causes damage in the US, there's no jurisdiction? I'd like to
>> see some authority on that.
>
|
|
|
"Chadwick Stone©" <chad_stone@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> Stuart A. Bronstein [spamtrap@lexregia.com]
>> Morely Dotes <morelydotes@spamblocked.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Not at all. In order to establish jurisdiction, the plaintiff
>>> must *first* establish inten
|
|
|
Seth Breidbart wrote:
> In article <ukeki2p14j7etbo0vsbelsr62ju3sbs9s0@4ax.com>,
> AndyS <andysharpe@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > So, if a guy sees a pretty girl in the parking lot and thinks that
> >it would be a real kick to rape her, but decides not
|
|
|
In article <7g8ni25afuimhl73lv26o87n5po70rdu0c@4ax.com>,
Philip M. Brewer <pbrewer@bluestem.prairienet.org> wrote:
>Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>> What about the Fifth Amendment against taking private property for
>> public use
|
|
|
sirius33@myrealbox.com <sirius33@myrealbox.com wrote:
So my questions are:
1. Is my insurance company going to wrongly fault me for the accident?
Possibly, but there is no way to predict how a claim will be handled.
Generally, if your comp
|
|
|
sirius33@myrealbox.com wrote:
> I was recently involved in a car accident (3 mos old 2006 Accord) on
> the freeway (65 mph speed limit):
> - a guy in a pick-up truck on the lane to my right cut me off
> - I was going to change to the lane on my left,
|
|
|
sirius33@myrealbox.com wrote:
<OP was victim of hit/run crash on freeway; other vehicle fled, but was
IDed by a witness>
> So my questions are:
> 1. Is my insurance company going to wrongly fault me for the accident?
Probably not, but YMMV. You
|
|
|
sirius33@myrealbox.com wrote:
> I was recently involved in a car accident (3 mos old 2006 Accord) on
> the freeway (65 mph speed limit):
> - a guy in a pick-up truck on the lane to my right cut me off
> - I was going to change to the lane on my left
|
|
|
sirius33@myrealbox.com wrote:
[totaled almost new car]
>
> So my questions are:
> 1. Is my insurance company going to wrongly fault me for the accident?
It may. If I were investigating, I'd say you were imprudent for not
having slowed down to a
|
|
|
OP states that another vehicle caused an accident that totaled his brand-new
vehicle, then drove away. No other vehicles were involved. The OP and
passenger were not injured.
> So my questions are:
> 1. Is my insurance company going to wrongly fa
|
|
|
bgold@nyx.net (Barry Gold) wrote:
> Yes, and there's one case famous in Science Fiction fandom, a
> wedding performed by a ULC minister consisting of the following:
>
> "You two been making it for a while?"
>
> "Yes" "Yes"
>
> "You two wanna
|
|
|
I am a landlord renting an apartment. I signed a lease with a tenant
that begins on November 1, but the tenant asked about moving in early
being that the apartment is vacant. Is there any legal risk involved
on my part in regards to a tenant moving
|
|
|
Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>Mon, 09 Oct 2006 08:05:04 -0400 from McGyver <Greyprof@msn.com>:
>> In rare cases an appeal is a "trial de novo." That means start over,
>> present the evidence again. In most cases, the facts are der
|
|
|
In article <pf8ni2duogk92mjp0ltirtgbkkgk38rsa2@4ax.com>,
Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>Mon, 09 Oct 2006 08:05:04 -0400 from McGyver <Greyprof@msn.com>:
>> In rare cases an appeal is a "trial de novo." That means start over,
>> pre
|
|
|
In article <bkeki29v0f1tm51a0rgbivghjih391it1a@4ax.com>,
Mike Jacobs <mjacobslaw@gmail.com> wrote:
>Sometimes, where the State wins a criminal case and the convict
>(representing himself, typically, in such cases) appeals his conviction
>on some ridic
|
|
|
AndyS wrote:
> fredfighter@spamcop.net wrote:
>
> > Possibly he broke a Federal Law prohibitting the sending of sexually
> > explicit communications over the internet to persons under the
> > age of 18. AFAIK the age of consent in state law is no
|
|
