|
|
X-No-Archive: YES
Stuart A. Bronstein [spamtrap@lexregia.com] has entered into testimony
eruvi2l52ouciquhdf886h21jfnm7e24hc@4ax.com
> sethb@panix.com (Seth Breidbart) wrote:
>> Stuart A. Bronstein <spamtrap@lexregia.com> wrote:
>>
>>> If you do so
|
|
|
Thu, 12 Oct 2006 07:48:05 -0400 from <lrbtav@gmail.com>:
> I was hit with a public intox a while back and have a court date coming
> up. I will be read the charges against me and then decide if I'm
> going to plead guilty or not guilty.
One hopes
|
|
|
ron.natalie@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:iquvi2t38v164gcqb61sb8hhdlh0sp7ckh@4ax.com...
,Last time I financed a car, the loan company actually had a rider that
forgave the "upside down"
part of the loan in the case of a total loss (it helps tha
|
|
|
This is a reminder about the misc.legal.moderated policy on
submissions containing munged headers such as
From: biff@willy.NOSPAMloman.org
1. Posters are free to munge headers (leaving aside forgeries in the
name of an actual third party). Spammer
|
|
|
In article <8quvi2devppfi2ut09k80tvap2urisldq5@4ax.com>,
<fredfighter@spamcop.net> wrote:
>The last time I tried that, about 30 years ago, the bank refused to
>cash it for me because *I* did not have an account at that bank.
What would happen if
|
|
|
In article <fmasi2huv30roha14g7blno4r11su6jj0v@4ax.com>,
Allan Adler <ara@nestle.csail.mit.edu> wrote:
>
>What I would like to know is this (apart from why this hasn't been challenged
>and struck down): if there is a state constitutional ban on athei
|
|
|
Rich Carreiro <rlcarr@animato.arlington.ma.us> writes:
> Allan Adler <ara@nestle.csail.mit.edu> writes:
> > I deplore both the
> > provisions which prevent atheists and clergy from holding office. They
> > are both obviously in conflict with the US
|
|
|
Fri, 13 Oct 2006 16:48:29 -0400 from Barry Gold <bgold@nyx.net>:
> A provision against atheists holding public office is on its face null
> and void because of Article VI.
I don't think so. Art VI applies to *federal* office, on its face at
least.
|
|
|
Thu, 12 Oct 2006 07:46:37 -0400 from Allan Adler
<ara@nestle.csail.mit.edu>:
> I was also informed that 8 states have provisions in their constitutions
> which explicitly prohibit atheists from holding any public office. The
> respondent also quoted
|
|
|
Fri, 13 Oct 2006 16:48:11 -0400 from John F. Carr <jfc@mit.edu>:
> Personally, I
> would prefer the courts follow Justice Thomas' invitation
> to hold that the establishment clause does not apply to
> the states.
You can't be serious.
Allow stat
|
|
|
In article <opuvi2prrkbsqupg6alg8a9l1b8bqnilr6@4ax.com>,
<ron.natalie@gmail.com> wrote:
>John wrote:
>> I have heard in the past that Banks or Credit Unions cannot require you
>> to use their own check vendor unless they provide the checks to you at
|
|
|
ron.natalie@gmail.com wrote:
> John wrote:
>> I have heard in the past that Banks or Credit Unions cannot
>> require you to use their own check vendor unless they provide the
>> checks to you at no cost. I'd like to find support in the law
>> for
|
|
|
D> To get 'vacation pay', which is a check for 40 hours * hourly rate, I
D> have to have worked 1,000 regular hours. I have worked 1067 hours, but
D> 156 of those hours were classified as 'overtime' even though I was not
D> compensated any extra pa
|
|
|
Fri, 13 Oct 2006 16:48:04 -0400 from Dave <bob_villa_dh@yahoo.com>:
> To get 'vacation pay', which is a check for 40 hours * hourly rate, I
> have to have worked 1,000 regular hours. I have worked 1067 hours, but
> 156 of those hours were classified a
|
|
