|
|
=> Vox Populi © wrote:
> "Due Process" is that specific
> legal/court process further defined and codified by law/statute, so
> if personal service is required by statute of the venue in question,
> then it is indeed part of the due process of law.
|
|
|
On 18 Feb 2004 16:24:50 GMT, MikeinAusTX <mikeinaustx@aol.com> wrote:
> My girlfriend got into a big fight the other night -- it was very physical.
> She is now telling me that if i do not agree to pay her $10,000 -- she will
> call the police. What
|
|
|
Someone wrote:
> I dunno-personally I took great plasure in burning my "cards" and escaping
> the police state of america..just cant figure why anybody woulkd want in
> these days
>
So in which bastion of liberty and equality do you now reside
|
|
|
My girlfriend got into a big fight the other night -- it was very physical. She
is now telling me that if i do not agree to pay her $10,000 -- she will call
the police. What are the legalities here?
|
|
|
"=> Vox Populi ©" <vox@popu.li> wrote in message news:<tUOXb.30$Xn3.24644@news.uswest.net>...
> veritas wrote:
> > All of this is quite amusing - but will someone please explain what
> > relevance the subject matter might have in Australia (aus.legal)
|
|
|
I wonder how a chinese citizen would fare if he were picked up at a us
airport for the same reason.
"=> Vox Populi ©" <vox@popu.li> wrote in message
news:8jsYb.66$9B3.18663@news.uswest.net...
> What goes around comes around ...
> Poli
|
|
|
RHR wrote:
>
> On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:13:00 -0800, "Arthur L. Rubin"
> <ronnirubin@sprintmail.com> wrote:
> >> 3. It is the panel which satisfies itself that it has come to the
> >> necessary degree of certainty. The notion that one of the parti
|
|
|
On 2004-02-18, => Vox Populi © <vox@popu.li> wrote:
> Sylvia Else wrote:
>> Someone wrote:
>>> I dunno-personally I took great plasure in burning my "cards" and
>>> escaping the police state of america..just cant figure why anybody
>>> woulkd want in
|
|
|
=> Vox Populi © wrote:
> rumik wrote:
>
>>=> Vox Populi © wrote:
>>
>>>rumik wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Alex Hunsley wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>rumik wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>=> Vox Populi © wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>rumik wrote:
>>
|
|
|
=> Vox Populi © wrote:
>
> Arthur L. Rubin wrote:
> > "=> Vox Populi ©" wrote:
> >>
> >> Arthur L. Rubin wrote:
> >>> "=> Vox Populi ©" wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Arthur L. Rubin wrote:
> >>>>> => Vox Populi © wrote:
> >>>>> No. I want I cite for
|
|
|
>If someone were to reject a piece of registered mail or mail that needs to
>be signed off, does that mean the recipient was never notified in terms of
>the law?
What does "reject" mean?
I can see a judge considering you had adequate notice of wha
|
|
|
I dunno-personally I took great plasure in burning my "cards" and escaping
the police state of america..just cant figure why anybody woulkd want in
these days
Mike
"¤¤ Vox Dei ©" <vox@dei.rex> wrote in message
news:aqdUb.45$nb6.53727@news.uswest.ne
|
|
|
Arthur L. Rubin wrote:
> => Vox Populi © wrote:
>>
>> Arthur L. Rubin wrote:
>>> "=> Vox Populi ©" wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Arthur L. Rubin wrote:
>>>>> "=> Vox Populi ©" wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Arthur L. Rubin wrote:
>>>>>>> => Vox Populi © wrote:
>
>>>
|
|
