|
|
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 21:34:27 -0700, " \"- Prof. Jonez©\""
<jonez@norcom.ca>
>> > Then there is that law in many jurisdictions that clearly
>> > prohibits you from proceeding into the intersection
>> > until all other traffic/pedestrians have clear
|
|
|
Seth Breidbart wrote:
> In article <JwWOd.1524$9t2.2648@news.uswest.net>, \"- Prof. Jonez©\"
> <!> wrote:
>
> > No one claimed they would block anything, that I am able to
> > exit the intersection on the yellow, yet opt for whatever reason
> > not
|
|
|
Seth Breidbart wrote:
> In article <lV7Pd.31$kA3.1936@news.uswest.net>, \"- Prof. Jonez©\"
> <!> wrote:
> > Cashew wrote:
>
> > > I can react to a green light instantaneously.
> >
> > Not in this universe, given Heisenberg et. al.
>
> He has adva
|
|
|
Hi
Is there anyone out there who has access to these cases:
C.J.S. v. E.K. 3 FLR 2414 (N.Y. Fam. Ct. 1977)
Warneburg v. Warneburg 6 FLR 2280 (N.Y. Fam. Ct. 1980)
Brittain v Brittain 4 FLR 2046 (N.C.App. 1997)
TIA for any help.
|
|
|
In article <lV7Pd.31$kA3.1936@news.uswest.net>, \"- Prof. Jonez©\" <!> wrote:
>Cashew wrote:
>> I can react to a green light instantaneously.
>
>Not in this universe, given Heisenberg et. al.
He has advance warning of when his light will change,
|
|
|
Thanks.
esnesnommoc@urthlynk.c0m wrote:
> On 14 Feb 2005, Adam Block <ablock@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>
>>I am in the process of reviewing a document dated
>>February 1940 that reads:
>>
>> "Deft. files answer in general denial. Jurisdictio
|
|
|
In article <JwWOd.1524$9t2.2648@news.uswest.net>, \"- Prof. Jonez©\" <!> wrote:
>No one claimed they would block anything, that I am able to
>exit the intersection on the yellow, yet opt for whatever reason
>not to, and exit on the initial seconds of
|
|
|
In article <8phn01ltig8b4arons4hs93phgdt9r7d85@4ax.com>,
usenet@martinobrien.com says...
>If I stop a car length past the STOP line, but otherwise properly at a
>red light, am I doing anything wrong?
Yes, you are technically blocking the intersec
|
|
|
Say not the Struggle nought Availeth wrote:
> Problem in the US on giving notice.
>
> If a person decides to quit working, you can not force him to work.
> Problems with the 13th amendment.
>
> Your remedy is to sue for breach of contract, and pos
|
|
|
On 14 Feb 2005, Adam Block <ablock@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> I am in the process of reviewing a document dated
> February 1940 that reads:
>
> "Deft. files answer in general denial. Jurisdiction
> proved. Sub. tr. and fdg. that plf. is entitl
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am in the process of reviewing a document dated February 1940. The
text reads as follows:
"Deft. files answer in general denial. Jurisdiction proved. Sub. tr.
and fdg. that plf. is entitled to divorce......."
What do the abbreviations sub.,
|
|
|
am concerned about a most grave miscarriage of justice that is on the
cards.
THE MICHAEL JACKSON TRIAL IS GOING TO BE DECIDED BY A JURY, MANY OF WHOM
BELIEVE THAT JAILING M.J. WILL MEAN THEIR HOUSES GET DEVALUED.
Here is the lowdown. I had reason
|
|
|
Richard Truman wrote:
> I am concerned about a most grave miscarriage of justice that is on
the
> cards.
>
> THE MICHAEL JACKSON TRIAL IS GOING TO BE DECIDED BY A JURY, MANY OF
WHOM
> BELIEVE THAT JAILING M.J. WILL MEAN THEIR HOUSES GET DEVALUED.
|
|
|
I have an eight year old son who lives with his mother in Illinois. I will
have to
leave the US and likely not return.
I want to make arrangements for him to receive some documents, and personal
items, strictly of sentimental value, by the time he
|
|
