HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: Maroonbook
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 15:11:12 GMT

In article <1992Dec20.235929.26524@lunatix.uucp> bmiller@lunatix.uucp (Barry Miller) writes:
>One of the local circuit judges came to speak to our legal
>writing class first semester of the first year.  One of my
>classmates -- who was destined for law review from his birth (and
>his life shall ever be a footnote) -- asked what I am sure was a
>brilliant question on legal citation.  The judge, trying not to
>laugh too hard at the question, told him:  "Hell, son, if I can
>find it, you cited it right."
>
>I take it the maroonbook embodies a similar philosophy?

Precisely.  It's also much less expensive than the Bluebook, which, in its
Fifteenth edition, suspiciously adopted some Maroonbook innovations...
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
Newsgroups: misc.legal
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: Re: Adverse Possession
Keywords: Sovereign
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 09:05:21 GMT

In article <19489@smoke.brl.mil> matt@smoke.brl.mil (Matthew Rosenblatt) writes:
>In article <1h524fINNcbl@meaddata.meaddata.com> joem@meaddata.com 
>(Joe Mehrle) writes:
>>In fact adverse possession is most often used against a
>>state, particularly in wild forest areas.  [Joe Mehrle]
>
>The original poster -- the fellow who is wondering whether he
>can use adverse possession or easement by prescription against
>City Hall -- would probably be interested in seeing case citations
>illustrating this statement.
>
>>|> 2)  Can one acquire an easement by prescription against the
>>sovereign?   [Matt Rosenblatt]
>
>>Yes, for the same reason above . . .  [Joe Mehrle]
>
>Again, how about some cases where this has been done successfully?

Well, one case where an exception was made for land held by a sovereign
in its private capacity and not for public use is Hinckley v New York,
234 NY 309 (1922).  There are undoubtably others, but there don't appear
to be enough of them to prevent the prefacing "In general," etc.
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
From: bhayden@teal.csn.org (Bruce Hayden)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Re: Attorney v. Lawyer
Date: 21 Dec 92 15:11:53 GMT
Distribution: misc
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.

cthorne@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Charles E Thorne) writes:

>In article <1992Dec20.4141.28403@dosgate> "nigel allen" <nigel.allen@canrem.com> writes:

>In the United States a notary essentially provides an "official" witness
>to documents (placing a seal on the document) and attesting that the
>person appeared before them, and signed the document.  Courts will not
>accepted documents (such as deeds) which have not been notarized.  Also,
>auto titles must be notarized when transferred.  The only other things
>notaries can do is take depositions.

Note that this is changing - in the Federal system we use mostly 
declarations instead of affadavits (witnessed by a notary).

>Notaries pass a state exam and are certified by the state.  Lawyers become
>life-time notaries, whereas non-lawyer notaries must renew they notary
>charter (until recently, in Ohio, non-lawyer notaries could only practice
>in their county of residence -- but could also become notaries in any
>adjoing county).

This is state by state. In Colorado all you have to do is post a bond.
I was a Notary long before I was an attorney.
 
Bruce E. Hayden
(303) 758-8400
bhayden@csn.org
From: whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com (sohl,william h)
Subject: Re: Property going to the state
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 92 15:45:57 GMT

In article <sBeFwB1w164w@cellar.org> hacksaw@cellar.org (Hacksaw) writes:
>My grandmother has recently taken ill and will probably spend the rest of her 
>life in a nursing home. Medicare is currently paying for care, but her limit 
>is about to run out(100 days). 
> 
>She does have a property that will be taken by the state to help pay for 
>expenses after the hundred days. The family does have power of attorney of 
>her assets. Is there a way we can sell the home just prior to it being 
>confiscated by the state?
> 
>We've already talked to a lawyer and getting answers from him is like pulling 
>teeth. He still hasn't answered the question forthright. 
>
>Any responses would be greatly appreciated.

I'd start by getting in touch with another lawyer.  That isn't meant to
sound cute, but there's no reason that any professional (lawyer, doctor,
dentist, etc.) should not answer any and all legitatimate questions
you may have.  That's what they are getting paid for.  If you aren't
satisfied, then change lawyers.

Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!cc!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  whs70@cc.bellcore.com
Newsgroups: misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.president.clinton
From: bhayden@teal.csn.org (Bruce Hayden)
Subject: Re: Weinberger's Pardon
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 06:01:50 GMT

dan@cae.prds.cdx.mot.com (Dan Breslau) writes:

>bhayden@teal.csn.org (Bruce Hayden) writes:

>>busta@vicki.enet.dec.com writes:


>>>  The big deal is that Reagan/Bush and company felt they could do
>>> anything they damn well pleased even though Congress and most of
>>> the American people said NO to giving military support to the Contras.

>>Most of the American people?? Where do you get that?? 
>>This was a policy dispute between a Republican president and a 
>>Democratic congress. You forget that Reagan was elected by these
>>same people that you assume so glibly opposed his policies, by
>>a margin significantly higher than Slick Willy's "Mandate". 

>And that vast Democratic majority in Congress was clearly imposed
>on the American people by a vast Communist conspiracy.

Maybe - with incumbant protection that was running 98% retention
rate in Congress. How do you compete if your oponent mails all
of your possible constitutents 3 times a year, then gets your
mother her medicare.

Note also that Reagan had more votes than all of the democrats
in either one of the houses. 

Bruce E. Hayden
(303) 758-8400
bhayden@csn.org
From: uctlxpd@ucl.ac.uk (Peter Bartlett)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Re: Copyright of personal likeness?
Date: 30 Dec 92 14:17:26 GMT
Organization: Bloomsbury Computing Consortium

tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com (Terry Carroll) writes:

>In article <1992Dec27.153503.20181@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, 
>ddaye@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (David C Daye) writes:
>> I'm curious about a person's rights to his/her likeness.  Do ordinary
>> citizens have any, to the extent that permission to publish a photo
>> of them is ever required? 

>Generally copyright isn't a source of such protection.  There is a "right of 
>puiblicity" that might be being violated, but I don't know the elements of 
>that, so I'll refrain from attempting an answer in favor of someone who does.

Terry is right; the issue isn't copyright.  There is some protection offered,
however.  It is usually invoked by celebrities whose voices or "images"
are mimiced in advertisements.  Thus there was a case (I think) where 
Carol Channing sued a jeweller for using a Channing impersonation
to sell diamonds (Channing herself had been offered the contract, but 
had turned it down, I believe), and she won.  Bette Midler has also 
been involved in this sort of litigation, I believe.  I have always
assumed these actions to be based in law on the tort of passing off,
but I may be quite wrong-- I haven't actually had occasion to read them.

More interesting for David's question will be the outcome of a French
case involving the poster from the 1940's of a Paris couple kissing, 
by that French photographer whose name begins with D-- (Delveaux, maybe?).
The couple has sued under French law for a piece of the action.  There
was an article on this in the Guardian (UK newspaper) in the last month
or so, if David or anyone else is interested.

peter.
From: matt@smoke.brl.mil (Matthew Rosenblatt)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Re: Embryos as Property?
Summary: . . . you should have been born a boy.
Keywords: Mazda v. Harriman
Date: 23 Dec 92 17:39:16 GMT
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Lab, APG MD.

In article <Bzpx2C.87v@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu 
(Herman Rubin) writes:

>Then there is the problem of carrying the child.  This corresponds, in
>the photographic analogy, to the developing and printing process.  Again,
>the photo shop is paid for this, but has no rights from this to the
>photograph.  Nor does the photo shop have the right to destroy the
>photograph.  While a child is not a photograph, and the analogy is
>not perfect, it does point out the problems of joint rights of the
>biological parents, at least until these are relinquished.  [Herman Rubin]

I think it's a darned good analogy!  And I'd take it further:  The 
whole purpose of a photo shop is to develop and print pictures.  Any
photo shop operator who doesn't like the idea of developing and printing 
pictures should not have opened a photo shop in the first place.  

A photograph is made up of areas of light and areas of darkness.
Without the contrast between the light and the darkness, there would
be nothing worth looking at in the photograph.  The "photographic
analogy" can be seen as encapsulating the great contrast in the
Universe between the forces of Light (e.g., Truth, Justice, Freedom,
Yiddishkeit, Ivy, and the American Way) and the forces of Darkness
(e.g., ENVY, RESENTMENT, Marxism, Fascism, Idolatry, War, Feminism, 
Pestilence and Death).  Blasted be the bones of the photo shop operator 
who destroys a single photograph, for it is as if he destroyed an entire 
Universe.

					-- Matt Rosenblatt
                                        (matt@amsaa.brl.mil)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"Die Knechtschaft dauert nur noch kurze Zeit."
From: antartic@byron.u.washington.edu (how?)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: can a tenant who brings a car prowler have parking priv. revoked?
Date: 30 Dec 1992 10:44:02 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: byron.u.washington.edu

 I manage a small apartment building to be able to live without paying rent.
 We recently caught the boyfriend of one of the tenants opening the hood of
 a vehicle which belongs to a third tenant.  Although he claimed to just
 having been taking a look at the old V-8 engine, this type of behavior 
 makes our tenants very uncomfortable.   Much more when recently somebody 
 broke the window of a car to steal a CD player. 

 Can anybody help me with the following legal questions:

	1) Opening the hood of a vehicle in a private garage is a crime.
           I believe so.  But what is its name? It is not theft since 
	   he does not seem to have attempted to remove anything. 
	   Is it some kind of trespassing (quare clausum fregit)?

	2) Since parking is a different contract, not included with the
	   rental of the apartment,  would it  be possible to  cancel
	   the parking   privileges of this tenant?  After all it is
	   her boyfriend who uses the garage most of the time,  using
	   a key which she gave him.
	   Or would it be possible to ban him from the garage?

 Any answers or ideas will be greatly appreciated.

 Joan
Newsgroups: misc.legal
From: srm@world.std.com (Stevens R Miller)
Subject: Re: Maroonbook
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 00:47:28 GMT

mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin) writes:

>After the first year, I abandoned Bluebook cite form almost
>entirely--choosing instead to focus on whether readers could find the case
>I was citing based on the information I provided.

I agree and approve.  "A Uniform System of Citation" is neither uniform,
nor is it a system.  But boy can it help you cite!  With all its
"accords, Cf.s, compares, but sees and e.g.s," the Bluebook has
actually been the axis on which cases have been known to turn (cite
if you need it).  As a law review note mentioned, the editors of the
Bluebook are the only law students in the country who can wake up in
the morning, state, "today I shall change the nature of jurisprudence
in America," and then actually proceed to do so before nightfall.  What
nonsense!  If only it were truly a system, I'd love it.  But I can never
find the form of citation I need, without a brute force search; the
index and contents are useless.  What a joke on the rest of us, but who
can argue with Columbia, Harvard, Penn and Yale?
-- 
Stevens R. Miller J.D.
Newsgroups: misc.legal,talk.environment,sci.environment,alt.activism
From: byrnes@sunsmart.dab.ge.com (Arthur Byrnes (ATS))
Subject: Re: Government to Grant Swift Endangered Species Act Protection to Hundreds of Imperiled Species
Organization: /util/lib/news/organization
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 21:25:49 GMT

In article <1hnhckINNnna@gap.caltech.edu> carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU writes:
>
>You make such a nice sheep.  Never questioned the propaganda they fed you in
>high school civics class, have you?  Please answer the following questions:
>    1)	When's the last time your vote mattered in an election?
>    2)	When's the last time an election was decided largely based on the
>	question of who had the bigger advertising budget?
>Now, please reevaluate your claim that "[u]nder a democratic government you can
>choose the rule makers."

Certainly, the system is biased to keep the powerful in power, but it is not
as bleak as you make it sound.

Your vote counts in many elections, in those that it doesn't it is because 
you don't want what the rest of your area wants.  Many elections are won or
lost because of 1 vote.

A local election here in Florida was just won by the person who had a really 
low advertising budget. He beat the powerful politician who had the backing of
the rich and powerful folks, but he was defeated by the voters.

Under a democratic system, the majority chooses the rule makers.  But, our 
system has a major flaw, too many people don't vote.  The other flaw is that
the media ignores the people with low ad budgets.


--
Arthur J. Byrnes

Disclaimer; These views are those only of the author, Arthur.
Newsgroups: misc.legal
From: ptrei@bistromath.mitre.org (Peter Trei)
Subject: Re: Know the source of Liberty's quote, "tired,huddled masses"?
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 19:04:53 GMT

In article <7kRLwB5w165w@netlink.cts.com> gregb@netlink.cts.com (Greg Beron) writes:
>lion@netcom.com (carl loeber) writes:
>
>> i
>> 
>> Anyone know where that phrase derived on the Statue of Liberty?
>> 
>
>It's part of a poem by Emma (?) Lazarus. 

     The quote is from "The New Colossus", a poem by Emma Lazarus,
which is an ode to the Statue of Liberty. It closes:

     Give me your poor, your tired,
     Your huddled masses yearning to breath free.
     Send these, the tempest-tossed, to me:
     I lift my lamp beside the Golden Door!

     Liberty stands on a small island in New York Harbour. Nearby is
the larger Ellis Island, for many years the main immigrant processing
station for the United States. Millions of immigrants (including my
grandfather) spent their first day on US soil in the Liberty's shadow.

>  The full text of the poem is on the tablet Lady Liberty is holding in
> her left hand.

>-Greg

     Nope. The statue is a gift from France. The poem was written
years later (I doubt that Bartholdi had every heard of Emma Lazarus).
The tablet bears a date: IV JULY MDCCLXXVI.

     The poem's text is on a brass plate attached to the pedestal of
the statue. If you visit the museum of immigration which wraps around
the base you can see it.
	
							Peter Trei
							ptrei@mitre.org
Xref: sparky misc.legal:21988 talk.politics.misc:66101
From: mark@whizbang.wariat.org (Mark W. Schumann)
Newsgroups: misc.legal,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Weinberger's Pardon
Distribution: world
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 93 23:25:42 GMT
Organization: The Software Sweatshop, Cleveland, Ohio USA
Reply-To: mark@whizbang.wariat.org


Scott McClure writes:

!Right, like the Clinton administration will be any different.  It's always
!the same.  It doesn't matter if it's Republicans or Democrats.  Sometimes,
!you have to do "unpopular" and "politically incorrect" things to get
!the job done.  It's the way the world works.  It may not sit well with
!the average citizen whose only link to the rest of the world is CNN Headline
!News.

What Bush's people did was not unpopular, nor was it politically
incorrect.  It was merely very, very illegal.

What a condescending attitude.

--
Mark W. Schumann/3111 Mapledale Avenue/Cleveland, Ohio 44109-2447 USA
Domain: mark@whizbang.wariat.org                      CIS: 73750,3527
"We're not nuts or anything; I mean *I'm* not nuts." <whizbang!judy>
Newsgroups: misc.legal
From: rsilver@world.std.com (Richard Silver)
Subject: Paperwork trails - email vs. snail mail
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 15:20:55 GMT


The header says it. I wish to generate some trails of correspondence
to (hopefully) avoid problems in the future. Is there a legal
distinction between the two mediums for this purpose. Thanks.

 
Newsgroups: misc.legal
From: kennedy@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Ralph Kennedy)
Subject: Re: Pre-Sex Contract
Keywords: Guilty; Studs'n'Sluts
Organization: Arizona State Univ, Tempe
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 18:17:09 GMT

matt@smoke.brl.mil (Matthew Rosenblatt) writes:
> that is all to the good, because man ought not to be having sex except
> with a woman to whom he has made a commitment that he will support her
> and any children they may bring into the world; that is, except with
> a woman he has married.

     Wow.  Is this guy for real?

     What a buffoon.

--Ralph Kennedy      {ames,gatech,husc6,rutgers}!ncar!noao!asuvax!kennedy
                        {allegra,decvax,ihnp4,oddjob}--^
                                          ^---------------The Wrong Choice
                             internet: kennedy@asuvax.asu.edu
From: wb8foz@skybridge.SCL.CWRU.Edu (David Lesher)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Re: Diplomatic Immunity
Date: 24 Dec 1992 01:06:17 GMT
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex
Distribution: misc
Reply-To: wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu (David Lesher)
NNTP-Posting-Host: skybridge.scl.cwru.edu

Others said:
# 
# If you are a diplomat
# posted outside your home country and break a law in another country, you
# may escape prosecution in the other country, but you may be prosecuted
# under your home country's laws.

Err, maybe...
The mission grounds, and interestingly, also residences of those on the
Dip List, are not part of the host country - rather they are part of
home country. When you enter an mission, you cross an international
border.

But, things get a little more complicated. In the case of the United
States, the first ugly question is: What state are you in? Errr,
well... Remember, many, many things are NOT violations of federal law,
but state ones. (Historic example: when JFK was assassinated by
[Oswald, the Mob, the CIA, Publisher's Clearing House], what federal
crime was committed?) Another hassle - what state do you vote in?

Then I'm told by informed sources, there is little or no case law about
crimes committed on such extra-territorial locations. My source told me
a story of a case he had investigated while in Army CID. A GI had
married a local woman. He named her on his GI life insurance policy.

The marriage failed when she walloped him on the head with the
tradition blunt object, while in their USArmy housing.  But the Army
passed prosecutation to the {local} goverment. They declined to pursue
the case, despite a confession, as I recall. She was free & clear.

The widow, being a citizen by marriage, moved to the US. She then sued
to collect the life insurance! She won.....

--
A host is a host from coast to coast..wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu
& no one will talk to a host that's close..........................
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
Xref: sparky misc.legal:21687 sci.crypt:6123
From: amanda@intercon.com (Amanda Walker)
Newsgroups: misc.legal,sci.crypt
Subject: Re: PGP use Ethical and Legal Questions
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 11:13:14 -0500
Organization: InterCon Systems Corporation
Distribution: world
Reply-To: amanda@intercon.com (Amanda Walker)
NNTP-Posting-Host: chaos.intercon.com
X-Newsreader: InterCon TCP/Connect II 1.1b26

rick@ee.uwm.edu (Rick Miller) writes:
> This same thing confronts *anyone* who contracts labor of just about any 
> sort. What about RSA/PKP?  They've undoubtedly known of PGP 2.1, yet 
> have not taken any action (that I know of) to defend their patent... 
> this signifies approval by default in my eyes.

Patent law allows selective enforcement--PKP's failure to sue anyone over
the use of PGP does not weaken their patent rights.

> The RSAREF license forbids any changes (other than 
> those needed to port it, in C only, to other architectures).

False.

> I'm sure that someone 
> could find a way to run their algorithm more efficiently, quicker, etc. 
> ... but that's not allowed. 

Yes, it is--read the current RSAREF license.  As an example, RIPEM includes
several performance enhancements to the vanilla RSAREF.



Amanda Walker
InterCon Systems Corporation
From: wb8foz@skybridge.SCL.CWRU.Edu (David Lesher)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Re: Diplomatic Immunity
Date: 23 Dec 1992 01:01:51 GMT
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex
Reply-To: wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu (David Lesher)
NNTP-Posting-Host: skybridge.scl.cwru.edu

Don't expect the Boob Tube to have things correct...

There are several degrees of diplomatic immunity. Diplomatic officers
differ fron consular officers who differ from other staff members.

You have immunity ONLY when your name and title are submitted to, AND
ACCEPTED BY, the host government. Your government can waive your
immunity (i.e. throw you to the wolves) if they feel like it.  The host
government, lacking that, can declare you PNG and boot you out.

You can write to the Office of Foreign Missions, Department of State,
Washington DC 20520 for more details.

--
A host is a host from coast to coast..wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu
& no one will talk to a host that's close..........................
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433