Datasets:

vblagoje

/

Law-StackExchange-Deduplicated

like 0

UK - Is there a legal limit to the profit margin of an item or service?

A friend of mine is adamant that a business is legally bound to not exceed a "fair" price for an item or service based on the cost of materials and hours of labour used. He claims that businesses have gotten into deep trouble over it. I told him that this was nonsense: even if one could argue that such a system were morally correct and/or beneficial to the economy, it would be impractical to implement. I'm interested in the UK mainly but other countries are acceptable.

Unless there is a law preventing you, you can charge whatever you like for your goods and services. There are lots of laws that prevent you. Just a short list, you cannot: Charge more than the regulated price if you are in a price regulated industry (e.g. telecommunications ) Collude to fix prices Form a cartel Abuse your market power : this prohibits practices such as predatory pricing, bundling, etc. Sell at a higher price than advertised Profiteer to benefit from unexpected shifts in demand However, assuming you are a normal business in a normal industry with a healthy level of competition (e.g. hairdresser, plumber, engineer, lawyer etc.) you can set your price anywhere you want.

Can a patient record interactions with their care providers under HIPAA?

A friend of mine is currently in a hospital where the staff have told her ( verbally ) on multiple occasions that "her stay will be covered by her insurance". Yet, she received several thousand dollars in medical bills recently, from the institution itself and not her insurance company. She has received some things in writing, but not as much about the financial process as she would have hoped (and nothing related to the bill she currently has). Thus, she is wondering if she can record her verbal interactions with hospital staff in order to hold them accountable if she is told that insurance will cover the costs, but she still receives a medical bill. This could be seen as an invasion of privacy of the care provider(s); yet it pertains to her case and since they have sidestepped conversations about giving her the official financial paperwork, or written consent that what they say is actually true (they could be saying it's true just to get more money out of her), it seems that this would be legal to do. As far as I understand it, HIPAA is meant to protect patients from care providers disclosing their medical information. Nothing I've read ( HIPAA Patient rights ; HIPAA disclosures to family and friends ) has anything about a patient's right to disclose their own information to whomever they want (in this case, family). Can she legally record her conversations with her care providers under HIPAA? If so, what would be required on her part in order to ensure that said recordings would hold up in court if, in fact, staff were intentionally or unintentionally lying to her in order to bill her? Yes I know it's highly unlikely that they would bother not billing insurance and try to screw her over. It's a long story, insurance claims have been difficult, just trying to figure out how to help her not rack up $10k+ in medical bills due to unintentional or intentional fault on the side of the care providers.

It is correct that HIPAA does not restrict what patients do. Recording a conversation may be governed by federal or state law: this is a good guide (check the relevant state law, in particular whether this is in a two-party state). Insurance companies never bill patients, but they do send notices saying "here's what you must pay" (which should match what the hospital bills). Note that apart from the billing department (whom patients do not see), medical staff including check-in receptionists do not and cannot know in real time what is actually covered for an individual, and they only give guesses. This article and the follow-up lightly discusses patient-responsibility issues. It would be interesting, but expensive, to see whether suing a hospital for their staff being wrong about insurance can get you any relief.

Does the death of a party involved in the execution of a will mean that they do not inherit?

A friend of mine is engaged in a lengthy probate process over her inheritance from her parents with her brother as the executor. Without getting into details of why it's been so protracted, it's been going on for well over a year now with all of the attendant drama and legal measures. Her health has been poor, and recently she's been worried that she might die (with attendant nightmares of parties involved plotting to hasten the situation), effectively turning the entire inheritance over to the remaining sibling (which yes, the inheritance wouldn't do her much good there, but her plans, including her will, involves disbursing her assets to various friends and charitable interests). So, my central question is, does the death of an inheritor during the probate process result in their "share" reverting to the remaining inheritors? This is a Pennsylvania case, for the sake of state law.

The common law rule was that to inherit you have to outlive the decedent from whom you are inheriting, and that the inheritance would pass to your estate if you died before distribution was made. Statutes in some jurisdictions provide that someone must survive for a longer period than that to be eligible to inherit, often five days, in order to simplify the factual issues in the common situation of a joint accident. Pennsylvania is one such state . But a will or trust can deviate from the default rule, and in U.S. practice, driven by federal estate tax laws, it isn't uncommon to require someone to survive the decedent by at least six months to inherit from them under an instrument. In this case, where more than a year has passed since the death, the inheritance would not lapse for these reasons. It also isn't uncommon for a trust, either established during life, or established at death, to provide that distributions from the trust are made at the discretion of the trustee and to require in those cases that the person receiving the distribution also be living at the time of the distribution. These trusts also typically contain specific provisions that spell out the rights of a beneficiary who dies before the trust is fully distributed.

Are municipalities responsible for rat problems?

A friend of mine is having some problems with rats along with a handful of his neighbors. He is under the impression that the city should be coming out to get rid of them since it's a "health issue". Is there any validity to his reasoning?

It depends on where you are. Typically, rodents inside a rental must be removed by the landlord. In Tukwila , ch. 6.16.030 under health and sanitation says It is unlawful for the owner or occupant to fail to reconstruct or repair [buildings of various types, controlling in various ways] for the purpose of preventing rats, mice, or other rodents from gaining entrance thereto; and it is also unlawful for the owner of [things rats eat] to fail to adequately protect the same to prevent such rodents from gaining access to or coming in contact therewith. This does not govern rodent "outside" (either on private property or on public lands): the city has absolutely no responsibility for rat control. A similar ordinance exists in Kirkland , except that 21.41.302(e) says "The owner or occupant of real property shall keep buildings and premises free from rats, mice and other rodents", where "premises" includes the land (thus, it is the land-owner's responsibility). The "owner" is defined as any person, agent, operator, firm or corporation having a legal or equitable interest in the property; or recorded in the official records of the state, county or municipality as holding title to the property; or otherwise having control of the property, including the guardian of the estate of any such person, and the executor or administrator of the estate of such person if ordered to take possession of real property by a court so Kirkland must eliminate rats in its parks. But there is an exception that The provisions of this section shall not apply to wetlands, unimproved parks, greenbelts or other unimproved property if the property owner or occupant has not committed any acts or omissions that increase the likelihood of rat, mice or other rodent infestation and it's not clear whether there are any improved property owned by the city that has rats. King County (which contains Tukwila and Kirkland) does not appear to have any rodent control ordinances apart from one pertaining to kennels, not surprisingly since most of the county is out in the woods. There are often municipal agencies that provide "assistance" in rodent control (not that they do it, but they may tell you what to do), but generally the responsibility is on the property owner.

Can withdrawal of funds from bank account by a relative be a basis for criminal case?

A friend of mine is in need of desperate guidance. She lives in UAE and is of Indian origin. Her husband died of cancer three years ago and had 401k with Fidelity. Suspecting his year-long battle with the disease, he withdrew the funds from 401K to his bank account. Her husband was working for an Airline and had properties in UK and UAE. His nephew who works for a investment bank in the USA, withdrew a large sum of money > 500k$ using his userid and password (She does not know how did he get hold of the login credentials as her husband never gave to him) to his bank account in the USA. Her husband died three years ago. She came to know only after 3 months of his death. Now her husband's family is after his property and all his bank balances. There are lawsuits in UK and UAE between her and her husband's family for the cash and property. But in UAE the wife gets only 1/8 if Syria law is applied but goes to wife if Hindu law is applied. Can a criminal case be filed now against his nephew for illegally withdrawing funds two days before his passing? The bank refused to take any action as it was withdrawn using login id and password.

A person who accesses a bank account without authorization and transfers money violates the Identity Theft and Electronic Fund Transfer Act and may be fined and imprisoned. This is a federal crime, so it would be federal prosecutors who pursue any criminal charges (if that are persuaded that the access was unauthorized). The bank cannot do anything – it's up to someone else to establish that a crime was committed. I assume that the husband died without a will, and was a UAE native Muslim, so Sharia law of inheritance applies. In case he was an Indian expatriate, Indian law may apply (then the question of his religion arises again because of the different inheritance laws). See this article for some of the complications and conditions for non-Muslim inheritance. Of course, the UK courts may disagree at least w.r.t. the property held in the UK.

What is the standard way to address written statements presented as evidence in a civil case?

A friend of mine is suing someone. I (and others) witnessed all of the violations that are claimed, but I'm unable to attend the hearing in person for various reasons (mainly that I've moved out of state). I'm writing a statement for my friend to present in the case, and wasn't sure how to address it. My plan was to use To Whom It May Concern or To All Interested Parties: or To the court or Dear <Judge's Name>, or Your honor, complainants, respondents, and witnesses: But I don't know that any of these are considered appropriate. Most likely I will choose the first. What is the standard form of address in written statements to be presented during civil proceedings? Also, who is actually being addressed here?

As the answer by Iñaki Viggers says, you should submit an affidavit, not simply a letter to the court. An unsworn letter will probably not be admissible at all. It is common for a witness to tell his or her story to the lawyer for the side that wishes to use the affidavit, and for the lawyer to then draft the actual affidavit in such a way that it will be acceptable to the court where it will be used. Then the lawyer sends it to the affiant (the person who would be a witness if s/he came to court, who is making the affidavit) with instructions. Generally an affidavit must be notarized or otherwise sworn to in front of an appropriate official. However, a person can draft his or her own affidavit. It is usual for it to be headed with the name and case number of the case where it will be used. It should include a statement that everything in it is true, and that the affiant swears (or affirms) this under penalty of perjury. It should include only relevant facts that the affiant has personally witnessed, not anything heard from anyone else, or guessed at or deduced. The facts should be stated clearly and simply. The affidavit should be signed in the presence of a notary, who will witness the signature and the oath that the contents are true. This WikiHow page describes the process in detail, with a template form.

Overseas ERP consequences

A friend of mine is worried about a certain thing he did a couple of months ago. Assume he lied about his age when he was 17 (now 18), and did erotic roleplay (ERP) with another individual who also lied about their age, and claimed to be over 18. This friend of mine lives in an overseas country, for example, Turkey while the other person lives in the US. My friend asked for their age multiple times, and asked for their birthday to confirm and actually got confirmation that they were an adult (no actual IDs were sent). There were no actual, real life pictures sent or received. Just drawings and chatting. Could my friend get into trouble for something he did when he was also a minor? Could he be arrested when he visits the US? Thank you.

This is unlikely to give rise to criminal charges in the U.S., if the bare bone facts of the question are all that is involved. It does not count as child pornography. But possible offenses might include contributing to the delinquency of a minor (a minor misdemeanor), or perhaps enticing a minor to travel in interstate commerce for sex, neither of which are likely to come up in a case where no travel occurs until both parties are adults. The potential offenses, unlike child pornography offenses themselves, would generally include defense for good faith mistakes regarding age. The situation in Turkey could be more serious. While I can't identify a particular offense, if the participants were of the same sex, even though homosexuality is not outright banned in Turkey, as it is in many predominantly Islamic countries, this could be characterized as an "offense against public morality" in Turkey. In either a same sex or opposite sex circumstance, it might be characterized in Turkey as some form of illegal seduction, or perhaps as some implicit form of blasphemy. Even if it didn't give rise to criminal charges, it might also be used as a basis for severe parental discipline, or as a basis for finding that someone lacked "good character" in a civil context, in either country. Of course, unless the interaction is known, identified with real people, and brought to the attention of law enforcement, nothing would happen.

Is it legal to give a friend money to avoid taxation in the UK?

A friend of mine owns a company in the UK. I live in Germany. He wants to transfer some money into my bank account in order to not pay as much tax when the taxation stuff is done, and afterwards, he wants to transfer the money back. This seems illegal to me, but he insists that it's legal as long as I say "it was a gift". But this is still wrong to do. Am I correct?

This is probably a scheme designed to avoid a tax of some kind (or perhaps to conceal the fact that no taxes were reported in income from the asset). My first guess would be that it would be to evade a wealth tax on net worth assessed on a given date each year, but Germany's wealth tax was struck down in violation of the German constitution in 1995. Another possibility is that what is being called a "gift" to you is being reported as an "expense" or capital investment in a depreciable asset, by him or one of his companies, thereby reducing an income tax burden. On one hand, if this isn't truly a gift and you cooperate by receiving the asset and then returning it, you are at a minimum you are knowingly conspiring to participate in evasion of German or UK taxes (which is a crime for both of you, one that Germany is unlikely to seek your extradition to prosecute if the taxes evaded are German, but the UK would prosecute if the taxes evaded were UK taxes). At worst, are engaged in money laundering which might be prosecuting as a crime in the U.K. too. Money laundering is basically concealing the source, ownership or purpose of assets to evade some other law, and is a crime. For example, the story about reducing taxes might be a lie and the true reason might be to hide assets from a creditor, a divorcing spouse, or assets obtained illegally through a criminal enterprise. The fact that he was really doing something more than evading taxes wouldn't be a defense if he was really doing something more nefarious, as you still knew that the money was being laundered. Even if it was found to be merely a "fraudulent transfer" to you while he was insolvent, rather than true money laundering, someone could still sue you to get the money improperly transferred to you back, possibly together with legal fees and costs and interest and civil penalties. On the other hand, if it is a true gift (and your friend would be in no legal position to argue otherwise), you could alway just keep the money he gave to you with an understanding that it be returned, although that would be a betrayal of his trust, arguably an act defrauding him which he could complain against you criminally for (even if he couldn't sue to get the money back), and at a minimum would permanently destroy the friendship. Overall, the safest course of action would be to decline to participate in this arrangement as it is probably illegal.

A Penny for Your Thoughts: Can You Evict a Tenant for Paying Rent in Pennies?

A friend of mine owns an apartment complex in NJ (USA) with multiple rentable units and is having difficulty with a particular tenant who insists on paying his rent in coins (pennies, nickels and dimes - but mostly pennies). I was asked to provide my two cents on the matter. My quandary is as follows: Generally a business is under no obligation to accept pennies as a form of payment. Department of the Treasury states that: no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services. However, it is unclear how this concept applies to a situation where a tenant is using pennies to pay for his rent and the landlord is refusing to accept pennies as a form of payment. The lease between the landlord and tenant does not stipulate that the tenant must pay using a specific form of money. However, it does allow the landlord to evict if the tenant does not pay the rent within 60 days after it is due. If the tenant offers to pay rent in pennies & the landlord refuses to accept payment, does that mean that the tenant is in violation of the lease agreement which states that the tenant can be evicted if "he does not pay rent within 60 days after it is due"? In other words, while I understand the landlord has a right to reject the rent, the tenant may have fulfilled his obligation as it relates to the terms of the lease as soon as he offered to pay rent? Additionally, the tenant could argue that if he pays after the due date it is like a debt which can be paid off in any form. Since rent is due at the beginning of each month, if the tenant pays his rent several days after the rent is due, the payment is now considered payment for a debt which would require the landlord to accept it in any form? Section 31 U.S.C. 5103, states: United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues. Foreign gold or silver coins are not legal tender for debts. Who has the upper hand in this case?

What does the contract say? I write that so often I should get a stamp made. If the contract is silent, then it is implied that payment in US currency is acceptable, as is any other method of payment the parties agree to. As you have correctly quoted, there is no limit to the number of US coins that are valid for payments, unlike in many other jurisdictions where there is such a limit. Accept the coins, make the tenant wait while you count them one by one and then give them a receipt. Oh, and change your lease when you can to nominate sensible forms of payment like electronic transfer.

Can one be liable for poisoning food one expects to be stolen?

A friend of mine posted about how someone keeps stealing her food at work, and I recommended she lace it with some insanely hot hot sauce. Someone else commented that she could be liable for poisoning someone if she did that. The thief is already ignoring written labels saying 'private' and 'do not take this if your name isn't ____'. My assumption would be that this constitutes a warning label, and that she isn't responsible, just like a company isn't responsible if you injure yourself using their product in a manner inconsistent with their instructions. So, I'm wondering: Is there any liability at all, since the item in question is being stolen? Are there any specific legal guidelines for what constitutes a written warning that waives liability for misuse of a product? If so, would this meet those criteria?

(I'm taking for granted that the question is about the application of poison to food, and I'm answering the general question about liability for poisoning food expected to be stolen. Whether application of a particular hot sauce meets that assumption is outside the scope of my answer.) The facts right now are: theft is foreseeable injury is foreseeable If you poison the food in a situation where a reasonable person would foresee theft and subsequent injury, then you are liable for at least the tort of negligence if the thief is in fact injured. Simply adding a note saying "don't steal" doesn't disclose the danger. Do you have a duty of care to other people with access to your food? (That is the remaining element of negligence.) Yes. (See http://premisesliability.uslegal.com/duty-owed-trespassers/ ). You have a duty to not willfully or wontonly trap or otherwise prepare harm for would-be tresspassers, and I believe that extends to lunchroom thieves. But, the simple answer is don't poison food!

Juvenile Curfew violating the first amendment?

A friend of mine proposed that a law, imposing a curfew for juveniles on public streets/spaces violates a first amendment right to assemble. What are some arguments against this?

As long as it's related to place and time, the state can ban assemblies. If it has to do with content / point of view, then it's a violation. It's why cities can say you can protest here, not there. But can't say this group can protest, that one can't.

Can I call the police in a non-emergency but sticky situation?

A friend of mine recently posted about the following situation: Alice is on public transport when she is approached by Bob, who asks her unwanted questions (e.g. where do you live, do you want to go out with me this weekend, etc). Alice attempts to avoid Bob by alighting, but Bob alights as well and keeps talking. Can Alice call the police? What about an uninvolved third party? If it matters, Bob is unarmed and the country is Singapore. My original inclination is "yes". However it looks like calling the police worldwide should only be done in emergency situations, e.g. the Singapore police website says one should only dial 999 when a crime is in progress, someone is hurt or in danger, and so on. Bob in this situation hasn't actually become violent, and while Alice is understandably frightened, she isn't actually in danger. If the answer is "no", how should Alice shake off Bob? "Walk to a police station" seems like the obvious answer, but there might not be one nearby.

In my home jurisdiction, this would be considered more than enough reason to call the emergency response number. This does not guarantee that a unit would be dispatched (quickly; of the desired type; at all). The contact centre responder will provide advice on how best to resolve the situation, and monitor for positive or negative development in the situation, until such time as a unit arrives or the situation is over. Generally, if you believe you are at risk, you should call the emergency number. In the case that this is not correct, the responder will either provide an appropriate number or redirect the call to them.

Can mailed documents make time sensitive requirements without indicating a postage date?

A friend of mine recently received a court document that required action in a specific time frame (in this case, 10 days). However, as hard as she looked she was unable to find any postage date to indicate what the actual deadline was. 1 Can a court hold someone responsible for missing a deadline when there is no way to know what the deadline was? 1: as such, she completing the requirement that day, but had no way of knowing if that was the day she received the document, as she doesn't check the mail every day

Courts almost always have very specific rules for calculating deadlines that vary considerably from one court system to another. In the U.S., the court document usually has a date of mailing at the bottom of the last page under a heading entitled "certificate of service", or a signature date if it is from the court, and the date on that document is usually the date that you count from. Days are usually counted from the day they are sent rather than they day they are received. Also, sometimes days means calendar days, and sometimes it means business days, an issue which is set by court rule. If you can't find a date of mailing on the document, you can call the clerk of the court involved if it came from a court, or the attorney sending the document if it was sent by an attorney, to find out what the date of mailing is. Sometimes, for example, the last page of a multi-page document accidentally doesn't get into the envelope due to clerical error. If the deadline is missed, the person is still responsible unless they promptly file a motion with the court requesting that the deadline be extended after the fact or the late filing be excused. Usually, relief is only available then if there is "excusable neglect", which is a very high standard (e.g. you were in the hospital or kidnapped or there was a hurricane that caused you to be away from your home), although, again, court procedures and local practice may vary considerably. Also, relief is usually unavailable if, for example, the case is an eviction case and the eviction has already happened.

Legality of an Ohio mariage if the ceremony was outside the state

A friend of mine recently told me an interesting detail about her mariage ceremony. She got her mariage licence in Ohio but they had the ceremony just across the border in another state. Neither of them was a resident in Ohio at that time. As far as I understand, non residents need to marry in the county where they received their mariage licence. Using a mariage certificate in another state doesn't seem to be possible in most states. Does this make the mariage void or voidable? Is it legal now that they've lived together for 8 years? Is there any criminal liability in supplying this faulty information to the state?

The specific venue requirement is ORC 3101.05 which says that Each of the persons seeking a marriage license shall personally appear in the probate court within the county where either resides, or, if neither is a resident of this state, where the marriage is expected to be solemnized. If neither party is a resident of this state, the marriage may be solemnized only in the county where the license is obtained. To possibly make things worse, An applicant for a marriage license who knowingly makes a false statement in an application or affidavit prescribed by this section is guilty of falsification under section 2921.13 of the Revised Code. If they lied on the application regarding the venue, that's a large problem. Otherwise, violating 3101.05 is a minor misdemeanor, which could be a fine up to $150. There is no provision that would invalidate the marriage, other than specified prohibited marriages (not nearer of kin than second cousin, already married).

Legality of the right to refuse admission by a privately owned restobar

A friend of mine recently tried to go into a restobar in India, and to his surprise, was informed that he couldn't because he was a male who was not accompanied by a female. Admittedly shocked, he spoke to the manager of that restobar to find out why, and was informed that due to other peace-disturbing, presumably single males (who caused fights and such), they had to implement such a rule. This restobar is privately owned, but is open to the public without restriction (i.e. doesn't require membership like a club, and such). I understand that almost every place of entertainment across the globe displays this "Rights to admission reserved" disclaimer. However, the second clause of Article 15 of the Constitution of India says: No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them, be subject to any disability, liability, restriction or condition with regard to - access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and places of public entertainment; or the use of wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads and places of public resort maintained wholly or partly out of State funds or dedicated to the use of general public. And then clause three of the same article goes on to say: Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children. Thus, by my understanding, the above-mentioned restobar's rule of not allowing single males in is illegal according to the Constitution of India. Am I correct to arrive at this conclusion? Or are there any additional relevant laws that I may have overlooked?

Article 15(2) of the Indian Constitution prohibits restriction to any citizen of India on entry to a public hotel, restaurant or place of entertainment on the grounds "only of religion, race, caste, sex [and/or] place of birth". It is a fundamental right guaranteed to all citizens of India. The Supreme Court of India has held a "public place" to mean any place which is open to the public and to also include private places functioning to serve a non-exclusive group of people. Hence, a club or premise opened only to serve its affiliates or members shall not be considered a public place for the purpose of this provision of law. Hence, if a citizen of India is not denied admission purely on the basis of his/her religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth, his admission to a restaurant or a hotel owned and operated by the government or private concerns may be prohibited as the rights of admission may be reserved with the management of the premises. Just to conclude you can sue the hotel for denying entry

Possible legal steps for psychological damage caused by a company

A friend of mine studies at an American university in the UAE. Recently, he was literally escorted out of the campus building on the premise that it was winter break. It is a common notion that the university remains closed during the winter break, but he is a full-time student and was on the campus for more than 24 hours. The university is heavily guarded and is always monitored by a Public Safety department which is actually run by a multinational security corporation (originally based in the US). The presence of my friend was already known and he has been a student for more than 3 years. He was working on a project, and is a kind of person who gets lost very easily in work. First night, he crashed in during the night because he lives in a far away city (in his case, Dubai) and continued working on his project the next day as well. The university is a very student-focused Liberal Arts university, and he was in no way ready for what was to happen. While he was working in one of the labs which is usually 24x7 for student use, two security guards approached him and asked him to leave the campus immediately. The demeanor of the guards was very rough and they kicked out this student and asked him actually to leave the campus (entirely) at around midnight. Now, my friend is literally left devastated by this act which they carried out on him at midnight. He now hates his university and is scared of the Public Safety officers (who are supposed to protect him). He immediately wrote to them asking what the actual protocol was for some student who would come to campus during a break, but hasn't received a response since (almost ten days now). Can he sue the company managing the Public Safety department (for the psychological damage he received)? He has witnesses, including me. On what grounds can he file a case? EDIT: The university is a residential education-based university that means students live there 24x7 except during the break, and during that time only the housing is shut but all the other major facilities are accessible. So all the places my friend accessed were done so using his university issued RFID-based ID card. So far, the Public Safety department has not given any official reply to his question about what the actual protocol is. It seems that there was no such protocol to deal with such a case in the first place but the security officers on duty that night just did it on a whim.

Nothing in the description strikes me as illegal or unlawful, so I am unsure of the grounds your friend would have for legal action. The questions a lawyer would ask (in addition to that) would be likely to include : How does your friend quantify the damage? The law is great for pursuing financial compensation, but does not handle abstract concepts. Has your friend used psychological counselling services, and what was the cost? What additional financial costs has your friend borne? If your friend has written to the University and has expected a response, what is the evidence of diminished trust? (The letter suggests otherwise.) Would a reasonable person (the proverbial "man in the street") be psychologically damaged by the events experienced by your friend? Is there evidence of a pre-existing condition? You've also mentioned yourself as a witness. Did you witness the eviction, or would you be attesting to your friend's state of mind? If the latter, what are your psychological qualifications? In the main Western jurisdictions, the answer to the question "can my friend sue?" is usually "yes", but whether they stood a chance of winning the suit would probably be a better question to ask. Your friend would only be likely to win a case against the University or the Security company if they could demonstrate unlawful or counter-contractual activity by staff, and were able to demonstrate financial damages that had been caused by that activity.

In Indonesia, can a clerk of courts be made to issue a court&#39;s decision without a bribe?

A friend of mine sue someone else for divorce. The wife appeals. It took 8 months from the time the decisions is made until the country court raise the documents to the high court. The high court doesn't upheld the country's court decisions quickly. My friend got the message on January 2016. Now, it's March 2016. The decision is already there. All the court clerk need to do is to tell the decision to the opponent. Then the opponent will have sometime to appeal again. The wife is a little crazy. She would appeal just to postpone the divorce to hurt her husband due to her religious beliefs. She has no money, does not understand the law, and cannot do anything to challenge the court's decisions. Here is the catch. The court clerk simply didn't do his job. We consult lawyers and the lawyer told us that court clerks have unlimited amount of time to notify the wife. That's it. The court clerks can postpone doing his job indefinitely. If we want this to happen faster, we got to bribe court clerks. I already knows that justice in Indonesia sucks. I have no idea that the laws is this depraved. It seems that the case has been common. Many court decisions could take decades. Someone who occupy another house illegally can keep postponing any court decisions without any merit, for example. So how should I speed the court clerks' job within reasonable amount of time without having to bribe him? Bribing is also punished severely but done so commonly lawyers consider that part of the game.

You can report that said clerk to the Monitoring Information System called SIWASMARI. Please don't bribe them as you will not change our criminal justice system. You can also send some mail to the Monitoring Court Body located in Kepala Badan Pengawasan MA RI Jl. Jend. Ahmad Yani Kav. 58 By Pass Cempaka Putih Timur Jakarta Pusat – 13011 You have to be active and keep contacting the clerk. Tell them that you will report them to the Monitoring Court Body.

If someone found out after the wedding that their partner had been sterilized, what rights would they have?

A friend of mine was dating, and nearly married an immigrant woman. While she was in the "old country," her parents had her sterilized under circumstances that would be illegal in the U.S. but permissible in the other country. (This happened while the girl was undergoing another operation, so she wasn't even informed.) Only when she went to the doctor for a pre marital check up was this discovered. Since my friend wanted children, they broke up the engagement. But suppose he had found out after the wedding. What rights would he have in the United States? Could he have the marriage annulled as opposed to file for divorce? Could he sue the girl's parents for doing this and not telling her about it?

The full answer is too broad (it's a 50-state survey question). Here is a starter, though. In Washington, annulment may be sought if (i) The marriage or domestic partnership should not have been contracted because of age of one or both of the parties, lack of required parental or court approval, a prior undissolved marriage of one or both of the parties, a prior domestic partnership of one or both parties that has not been terminated or dissolved, reasons of consanguinity, or because a party lacked capacity to consent to the marriage or domestic partnership, either because of mental incapacity or because of the influence of alcohol or other incapacitating substances, or because a party was induced to enter into the marriage or domestic partnership by force or duress, or by fraud involving the essentials of marriage or domestic partnership, and that the parties have not ratified their marriage or domestic partnership by voluntarily cohabiting after attaining the age of consent, or after attaining capacity to consent, or after cessation of the force or duress or discovery of the fraud, shall declare the marriage or domestic partnership invalid as of the date it was purportedly contracted But then also (ii) The marriage or domestic partnership should not have been contracted because of any reason other than those above , shall upon motion of a party, order any action which may be appropriate to complete or to correct the record and enter a decree declaring such marriage or domestic partnership to be valid for all purposes from the date upon which it was purportedly contracted So an annulment would have to fit into one of these latter unspecified reasons. Although material fraud is considered to be such a reason, the closest case ( an attempt to annul based on fraud ), the WA Supreme Court avoided deciding whether a particular instance of alleged fraud sufficed to invalidate a marriage, since in addition one party was incompetent and the marriage was not solemnized, as required by state law. In Radochonski v. Radochonski (1998 Wash. App. LEXIS 765), the husband sought a declaration of invalidity of marriage based on fraud in the essentials of the marriage (the allegation was that the wife entered into the marriage to get permanent residency). The petition was denied because "the alleged fraud does not go to the 'essentials' of marriage" and because he "cannot demonstrate reasonable reliance on any statements Barbara made as to her motive in marrying him". The court notes that there is only one case, Harding v. Harding , addressing what the essentials of marriage are: where one of the parties to a marriage ceremony determines before the ceremony that he or she will not engage in sexual intercourse with the other after marriage, not disclosing such intention to the other, and carries out such determination, the offending spouse commits a fraud in the contract of marriage affecting an essential of the marital relation, against which the injured party may be relieved by annulment of the marriage. The court said that fraud in an essential may be found (citing cases in other states) where one spouse has misled another on an attribute that prevents sexual relations between the parties such as impotence, venereal disease, and drug abuse, the latter on the theory that narcotics cause impotence. These attributes have gone to the essentials of marriage because they affected the sexual relations that are at the heart of the marriage but no so in the case of premarital chastity, false representations as to love and affection, misrepresentation of affection, failure to disclose out-of-wedlock children, fraudulent representation of pregnancy, and failure to end a previous relationship. So it is highly unlikely that fraud in the essentials of marriage would be found at least in Washington.

What constitutes legal malpractice? What are the remedies?

A friend of mine was doing business with Company A, and asked a lawyer to draft a contract saying that if Company A failed to perform, my friend would be able to take possession of Asset X (the critical asset), as an indemnity so that he could do the job himself. The lawyer drafted a contract with Asset Y (a totally different Asset) as indemnity. Further, he attached several Exhibits to the contract that don't clearly relate to either Asset X or Y, and only confuse the picture. Company A failed to perform, but won't hand over Asset X, and my friend doesn't have the indemnity that he envisioned because of the way the contract was drafted. (A first year law student could probably have done better.) That's the causation. The harm comes from the fact that my friend now has to sue Company A, which might not be necessary if the contract was solid. The breach of duty comes from the disregard of instructions to "securitize" Asset X. Does this constitute legal malpractice, and if so, what are the remedies? These questions relate to New York State.

Legal malpractice varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In many you'd need to show that there existed an: Attorney-client relationship Breach of duty Causation Harm This is a more in depth summary of each of the elements. Each jurisdiction is going to put tests in place to determine whether the elements are actually met. So your firend's locality matters a good deal. The ABA also has some aggregate statistics on the incidence of the various types of malpractice here . For example, it helps one to distinguish between clerical errors and failure to follow a client's instructions. Edit: for the state of NY (which applies the above rules), see: NY State Bar Assoc. Code of Professional Responsibility ABA Model Code

Is it legal to grope an unconscious person in Virginia?

A friend of mine was groped by a man she knows while she was asleep. She didn't wake up because of her medication which makes her sleep pretty heavily. The man has fully admitted to doing this, so there is no debate as to what happened. The investigator has said that according to Virginia law, what he did was wrong but not illegal. Since "he didn't use force, threats, or intimidation, it's legal. So in VA, you can do many things to someone who is asleep provided that if they wake up and tell you to stop, you stop." (quote from friend paraphrasing investigator). I find it extremely hard to believe that you can sexually assault a person so long as they remain unconscious don't resist you. Is this really how the law in Virginia works? What are the limits of what you are legally permitted to do to an unconscious person?

Short Answer No. This is not legal under Virginia law. It is a serious crime. Long Answer The basic reasoning This would be actionable as aggravated sexual battery and punishable by up to 20 years in prison, because the facts demonstrate a touching of intimate parts with an intent to molest (i.e. sexual abuse) and this is accomplished through the victim's physical helplessness, which includes being unconscious at the time for any reason. Intent to Molest, Gratify or Arouse Contrary to user6726, I don't think that groping in the factual context of the question can be reasonably interpreted as lacking an intent to molest under the statute. An interpretation that requires an effect on the victim would be contrary to the fact that the statute is talking about the intent of the perpetrator and to the fact that the statute expressly authorizes prosecutions in cases where the victim is physically helpless a definition that includes unconscious or drugged. One could probably get the court to provide an extra non-standard jury instruction if this was raised by the defense at trial as an issue. The intent to molest, gratify or arouse intent requirement is designed to distinguish between, for example, giving a sponge bath to an unconscious patient at a medical facility or by a family member, or touching someone's breasts in order to get a bra size for a tailor, and "groping." The intent requirement also excludes unintentional conduct such as slipping and falling into someone by accident. The admission by the perpetrator in the question doesn't suggest any possible non-sexual reason for the contact, and is inconsistent with unintentional conduct. Corroboration From Actual Recent Prosecutions This reading is consistent with the fact that Virginia prosecutors have brought charges in similar circumstances such as the rape of an unconscious woman at a house party and charges against a Virginia DJ for his conduct towards unconscious women . The only material difference between rape and aggravated sexual battery under Virginia law is that rape requires penetration, while sexual battery merely requires sexual contact. Additional Commentary Reaching this conclusion is a bit tricky, because usually aggravated sexual battery would have a narrower definition of the crime than "plain vanilla" sexual battery. But, in Virginia, there is conduct that constitutes aggravated sexual battery which does not constitute "plain vanilla" sexual battery, including molestation by accomplished through physical helplessness which is defined broadly in the relevant statute. In other words, in this fact pattern, "sexual battery" is not a lesser included offense of "aggravated sexual battery" under subsection A(2) of § 18.2-67.3 of Virginia's statutes. Plain vanilla sexual battery includes the circumstances of subsection A(4) of § 18.2-67.3 of Virginia's statutes and some special "statutory rape"/"position of trust" type conduct that is outside of the scope of both A(4) type conduct and aggravated sexual battery generally. I would attribute the statements of the investigator as symptom of poor training about sexual assault cases and a generally regressive state of law enforcement attitudes about sexual assault in Virginia. Your friend should insist on talking to the investigator's supervisor and reviewing the relevant legal citations, with a lawyer, if necessary, if she wants to press charges. Of course, the prosecutor has no obligation to prosecute the case even if the prosecutor had a videotaped confession to every element of the crime. But, there is no reason for a prosecution to be prevented due to a non-lawyer investigator's misunderstanding of the law. A letter of complaint to the investigator's supervisor or the head of the department or the politician to whom the department reports would also be in order. The Statutes The statute creating the crime is as follows, with all of the pertinent language in bold. I have put the word "or" when necessary to see how the statute fits together (which could be omitted in a block quotation showing omissions with ". . .") in italics and have left the remainder of the relevant statutes in plain text to allow a reader to confirm that the reading I am giving to the statute is correct. § 18.2-67.3. Aggravated sexual battery; penalty. A. An accused shall be guilty of aggravated sexual battery if he or she sexually abuses the complaining witness, and The complaining witness is less than 13 years of age, or The act is accomplished through the use of the complaining witness's mental incapacity or physical helplessness , or The offense is committed by a parent, step-parent, grandparent, or step-grandparent and the complaining witness is at least 13 but less than 18 years of age, or The act is accomplished against the will of the complaining witness by force, threat or intimidation, and a. The complaining witness is at least 13 but less than 15 years of age, or b. The accused causes serious bodily or mental injury to the complaining witness, or c. The accused uses or threatens to use a dangerous weapon. B. Aggravated sexual battery is a felony punishable by confinement in a state correctional facility for a term of not less than one nor more than 20 years and by a fine of not more than $100,000. This in interpreted in light of some key definitions: § 18.2-67.10. General definitions. As used in this article: "Complaining witness" means the person alleged to have been subjected to rape, forcible sodomy, inanimate or animate object sexual penetration, marital sexual assault, aggravated sexual battery, or sexual battery. "Intimate parts" means the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, or buttocks of any person. "Mental incapacity" means that condition of the complaining witness existing at the time of an offense under this article which prevents the complaining witness from understanding the nature or consequences of the sexual act involved in such offense and about which the accused knew or should have known. "Physical helplessness" means unconsciousness or any other condition existing at the time of an offense under this article which otherwise rendered the complaining witness physically unable to communicate an unwillingness to act and about which the accused knew or should have known. The complaining witness's "prior sexual conduct" means any sexual conduct on the part of the complaining witness which took place before the conclusion of the trial, excluding the conduct involved in the offense alleged under this article. "Sexual abuse" means an act committed with the intent to sexually molest, arouse, or gratify any person, where: a. The accused intentionally touches the complaining witness's intimate parts or material directly covering such intimate parts; b. The accused forces the complaining witness to touch the accused's, the witness's own, or another person's intimate parts or material directly covering such intimate parts; c. If the complaining witness is under the age of 13, the accused causes or assists the complaining witness to touch the accused's, the witness's own, or another person's intimate parts or material directly covering such intimate parts; or d. The accused forces another person to touch the complaining witness's intimate parts or material directly covering such intimate parts. Also relevant is this statute: § 18.2-67.6. Proof of physical resistance not required. The Commonwealth need not demonstrate that the complaining witness cried out or physically resisted the accused in order to convict the accused of an offense under this article, but the absence of such resistance may be considered when relevant to show that the act alleged was not against the will of the complaining witness.

What happens when a legally binding document is accidentally filled out wrong?

A friend of mine was hired by a company that has a lengthy onboarding process that has lots of paper work. One document he had to sign contained The following are Developments not covered by Paragraph 5, in which I have any right, title, or interest, and which were previously conceived or written either wholly or in part by me, but neither published nor filed in any Patent Office: Description of Documents (if applicable):...... Title on Document.......Date on Document....Name of Witness on Document Signed: Date: After they filled it out and sent it to head office they believed they filled it out wrong. Under the description they put “personal projects”, as well as writing “none” on another line. Since the instructions say not to do this and “personal projects” probably isn’t what they were looking for, this contract was filled out wrong. This is just an example but in general what happens when something legally binding is filled out wrong? Does it invalidate the whole thing?

One of the principles of contract law is that the offer and acceptance are evaluated based on the objectively ascertainable intentions as judged by a reasonable person. On the facts that you have provided - even if your friend claims that they filled it out wrong, there is no reason for someone to objectively think so, particularly given the fact that they went to the trouble of writing the information in. However, this will depend on what kind of legally binding document this is. If it is, in fact, a contract, then the employer must accept it before it becomes legally binding, and they must actually communicate this acceptance to your friend (the offeror ). If this is a policy document, then it is only legally binding if another contract has said that it is legally binding - generally, (smart) employers will include a clause in their employment contract stating that you are to adhere to policies but that those policies do not form part of the contract. If that is the case, then your friend is legally bound by the terms of the policy and will breach their employment contract if they do not adhere to this policy. This is unlikely to be an issue of contract law in and of itself - your friend cannot unilaterally bind their employer to terms as he sees fit. More information - including the nature of the document and other agreements that were made - would be required to provide more useful information (and that's what you would give to a lawyer).

Unprofessional behaviour during interview

A friend of mine was in a job interview during Covid-times, therefore it was all done remotely. At half-way through the interview, an unprofessional incident happened which made that friend believe, that the last half of the interview did not go in their favor: The 3 interviewers decided to make a short bio-break, at first the 2 interviewers went off screen, however the third interviewer turned around and apparently their pants were not closed properly and slipped including underwear off. My friend saw the whole naked bottom half of the human body. After the pause, everyone went back to the interview and continued as normal. However, this incident could have raised an unfavored bias. Is there any legal ground, in German law, to indemnity? Clearly, my friend has taken a lot of time and effort in this interviewing process and already was at the final stages.

Is there any legal ground, in German law, to indemnity? I am not very knowledgeable of German law, but the chances of indemnity seemingly are zero even if the unpleasant conduct were actionable on grounds of obscenity, indecent exposure, sexual harassment, etc. Also, your description nowhere reflects that the incident reasonably and/or actually traumatized your friend. Since there was no contract between your friend and the employer pertaining to the interview, the time and effort your friend spent thereon are not susceptible to compensation.

Offering money to potential witnesses in criminal proceedings

A friend of mine was involved in a confrontation with a police officer in the UK, in which the officer basically accused him of assault. While the officer was arresting him, a bystander shouted something like, "Officer, you touched him first!" My friend immediately shouted back, "Come in and testify, there's two hundred pound in it for you." The man spoke with the head at the police station, the charges were dropped, and my friend paid the man £200 as promised. In the US, it would seem that situations often arise in which potential witnesses refuse to take the time to testify (loose use of the term), and those falsely accused suffer. If an American accused of a crime offered money to a verifiable witness, would his or her testimony be admissible in a court? How about in a police station? Would it not be considered bribery?

In many jurisdictions, there is a "witness fee" that one is required to pay, as a token recognition of the value of a person's time. Fact witnesses can often be obligated to appear and testify, for minimal compensation, but not against themselves. In federal cases, Rule 17(b) of the Rules of Criminal Procedure permit the defendant to apply to ask the government to pay the witness fee if they cannot afford it and the presence of the witness is necessary for an adequate defense. The other side of a case (in this example, the prosecutor) could try to impeach the witness's testimony (i.e. make him seem less credible in the eyes of the jury) by demonstrating that the witness is a "professional witness" (i.e. fees from saying things in court are a major part of the witness's regular income). That doesn't seem to apply to the facts you've listed, where the witness just happened to be in that place and time to observe what happened and (assuming for this question) accurately testified as to what he saw. Personally paying the police officer or judge for a favorable result is a different question with a different answer.

Company makes confidential CV publicly available and searchable. Legal recourse?

A friend of mine was looking for a job last August. She sent CVs for various positions. Now, months later, somebody told her that if he Googles her name, her CV pops up. She tried it herself and sure enough, the first result is her CV in PDF format, from the website of one of the companies she contacted. The link is in a wp-content/2018/08 format, which means it was uploaded on their website, but it’s freely available for anyone to search and download it. My question is: does she have any ground for legal action? Is such action worth the effort in terms of compensation? The location is Cyprus, covered by EU and GDPR laws.

She could refer this to the Cyrpriot Commissioner for Personal Data Protection , but I would try contacting the company first and telling them to remove her Personal Data from the public website - or delete it completely. If they don't give a satisfactory response, mention the CPDP. This could lead to the data being removed within a few days, while an official complaint is likely to take longer. She may have grounds for legal action which would result in the company being compelled to take down the data (or to close the website), but if your friend is thinking in terms of compensation, what compensation would she seek? If she can demonstrate and quantify financial losses that occurred specifically because of this disclosure there might be a possibility, but I suspect that would be difficult to prove.

Is a judge required to explain his ruling?

A friend of mine was recently in Special Civil court where the Defendant submitted a 25 page motion to dismiss the case. The judge read the motion (to himself, quietly) and announced that he does not agree with the motion. He gave less than a two minute explanation - addressing only a small fraction of the arguments raised in the motion and then proceeded to discuss the actual case. Is a judge required to go through each argument separately and explain why it isn't valid? Is the party who filed the motion entitled to a clear and thorough understanding as to what grounds the motion is being rejected? If the party who filed the motion isn't aware on what grounds the judge dismissed the motion, how can they file an appeal?

Denial of a motion to dismiss is not an appealable order. Likewise, denial of a motion for summary judgment cannot be appealed except in rare cases where it deals with a privilege against being sued like qualified or absolute immunity from suit. If an order can be appealed, it can be reversed on appeal if the trial court did not provide an adequate basis to justify its ruling.

Asked to assist when company in administration (UK)

A friend of mine works (worked) for a company that has gone into administration (in the UK). She has been asked to still come to the office for a few days to help out with the accounts. I was just wondering if this is allowed, legally? But thinking about it, someone with knowledge of the company systems and procedures should be able to help close the account, but albeit under the watchful eye of the... receivers(?), and not asked to do anything without their knowledge? Should she get advice from somewhere? Thanks.

Unless her employment has been terminated by the Administrator she is still an employee of the company and is obliged to follow its lawful and reasonable requests. She would, of course, be entitled to payment of her salary and conditions for the period for which she "helps out".

Is it racial discrimination - company wide email disparaging white people

A friend of mine works at a religious organization as an employee. They are also a naturalized citizen, who is white, but is of a minority ethnic group (for background). The org has sent out several emails over time focusing on racism, but with the implication that white people are the sole problem of all racism. (which, let me be clear, here in the US, there is of course centuries of legitimate beef!) The issue being that they are receiving these messages and feel insulted and as if they're being disparaged by the company itself, solely for their race. This person is open minded and believes that there are issues with equality in the country, but receives these emails and believes from time to time that they are being told that all white people are a problem, rather than focusing on issues with inclusivity and equality or racism in general, just very specifically focusing on white people. They recently received a company wide meeting invite for a meeting discussing the concept of whiteness and how it impacts an organization and individuals, going on to liken "whiteness" itself to white supremacy. My friend wrote a response, asking not to be included on future meeting invites, explaining that the one in question and others have made it feel as though their 'whiteness' was a problem, and that they felt it was a pejorative term and would like to not receive remarks like this in the future. The business later sent another email that includes some description of the meeting itself, that it is sent to an organization wide distribution list and will not have an ability for people to opt out (therefore, my interpretation being, they are ignoring their request to stop receiving the offensive remarks in these emails into the future). It goes on to state that the next session will be on White Fragility, and states that "by definition", racism is based on the concept of whiteness, which is enforced by power and violence. It has a definition of 'white fragility' later on that paired with the usage of the term in the email seems somewhat offensive... in the same way that hearing 'black fragility' or other combinations of the words would seem, from the negative connotations of the word fragility, of course pejorative to whatever group is paired with it. My question is... This seems like a form of harassment and discrimination. Is it? Are there additional steps they should take to address the issue? I've told my friend they need to find a lawyer and consider whether they have a case, as they'd included HR and their own manager, as well as the other person who's sending these messages, and are still receiving them. They've told me messages like these have been going out for years and it's been very upsetting having to read them and having to confront them specifically in order to request that they stop receiving them... just to have it continue. They are, of course, very worried they'll lose their job over speaking up over it. **Are religious organizations allowed to discriminate based on race, is this a moot point?** I've seen references on the internet that the supreme court has ruled that religious org's can discriminate based on religion, but I haven't seen on race, such as in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & Sch. v. E.E.O.C. (2012) ( https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/926/discrimination-by-religious-organizations ).

This is the overview of employment discrimination by the EEOC (no legal reason for them to specifically put this under "youth"). To "discriminate" against someone means to treat that person differently, or less favorably, for some reason... The laws enforced by EEOC protect you from employment discrimination when it involves: Unfair treatment because of your race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, gender identity, and sexual orientation), national origin, disability, age (age 40 or older), or genetic information. Harassment by managers, co-workers, or others in your workplace, because of your race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, gender identity, and sexual orientation), national origin, disability, age (age 40 or older), or genetic information. A subtype of harassment is "hostile environment harassment". See the EEOC page on harassment . It is unwelcome conduct that is based on race... Harassment becomes unlawful where 1) enduring the offensive conduct becomes a condition of continued employment, or 2) the conduct is severe or pervasive enough to create a work environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive. Also it is illegal to punish a person for complaining about harassment. On the face of it, this could constitute racial harassment. The EEOC suggests that it is illegal here , in their FAQ Are White employees protected from race discrimination even though they are not a minority? Yes. You are protected from different treatment at work on the basis of your race, whether you are White, Black, or some other race. Although this is an advisory from the Dep't of Interior and not the EEOC, it is reasonable to assume that it was at least minimally vetted by competent lawyers who know discrimination law. What is prohibited is Unwelcome conduct, verbal or physical, including intimidation, ridicule, insult, comments, or physical conduct, that is based on an individual’s protected status or protected activities under Personnel Bulletin 18-01, when the behavior can reasonably be considered to adversely affect the work environment, or an employment decision affecting the employee is based upon the employee’s acceptance or rejection of such conduct (where race is a protected status). I don't know of any case law that establishes for certain that what you describe is illegal. The ministerial exception allows a religion to follow the rules of the religion in hiring its ministers, but otherwise doesn't exempt religions from prohibitions against discrimination.

Noncompete agreement - Esthetician

A friend of mine works at a skin care and retail store as an esthetician (dealing with skin care and other spa related treatments). Her boss has had her sign a non-compete agreement that would bar her from working as an esthetician in the local area if she were to leave. I would like to confirm if this is legally binding, and to what degree. I am under the impression that non-competes are difficult to enforce if they prevent you from making a lively in your chosen field, particularly since there would no proprietary knowledge being taken to another organization. What vulnerability is she open to? *This question pertains to New Hampshire, USA **I will not use any guidance here as legal council. I am looking for some initial information.

Such a clause must be presented before or at the same time the offer is made. The (somewhat new) law NH RSA 275:70 says Any employer who requires an employee who has not previously been employed by the employer to execute a noncompete agreement as a condition of employment shall provide a copy of such agreement to the potential employee prior to the employee's acceptance of an offer of employment. A noncompete agreement that has not been disclosed to an employee as required by this section shall not be enforceable against the employee, but all other provisions of any employment, confidentiality, nondisclosure, trade secret, intellectual property assignment, or any other type of employment agreement or provision shall remain in full force and effect The question is whether such an agreement would mean you can't set up shop on your own and take a bunch of customers with you (it seems that such clauses are enforceable), or does it mean you can't work in that trade (competing for new customers, or as an employee of a competitor) – such an interpretation would not be enforced, in the analysis of this article . The clause must be "drafted narrowly to protect only a company's legitimate business interests, like customer goodwill and confidential information". A specific case of this interpretation is Merrimack Valley Wood Products v. Near , 152 N.H. 192, which finds that the law does not look with favor upon contracts in restraint of trade or competition...Such contracts are to be narrowly construed. Nonetheless, restrictive covenants are valid and enforceable if the restraint is reasonable, given the particular circumstances of the case In assessing reasonableness, three tests must be passed (must be answered "no"): first, whether the restriction is greater than necessary to protect the legitimate interests of the employer; second, whether the restriction imposes an undue hardship upon the employee; and third, whether the restriction is injurious to the public interest. As an example of a reasonable restriction: When an employee is put in a position involving client contact, it is natural that some of the goodwill emanating from the client is directed to the employee rather than to the employer. The employer has a legitimate interest in preventing its employees from appropriating this goodwill to its detriment. But restricting a person from working with any customers of the company (not just the employees work-related contacts) is unenforceable, because the company had no legitimate interest in protecting its entire client base from its former employee, because he had no advantage over any other complete stranger, possessing no special hold on the goodwill of the majority of Technical Aid's customers. See also Brian's Fitness v. Woodward for reaffirmation ("valid only to the extent that it prevents an employee from appropriating assets that legitimately belong to the employer"), and additional citations. The question arises whether there is a distinction between the former employee approaching former customers, versus those same customers approaching the former employee. I have not located any case that directly addresses that, but Technical Aid v. Allen , 134 N.H. 1 says A restrictive covenant must unreasonably limit the public's right to choose before it will be found to be injurious to the public interest. I think it is likely that the courts would find it to be an unreasonable limit on the public's right to choose, if a customer were prevented from choosing a different company to provide the desired service simply because the customer happened to have previously had a business relationship with the former employee. This "right to choose" is asymmetrical – the public has a right to choose any service provider, an employee does not have an equivalent right to pursue (seek out, woo) a customer, in light of a restrictiveness covenant.

Who has jurisdiction over civilian crimes on a US military base overseas?

A friend of mine works for the US military, and their family was living on a base in an allied nation. While they were there, a person known to them did some terrible things to their family, the kind of things that would be considered horrific crimes in every civilized nation, and get him summarily put down like the rabid dog he is in the uncivilized ones. Unfortunately, no one is doing anything about it. There's no question about what was done or who did it, but there appears to be a jurisdictional mess: the host country won't prosecute because everyone involved, on both the victim and perpetrator sides, is a US citizen and it took place on a US military base, and the military can't prosecute because the perpetrator is a civilian who is not subject to the UCMJ. My friend and their family have been transferred, but they hear that this monster is openly boasting about what he did and is planning to hunt them down, and they are looking very seriously at possibly going into hiding because no one will do anything to stop him. I'm having a difficult time accepting the concept of "no valid jurisdiction." It seems to me that if nothing else, a US citizen on US territory would be subject to Federal law, but apparently things aren't quite that simple. Even so, I don't believe in "no jurisdiction." Whose jurisdiction would this fall under?

There's no question about what was done or who did it, but there appears to be a jurisdictional mess: the host country won't prosecute because everyone involved, on both the victim and perpetrator sides, is a US citizen and it took place on a US military base, and the military can't prosecute because the perpetrator is a civilian who is not subject to the UCMJ. The host country probably has jurisdiction because a military base, unlike an embassy, is not generally immune from domestic criminal law jurisdiction, although the host country is within its rights to decline to exercise that authority and the status of forces treaty with that country would control. The belief that the military cannot prosecute the perpetrator under the Uniform Code of Military Justice because the perpetrator is a civilian who is not subject to the UCMJ is mistaken, and the easiest way to address the issue may be to point this out to the responsible JAG officers and commanding officers with jurisdiction over the case. Generally speaking, as set forth more fully below, the UCMJ does apply to civilians on military bases. See 10 USC 802(a)(11) and 10 USC 802(a)(12). There is also probably U.S. civilian criminal law that is applicable to civilians on a military base much like other federal territories. Historically, these offenses could be presided over in ambassadorial courts of the U.S. ambassador to the country in question, but the current practice is for such prosecutions to be made by the Justice Department before a U.S. District Court judge (I believe from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, although I may be mistaken on that point). Who Is Subject To The UCMJ? Section 802 of Title 10, set forth in the block quote below expressly states who is subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Mostly, the UCMJ applies to members of the U.S. military, broadly defined, with some of the potentially close cases described with specificity. A lot of the detail in this definition goes to the issue of when non-active duty military personnel (1) are subject to the UCMJ, (2) are subject to state versions of the UMCJ in lieu of the UCMJ, or (3) are not subject to the UCMJ at all. The UCMJ also applies to some civilians and people who belong to other military forces, most of which involve (1) people who are civilian employees of the military or civilian military contractors, (2) civilians and members of foreign militaries who are traveling with the military or present on military bases, and (3) prisoners of war broadly defined. These exception cases are emphasized in bold in the blockquote setting forth 10 USC § 802 below. (a) The following persons are subject to this chapter: (1) Members of a regular component of the armed forces, including those awaiting discharge after expiration of their terms of enlistment; volunteers from the time of their muster or acceptance into the armed forces; inductees from the time of their actual induction into the armed forces; and other persons lawfully called or ordered into, or to duty in or for training in, the armed forces, from the dates when they are required by the terms of the call or order to obey it. (2) Cadets, aviation cadets, and midshipmen. (3) Members of a reserve component while on inactive-duty training, but in the case of members of the Army National Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United States only when in Federal service. (4) Retired members of a regular component of the armed forces who are entitled to pay. (5) Retired members of a reserve component who are receiving hospitalization from an armed force. (6) Members of the Fleet Reserve and Fleet Marine Corps Reserve. (7) Persons in custody of the armed forces serving a sentence imposed by a court-martial. (8) Members of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Public Health Service, and other organizations, when assigned to and serving with the armed forces. (9) Prisoners of war in custody of the armed forces. (10) In time of declared war or a contingency operation, persons serving with or accompanying an armed force in the field. (11) Subject to any treaty or agreement to which the United States is or may be a party or to any accepted rule of international law, persons serving with, employed by, or accompanying the armed forces outside the United States and outside the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands. (12) Subject to any treaty or agreement to which the United States is or may be a party or to any accepted rule of international law, persons within an area leased by or otherwise reserved or acquired for the use of the United States which is under the control of the Secretary concerned and which is outside the United States and outside the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands. (13) Individuals belonging to one of the eight categories enumerated in Article 4 of the Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, done at Geneva August 12, 1949 (6 UST 3316), who violate the law of war. (b) The voluntary enlistment of any person who has the capacity to understand the significance of enlisting in the armed forces shall be valid for purposes of jurisdiction under subsection (a) and a change of status from civilian to member of the armed forces shall be effective upon the taking of the oath of enlistment. (c) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a person serving with an armed force who— (1) submitted voluntarily to military authority; (2) met the mental competency and minimum age qualifications of sections 504 and 505 of this title at the time of voluntary submission to military authority; (3) received military pay or allowances; and (4) performed military duties; is subject to this chapter until such person’s active service has been terminated in accordance with law or regulations promulgated by the Secretary concerned. (d)(1) A member of a reserve component who is not on active duty and who is made the subject of proceedings under section 815 (article 15) or section 830 (article 30) with respect to an offense against this chapter may be ordered to active duty involuntarily for the purpose of— (A) a preliminary hearing under section 832 of this title (article 32); (B) trial by court-martial; or (C) nonjudicial punishment under section 815 of this title (article 15). (2) A member of a reserve component may not be ordered to active duty under paragraph (1) except with respect to an offense committed while the member was— (A) on active duty; or (B) on inactive-duty training, but in the case of members of the Army National Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United States only when in Federal service. (3) Authority to order a member to active duty under paragraph (1) shall be exercised under regulations prescribed by the President. (4) A member may be ordered to active duty under paragraph (1) only by a person empowered to convene general courts-martial in a regular component of the armed forces. (5) A member ordered to active duty under paragraph (1), unless the order to active duty was approved by the Secretary concerned, may not— (A) be sentenced to confinement; or (B) be required to serve a punishment consisting of any restriction on liberty during a period other than a period of inactive-duty training or active duty (other than active duty ordered under paragraph (1)). (e) The provisions of this section are subject to section 876b(d)(2) of this title (article 76b(d)(2))

Placed on 24 hour shift under National Minimum Wage (UK)

A friend of mine works in a care home for young adults with severe learning difficulties. These people need 24-hour care. She is paid approximately £7 per hour. She has today been placed on a rota for the following shifts: 14:15 - 21:45 followed by 21:45 - 07:15 followed by 07:15 - 14.45 She is concerned about working over 24 hours in a row (the overnight shift 21:45 to 07:15 is a shift where she is in the workplace allowed to sleep, but can be woken at any time to help the patients). She is concerned that this will have a negative impact on her own health (if she is woken, she will get no sleep) and also on the quality of care that she can give to the patients. Furthermore, for the overnight shift (21:45 to 07:15) she is paid a lump sum of £30 which is £3.15 an hour - she is entitled to a National Minimum Wage of £5.55 per hour. Exactly which laws and regulations are being breached here so that she can effectively raise the issue to her boss?

Both the minimum wage and maximum working hours are set out in legislation; the place to start would be the Government website . But I think you (or your friend) may be expecting too much from the legislation: a shift when you are on call but not necessarily working does not normally qualify as working hours under the regulations (the website says explicitly "You may have to work more than 48 hours a week on average if you work in a job...where 24-hour staffing is required"). The only way to be sure what applies in the specific situation would be to consult an employment lawyer (perhaps through a union).

Harassment report from a non-US citizen outside the USA

A friend of mine, who isn't a US citizen and lives in another country, is being harassed by someone in the US. Can she file a harassment report even though she isn't in the US?

Yes. She can call the police for the jurisdiction in which the harasser is located. Some jurisdictions will take the report seriously. Others will not.

Insurance situation for unpaid babysitter

A friend of ours will be looking after our infant daughter for a few days. This will happen at her home with her family. She will do this without charge and we are also in no business relation to each other. Which insurance would protect the child during this time? My home insurance, my friends insurance or neither? In case of neither are there insurances for such occasion and if yes what are they called? I googled but couldn't any information about unpaid babysitter.

In general, there are a range of insurances that may or may not apply to your child irrespective of if they are being cared for by you or another person. These include health insurance, life insurance, total & permanent disablement insurance etc. You are responsible for taking out this insurance if you want it. Absent such insurance and absent a contract, the sitter would only be liable if she was negligent: the appropriate policy is a public liability policy. I will bet London to a brick she doesn't have one which leaves her personally liable to the limit of her assets (i.e. until she goes bankrupt). If an injury was caused by negligence of the property owner, then the public liability clauses of the house insurance would be triggered. If your child is injured in the absence of negligence then you must bear the costs.

Can a lay person help a friend bring a petition of violation of child support to Family Court?

A friend of the family, who only got up to the fifth grade, needs to file a petition for violation for child support in Family Court. I can help her assemble her evidence -- it's pretty simple, it's bank statements showing the shortfall in the father's payments -- and I can help her fill out the form and write the letter. But I would like to help her present her case in Family Court. It's a simple case, but my friend can't do it alone -- her first language isn't English, and she gets nervous, flustered and can't function well when she goes to Family Court, even when there's a translator present. The reason I don't want to use a lawyer is that when we used a lawyer for a similar petition, about unpaid medical expenses, the father convinced my friend's lawyer that he's a poor shmo who shouldn't be blamed for not paying what he should, and the lawyer didn't go after him aggressively enough. I would not let myself be beguiled. Side question: how far back in time can we go? We already found proof going back two full years, and with more digging we might be able to go back farther. (Please don't feel tempted to feel sorry for the father. He earns three times as much as the mother does, and he doesn't have shared custody. He doesn't even have the child for visits any more. He dropped the child like a hot potato a year ago when the child was discovered to have epilepsy. Also note, the amount of child support is tragically small -- $100/week. We are going to petition to increase this, but we want to clear up the violation first.) (Would like to create new tag for Family Court, not enough rep.) Edit 9/27/16 Update: I was allowed to go in and sit next to my friend, which she found helpful as moral support. The important thing we learned subsequently is that for an amazingly low fee, there is legal help available for this type of action, through the Department of Social Services. Another thing I learned is that the low-man-on-the-totem-pole front desk receptionist at our court was not very helpful, but the main court clerk was. I learned to phone ahead and make sure the court clerk was in before delivering paperwork. I learned to check with the court clerk to make sure we were doing things right.

How to Best Help I suggest you ask around at the courthouse. You might need to get advanced permission from the judge. Every courthouse is setup a bit differently so it's hard to say exactly whom you will need to ask. But ultimately that will probably require the judge's advanced approval. Order of Child Support You used the term violation so I will assume the mother has in her possession a copy of the Order of Child Support (OCS) resulting from the divorce or paternity case that determined the amount and timing of support payments she is entitled to. Correct? Aside: If the mother doesn't already have an OCS it's pretty simple to get one. Most states just have a standard set of forms and a formula to apply. There is very little subjectivity involved. Unless one or more of the parties has unreported or variable income. And she can also collect back child support too. Back Child Support AFAIK you are not barred by statute for seeking back support as far back as when dad's obligation began. Which AFAIK is when mom became the primary caregiver. In practical terms, this would be the first day mom had the kids living with her and dad didn't live with them. Interest on Unpaid Child Support Most states allow mom to collect interest on (ordered but) unpaid child support at a rate set by statute. In some states the interest rate is in the 9 to 12% range. You need to compute it using a spreadsheet. You go back to each ordered monthly obligation, calculate the number of months from then until the current date, then multiply that number times the obligation amount times 1/12 of the interest rate. Then add all those months together to get the total. Like I said, a spreadsheet is the easiest way to do this calculation. Motion for Contempt of Court Assuming you have acquired an OCS, enforcement is also pretty straightforward. In some states, the mechanism to force the father to pay is called a Motion for Contempt of Court for violating the OCS. Again, it's so common, unfortunately, most courthouses support pro se litigants by having all the necessary forms on hand and volunteers to help people fill them out! When mom files the contempt motion with the court she will schedule a date for a Show Cause Hearing , at which time dad will need to appear and explain why he should not either pay up or be found in contempt of court. Courts enforce child support VERY strictly. So the paperwork alone should be enough for her to win her case. Unlicensed Practice of Law As for you "helping her" in court. Be very careful. That sounds dangerously like practicing law without a law license. There is a thing called a "bar" in the courtroom that only attorneys or clients are allowed to cross (by practice and tradition). That's where the term bar exam originated. Anyway, if you want to try that, be very careful and you might want to run that by the judge or clerk and get prior approval first because the unlicensed practice of law has the potential to be a sticky wicket. Use of an Interpreter I would be shocked if the court did not make allowances for non-native English speakers to use the services of an interpreter in the courtroom. That's something you definitely need to ask around at the courthouse for all the details. And whether the interpreter needs to be licensed, registered or otherwise approved by the court in advance. Process Service One last point. Make sure to properly process serve dad with the motion and paperwork. Process service is what will bind him to appear at the show cause hearing. You should be able to find forms, instructions and a professional process server by asking around down at the courthouse. Dad will have a chance to respond in writing to the motion prior to the hearing. And mom will have a chance to respond to his response. Ask around at the courthouse how all this works. Especially the deadlines involved. These are also strictly enforced. State Registry Enforcement Assistance One last, last point. In the future, it might help if the OCS made a provision for the father to pay directly to the state registry for child support enforcement. The will keep track of all the payments and can provide enforcement assistance like levying bank accounts and garnishing wages, etc. So that could help with future enforcement. Disclaimer I am not a lawyer. I am not your lawyer and you nor the mom are my client. This is not legal advice. So please don't do anything based on what I write here; if you do, please be aware you do so at your own risk. So seek the advice of a real lawyer if you are going to actually do anything that might create an issue.

Is an act of battery/assault - characterized as an 1st Amendment opinion - itself protected speech?

A friend on Facebook posted an article proposing that burning an American flag be made an act of treason in the United States. I pointed out that in Texas v. Johnson the Supreme Court ruled that burning the American flag was a protected form of expression under the first amendment. He then asked if he struck the person that burned the flag (as a way of expressing his opinion of the flag burner) would that be protected under the first amendment? My initial response is that battery (striking the protester) would not be protected, but my Internet searching skills failed to come up with anything conclusive. There's a lot out there about threats of imminent violence not being protected by the first amendment, but nothing about actual violence. Can anyone provide some pointers that would be helpful?

You have a conflict of rights - freedom of expression vs freedom from harm. Freedom from harm wins - this is a crime and arguing a first amendment right to punch someone in the face is not going to work. Nor would it work if you expressed yourself by shooting them in the head. More broadly, you can only exercise your rights so long as you don't infringe mine. You burning your flag is free speech: you burning mine is criminal damage. As a rather trivial point - in the millisecond before the fist contacted the head there was clearly "imminent harm".

If someone sent me a gift in exchange for a favor and I did said favor can I be required to return the gift?

A friend recently mailed me an X-Box One and a Samsung Galaxy S10 in the condition that I complete Nightwave Season 2 for them in a PlayStation Network Video Game known as Warframe. So I did log on his account and complete this for him every single day from when this started. Then midway during this, he added an extra stipulation that was NOT a part of the original deal after the gift was sent out: That I should help him find a job on a casting website called Casting Networks. It should go without saying but I feel altering the terms of a conditional agreement midway without the expressed consent of the other party is illegal and unethical. Would I be required by law to give him back his phone after completing the original agreement, but not completing the additional provisions added without my consent. I feel I don't have to return this phone since it was given to me as a gift.

am I required to send the stuff back? No, but you should be able to prove that you met the conditions of the original contract between you two. There is no gift. There is a compensation that forms part of the contract between the offeror and you. The offeror's preference to call it a "gift" does not change the legal fact that his offer and your acceptance to complete Nightwave Season 2 constitutes the formation of a contract . From that standpoint, you are entitled to keep the items he mailed to you as long as you honor your part in that contract. You are right by conjecturing that a party is not allowed to unilaterally alter a contract. Any modification has to be agreed upon by all parties to that contract. However, a consent or agreement may be inferred from the parties' subsequent conduct . Hence the best way to pre-empt or supersede any such inference consists of letting that party know that you disapprove of the belated alteration(s). The absence of a written agreement can only complicate matters, though, since it appears that neither party has an objective, directly credible way to prove the terms of the original contract. Perhaps such terms can be deduced from the subsequent emails that he has been sending you, but that is impossible to ascertain without knowing the wording of the subsequent communications between you two. Lastly, enforceability of your contract is less clear if completing Nightwave Season 2 through someone else's performance amounts to an unlawful act. Not being knowledgeable of the terms and conditions of that game (?), I am unable to state with certainty whether the offeror could lawfully recover from you the items he mailed.

Is it legal for a restaurant to assume tips on cash payment?

A friend recently posted that, She is a waitress that receives tips. Her restaurant has a POS machine. This POS machine assumes a 15% tip on all cash payments. She can not alter this setting. Because the tax liability is on the waitress the only value I can see in the restaurant forcing this on her is to mitigate the likelihood of triggering an audit. This seems to amount to the theft of wages for a service to mitigate the establishment triggering an IRS audit, does this satisfy a claim to wage theft? It creates a situation where wait staff can actually be forced to pay income tax on unearned wages.

The difficulty is that tips are, by statute, considered a form of wages rather than a form of self-employment income for the tipped employee for income tax purposes (in contrast, employers don't have to keep track of tips for minimum wage purposes, tipped employees just have an extremely low minimum wage+). (If it was self-employment income, withholding and paying self-employment tax which is paid in lieu of FICA taxes, would be solely the employee's problem and none of the employer's business.) A comment notes, probably correctly, that: If wages plus tips do not add up to the full regular (non-tipped) minimum wage, the employer must pay the difference. This is not well-enforced, however. So, employers have a duty to report to the IRS and withhold taxes from their best estimate of combined wages and tips in a manner authorized by IRS regulations. If they don't, the employers face stiff penalties from the IRS for failing to withhold taxes. There are tax regulations and other forms of official guidance governing when it is permissible to infer tips on cash payments in this fashion. It isn't truly "wage theft". The employee still gets whatever the actual tip is, and the employer still doesn't get the tip itself. Instead, what the employer does is withhold taxes for the benefit of the employee (and with respect to FICA an equal share of employer obligations withholding) based upon estimated wages and tips combined. The income tax withholding is annually reconciled (in theory anyway) against actual taxes owed on the annual tax return. If you maintain good records, you might get audited, but you'd probably win. If you maintain sloppy records or don't keep track at all, you'd probably lose in an audit. To reconcile the error in income tax reporting in federal tax law, the waiter files a 1040 with the W-2 from the employer. The waiter reports the amount withheld in one box. The waiter reports the correct amount of wages and salary and tips rather than the incorrect amount in the wage and salary box. The waiter files a supplement to the tax return page explaining the that W-2 is inaccurate. The waiter calculates tax and shows entitlement to a refund, and the IRS either writes a check or audits after which the IRS or if there is no agreement the tax court decides who is right. Cash tips should be logged daily by the waiter and regularly deposited. (I've done this before personally, with success in the audit process, in cases of erroneous 1099s for my personal taxes.) Reconciling errors in FICA withholdings is rather more difficult, but erroneous overwithholding still provides a benefit to the employee, and the employee's survivors, in the long run in that case. This is done in the form of larger Social Security benefit checks that are based on the inflated wage and tip estimate and the actual FICA taxes paid. If the employee actually receives more cash tips than reported by the employer and doesn't correctly increase the amount in a tax return, the tipped employee is actually engaged in petty tax evasion (and, in practice, excess cash tips are rarely reported). The circumstances under which a fixed percentage may be properly set and what it should be are too technical for an answer here. Systemically, the problem with the applicable regulations is that the inferred tip percentage is benchmarked against the tips paid on credit card payments, per IRS guidance and permission, but actually, customers tip at lower percentages of the bill when paying in cash than when paying via credit card. This is a flaw in the law, but it doesn't represent impropriety on the part of the employer.

Is an employer required to tell you why they withdrew an offer based on a background check?

A friend recently received two job offers. He accepted one and rejected the other. The employer he accepted subsequently withdrew the offer because of what came up during a background check. He has asked the employer for the substance of the background check that was grounds for withdrawing the offer, but has not received any response. Is there any requirement that this information be shared, since it was the basis for terminating a contract? Furthermore, if one rejects an offer to accept another, does the withdrawal of the other offer constitute a tort, e.g., violation of promissory estoppal?

Anyone who uses a credit report or another type of consumer report to deny your application for credit, insurance, or employment – or to take another adverse action against you – must tell you, and must give you the name, address, and phone number of the agency that provided the information. Summary of Your Rights Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act Read some more of that document. It tells you that you have a right to see your file. It also tells you who to contact. Promissory estoppel is not something that is violated. It's a legal doctrine which can help enforce a promise made in the absence of a contract. Without more facts it's impossible to predict if promissory estoppel can help your friend. And if there aren't more facts it's unlikely that PE will help as this appears to be a routine job offer contingent on a background check. Now, the action based on a background check might be interesting especially if your friend is a member of a protected class. You can read more about this in the document I linked to.

At what point is it punishable to support a &quot;criminal organisation&quot;?

A friend said to me the other day that she was worried that she had supported the the " Last Generation " ("Letzte Generation") organization financially. The Last Generation often blocks the streets of Berlin and other large cities in Germany to encourage politicians to focus more on climate change. In the past, it has been possible to support the organization through donations to help them afford the legal costs they face after their actions. The background to this is that in Germany the Last Generation organization as a criminal organization because of its activities. As a criminal organization because of its activities. Now my friend is of the opinion that if that were to happen, she would have committed a retroactive offence. Because supporting a criminal organization in Germany is a punishable offence. According to my legal understanding, I would say that an organization that has been retroactively classified as a criminal organisation does not does not mean that it has committed a criminal offence. So that it has nothing to fear here. Am I right?

england-and-wales Short Answer: Paying legal fees for a criminal organisation is not (by my reading of the law) an offence. But if it is, retrospective legislation is prohibited in all but a few situations. Long Answer: There are two issues here: Support for an organised crime group This is an offence contrary to section 45 Serious Crime Act 2015: (1) A person who participates in the criminal activities of an organised crime group commits an offence. (2) For this purpose, a person participates in the criminal activities of an organised crime group if the person takes part in any activities that the person knows or reasonably suspects— (a) are criminal activities of an organised crime group, or (b) will help an organised crime group to carry on criminal activities HOWEVER it seems unlikely that " donations to help them afford the legal costs they face after their actions " would meet the emboldened requirements at subsection 2(b) as it does not appear to be supporting "criminal activities." That said, each case will be considered on its own merits. Retrospective legislation Generally, this is prohibited under the European Convention on Human Rights, enacted under Article 7 Human Rights Act 1988: No punishment without law 1 No one shall be held guilty of any criminal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a criminal offence under national or international law at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the criminal offence was committed. 2 This Article shall not prejudice the trial and punishment of any person for any act or omission which, at the time when it was committed, was criminal according to the general principles of law recognised by civilised nations. However, paragraph 2 does allow for retrospective legislation if the need arises. For example the War Crimes Act 1991 retrospectively criminalises murder etc committed in Germany or its occupied territories during the second world war. Although tagged germany , I have answered according to the LawSE Help Centre : " we expect and encourage answers dealing with other jurisdictions ... please tag your answer using the tag markdown: [tag: some-tag] "

Are technology patents useful?

A friend tells me it's not worth it to get a patent on a web application because they are not useful. Either: the USPTO has stopped granting patents on "process" improvements (i.e. web apps) or they are not useful once granted. Take, for example, the fact that Amazon technically owns the patent for selling stuff over the internet . So, I ask this community: Are technology patents useful?

Yes, technology patents are useful. Regarding the Amazon patent you referred to, it only covers Amazon's one-click ordering (and similar single-action ordering), and it is immensely valuable to Amazon. Their competitors (essentially, anyone who sells things online) would love to use a similar system, but to do so, they must either pay Amazon a licensing fee or risk being sued for patent infringement. Beyond the value that patents can bring in court or at the negotiation table, and the value that they can have in dissuading potential competitors from taking away your business, patents can also have great defensive value. Some technology companies amass vast collections of patents for defensive purposes. They do not necessarily plan to sue anyone for patent infringement, but if one of their competitors were to sue them, they have the arsenal to effectively countersue.

How long is Ghislaine Maxwell&#39;s trial likely to last?

A friend wants to visit NYC and go to the trial starting 29 July. She's wants to stay a month. I reckon the likelihood that is 1) the start date will be moved back, and 2) it will run way, way longer than a month. There will be a mountain of evidence to get through. OJ Simpson's trial ran for 134 days! (Is it fair to make a comparison?) Any thoughts on this? I'm in the UK. What's it like in the US?

If the matter goes to trial, there is a precedent for a figure in the years, namely the McMartin preschool trial . The first trial involved 3 years of testimony and 9 weeks of deliberation, resulting in acquittal for one defendant. A second defendant was cleared of only 52 of the 65 charges but two jurors would not acquit on the remaining counts. The second trial of 6 of those charges lasted 2 months and resulted in a hung jury, at which point the prosecutor gave up. This is the longest criminal trial in US history. This book esp. ch. 2 computes a median total trial duration of 11 hour and seven minutes for criminal trials, from jury selection though deliberation. However that figure goes up to 33 hour and 4 minutes for homicide cases, and it also turns out that venue matters (almost an order of magnitude longer trials in Marin county compared to Elizabeth NJ). Unfortunately there is no analysis of variance in that study, so we don't know about factors tending to result in longer trials vs. shorter trials. Given all of the factors related to trials, it's likely that the trial, if there is a trial, will last less than a year.

vehicle insurance settlement

A friend was rear ended and the other party's vehicle insurance agency sent them a release and settlement of property damage claim with some vague conditions in an email: Here is the release [attached to the email] that I will need to have signed to be able to move forward. Once I have a copy of the title, and you let me know when would be a good time for you to have the vehicle picked up. We will also have to have the title processed per state guidelines, please hold onto the title for that. My friend signed, scanned, and emailed back the release which included the settled on dollar value, and agreed on a date the following week the agency suggested for the pickup. If the offer letter mentioned nothing about vehicle title status (ie clean vs salvage), and the insurance agency missed the fact the vehicle was salvage condition, what is the likelihood the insurance agency is able to cancel the settlement and revise the reimbursement value, if they notice the title is marked as salvage condition? I think the signed settlement may be 'binding' but I have absolutely zero legal knowledge. Thank you. Here's the letter: This release agreement is made and entered by x and y and its affiliated and related companies and corporations and past, present, and future officers..

A salvage title does not negate the value of a vehicle. If there was no fraud (lying about the title) on the owner's part, and if there was actual offer and acceptance (not "negotiations in progress") then the agreement should be binding – but you would have to read the agreement to see if there are any escape clauses that would allow either party to escape the consequences of the agreement.

Is a lie by ommission to make it seem like a legal offices services are required legal?

A friend was researching using a sperm donor she knows to do IVF. she got concerned when she read this website's legal 'advice' They basically say that unlike most states PA has no law that says a sperm donor is not considered the legal father if he donates through a clinic, and lacking such a law the situation comes down to case law which will be ruled based off of the specifics of the case; with the clear implication that even donating at a doctor offices has a high chance to lead to the sperm donor being considered the legal father. What they fail to mention is that the case law in this situation seems pretty clear, as there is already a ruling stating that a donation through a clinic does not make a sperm donor the legal father. So unless I'm misunderstanding what looks to be a pretty clear cut example of case law it would seem that the legal office's website is quite misleading, and likely this is done intentionally as fear mongering to scare people into using their legal office to have a contract written up to protect them. This is extra ironic because as far as I can tell by scanning the previous brief it looks like PA case law falls strongly on the side of not respecting donor contracts (though I haven't fully researched the fact, the presidents the brief cites definitely support the idea that parent's can't sign away their child's right), so it seems like the firm is misleading people about the law so they can offer to write contracts that likely won't be respected. I know the website is not technically lying in what they say, but it seems intentional misleading. I doubt a legal firm would break the law so blatantly, so I assume the claims on the website must be legal. However, that surprises me since what little I do know about common law situations it seems like 'technical truths' that are intentionally misleading usually are treated as falsehoods in other situations, for instance slander/libel laws or contract rulings trying to emphasis intent of contract instead of just the letter of the contract. So, why is a claim like this allowed? Is this either not as clear cut a lie of omission as it seems to be to me, or are such lies by omission actually allowed?

Let's look at what they say: Pennsylvania does not have any statutory laws governing assisted reproductive technology. True Pennsylvania’s laws regarding sperm donors come only from case law that are specific to the facts of the case being considered by the court. True and trivial given the previous sentence. Pennsylvania courts have found sperm donor contracts to be legally enforceable. True, that's what Ferguson v McKiernan says in the first paragraph of the decision. Your statement that "PA case law falls strongly on the side of not respecting donor contracts" is, at least as far as the case you cite, flatly wrong. In other cases, the contract may or may not be enforcable indeed the court agrees with this specifically: Although locating future cases on this spectrum may call upon courts to draw very fine lines, courts are no strangers to such tasks, and the instant case, which we must resolve, is not nearly so difficult. This also directly supports the previous sentence. Therefore, even if you go through a fertility clinic, a contract between the donor and the intended parents would need to be in place before the conception. True, this is exactly what Ferguson v McKiernan says. You assert that Ferguson v McKiernan says "donation through a clinic does not make a sperm donor the legal father", however, it doesn't say that at all. The status of the doner as the father was never an issue - both parties agreed that he was the biological father and the court accepted that. What was at issue is if he had the rights and obligations of a father that had been removed by the contract. The lower courts held that the contract was unenforcable as being contrary to public policy because it removed rights from the children who were not parties to the contract. However, the State Supreme Court held that the contract was enforcable. TL;DR What they say on their website is not misleading.

Can an incapacitated individual consent to marriage?

A friend was to be married on Saturday afternoon. He suffered a debilitating stroke Saturday morning. Today he can respond to verbal prompts to move his left hand a bit. This occurred in the USA in the state of South Carolina but I’m also interested in law related to the issue from other areas. Could a hospital room marriage take place, given his limited physical ability, that is legally binding in every way?

In england-and-wales this would fall within the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and depends on whether he lacks the mental not physical , capacity to make the decision for himself . Can he: Understand the information relevant to the decision Retain that information Use or weigh that information as part of the process of making the decision Communicate that decision (whether by talking, using sign language or any other means). If the answer to any of these is" no " then he cannot lawfully give true consent. Although the Act allows for others, such as a power of attorney, to make decisions on behalf of someone lacking the mental capacity, s.27 specifically excludes the decision to marry.

Do Swiss banks have the right to demand seeing a visa for a foreign country?

A friend who is a Swiss citizen and resident of Switzerland has a checking account with a Swiss bank. Because of a stay in the US, he was asked to file a "Status Declaration Form for Individuals" confirming that he is not a US resident. In addition to many more documents including tax returns, the bank asks to see his US visa. Does a Swiss bank have the legal right to request seeing a visa for a foreign country, and if so under which paragraph of which law?

Yes The relevant Swiss law is known as the FATCA Agreement and has been in force since 30/6/2014. FATCA stands for the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, a unilateral set of US regulations that applies worldwide for all countries. It requires foreign financial institutions to disclose information on US accounts to the Internal Revenue Service or levy a high tax. At the moment, Switzerland uses the "Model 2" agreement with the USA, which requires the consent of the US taxpayer or an administrative request by the IRS. There are plans to move to the "Model 1" arrangement, which uses automatic data sharing, but the timeline is uncertain. The bank is required to verify that your friend is not a US tax resident, and the visa is one of the pieces of evidence they need. Your friend can, of course, refuse to produce it. The bank can then either refuse to do business with them, or treat them as though they are a US tax resident and withhold the required tax until such time as they prove they are not.

Is offering a means to break one&#39;s own policy legal?

A friend's kid's High School has a strict policy against using social media during school time. My friend agrees, and made sure the kids' access to social media is blocked on all the devices they own. However, the school distributed laptops to kids without any social media blocks. When my friend contacted the school about it, the response was that the kids should be mindful of the school policies, and, if they would use the social media (to which they have access only via the laptops the same school distributed) they will be punished. Is this an example of entrapment? Is this any different than, say, placing an open bottle of vodka in front of a teen who never asked for it, and "expecting" him not to drink it, and holding him responsible if he does?

Entrapment is when a law-enforcement organization, or other parts of a government working with an LEO, entice a person to violate a law, and then prosecute the person for that violation, usually arresting the person first. Note that this definition of "entrapment" is US-specific, and does not apply in all other countries, perhaps not in any other county. But then, the question is tagged for California. As the school presumably does not intend any criminal prosecution, these actions are not legally entrapment, even if they are morally similar. Entrapment is not itself illegal even when it leads to criminal charges. That is to say, the police and prosecutor cannot be charged criminally for engaging in entrapment, nor sued for money damages by the person entrapped. However, entrapment can be a defense. If a person charged with crime can show that the crime only occurred because of entrapment, that will generally be grounds for acquittal. In addition, many people consider entrapment to be morally and ethically wrong. Generally, for a situation to be entrapment legally, a person must not only have an opportunity to break a law, but must be actively persuaded or enticed to do so, and the idea must come from the entrapper. However, the question says that the school "has a strict policy against using social media during school time ". If the students retain the laptops outside of school hours (as they may well do) it might be fine with the school to use social media during those times, so perhaps school authorities don't think a blocker is needed. In any case there is no legal requirement for the school to install a social media blocking program, even if use of the school-issued laptops to access social media is against school rules at all times. A parent could install a blocker, unless school rules for use of the laptops prohibit doing so. Of course, in later life, people will almost surely encounter situations where they could do something unlawful or forbidden, but should not . An employer might provide access to computers, but forbid using them to access porn, even though no blocking software is in place. It is also not a bad idea to check school-issued laptops for possible privacy violations. There have been cases where school IT departments or contractors routinely activated built-in web-cams, ostensibly as an anti-theft measure, but in fact observing private situations, including inside the student's home.

Which state&#39;s defensive driving test to take in case of out-of-state speeding ticket?

A friend, who is resident of IL and has an IL DL, got a speeding ticket in Oklahoma, which they refused to sign. They were charged to drive at 61 mph in a 40 mph zone with a ticket of $259. Can they take a defensive driving test to get the points off? If, yes which state's test they need, OK or IL? Note that this is their first ever ticket.

Points reduction, for points assessed by Oklahoma, is possible, see here : "Two (2) points shall be credited to a person's driving record upon successful completion of an approved Driver Improvement/Defensive Driving Course ". There is, apparently, no authoritative state-wide published list of such courses. In the case of OK City , they give you a number to call (or else show up at city all) to make the request. So it would depend on the local policy.

Assuming a one trillion dollar coin exists, and is stolen, is there are sequence of events that could lead to someone legally owning it?

A funny (and seemingly legal, if absurd) proposal during the current debt ceiling debate is to mint a one trillion dollar platinum coin and deposit it with the Treasury to reduce the debt below the limit. This leads to the amusing hypothetical case of someone stealing said trillion dollar coin from the Treasury, or the coin somehow going missing (gets lost in a couch and the couch is sold as-is in a federal auction). Are there any means by which someone could become the legal owner of this coin, and thereby have a one trillion dollar plus net worth, without actually earning one trillion dollars and buying it? I figure if it's actually stolen property, even if all statutes of limitation have passed and even if you committed no crimes in acquiring it, you'd probably be required to return it, but I'm not sure on this, especially in cases where you committed no crime yourself (e.g. if the auction scenario mentioned above occurred because the thieves dropped the coin on their way out of the building with the buyer legally and inadvertently acquiring the coin as part of the auctioned item). We can ignore the practical issues with proving it's "the real coin" rather than a counterfeit; I'm just curious about the legality assuming the coin was made in some way that rendered it immune to counterfeiting ( handwaves explanation ). Yes, this is a hypothetical, but I'd be willing to bet if any such coin existed, there'd be at least one movie made that involved either stealing it or becoming an overnight trillionaire by accident, so I figured I'd get the jump on the plausibility of such a movie.

As current law stands, it would be property of the US Mint if coined, US Treasury, if printed as a treasury note, not federal reserve note. This was decided by appellate court in regards to 1933 gold double eagles, coins that were struck, but never released to public. 3rd circuit pdf

Does rebuilding a computer game from scratch infringe copyright?

A game named Blinx, was manufactured last in 2004 by a company named Microsoft. In 2014-2015 they dropped the trademark, and so the name is usable, but the game, the intellectual material is copyrighted. If I don't use their images or their code, can I legally reproduce the game?

If you mean to " make a game with the same game rules and logic, but with new code & new graphics ", then yes, you can. Copyright protects an expression of an idea, but not the idea itself. In the context of game development, an idea can be tic-tac-toe game. I write a webpage with JavaScript to play the game, that is my expression . You cannot reproduce my webpage without my consent, but you are free to code an exact replica of the game say, in iOS. To prevent someone from making a game with the exact (or very similar) rules, you'd need a patent. Two famous games which are patented are " Monopoly " (they got the name right!) and Tetris *. There is a reason why you see people making many Reversi, Sudoku, Tic-Tac-Toe etc implementations in the app store, but not Monopoly and Tetris. *Technically, Tetris is not protected by patent, only by copyright. Many developers have rejected the company's copyright infringement claims as game design is not covered by copyright.

Evidence needed for damages

A gang beat me up and incurred a $1200 medical bill. Police filed charges but did not arrest. What evidence do I need to file a civil lawsuit over the bill? They probably deleted the door camera footage. I have a police officer and his body cam showing my injuries, a medical bill, but no direct witnesses to the event. Is it enough to show that this huge group of guys standing around me and me being injured? Or is that not conclusive evidence? If I can order the amazon go camera footage and find it was deleted does that make them look bad on destroying evidence? For clarity they invited me over to their house to return a car they stole which is a separate case, then kidnapped and attacked me.

You need whatever evidence you need to prove your case on the balance of probabilities You have to decide on what legal basis you are seeking to recover damages; presumably Battery . Each cause of action has elements that you need to prove. Some of these elements may be conceded by the defendant - if so, you don't need any evidence at all. If the elements are contested then you will provide evidence and they will provide evidence and the more probative and convincing evidence wins with ties going to the defendant.

How far does someone need to be moved for kidnapping?

A gang invited me to a house, when I arrived they dragged me around the property and beat me up. There are no witnesses on my side but I think it is pretty obvious what happened and I hope the police just make the gang confess by giving rewards for information. How far does someone have to be moved for it to be considered a kidnapping? Do you need to be driven in a car a long distance or is dragging someone into a house enough? Does it depend? There was also robbery and aggravated assault involved so if kidnapping can be proven they all get life without parole.

Here is Nevada's definition of kidnapping : 1.  A person who willfully seizes, confines, inveigles, entices, decoys, abducts, conceals, kidnaps or carries away a person by any means whatsoever with the intent to hold or detain, or who holds or detains, the person for ransom, or reward, or for the purpose of committing sexual assault, extortion or robbery upon or from the person, or for the purpose of killing the person or inflicting substantial bodily harm upon the person, or to exact from relatives, friends, or any other person any money or valuable thing for the return or disposition of the kidnapped person, and a person who leads, takes, entices, or carries away or detains any minor with the intent to keep, imprison, or confine the minor from his or her parents, guardians, or any other person having lawful custody of the minor, or with the intent to hold the minor to unlawful service, or perpetrate upon the person of the minor any unlawful act is guilty of kidnapping in the first degree which is a category A felony. 2.  A person who willfully and without authority of law seizes, inveigles, takes, carries away or kidnaps another person with the intent to keep the person secretly imprisoned within the State, or for the purpose of conveying the person out of the State without authority of law, or in any manner held to service or detained against the person’s will, is guilty of kidnapping in the second degree which is a category B felony. As you can see, you don't have to take the victim anywhere. Seizing and confining against a person's will suffice. Substantial bodily harm is defined as "Bodily injury which creates a substantial risk of death or which causes serious, permanent disfigurement or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ; or Prolonged physical pain".

What counts as work complete for the purpose of a construction lien

A general contractor is putting up a large office building for a customer. A sub-contractor is hired to install the dry wall and office doors. The work is essentially complete. More than 90 days has gone by and the sub-contractor has not been paid. The general contractor is close to handing title of the building to the customer. The credit manager of the sub-contractor is unhappy that his firm has not be yet paid. He would like to put a lien on the building but 90 days have passed since the work has stopped. He then notices that one of the terms of the contract says that the sub-contractor must deliver a garbage can for the lobby and his firm has failed to do so. So he buys a garbage can and delivers it to the new building. He then places a lien on the building. The general contractor's lawyer says that the lien is invalid because more than 90 days have passed. The credit manager says it is because the work was not complete until the garbage can was delivered. Who is right?

The garbage can probably wouldn't work because it isn't a fixture or part of the property. But the bigger question doesn't have a general answer and has to be determined on a case by case basis by a judge interpreting the language of the mechanic's lien statute in light of experience and the evidence presented. There are certainly cases where a subcontractor could do some work on a contract, pause work, and then do some more work on the contract, in order to benefit from the later "last work done" for mechanic's lien filing purposes. The pertinent New Jersey Statute is here . The statutory section establishing the deadline states, with bolded language limiting the kind of conduct contemplated in the question: 2A:44A-6. Filing lien claim A lien claim shall be signed, acknowledged and verified by oath of the claimant or, in the case of a partnership or corporation, a partner or duly authorized officer thereof, and filed with the county clerk not later than 90 days following the date the last work, services, material or equipment was provided for which payment is claimed. No lien shall attach, or be enforceable under the provisions of this act and, in the case of a residential construction contract, compliance with sections 20 and 21 of this act, unless the lien claim is filed in the form, manner and within the time provided by this section and section 8 of this act, and a copy thereof served on the owner and, if any, the contractor and the subcontractor, against whom the claim is asserted, pursuant to section 7 of this act. For purposes of this act, warranty or other service calls, or other work, materials or equipment provided after completion or termination of a claimant's contract shall not be used to determine the last day that work, services, material or equipment was provided.

Is there a Statute of Limitation for crimes such as molestation?

A girl is 17 now. She lives in Illinois. When she was 6, she was molested by her 17 year old uncle. Does the fact that this crime happened 11 years ago mean she cannot get justice? It was either in Phoenix or Southern Illinois.

Maybe, depending on exactly what happened and where it happened. In Arizona, there is no statute of limitations for sexual assault . A prosecution for ... any offense that is listed in chapter 14 or 35.1 of this title and that is a class 2 felony ... may be commenced at any time. Chapter 14 is titled "Sexual offenses", while 35.1 is "Sexual exploitation of children". It's likely that whatever happened will be covered by one of those two chapters. The situation in Illinois is somewhat more complicated : (720 ILCS 5/3-5) (from Ch. 38, par. 3-5) Sec. 3-5. General Limitations. (b) Unless the statute describing the offense provides otherwise, or the period of limitation is extended by Section 3-6, a prosecution for any offense not designated in Subsection (a) must be commenced within 3 years after the commission of the offense if it is a felony, or within one year and 6 months after its commission if it is a misdemeanor. (720 ILCS 5/3-6) Extended limitations. (j) (1) When the victim is under 18 years of age at the time of the offense, a prosecution for criminal sexual assault, aggravated criminal sexual assault, predatory criminal sexual assault of a child, aggravated criminal sexual abuse, or felony criminal sexual abuse may be commenced at any time when corroborating physical evidence is available or an individual who is required to report an alleged or suspected commission of any of these offenses under the Abused and Neglected Child Reporting Act fails to do so. (2) In circumstances other than as described in paragraph (1) of this subsection (j), when the victim is under 18 years of age at the time of the offense, a prosecution for criminal sexual assault, aggravated criminal sexual assault, predatory criminal sexual assault of a child, aggravated criminal sexual abuse, or felony criminal sexual abuse, or a prosecution for failure of a person who is required to report an alleged or suspected commission of any of these offenses under the Abused and Neglected Child Reporting Act may be commenced within 20 years after the child victim attains 18 years of age. (3) When the victim is under 18 years of age at the time of the offense, a prosecution for misdemeanor criminal sexual abuse may be commenced within 10 years after the child victim attains 18 years of age. (4) Nothing in this subdivision (j) shall be construed to shorten a period within which a prosecution must be commenced under any other provision of this Section. Depending on what happened, the statute of limitations may have expired eight or nine years ago (unlikely -- the above list looks fairly comprehensive), or she has until either her 28th or 38th birthday to file charges.

How do Florida&#39;s labor laws protect employees injured when asked to do something unreasonable?

A girl that works for a major retail chain, is left unable to lift her arm above her head after being asked to lift a 180lb box. When trying to perform this task her shoulder "popped". She has requested to file an injury report with the company but was ask not to because: It's a lot of paperwork. And the location is nearing a year without any injuries being doctor level. Do Florida labor laws protect employees in such cases? Can she seek any kind of legal action if the company refuses to pay her medical bills?

You should consult this web page from the Florida government. First, you are expected to report the injury to the employer within 30 days, and if you do not, your claim may be denied. You have actually done that (they have actual knowledge of the injury so a future petition is not barred by the 30 day rule ). Then within 7 days they are to report the injury to their insurance company. They acknowledge that employers may refuse to report injuries, and clarify that the employee has a right to report the injury to the insurance company (they offer assistance in doing that). Your medical expenses would be covered. There is also a provision that you can get compensation for lost time. It is against the law for them to fire you for filing a claim or attempting to file a claim ("No employer shall discharge, threaten to discharge, intimidate, or coerce any employee by reason of such employee’s valid claim for compensation or attempt to claim compensation under the Workers’ Compensation Law"). Regardless of the effect on the location's record of reported accidents or the amount of paperwork involved, it is not obviously in the interest of an employee to forgo their rights to compensation. The employee's attorney can advise the employee whether the company's alternative offer is advantageous. If one does not take action (notifying the insurance company for example), eventually they will have waived your rights for compensation. Supposing that the employee files a report with the insurance company, and the company then fires her in retaliation. This would not involve any unemployment compensation. There is no provision under the law for the state to litigate on her behalf, although the attorney general might file a class action suit if the company is engaged in widespread illegal terminations. So it would fall on the employee to litigate the matter: retaliation for filing a workman's comp claim is one of the recognized grounds for a wrongful termination suit. There are numerous attorneys who may take such a case on a contingency basis (it would depend on the actual details, to be discussed with the attorney).

FL, USA - Recording/Voyeurism Laws In Harassment Situation

A good friend is being harassed by his neighbor, and is at the end of his wits trying to get some recourse. Essentially the neighbor is belligerent: comes out when family members are home specifically to verbally harass them, trashes the area around their house by blowing lawn debris or placing garbage around it, puts signs in his yard that points to their property to shame them, the list goes on. They do not have property surveillance, so the attempt thus far has been to hide a cell phone with recording on when he comes out to harass them from his driveway, photo-document the trash/signs, etc. The police can't typically do anything in this dispute because a crime hasn't actually been committed, even with video evidence of verbal harassment. Being said, in exasperation the friend has uploaded videos documenting the issue to a video-sharing site. I suspect there are Florida statutes that, regardless of reason, prohibit this manner of recording where the harasser is at home (a time/place which there is a reasonable expectation of privacy), does not know about the recording, and it has been disseminated online in a manner which would shame the harasser in the eyes of someone reasonable. I'd like to think this is in violation of FL 810.145 but the language there is almost specific for recording someone dressing or through their clothes. Am I correct in my thinking? As a side question, for such disputes, would the best course of action be to collect good audiovisual evidence and then file a harassment claim and just prove it in court?

FL 810.145 (c) - "Place and time when a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy" In Florida, there is no expectation of privacy in public. You can legally record both audio and visual anything you can see in public. As for the harassment, set up security cams and record as much of it as possible in order to provide the Police with evidence of any potential crimes.

An erstwhile friend misled me to believe she had committed suicide. Can I take action?

A good friend of many years, but with whom I fell out two years ago, meticulously misled me via multiple emails purporting to come from a member of her family, that she had died. Not only died, but committed suicide 2 days after last contacting me by email. I was very distressed, and announced the death not only on Facebook, with a long and compassionate eulogy, including a photo of her and I, but also personally to multiple people that she once knew in our town (she left about 3 years ago). Some of the later mails went on to impart a portion of responsibility to me for the apparent suicide, fictitiously citing her mother and step father. This increased my distress then, and my anger now, further. I consider this kind of hoax to be in more than bad taste, and indeed, punishable, as she has not only humiliated me, and the several people who called me, but because of the public post, made me look socially awkward, stupid. She also put many people through a lot of sadness for the 24 hour duration of her hoax. Has she broken UK law? What recourse do I have to ensure she doesn't do things like this again? She has a history of bad behaviour (though this takes the cake).

Has she broken UK law? You might have only a claim of harassment because of the multiplicity of acts (i.e., emails) with which your former friend made the hoax. Pseudocide or faked death is in and of itself not unlawful, and your description does not reflect that she obtained or sought to obtain something of value . Likewise, your scenario seemingly falls short of a tort of intentional infliction of mental shock . In addition to having to proof severity of distress, it is noteworthy (from an article regarding data privacy ) that " compensation awards for emotional distress are typically low value and may not provide sufficient incentive to bring such a claim ". Nor is online impersonation of lay people (such as a family member) for purposes of that hoax a crime under UK law. The impersonated member of her family might have a claim of defamation if the wording of the emails injure or tend to injure that relative's reputation. Similarly if the emails contain defamatory falsehoods regarding someone else. However, the fact that you published information [on which you relied] would defeat your claim of defamation as for her hoax making you " look socially awkward, stupid ". Since there is no judicial recourse for preventing her from doing this again, your best option is to clarify to your audience that this was all a prank of hers. Besides helping to restore your reputation, your clarification will warn others not to blindly rely on other misrepresentations she might make or has made.

Does the https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/applications/ give the correct data to calculate the &quot;patent term adjustment&quot; days?

A google search reveals that USPTO might mis-calculate the patent term adjustment days. Do their website they have the right data to allow someone to calculate the patent term-adjustment days or is there data subject to error? Is the Patent Term Adjustment Days equal to Non-overlapping PTO days minus Applicant Delays? https://www.troutman.com/insights/the-uspto-may-be-miscalculating-patent-term-adjustments.html

If by "right data" you mean does the record at the USPTO of all the back-and-forth between the applicant and the office reflect what really occurred, then yes. The linked article says they do not follow the latest ruling on how to use that data to calculate the PTA, not that the data is erroneous. There have been court cases over PTA that the USPTO lost and some they won. If you have a pharmaceutical patent every day is millions of dollars Then there is a separate thing called Patent Term Extension for regulated inventions. The calculation is not straightforward see USPTO's explanation of the rules . (3) "A" DELAYS. This entry reflects adjustments to the term of the patent based upon USPTO delays pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 154(b)(1)(A)(i)-(iv) and the implementing regulations 37 CFR 1.702(a) & 37 CFR 1.703(a). All "A" delays will be included in the PTA determination that is mailed as part of the ISSUE NOTIFICATION LETTER. (4) "B" DELAYS. This entry reflects adjustments to the term of the patent based upon the patent failing to issue within three years of the actual filing date of the application in the United States under section 111(a) in the United States or, in the case of an international application, the date of commencement of the national stage under section 371. See 35 U.S.C. § 154(b) and implementing regulations 37 CFR 1.702(b) & 1.703(b). "B" delay is calculated at the time that the issue notification letter is generated and an issue date has been established. (5) "C" DELAYS. This entry reflects adjustments to the term of the patent based upon USPTO delays pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 154(C)(i)-(iii) and implementing regulations 37 CFR 1.702 (c)-(e) & 1.703(c)-(e). These delays include delays caused by interference proceedings, secrecy orders, and successful appellate reviews. (6) OVERLAPPING DAYS BETWEEN "A" AND "B" OR "A" AND "C". This entry reflects the calculation of overlapping delays consistent with the Federal Circuit's interpretation of 35 U.S.C. § 154(b)(2)(A) in Wyeth v. Kappos. Specifically, this entry reflects the summation of the number of days that an "A" delay occurred on the same calendar day with either a "B" delay or a "C" delay. The number of days determined to be overlapping will reduce the summation of the number of days calculated for "A" delays, "B" delays and "C" delays. (7) NONOVERLAPPING USPTO DELAYS. This entry reflects the overall summation of the USPTO delays minus any overlapping days. Particularly, it includes the following: ("A" delays + "B" delays + "C" delays) - (the number of calendar days overlapping between "A" delays and "B" delay + the number of calendar days overlapping between "A" delays and "C" delays). This entry does not reflect the number of days of applicant delays pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 154(b)(2)(C) and 37 CFR 1.704(b) and 37 CFR 1.704(c)(1)-(11). (8) PTO MANUAL ADJUSTMENTS. This entry reflects the UPSTO personnel adjusting the calculation to increase or decrease the patent term adjustment based upon a request for reconsideration of the patent term adjustment pursuant to 37 CFR 1.705(b) (9) APPLICANT DELAYS. This entry reflects adjustments of the patent term due to the Applicant's failure to engage in reasonable efforts to conclude prosecution of the application for the cumulative period in excess of three months. See 35 U.S.C. § 154(b)(2)(C)(ii) and implementing regulation 37 CFR 1.704(b). The entry also reflects additional Applicant's failure to engage in reasonable efforts to conclude prosecution of the application. See 35 U.S.C. § 154(b)(2)(C)(iii) and implementing regulations 37 CFR 1.704(c)(1)-(12). (10) TOTAL PTA CALCULATION. This entry reflects the summation of the following entries: NONOVERLAPPING USPTO DELAYS (+/or - PTO MANUAL ADJUSTMENTS) - APPLICANT DELAYS. It is noted that the TOTAL PTA CALCULATION will be determined at the time of the issuance of the patent and will be included in the ISSUE Notification Letter that is mailed to applicants approximately three weeks prior to issuance of the patent. Note the mention of a court case in (6). The USPTO lost badly in its then (2010) interpretation or PTA rules. Wyeth v. Kappos- holding that because, in the context of § 154(b)(C), § “154(b)'s language is clear, unambiguous, and intolerant of the PTO's suggested interpretation,” the Federal Circuit “accords no deference to the PTO's [interpretation] ” Then there are corner cases and lawsuits - See a quick summary of a case from 2012 In Exelixis, Inc., v. Kappos, the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia determined that the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) improperly reduces Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) in patents where the applicant files a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) more than three years after the original patent application filing date. The court held that the USPTO should not deduct any time from an applicant's PTA if the applicant files the RCE more than three years after the patent application was filed. Outcome Exelixis, Inc., v. Kappos In its November 1, 2012 opinion, the district court agreed with Exelixis and held that Section 154(b)(1)(B) does not require an applicant's PTA to be reduced by the time used to process an RCE that is filed after the end of the three-year application pendency period. See notes on two cases that went to court from PatentlyO In Actelion Pharm., Ltd. v. Matal (Fed. Cir. Feb. 6, 2018), the Federal circuit sided with the PTO in a patent term adjustment challenge holding that the PTA calculations beginning with a national-stage application were not triggered by the patentee’s statement that it “earnestly solicits early examination and allowance of these claims.” The problem was that “casual” request was buried within the remarks while the applicant failed to check the box on the form to expressly request. In a separate recently decided PTA case, a district court has agreed with Ariad that its original RCE filing should only cut-off PTA accumulation since the PTO negligently failed to process the filing (instead sending a notice of abandonment) and then took three months to withdraw the abandonment. ARIAD Pharm., Inc. v. Matal, 1:17-CV-733, 2018 WL 339141, at *1 (E.D. Va. Jan. 5, 2018)

Why Can’t I prove Negligence &amp; claim damages in delayed Admission Decision?

A gov admitting agency had the mandate to green-light my application but they halted it pending transcript verification from my previous university. I was later admitted but BECAUSE i wasn’t admitted by the preset deadline, i missed a scholarship. I mean, as is the custom elsewhere, students are admitted as the admitters await transcript verification responses from previous universities, but for my case they indefinitely suspended the admission altogether. I missed out on being considered for a scholarship that i had prepared for- for the last 3 years. I believe it was unfair coz verification only satisfies the interest of the admitter therefore an applicant should not suffer it’s consequences incase it delays or does not go well, besides verification wasn’t listed as a pre-condition for admission. As an applicant i satisfied the admitters requirements & expectations when i uploaded all required docs and paid the application fee which in the admitter’s ordinance is meant to appraise the application, and my interest and expectation was to be admitted BY the preset dates. How best if so can i or why can’t i claim damages for the admitting agency to give me all benefits i missed in the scholarship? Most specifically can i prove proximate cause? Thanx

You cannot claim damages because the government has sovereign immunity for functions performed as a government. That is, it can only be sued when it agrees to be sued. Notwithstanding, even if the government agrees to be sued by you, you probably won't win. If the "admittor" was exercising discretion that they properly possess under administrative law (almost certainly yes) then you would need to prove that the discretion was used maliciously or in a discriminatory way - while this is possible it is highly unlikely. Furthermore, even if this was a private matter, I do not think the damage is proximate enough in a legal sense. Unless you made it clear to the "admittor" that your scholarship was contingent on being admitted by a given date it is not something that was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of their actions. I would also be willing to bet that the application materials made it clear that a verified transcript was required and what that meant; this would make you the cause of the delay.

Why would a business accept an open ended indemnity clause?

A government contractor wants to place a blanket PO to our small business but has this open-ended indemnity clause: The Subcontractor agrees to indemnify and hold harmless [the contractor] and the United States Government, and their respective officers, employees and agents (the "Indemnities"), from and against any and all liabilities, of whatsoever kind or nature, arising out of or in any way connected with the Subcontractor's performance under this Agreement, excepting only (i) liability arising from affirmative acts, done with intent to cause loss, damage or injury, by the Indemnities; (ii) liability arising from the sole negligence of the Indemnities; or (iii) any express liability as may be specified elsewhere in this Agreement. Why would any business agree to such a clause when, at least in our case, a minor innocent error on our part could result in liability far exceeding the value of the PO? I spoke with multiple sources including lawyers and can't get a clear answer. The contractor claims they NEVER waive or modify the clause.

A contractor would agree because it basically it comes close to restating the state of the law in the absence of any agreement between the parties. So contrary to the answer of ShazamoMorebucks it probably would be enforced. Sometimes contracts that waive liability that would otherwise exist in the absence of an agreement are viewed as objectionable. But, a requirement in a contract that simply places upon a party the liability that they would have in the absence of an agreement is usually enforced. The Subcontractor agrees to indemnify and hold harmless [the contractor] and the United States Government, and their respective officers, employees and agents (the "Indemnities"), from and against any and all liabilities, of whatsoever kind or nature, arising out of or in any way connected with the Subcontractor's performance under this Agreement, excepting only (i) liability arising from affirmative acts, done with intent to cause loss, damage or injury, by the Indemnities; (ii) liability arising from the sole negligence of the Indemnities; or (iii) any express liability as may be specified elsewhere in this Agreement. The big limiting factor here is that the liability must arise out of or be connected with the Subcontractor's performance under the Agreement. Usually, if liability arises from the Subcontractor's performance, the Subcontractor would be, at least, jointly and severally liable for the liability in any case, where liability does not arise from the other party's intentional acts, or from the other party's sole negligence. Liability for defects in goods sold is generally a matter of strict liability. If the Subcontractor did defective work, and the general contractor simply purchased that work and did nothing else to contribute to the liability, why should it be on the hook? The only case where this may modify the default rule is when both the subcontractor and the general contractor are at fault. For example, maybe the subcontractor made a defective good but the defect was so obvious that the general contractor should have noticed a returned the goods before using them in a larger project. This puts full liability on the subcontractor, even when the general contractor is also negligent. But, in practice, the general contractor will still be on the hook for most of the liability that the general contractor is forced to pay, because the subcontractor will generally be almost judgment proof and will go bankrupt before it pays a small portion of the amount that it owes to the general contractor in the event of the subcontractor's fault giving rise to a major liability (e.g. if goods it supplied caused a multi-million dollar project to have to be done over from scratch). Also, subcontractors routinely can and do insure against this risk and figure the cost of the insurance into their prices. Working on a federal government subcontract can be a source of lots of business, and this is worth it if the primary risks can be insured against and the insurance cost can be recovered in the price charged for the work.

What are ways that money can be held in trust for a beneficiary?

A grandmother has a will which leaves money to three grandchildren. The way it's written, the money would be in trust (managed by their father) until they reach 35, at which point the money is theirs outright. If they reach 35 before she dies, then the trust is skipped entirely. One of the grandchildren (now 37) has some physical and mental health issues that lead to occasionally erratic behavior. The father has suggested to the grandmother that this means he's unable to manage his own affairs and she should write an exception so that grandchild's share is held in trust regardless of age. The grandson is really angry about this, and feels that this is meddling and controlling behavior. The truth lies somewhere in between (grandson is certainly irresponsible, but is not mentally incompetent) -- the two haven't gotten along well for years, and the proposal is causing a great deal of conflict and beginning to spread into a "pick sides" family-wide fight that can't end well. Hence, looking for ideas to propose a compromise that would satisfy all parties. What are alternatives to a trust managed by a family member that still enable some oversight of inherited assets? The grandson currently lives in New York State, but may move; the grandmother in Illinois. If this might be a better question for Money.SE, I apologize :)

The only alternative to a trust managed by a family member is a trust managed by an unrelated fiduciary. You really need to consult an estate planning practice in your jurisdiction to fully evaluate the options available there and to ensure that the details are implemented correctly.

Is it illegal to play a cover song?

A group decides to cover a protected piece of music. In this example, lets say " Bohemian Rhapsody by Queen ". Is the act of playing this song violate any copyright law? Does it make a difference if they make money off playing a cover?

Unless they have permission or pay the required royalty: yes . If they are playing it for personal entertainment or at a private function then they can make a fair use/dealing defence.

What constitutes &quot;management&quot; for an amateur radio club?

A group of licensed radio amateurs has joined together to form a club. The club meets monthly, sponsors classes to license new amateurs, hosts an amateur repeater station and operates at public events. The club has bylaws and is a 501(c)(3) entity. The club has no officers and no dues. As a small group of reasonable people, club members agree on what to do and chip in as needed. The club would like to obtain a permanent call sign for use at club events. (This in contrast to a "special event" call sign which would have to be obtained on a per-use basis.) The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations state, in part 97.5(b)(2) (emphasis supplied) : A club station license grant. A club station license grant may be held only by the person who is the license trustee designated by an officer of the club. The trustee must be a person who holds an operator/primary station license grant. The club must be composed of at least four persons and must have a name, a document of organization, management , and a primary purpose devoted to amateur service activities consistent with this part. The club is told by an organization that administers amateur radio licenses for the FCC that the club's "management" must comprise a president, vice president, secretary and treasurer. Part 97.5(b)(2) makes no mention of how the management should be structured; reference to "an officer" indicates that a single individual could comprise the management. The club eschews the trappings of a management structure, but would consider investing a single member with the title of president if needed to pass legal muster. What are the club's options?

The first thing is to change the club license to your name and address, as you are the custodian of the club license. The club license belongs to the club, but you ensure that all FCC rules are followed. The FCC privatized the Club Call Sign Assignment System several years ago. All club licenses MUST go through a Club Station Call Sign Administrator and there are three, the ARRL VEC in Newington, the W5YI VEC and the W4VEC. There is no charge, but the appropriate form must be used. When applying through the ARRL VEC, the form is the ARRL VEC Form 605-C. If the club does not have a club license and if it wants one, it can be obtained by using the above URL. The FCC will not accept club license forms directly from the applicant; if you send it to the FCC, it will be returned without action. The form must bear two different signatures, the new trustee and another officer in the club. The signatures cannot be the same. http://www.arrl.org/club-station-faq You can appoint someone president, but you will need more than one officer, or an officer and a trustee, since you need the trustee and the officer to sign. The form is available here: http://www.arrl.org/files/file/VEs/ARRLClub%20NEW%20605C-2017_Interactive.pdf

Is lying to get &quot;gardening leave&quot; fraud?

A group of my friends was celebrating one of our group securing a new job, and he was complaining about having to continue working at his old job for his 3 month notice period, we started discussing humorous ways that he could force his company to immediately terminate his contract. One of the group mentioned that his company had a policy for employees who had accepted a role with a competitor of immediately escorting the employee off the premises and placing them on gardening leave. Assuming my employer had a similar policy, and I secured a role with company A (who aren’t a competitor of my current employer), but I told my manager that I had secured a role with company B (who are a competitor) in an attempt to secure gardening leave. Have I committed fraud?

Yes, that would be fraud. From the Fraud Act 2006 : 2: Fraud by false representation 1) A person is in breach of this section if he— (a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and (b) intends, by making the representation— (i) to make a gain for himself [...] By saying that you had got a position with a competitor you would be dishonestly (i.e. you knew it was a lie) making a false representation. Your purpose was to obtain gardening leave, which is a gain for yourself.

Is a Director of an organization entitled to information on the D&amp;O insurance?

A group of several churches have come together to form a high school, with each church electing one representative to serve on a Board of Directors. My church's director has been met with resistance and obstacles when attempting to gain information on the Directors and Officers insurance. Can the Head of School (functionally, the CEO) refuse to provide information on the Insurance Policy (such as coverage amounts and proof of payment) to a member of the Board of Directors?

Employees must follow the lawful and reasonable directions of their employer The CEO is an employee. Their employer is the school which, I assume, is some sort of body corporate since it has directors. The school must act through its agents, in this case the directors. So, if the directors instruct the CEO to do something lawful and reasonable, then the school has done so and failure to comply is misconduct and grounds for dismissal. Whether one director acting alone can issue such a direction depends on the constitution of the school. It might or it might require a resolution of the board. Since the CEO is an insider, the rules of apparent authority are probably not relevant. Of course, if a director is not comfortable with the way the school is being run, they can always resign.

Dealing with a fundraiser con-artist / fraudster

A group of us are aware of someone with a history of fraud/deception. We're seeing ongoing acts of fraud that we want to stop. Key facts about the person: Currently running a fundraiser for Louisiana (following the hurricane) Only $3,000 out of $24,000 raised has been given to the cause The fundraising site (GiveSendGo) seem uninterested in stopping the campaign Arrest warrants (hit and run, check fraud) in Orange County, from several years ago but still active Convictions for bribery, check fraud, vandalism Filed for bankruptcy in 2018 Falsely claimed on social media to have law qualifications Ran a fundraiser in 2020 that had fraud complaints Claims to have been abused by many people, including many members of the clergy When asked questions on social media, she almost always blocks people Her family state that she is a pathological liar Many other deceptive acts to gain followers Orange County said her charges are not exdraditable Colorado fugitive task force said they couldn't extradite her She changes address often. I believe she's in a hidden address identity program after claiming her ex-husband abused her, though the state she's in must know where she is from her PO box (I think I know which state, but won't specify it here). I don't have time or money to invest into pursuing her, so I'm hoping there might be organisations or government departments etc. who might take on something like this. How to proceed?

The FBI provides guidance on how to Report Fraud : If you're a victim of charity or disaster fraud or have information about these types of schemes, you can: Contact your state consumer protection office Report fraud to the FBI at tips.fbi.gov Report online fraud to the FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) File a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission ​(FTC) Report suspected disaster-related fraud to the National Center for Disaster Fraud

I was late to file a report in auto accident

A guy hit my car about 3-4 months ago, it was fairly minimal hit on my front passenger door. since it was his fault, he offered me to help me by fixing it at his dad's for free rather than calling insurance and I didn't wanted to make big deal out of it. I went and his dad said it'd take 2 weeks to get the parts, and after that he wasn't responsive and when i contacted them after 2 weeks, both son and father weren't responding. since i could still drive the car, thought never hit my mind that he would rip me off, and today when I went to his home (where he promised me to fix my car), he said it was too late for me to file anything legally, What's my legal approach? I have voice recording of today's conversation where he said that i couldn't do anything legally, not-in-words but he pretty much admitted he did that. i live in irving, texas, usa.

He is mistaken. The statute of limitations for suing someone for a car accident, and for enforcing an oral promise, are both far longer than 3-4 months. You could get an estimate of the damages, report it to his insurance company, and, if the insurance company does not cooperate promptly, bring suit in a court of limited jurisdiction or a small claims court. Even if you don't retain a lawyer to take on the case for you fully, if you need to sue, you should hire a lawyer to coach you on the high points of how to represent yourself in this case, particularly with regard to how to fill out the Complaint, how to serve the other driver with process, and what evidence you need to present in what manner a trial.

Are there any essential differences in the nature and quality of the following defenses?

A has clearly been injured, and has the bruises to prove it. He sues B for hitting him and causing those bruises. As far as I can see, B may have several different defenses. Yes, I did hit A, but was doing so in self defense. A came after me with a knife. No, I wasn't the one that hit A, but I saw C do it. No, I didn't hit A. His injuries were caused by a fall. Do these defenses have different "supporting" requirements, e.g. different burdens of proof? Or if B claims 1) are there things like "reasonableness" tests? E.g. If the "knife" had been a child's plastic knife instead of one with a steel blade, could B's defense be weakened to a degree that is not possible for the other defenses?

They have the same standard of proof but different onus The legal system places the onus of proving an allegation on the person making the allegation. For your example, this is A if they are suing B or the government prosecutor if B is being prosecuted. The standard of proof is “beyond reasonable doubt” if B is defending a criminal prosecution and “balance of probabilities” if B is defending a civil prosecution or a lawsuit. Courts have historically been reluctant to define these terms further because doing so can lay grounds for an appeal if the judge oversteps so they mean what their plain English formulation means and what they mean precisely in any given case is one of the things the trier of fact has to decide. For A or the prosecutor to win, they have to meet this burden for each and every element of the offence or cause of action; if they don’t, then B wins. So, B doesn’t have to offer a defence at all and will still win if A doesn’t meet their burden. If B does offer a defence then the trier of fact compares the evidence of each side and decides which they prefer and therefore whether A has met their burden. A jury doesn’t have to give reasons for their decision; a judge does. In general, the decisions of the trier of fact are not appealable unless there was no reasonable basis in evidence to support the decision. For example, the evidence of B might not be believed - this is fine, unless the reason for not believing it is that B has a beard and everyone with beards are liars. Options 2 and 3 are simple matters of comparing evidence and deciding which is preferred. Option 1 is different; it is what’s called an affirmative defence. Here, A has met their burden because B conceded . Now B is relying on the position that they had a legal excuse, that is B is alleging a position and B has the burden of proving it . Now, the burden on B is always “balance of probabilities” because B is not alleging that anyone committed a crime so they don’t have to reach the criminal standard.

Can a father not have responsibility for child-support?

A high school classmate of mine was approached 5 years ago by a lesbian couple to father a child with one of them. They did not involve lawyers at the time. He did the deed with one of them and 9 months later, a little boy was born. Prior to that, they wrote out a document, just in plain language (like I said, no lawyers or even legal templates were used) in which he stipulated he would give up all parental rights, and they would not seek child support. All three signed the document and they also had witnesses attest by signature. Two copies of the document, worded the same, were printed and signed so each party has a copy. All three were making a decent living at the time. Then came COVID and one of the ladies was laid off and has not been able to find work since. The other one was recently also laid off and is now on unemployment. They have contacted the father and told him he has to start paying child support, including all back owed. Can a father abrogate his responsibility of child support at all? Is he now required to pay and also pay what he owes prior? I'm not asking about the parental rights/visitation in this question to keep it more focused.

The first step is for the parents of the child to seek a court order for child support. This would be based on your friend being the actual father, and the non-mother not having adopted the child (extinguishing the obligations of the father). Many states, but not Michigan, have adopted the Uniform Parentage Act which covers assisted reproduction, but even in those states, this does not constitute assisted reproduction. The "agreement" is legally invalid (surrogate parentage contracts are unenforceable ), and that, folks, is why you should hire an attorney rather than devising a legal theory on your own. This article summarizes the various paternity laws of Michigan. Under the Paternity Act , this may be a child born out of wedlock, if the child is a child begotten and born to a woman who was not married from the conception to the date of birth of the child, or a child that the court has determined to be a child born or conceived during a marriage but not the issue of that marriage where the meaning of the last expression would have to be determined by the court. Probably the court would say "this child is not the 'issue' of the marriage", given legislative intent. Under the Acknowledgment of Parentage Act , unmarried parent can by signing a statement "define" the parentage of a child, but the statute is specifically limited to a man acknowledging paternity, and cannot apply to a lesbian couple. The clearest statement of the law of parentage for lesbian couples in Michigan is Lefever v. Matthews where (just one year ago) the court held that both of two women were parents – but in that case, the eggs came from one of the women and they were implanted into the other woman. An important distinguishing feature is that in this case, the woman at a statutory disadvantage sought parental rights, whereas your question is about a legal parent seeking to avoid a legal obligation to the child. Courts generally do everything possible to protect a child's right to support by the parents. The prospects that an actual father could avoid that obligation are slim.

Purposeful Destruction of a Computer

A hobby of mine is reading up on the latest IT nasties, and i came across ' The USB Killer '. 'The USB Killer' is designed to look just like a USB Thumb drive, but when plugged in it causes a lot of damage to computer components including the mothorboard, or almost anything which supports USB. This leaves them, in most cases, completely useless. Would any offence be committed for: Having this on your person Buying or selling this Leaving it around for people to plug in to a computer In British law there are two sections which clearly cover this. Section 36. Unauthorised acts with intent to impair operation of computer, etc. punishable by up to 10 years in prison or a fine or both. Section 37. Making, supplying or obtaining articles for use in computer misuse offences, punishable by up to 2 years in prison or a fine or both. Is there anything similar under law in USA or International Law?

Would any offence be committed for: Having this on your person? Buying or selling this? Leaving it around for people to plug in to a computer? In the abstract, I don't think that this conduct would violate either Section 36 of the U.K. law or U.S. law, although, obviously, purposefully destroying a computer itself (i.e. actually using the device without the consent of the owner of the computer) would violate many U.K. laws and would also violate many U.S. laws at both the state and federal level. I also don't think that possession or buying or selling this product would be a crime absent some intent that it be used illegally, in which case there might be an "attempt" to commit a crime offense, or an offense that would make one part of a conspiracy to commit a crime. In the "leaving it around" example, there is arguably an intent to use it to harm another improperly, although the phrasing is ambivalent. While many statutes in the U.S. criminalize possession of burglary tools, or drug paraphernalia, sometimes with an associated intent element (although even these crimes often have an express or judicially implied intent to use element), I'm not aware of any statute that criminalize possession of tools for malicious destruction of property. So, if the tools aren't possessed or used in a manner intended as a step in the facilitation of a crime, I don't think that any law is violated. So far as I know, the U.S. does not have a counterpart to Section 37 of the British statute cited above (it isn't a terribly easy thing to search for to definitively rule out the existence of such a law because federal law has many uncodified crimes in unexpected statutes and there are many sets of state criminal statutes, not all of which are codified either). The example giving in the comments by @gnasher729 of possession of a hammer which could be used to do the same things that this object could be used to do is instructive. Arguably, this USB-like tool is more specifically targeted at malicious conduct. But, for example, when I used to work as a radio news reporter, we had a machine that was basically a high powered magnet that was specifically designed to destroy all information on magnetic media. This was, in part, so that it could be reused, but it was also so that confidential interviews wouldn't fall into the wrong hands once they were no longer needed, in much the way that one might shred paper documents. It isn't so implausible to think that a device like this one might be necessary for individuals or firms with national defense secrets embedded in their hardware and software to have on hand in order to destroy a sensitive computer in order to prevent a security breach, if necessary. In a case like that, leaving one of these devices around the office unlabeled might be negligent, but wouldn't have the intent necessary to be an intended crime. And, it is hard to imagine that the device itself, which seems pretty simple, would itself involve any technology that is a national security secret, so it probably wouldn't violate export control laws. Of course, possession, purchase or sale of such a specialized device, or leaving it around unlabeled would certainly be powerful evidence of an intent to use the device in a wrongful manner, and hence, of an attempt to commit a crime. Indeed, possession of such a device or purchase of one might very well be sufficient to establish probable cause to seize the device and arrest the person holding it on charges of an attempt to destroy a computer. But, this device would be merely powerful evidence of an intent to commit a crime, rather than something that is a crime to commit in and of itself. There are no international laws that govern this kind of thing. The only international laws applicable to individuals pertain to war crimes and nuclear and chemical weapons. Even then, most international laws direct member nations to adopt domestic laws on the subject rather than being self-executing.

Can a private business require a doctor&#39;s note from a customer?

A holiday has been booked and paid for, but due to medical reasons, must now be cancelled. The company booked with offers a cancellation fee so that if a booking with them is cancelled, then a full refund will be issued less the initial deposit. However, the business has demanded that a doctor's note be provided to prove there are medical grounds for the cancellation before they will issue the refund. Is it legal in the UK for a private business to request a doctor's note? All research I have tried to conduct on the subject deals with employers and employees, which is not relevant to this situation.

Yes, this could be required. This is (1) because while disclosure of private medical information is generally prohibited, you would be voluntarily waiving that privacy to receive a benefit, and (2) because the disclosure by the doctor wouldn't have to say anything more than that there was a medically valid reason for the cancellation without going into detail about its nature. You already told the company you were medically indisposed, so that bare fact wasn't confidential anyway.

Is it legal to refuse an offer for real estate which is above the asking price, when there are no other offers by the published due date

A house in California is for sale with asking price of X . A buyer engages with an agent and finds out in writing that offers will be accepted until a certain date. A buyer submits a formal written offer of Y, which is greater than X , prior to the published due date. On the date the offers are reviewed, no other prospective buyers have submitted an offer. The sellers refuse to accept responding to the effect of - you were the only buyer but we were hoping for more. The next day the seller raises the asking price to the level that they wanted to, the new price is Z, which is higher than either X or Y and the offer date is now renewed. In my view if this were any other good, such behavior would be frowned upon and possibly a bait and switch, but is it illegal?

It is legal, though not if the grounds are illegal discrimination (race, religion, etc), which by their (empirically supported – they raised the price) representation is not the case. As a marketing strategy (pick a low number, hope for a bidding frenzy that drives the price up) it is legal, though carries a non-trivial risk. It does not constitute "bait and switch" under any definition of the term, and it is not illegal to engage in a business practice that causes someone to frown, or otherwise disapprove.

Does settlement of an HOA liens wipe the slate clean?

A house in Missouri was being sold and the owner wanted to negotiate a lower payment to settle the HOA liens because the buyer would not offer him enough money to cover both the HOA dues and the mortgage.(The amount offered actually wasn't enough to cover either amount in full) The HOA liens was filed prior to the mortgage, which is owned by a private mortgagee, not a bank. The mortgagee had recently filed a new mortgage that replaced prior mortgages, after the HOA had already filed its liens. So I know the liens takes priority over the mortgage at this point. The HOA agreed to a payout to release the liens that was lower than the total balance on the account. Does that remaining balance disappear with the liens settlement and release, or does the difference between the amount paid to release the liens and the original account balance remain for the new owner?

A lien is used to prevent sale of a property until a debt is paid. This has nothing to do with priority over a mortgage. The HOA agreed to release the lien for some payment. The negotiation of that payment doesn't matter to the new buyer. Once the lien is released, then it is no longer listed with the county on the property, so the property can now be sold. The former lienholder cannot now apply a new lien to the property because the new owner is not a debtor to the former lienholder. This would be a terrible way to manage property sales, and no mortgage company would allow a mortgage for a property that could not be sold in case of foreclosure, which is likely why the mortgage holder was a private individual. It is possible for a new owner to take on existing liens, but this would be clearly spelled out in purchase documents. There should be a statement on the title search results that no liens exist.

What is a citizenship?

A human on earth can say "I define myself as citizenshipless" or "I define myself as a human without a citizenship" and alike ("I am global" or "I am free from citizenships"), and yet, that human could use a passport and/or an ID card in practice , so what is a citizenship exactly? I assume that citizenship is any time period in which all authorized officers (or enough officers) of a given state would agree to issue citizenship documents (for example, a passport) for that human .

Citizenship is essentially an imaginary label that sovereign states assign to people to say "this person is one of us". How those imaginary labels are granted, recorded, proved, maintained etc. is up to the sovereign state to decide. I assume that citizenship is any time period in which all officers of a given state would agree to issue identification documents for that human. Not accurate. Identification documents simply identify persons. They may or may not convey information about citizenship. Some (like driver's licences) do not. Other (like alien's passports ) explicitly mean that the holder is not a citizen of the issuing sovereign state. Conversely, having troubles to get a passport does not necessarily mean that the person is not a citizen. In some circumstances it may be difficult to prove citizenship (e.g. emigrated as an infant with no birth record), and court proceedings may be needed to convince the authorities.

Does public domain give me the right to take old work out of context, such as claimed in this SMBC comic?

A humorous comic by SMBC claims that, since an 1884 foreword written by Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens) is out of copyright, anyone can write any book, include that foreword, and add "with a foreword by Mark Twain" on the cover. Creative Commons licences have a clause to ask for attribution to be removed , which authors may want to do if their work is attributed in a context that may imply endorsing something they don't. Mark Twain is long dead (in case it matters) and his work is in public domain, not under a Creative Common licence. Legally, in the United States or other locations, is the situation described in this comic accurate, or is there anything that may limit authors from implying endorsement or taking out-of-copyright quotes out of context? Or could I really take any old enough quote saying "This is great!" (or the same with enough words as to make it unique) and put it — with attribution — on any book cover (or elsewhere)? Source: SMBC Transcript: Panel 1: Fact: in 19984, Mark Twain wrote the foreward to a French edition of The Adventures of Tom Sawyer. (Drawing of a book titled *Les Aventures de Tom Sawyer) Panel 2: Fact: That foreword is now in the public domain. (Drawing of a copyright symbol with a diagonal strike-through) Panel 3: From which it follows: for any book you write, no matter the topic, ally ou have to do is reproduce that foreward and you can do this: (Drawing of a book titled: A guide to fellatio. With a foreword by Mark Twain.)

Yes it does. You can do anything at all with a public domain work, and it is not an infringement of copyright. For the matter of that, one could write a forwards attributes to Justinian or Genghis Khan, who newer wrote any such forward at all, and it would not infringe any copyright, nor any right of publicity. It is possible that such claims would constitute False advertising . But if the claim is "obviously absurd" then such laws usually do not apply. What is "obviously absurd" is a judgement call. I recall seeing books in which a "foreword" is attributed to a fictional character. If such a foreword is attributed to a person who is living, that person might have a right to sue under a publicity right theory. In those jurisdictions where such rights last beyond the author's life, such a suit might be filed by an heir within the time such rights are valid, which varies widely.

Can a single attorney draft a &quot;Default with Agreement&quot; Divorce?

A hypothetical couple decided to amicably end their marriage. They live in California and they do not have kids. They maintain their financial lives separately, do not own any shared property and have utmost clarity on their financial delineations. They decided that "default with agreement" is the type of divorce that they would like to pursue. Neither of them want to spend time filling out the forms and googling answers. They would rather have an attorney do this for them since they are both are very busy with their lives. They learned that a single attorney cannot represent two parties in a divorce process in CA. What are their options? Summary: Amicable divorce No kids, no mortgages, one insignificant shared account Clearly delineated financial lives They do not qualify for Summary Divorce because of the value of the assets in their community property as defined by Law They are on the same page with the divorce agreement How can they delegate handling the paperwork and the process to someone else? Does it even need to be an attorney?

We learned that a single attorney cannot represent two parties in a divorce process in CA. That is inaccurate. In Re Marriage of Deffner , 49 Cal.Rptr.3d 424, 430 (2006) is premised on a divorce case where one same lawyer, referred to as "Attorney V", represented both parties . The Deffner court portrays the underlying matter as " masquerading " and as "fraud on the court". But altogether the opinion reflects that dual representation in a divorce case is lawful. The details of your matter might be conclusive enough to distinguish it from Deffner , and accordingly preclude an alleged finding of "masquerading". By contrast, hiring separate lawyers puts you and your wife at risk that those lawyers will needlessly drag your case for as long as any of you two have any assets. This report denounces that unfortunately that practice is rather common in courts. Furthermore, each lawyer involved might persuade his/her respective & unsuspecting client that taking a "slightly" different approach would improve the client's position, and next thing you know is you are entangled in spiraling litigation of what once was an amicable decision. Your preference to delegate the process is totally understandable. However, if you can't find a lawyer who is willing to represent both of you and readily deliver results, it will be in your best interest to do the research in order to do the process by yourselves.

Can a football player be prosecuted for tackling a fan?

A hypothetical scenario: An athletic event is being played in the U.S. (Let's say it's American football). A fan runs onto the field and disrupts the game. A player performs a rough, aggressive "football tackle" on the fan and holds the fan for security to arrive. Click here for a video of similar circumstances . Although, my question is different than what's shown in the video. My fact pattern includes the player performing a rough / aggressive "football tackle" on the fan. Question Did the player who tackled the fan commit a crime (or tort) of assault or battery against the fan?

I'll use California penal code 837 as an example, though most other states have similar statutes: A private person may arrest another: For a public offense committed or attempted in his presence... 839 says: Any person making an arrest may orally summon as many persons as he deems necessary to aid him therein. Generally, someone making an arrest is allowed to use "reasonable force" to effect the arrest. The question then becomes, is the act of interrupting a football game a public offense? Once a fan at a football game enters the field, assuming it is a violation of the license granted to the fan, they are trespassing. These fans are often drunk when performing their midfield dance so that is another public offense for which they could be arrested. Once arrested, the interloper must be turned over as soon as possible to a magistrate or peace officer. The person making the arrest is always subject to being sued. It is a question for a trier of fact to determine if unreasonable force was used in effecting the arrest. My guess is that in most of these cases security simply ejects the exuberant fan from the premises and the fan never looks back. If a lawsuit were to be filed it would be based on unreasonable force being applied during the arrest. California penal code 240 defines assault as "an unlawful attempt, coupled with a present ability, to commit a violent injury on the person of another." Certainly, one could be charged with assault in effecting a citizen's or private arrest but it would go back to the definition of reasonable force and what force was necessary to effect the arrest. If someone resisted arrest I think it more likely that that person could face an assault charge.

US Law on interfering in a federal investigation

A hypothetical situation: Suppose someone finds out through neighborhood gossip that one of their neighbors is under investigation for possible smuggling of arms across the US-Mexico border. He is a gun owner himself and a friend of the suspect. When he is approached by FBI agents to provide information he doesn't just not provide the requested information (as in a denial that he has any), but provides information that is intentionally obstructive to the investigation. In addition to this, after he finds out a female neighbor is cooperating with agents to provide information, he leaves a shotgun bullet casing near her car driver's side door. What are the potential consequences of such a person's actions? How strong would be his claim either that it was a joke or otherwise benign expression (because it was a spent round) of his disagreement with her?

This would be a serious crime Knowingly telling lies to a federal investigator is itself a crime, or can be. Threatening someone to attempt to indue that person not to cooperate with a federal investigation is also a crime. The shotgun casing would be likely to be considered a threat, and later efforts to pass it off as a "joke" are not likely to work. Thus at least two crimes would be involved, quite possibly more. Specifically: False Statement 18 UDC 1001 Such a person would be violating 18 USC 1001(a) which provides: (a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully— (a)(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact; (a)(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or (a)(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both. If the matter relates to an offense under chapter 109A, 109B, 110, or 117, or section 1591, then the term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be not more than 8 years. See also "What are “false statements” under 18 USC Section 1001" which states False statements can be spoken or written and do not have to be made under oath to violate the law, applying equally to misrepresenting income to the IRS or lying to the FBI during an interview. The government can’t convict a person simply for telling a lie. In addition to proving that the defendant made the statement in question to a federal agent or officer, the government must also prove three things: That the defendant’s statement was “materially” false. ... That the defendant “knowingly and willingly” made the false statement. ... That the statement was made regarding a matter within the federal government’s jurisdiction. ... Tampering with a witness 18 USC § 1512 Such a person would also be in violation of 18 USC § 1512 - Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant subsection (a)(2) which provides that: (a)(2) Whoever uses physical force or the threat of physical force against any person, or attempts to do so, with intent to— (a)(2)(A) influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding; (a)(2)(B) cause or induce any person to— (a)(2)(B)(i) withhold testimony, or withhold a record, document, or other object, from an official proceeding; (a)(2)(B)(ii) alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal an object with intent to impair the integrity or availability of the object for use in an official proceeding; (a)(2)(B)(iii) evade legal process summoning that person to appear as a witness, or to produce a record, document, or other object, in an official proceeding; or (a)(2)(B)(iv) be absent from an official proceeding to which that person has been summoned by legal process; or (a)(2)(C) hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense or a violation of conditions of probation, supervised release, parole, or release pending judicial proceedings; shall be punished as provided in paragraph (3). 18 USC § 1512 (a)(2) carries a penalty of up to 20 years imprisonment, plus a fine. 18 USC § 1512 (d) could also be charged here, it carries up to 3 years, plus a fine. There might also be charges for harassment or stalking, depending on state or local law. There could also be a charge of accessory to or conspiracy with the person being investigated. In short, such a person could get into some quite serious trouble, if the investigators found out what s/he has done.

Is this a legal way to make money or buy an entire company?

A hypothetical very wealthy investor (which could be a large public traded company) feels that the XYZ stock is undervalued. The investor buys about 4% of the company. He then offers to buy the whole company for a 25% premium. He would be happy to buy the company at that price. The management of XYZ would like a higher price but the investor is not offering a higher price so the XYZ company attempts to find another buyer for the company at a higher price. If they succeed, the investor is happy because he made a nice short term profit. If they fail, he gets the company at a price he wants. Is there any legal issues using this approach?

This is very likely to be legal. The devil is in the details (there are lots of forms that are expensive to have lawyers prepare that you have to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission to carry out this plan and the transaction may need to pass anti-trust review and media ownership consolidation requirements to pass muster, for example). But this is pretty much the standard arrangement in a hostile takeover of a publicly held company (except that usually the offer is limited to a majority of the shares outstanding, or whatever percentage is necessary to secure control, rather than all of the outstanding shares of the company, and usually the control premium is a little larger than 26%). In practical reality, the Board will often have put in place a variety of legal measures, sometimes called "poison pills" to allow it to discourage tender offers (which is what these are called) when faced with bidders that management doesn't like, which can be waived for bidders that management does like, and this frequently results in litigation under an expansive and involved body of state corporate like in the Delaware Chancery Court in most cases. But those steps are more often speed bumps than deal killers in these kinds of transactions. The way this plays out in a privately held company, where there is frequently a shareholder's agreement restricting transfers, would be quite different. But the question appears to contemplate a publicly held company scenario/. Also, in practice, even an extremely wealthy investor couldn't afford to make a purchase like that without financial institution support (often in the form of corporate bonds in what is called a "leverage buy out"), or a "committee" of wealthy investors working together. But again, the source of financing doesn't seem to be the main point of this question.

What Are The Obligations Of U.S. Employers As It Relates To Bargaining With Unions?

A hypothetical: Company A has 10 employees who work "at-will" making $100k/yr and 1 owner who keeps 100% of all net profits. The employees of Company A decide to Unionize. Exclude other aspects of labor contracts to keep it simple and just focus on the salary piece. What are the lawful requirements of Company A in bargaining? Is there a minimal salary that must be offered (apart from minimum wage laws)? What happens if Company A and the union do not agree to terms? Can company A elect to hire people from outside the union "at-will" while negotiating with the union? Could Company A continue to do so indefinitely, essentially no longer employing the union members and just hiring a new group? I have read: "It is clear that the obligation to bargain in good faith does not compel the making of concessions or reaching final agreement on a contract. It’s the process, not the end result, that the law examines." But this doesn't really seem like a full explanation since it makes it seem like unions are completely impotent. Can't Company A just offer something substantially lower, say minimum wage, to the union and claim that they view the inability to easily hire/fire/promote employees at will as a major business risk? Is this basically saying that the only power unions ultimately have is to quite en masse and make it difficult for the company to hire replacements?

Caveat: This answer applies to private sector union workers in the U.S. The considerations that apply to public sector unions are very different. Also, as I discuss below, there are special labor relations law rules that apply to a few specific private sector industries that are pertinent to these questions. The legal framework largely flows out of the National Labor Relations Act and the cases decided under it by the National Labor Relations Board (which is the first instance trial court in most union-management disputes), the U.S. Courts of Appeal for the various circuits, and the U.S. Supreme Court. But, I have not cited chapter and verse of particular statutory sections and cases supporting this analysis for lack of space and time (it would normally take up about a third of a one semester law school class on labor law to cover the points summarily answered below). What are the lawful requirements of Company A in bargaining? There is an obligation to negotiate in good faith and to make available some information necessary to allow that to be possible. The employer also can't fire an employee for insisting on negotiations in good faith with the union or for union activity. Is there a minimal salary that must be offered (apart from minimum wage laws)? No. Also, in some industries, the employer needs to pay the "prevailing wage" in order to get government contract which are critical to its business and basically amount to the union negotiated wage at comparable firms. What happens if Company A and the union do not agree to terms? There is no collective bargaining agreement and the employer's terms are in force when the existing collective bargaining agreement expires. Usually, if this happens, the workers then go on strike rather than working under the unilaterally employer imposed contract terms, until a new collective bargaining agreement is negotiated (and the vast majority of the time, a new collective bargaining agreement is negotiated after some period of time when the workers are on strike). But, sometimes a prior collective bargaining agreement will establish an arbitration resolution if there is a deadlock. Arbitration is also used to resolve deadlocks, if I recall correctly, in a few key industries with large employers where avoiding a strike is critical to the nation's economy (outside the jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Act) that are established by statute. Can company A elect to hire people from outside the union "at-will" while negotiating with the union? Yes. These people are often pejoratively called "scabs" and neutrally called "replacement workers". Generally speaking, when a strike is over, the business has to take back all of the striking workers, and fire all of the replacement workers, except to the extent that the business whose workers went on strike had vacancies when the strike started. In part, this is because this is a term of the new collective bargaining agreement and in part as a consequence of the requirement that employers not retaliate against employees for union activities. In states that are not "right to work" states, the union can prevent non-union replacement workers from being hired at all after the strike is over. Could Company A continue to do so indefinitely, essentially no longer employing the union members and just hiring a new group? More or less. I can't easily summarize the case law on the point and prior collective bargaining agreement terms can be relevant. Also, there are a few sectors of the economy (mostly the stage play industry, the movie industry, and the construction industry), in which unionization is structured on the basis of professions for an entire industry, or the entire industry in a geographical region, rather than on an employer by employer basis. This tactic doesn't work in those industries. The common thread is that work in these industries is organized on a project by project basis (i.e. a particular play, a particular movie, or a particular construction project), in which the firm paying for the project is usually a single project only entity. Another important bright line rule is that an employer always has the right to shut down the business covered by the union entirely, rather than deal with the union. But, this is why unions tend to be more effective in industries with large employers who can't replace the employees very easily with non-union workers (like factories and ship yards, and grocery store chains). Is this basically saying that the only power unions ultimately have is to quite en masse and make it difficult for the company to hire replacements? Basically. But, the power to strike is considerable in most unionized employment contexts and many people won't "cross a picket line" in solidarity with striking workers. From a consumer's perspective, not crossing a picket line means not patronizing a business whose workers are on strike. But, not crossing a picket line can also mean that workers (usually at a unionized business that is a vendor to the business whose worker's are on strike, or that deliver things to the business whose worker's are on strike) will refuse to participate in doing business with the business whose worker's are on strike. So, even if enough replacement workers can be found to continue to operate the business, this doesn't necessarily mean that a business won't face very severe consequences for continuing to operate with replacement workers while its regular workers are on strike. Furthermore, unions can take other actions short of strikes, like staying on the job and "working to rule" strictly refusing to show any flexibility beyond the bare requirements of their existing contract or the new one, or pursuing every single minor bump and scratch as a worker's compensation claim, reporting every Occupational Safety and Health Administration violation, or pursuing unfair labor practices litigation against the employer. Private sector unions are declining, in part, due to the ability of employers to hire replacement workers. Still, this is one reason for the long and steady decline of unionization in the private sector U.S. labor market (although the trend has reversed a bit in the last several years). Consider, for example, the following chart (via Wikipedia): As I recapped the economic history of labor action in the American workforce as of December 2010: [There have been] six general strikes in U.S. history, one in 1919 in Seattle, and four in 1934, at the height of the Great Depression, one in Toledo, one in Minneapolis, one in San Francisco and one at West Coast Ports. There was also a general strike in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico in 1998. The last one in the English Speaking United States was 76 years ago, and very few people living today remember it. The United States has never had a nationwide general strike and just two general strikes in its history, one restricted to a single industry, and the other to a U.S. territory, extended beyond a single city. Union-management relations in the United States used to look a lot like they do in Europe. Strikes were large, frequent and involved a large share of the work force. National guard forces or private security forces were frequently called in to put them down in bloody conflicts. Openly socialist political parties were organized. In 1950, a year that revisionist history remembers as a tranquil period in American history, there were 424 strikes involving 1,000 or more workers, in all involving 1,698,000 workers, which was more than one in nine members of the unionized workforce of 14.3 million workers who made up 31.5% of the total work force. In 2008, there were 15 strikes involving 1,000 or more workers, in all including 72,000 workers which was one in two-hundred and twenty-three members of the unionized workforce of 16.1 million workers who made up 12.4% of the total workforce. The public sector which is 36.8% unionized, is as unionized as the private sector was at its peak. The private sector, which is 7.2% unionized, has the lowest level of unionization in the private sector since the 1920s, if not earlier. The unionized workforce has remained more or less constant for half a century, despite a growing workforce, and that masks the fact that there has been substantial growth in public sector union membership and a substantial decline in private sector union membership over that time period. The United States, there has been only one year since 1983 that more than 3% of unionized workers went on strike (1986), and there has only been one year since 1998 (the year 2000) when more than one in eighty union members went on strike. In the entire United States from 1990 to 2008, there wasn't a single year that there were more than 45 strikes involving 1,000 or more workers in the entire United States, in a period that started with a labor force of 103 million workers and peaked at just short of 130 million workers. In contrast, there wasn't a single year from 1950 to 1987 that had less than 46 strikes, despite that fact that the workforce was significantly smaller. Prior to the 1980s there were a couple hundred major strikes in the United States per year, about ten times current levels of labor action. I updated this account in 2014 and 2015 : There were thirteen major strikes that took place at least in part in 2015 according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics monthly tables. This is just two more than in the year 2014, which had fewer major strikes which involved fewer workers than any year from 1947-2013 except 2009, a low point of the financial crisis. Most of the half century before WWII also had more major strikes (at least proportionate to the size of the population) than there are these days. In all of the United States in 2014, there were just 11 strikes involve 1,000 or more workers, which involved a total of 34,000 workers and resulted in 200,000 work-days idle, which was less than 0.01% (i.e. less than 1 day in 10,000) of the total working time of the American labor force. The year 2015 was the next most peaceful year in post-WWII labor history. The year 2010 also had just 11 major strikes, but those strikes involved more workers and produced more days idle. There were just 5 major strikes in 2009 in the United States which involved fewer workers than in 2014 and fewer days idle. This has a lot to do with the decline of private sector unions in the United States. . . . Just under half of union members are in the public sector and public sector unions, as a rule in the United States, have limited or non-existent rights to strike (although teachers unions which are a huge part of total number of public sector union members can frequently strike). In 2014, just 0.001% of the working time of the American labor was idle due to strikes or lockouts. The last year than more than 0.01% of the working time of the American labor force was idle was 2000. The last year that 0.10% or more of the working tie of the American labor force was idle was 1978. Only one year from 1948 to 1959, a time often nostalgically remembered as the "good old days" by conservatives was below the 0.10% threshold. Nationally, in 2014, the private sector 6.6% (7.4%) of employees were members of unions (represented by unions), while in the public sector 35.7% (39.2%) of employees were members of unions (represented by unions), with both percentages generally tending to fall over the previous decade. Within the public sector, nationally, union representation rates are highest with local government employees (45.5%), intermediate with state government employees (32.8%), and lowest with federal employees (31.6%). In the United States in the year 2020 the union membership rate (the percentage of wage and salary workers who were members of unions) was 10.8 percent. . . . the union membership rate in the public sector was 34.8 percent, while the rate in the private sector was 6.3 percent.

Assigning intellectual property rights like a provisional patent to oneself while employed

A hypothetical: let's say I am employed in the U.S., and in a field where I am compensated for the results of my ideas or intellectual work, i.e. engineering. Let's say I have a roughly standard employment agreement and NDA with common stipulations, such as: I further acknowledge that all inventions, original works of authorship, developments, concepts, know-how, improvements or trade secrets which are made by me within the scope of and during the period of my Relationship with the Company are "works made for hire" [...] This clause makes a lot of sense and protects the company and their shareholders from questions regarding who owns what -- they company pays me to come up with stuff, and they own it! Great. Let's say that in addition to engineering (or whatever), I write a nonfiction book about investing in commercial real estate. Can I secure an original work of authorship, as in a copyright , because it is out of scope? What about extending that to a patent ? If I come up with an original process for effectively fermenting kombucha, what are the ramifications of filing a provisional patent assigning the rights to myself? Are there clear criterion for what is "in-scope" and "out-of-scope"? For clarity, the jurisdiction is U.S./Nevada.

It is not clear, until the parties make it clear, though individual states may have partially answered the question. There may be a requirement for the business to clearly delimit what they are laying claim to. So if there are clauses exempting works created by the employee wholely on their own time, not using company property including confidential trade secrets, which in not directly related to the company's business including anticipated developments, then that clearly delimits what the company can claim. An expression like "in the course of employment with the company" is vague and could refer to "during that time period" or to "as a result of". If the intent is "during that time period", then you should say it that way, and perhaps the candidate will decide to not take the position. Since the company gets to write the contract, the courts will interpret ambiguous language against the interest of the contract's author. If the contract is written differently for copyright versus patents, then patents could be handled differently. The main difference between patents vs. copyright is that patents are more valuable, so the company has a stronger incentive to snag all patents, but this is not a function of the law.

Helping a friend = Too many fines and not enough money

A insured a motor bike for B, who signed it over to A. Since then, A has gotten close to $1000 in photo radar tickets. After multiple attempts to stop B from speeding, A cancelled the insurance. After A received 2 more tickets, A took the license plate and told B that A needs the tickets paid. B won't pay, so A said he would sell the bike to cover it. Now hypothetically it's not A's bike, but A is the registered owner of it. (Because B now has insurance from a different company, A assumes B forged A's signature.) Can B do that? What legal options does A have? A cannot afford the tickets and doesn't want any marks against him for whatever could happen license wise. (A only has a learners class 7 and is worried that it will affect his drivers class 5.)

The bike was signed over to A, which constitutes a sale. So A owns the bike. He can sell his bike as he sees fit. Further, A should have responded to all tickets with identifying B as the driver.

Wrongful termination of contract as anticipatory breach?

A is a book publisher and would like to take part in a Book Fair. A contracted B to do all the arrangements, for example, erecting displays and stands in the venue of the Fair. A agreed to pay B by two instalments. The payment of the second instalment is late for 4 days. B attempted to terminate the contract, claiming that A has committed a 'repudiatory breach ' of the contract by late payment and that time is the essence of the contract. Assuming that time is actually NOT a condition (or essence) of the contract, and thus B in fact has NO right to terminate, would B's attempt to terminate amount to an anticipatory breach? Because B has clearly evinced an intention to refuse all performance by 'terminating' the contract?

There are 2 easy ways to terminate a contract: by performance or by agreement. All the other ways are difficult, painful and expensive. The only way to know if you have a right to terminate is do it, get sued and have a judge tell you you did have that right ... or not. A and B should talk to each other and work out a way to either complete the contract (i.e. renegotiate) or work out how to end it in the least painful way possible.

How are civil judgments most typically settled?

A is suing B, and the court has awarded A £5000. Who decides how this balance should be paid, and what is the most common method of payment? Is it usually done through a bank transfer or a cheque? Can A insist on a cash settlement?

I can't say how they are typically settled, and there are no hard-and-rules that I can find. However, Gov.uk offers this: You’ll have to pay the person or business you owe the money to, or their solicitor. The name and address will be on the judgment form. Do not pay the court. Make sure you can prove you’ve paid. Send a cheque or postal order by post, or make a bank transfer. Do not send cash through the post. Keep a record of your payments and make sure you pay in time. If you’re paying in instalments, ask the person or business you owe the money to about the best way to pay. You may want to set up a standing order to pay the money directly from your bank account. As for A insisting on a cash payment, it's B's debt and as long as it's not unreasonable and in accordance with the Order B should decide on how it is settled if they can't come to an amicable arrangement.

How long can one be detained without a court hearing?

A journalist was detained in the US on January 13 . According to CBS, Ricardo J. Bascuas, a professor at the University of Miami School of Law says she should have been granted a court appearance by now. How long can one be detained without a court hearing?

The linked news story says that the journalist was detailed as a material witness. according to 18 USC § 3144 If it appears from an affidavit filed by a party that the testimony of a person is material in a criminal proceeding, and if it is shown that it may become impracticable to secure the presence of the person by subpoena, a judicial officer may order the arrest of the person ... Release of a material witness may be delayed for a reasonable period of time until the deposition of the witness can be taken pursuant to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. No specific time seems to be specified for which detention is allowed. What a court would consider "reasonable" would no doubt depend on the specific circumstances.

Who can overrule a court&#39;s finding of contempt?

A judge has authority and broad discretion to incarcerate people for contempt-of-court . Who, besides the judge who holds a person in contempt, has authority to overturn a finding of contempt or an order of incarceration for contempt? Do higher courts hear appeals of contempt? Can a governor or president issue a pardon that overrides a finding of contempt?

In the United States, a contempt finding can be wiped out by: The judge who issued it. United States v. Jerry , 487 F.2d 600, 605 (3d Cir. 1973) (“[S]o long as the district court has jurisdiction over the case, it possesses inherent power over interlocutory orders, and can reconsider them when it is consonant with justice to do so.”) An appellate court with juridiction over the judge who issued it. This was what happened with several of the contempt orders in the case depicted in The Trial of the Chicago 7 . In re Dellinger , 461 F.2d 389, 401 (7th Cir. 1972) (“Therefore, the contempt convictions of appellants are reversed and remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith.”) For convictions on charges of criminal contempt in federal courts, the president of the United States may issue a pardon that nullifies the conviction. This was what happened in the case of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio , who was convicted of defying a court order to stop harassing Hispanic people. For convictions in state courts, a governor may be able to issue a pardon.

Is it error of law to judge on less relevant case law when there is much more relevant one?

A judge in a civil case makes a judgment justifying it by similar decision made in somewhat relevant case. A party to the case is dissatisfied with the judgment. They find a more recent and, more importantly, much more closely related case (same court) in which the decision was the opposite. Can what the judge did be called "error of law" for the purposes of appeal?

On an issue of pure law, an appellate court decides if the trial judge got it right or wrong from scratch, and if there is a case that is a better match than the one that the judge used that leads to a different outcome in the case, then an appellate court is likely to find that the trial court's ruling is a reversible error. On an issue of mixed fact and law, or on a legal issue where a judge has more discretion in how the law is applied (like many evidentiary issues), a judge is given more deference, and the judge will generally only be reversed if no reasonable judge could have applied the correct law to the facts viewed in the light in which the judge saw them, and then, only if an application of the correct law to the facts viewed in the light in which the judge saw them would have changed the outcome of the case. There are a couple of ways that this standard of review is described, one of which is called "abuse of discretion" review.

Why would someone face 2nd and 3rd degree murder, and manslaughter for the same killing?

A judge just dropped the 3rd degree murder charge against Derek Chauvin. He still faces a 2nd degree murder charge and a manslaughter charge. This doesn't make sense to me. How can someone face multiple homicide charges for the same killing?

The concept is known as lesser included offense . The prosecution believed that they have a chance to prove murder, so they charged murder, but they understood that the judge and jury might not convict on murder. So they said in effect, "and if you won't find him guilty of murder, at least convict for manslaughter."

Meaning of &quot;costs throughout to&quot; in a court case?

A judge said, "I would therefore dismiss the appeal with costs throughout to the respondent." Excuse my simple post here. I looked for an answer on google, but could not find any. I would like to confirm my assumption of the meaning being all costs to be covered by the respondent.

The court is ordering the appellant to pay the respondent for any court costs it has paid. The losing party in a lawsuit is frequently ordered to reimburse the prevailing party for whatever it costs it may have incurred. Those costs typically come in the form of fees for various actions taken by the clerk, from the filing of the complaint to sending subpoenas, to paying witnesses for their time. "Costs throughout to Party X," or more frequently, "Costs to Party X" are common ways to note that the court is making that order.

Is it normal for district judges first instance decisions to be appealed to circuit judges in other locations?

A judgment from clerkenwell and Shoreditch county court district judge (swan) was appealed to a circuit (?) judge in central London (Luba). Isn’t the point of a circuit judge that they are the more senior appellate judges in a given location of the county court? How would it have “skipped” over from C&S to central London?

See Practice Direction 52B : The venue for an appeal within the County Court will be determined by the Designated Civil Judge and may be different from the appeal centre.

When and why are jury trials preferred to bench trials of criminal charges?

A jury trial consists of a judge, who is the arbiter of law, and a jury, which is the "fact-finder." A bench trial consists only of a judge, who determines questions of both law and fact to render a verdict. In the U.S. there are some hurdles to obtaining a bench trial in criminal cases. For example, under Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure ( FRCP 23a ) criminal trials must be by jury unless the defendant, prosecutor, and judge all agree to a bench trial. Many states do, however, allow a criminal defendant to unilaterally opt for a bench trial. Disregarding any obstacles resulting from those rules of criminal procedure: When a criminal defendant has an option to choose between a jury or a bench trial, when and why does one opt for the latter vs. the former?

In the overwhelming majority of criminal trials for felonies, and a very large share of misdemeanor and traffic trials, criminal defendants, following the advise of their criminal defense attorneys – who have a good knowledge of the system – overwhelmingly choose jury trials. (Even though criminal defense attorneys may personally have reasons to prefer bench trials which take less preparation as criminal defense attorneys are usually spread very thin with many clients and limited resources.) This is primarily for one very good reason. A jury is six times more likely to acquit than a judge and, unlike a judge, can also deadlock (resulting in a mistrial followed by a retrial or more lenient plea bargain in most cases), if the facts are at all susceptible to more than one interpretation. Judges and juries agree on the verdict in roughly 78% of criminal jury trials where a verdict is entered, but judges are much less likely to acquit defendants than juries do, ( 3% v. 19%+ ) (see the sources cited in this previous Law.SE answer ). The National Center for State Courts conducted a survey of hung jury rates using felony case data from all federal courts and 30 state courts in 75 of the most populous counties. The NCSC project found that state courts in large urban areas had an average hung jury rate of 6.2%, with substantial variation across courts, ranging from a low of 0.1% in Pierce County, Washington to a high of 14.8% in Los Angeles County, California. Federal hung jury rates were found to be particularly low, averaging about 2% of all federal jury trials: federal civil trials had lower rates than federal criminal trials. ( Source .) On average a criminal defendant is eight times more likely to avoid a criminal conviction in a state court criminal case in a trial before a jury than in a bench trial . In federal court, there is a 38% chance of bench trial acquittal (12% of all federal criminal trials are bench trials while 88% are jury trials), some of which are for misdemeanors and traffic cases, and a 14% chance of jury trial acquittal. But only 2% of federal criminal cases go to trial ( roughly 99.6% of cases presented to federal grand juries result in indictments ) with the remainder plea bargained (90% of cases charged) or dismissed (8% of cases charged, sometimes due to a state court conviction), and only about 2% of all U.S. criminal cases are filed in federal court. So, federal criminal bench trials are very rare and atypical. Secondarily, there is lots of highly prejudicial and legally irrelevant information (e.g., the criminal history of the defendant, or evidence excluded for 4th Amendment violations) that a jury will not know, but a judge will know. Jurors almost never disregard evidence that they are told to disregard , and often give it undue weight, and judges aren't any better. The real question should be: Who chooses a bench trial and why, notwithstanding these facts? Some situations in which someone might consider a bench trial rather than a jury trial include: A bench trial can be easier for a pro se defendant , which is one not represented by counsel either because the defendant is not indigent and hence not entitled to counsel, or because the proceeding is one in which there is no right to counsel (usually traffic cases). In these, usually low stakes, matters the cost of counsel does not justify the expenditure and it can be easier to do a bench trial as a pro se party than a jury trial. The vast majority of criminal or quasi-criminal bench trials are in low stakes cases (which are segregated into separate courts in state court and mixed in with more serious cases in federal court) where this is a primary consideration. A bench trial can be desirable for someone who needs a quicker trial date (e.g., someone who lives somewhere seasonally and needs to get home), especially in a low stakes case where the sentence is likely to be a fine or a sentence to "time served" if there is a sentence. A bench trial can be desirable when the guilt-innocence determination is largely a foregone conclusion but the defendant would still like to at least try to be acquitted, as a way to more fully tell a story of how the incident was understandable even if not a legal justification for conduct, to prepare the judge for sentencing with a more full picture of what happened than a guilty plea would provide. For example, it might be a strategy that someone who assaults (ambush style) someone who raped his sister might take, even though a tape recorded confession and video tape of the incident makes the likelihood of acquittal small (unless the defendant thinks that "jury nullification", i.e. ruling in his favor notwithstanding the law, is likely). Another example would be to provide a forum in a drug possession case to show that someone in possession of a large quantity of controlled substances was really a "mule" and not a big time dealer. This kind of consideration drives a fair number of bench trials in federal criminal cases. A bench trial can be desirable for a defendant who thinks that a judge will be favorably inclined towards him (e.g., some law enforcement officers or public officials). A bench trial can be desirable for a defendant when a jury is likely to be biased against him (e.g., a Muslim defendant at a time when anti-Muslim sentiment is strong due to some recent news event, or a defendant in a community with lots of racist potential jurors who is before a black judge). A bench trial can be desirable for a defendant whose primary defense requires above average sophistication to understand (e.g., a defendant in some complicated regulatory or white collar case). Bench trials are more attractive in cases where the criminal defendant is a first time offender, has no arrest record, and is not relying on suppressing any evidence at trial , so that the availability of more information to the judge than the jury is not a problem. A summary of jury trials in Colorado, which is typical, shows the revealed preference for jury trials. In 2016, defendants elected jury trials in 67% of traffic cases, 69% of misdemeanor cases, 97% of state court felony cases , and 59% of federal criminal cases (which are a mix of misdemeanors and felonies).

HOA forcing family to pay for facilities which we are prohibited to use

A large debt was accrued by our family with our Home Owners Association, which was paid off. However, the HOA still insists that there are additional debts, thus stripping our rights to a community parking permit, and a community pool key. Both of which are services that are provided and maintained with each homeowner’s $500 monthly fee. Is it unlawful for the HoA to be charging my household for services which we are not allowed to use?

There are two issues. First, can the HOA deny access to its facilities and common areas for an unpaid HOA assessment. There might be exceptions in particular jurisdictions, but the general rule would be that it is not unlawful to deny someone who isn't current on their dues use of facilities and common areas. Second, do you have an unpaid HOA bill? This is obviously a factual question. The HOA takes the position that you do and is acting accordingly. You could sue the HOA for a determination that your bill is paid in full, or could try to work with the HOA treasurer to determine why the amount that you believe is owed differs from the amount that they believe is owed. I've seen cases where the HOA failed to credit payments that were made or miscalculated the amount due, and I've seen cases where, for example, the homeowner has paid the principle, but not additional amounts owed for late fees, interest and attorneys' fees incurred in collecting the balance that are also owed.

Can a person in BDSM relationship legally protect themselves?

A large part of BDSM lifestyle is the "SM" part - namely, a desire by two sides of a couple, to inflict pain on another, or have pain inflicted on them (if done right, obviously in a consensual manner , duh). Often, this is done in ways that would - outside the context of BDSM relationship - be classified as a crime (assault, battery, etc...). Clearly, this produces a sizeable legal risk. As such, is there a way for a "S" partner in a relationship (the one inflicting pain), to protect themselves legally in a reasonable way in either the case of third-party exposure (e.g. some nosy person calls the cops on the couple); or worse yet, the relationship breaking down and the "M" partner of the relationship filing charges over what they supposedly consented to previously? Just to re-iterate, the scope of the question is activity that is (at the time it happens) fully consensual . In general societal context, obviously there is a way to engage in consensual violence without being charged - for example, a boxer or martial artist would never be charged for participating in a martial arts competition or training, which involves acts that - outside of them - would be criminally penalized. Is there a way to do that in a BDSM relationship context - that would actually stand up in a judicial setting ? In other words, anyone can sign any "BDSM contract" (probably the only thematically accurate BDSM related topic in the otherwise deplorable "50 shades" series); but did any such contract ever stand up in court when one of the partner was charged with perpetrating violence on another? I'm mostly interested in an answer related to criminal justice system; but an answer covering civil charges from one partner on another also would be welcome, if the two answers differ. Jurisdiction is USA, if more precision is needed let's say New York City where BDSM is common enough that things like this probably actually made it to court.

canada The law "The [Criminal] Code requires 'ongoing, conscious consent' to 'each and every sexual act' and can be revoked at any time." See R. v. Sweet , 2018 BCSC 1696 , citing R. v. J.A. , 2011 SCC 28 . "The definition of consent for sexual assault requires the complainant to provide actual active consent throughout every phase of the sexual activity. It is not possible for an unconscious person to satisfy this requirement, even if she expresses her consent in advance." R. v. J.A. , para. 66 . The Supreme Court has explicitly declined to decide "whether or in which circumstances individuals may consent to bodily harm during sexual activity" ( R. v. J.A. , para. 21 ). However, in the context of a non-sport fist fight or brawl, one cannot consent to another intentionally applying force that causes serious hurt or non-trivial bodily harm: R. v. Jobidon , [1991] 2 S.C.R. 714 . 1 And at the provincial appellate level, it has been held that "consent is not a defence to a charge of sexual assault causing bodily harm in circumstances where the accused has deliberately inflicted pain or injury upon a person that gave rise to bodily harm" ( R. v. Quashie (2005), 198 C.C.C. (3d) 337 (Ont. C.A.)). Consent would be irrelevant in a charge of criminal negligence or manslaughter, if the activities were to escalate this far ( R. c. Deschatelets , 2013 QCCQ 1948, para. 175-77 ). The content of advance negotiations is not relevant to whether the complainant was consenting to the impugned conduct, however, it may be relevant as evidence of expectations about how consent would be communicated between the parties throughout the conduct. See R. v. Barton , 2019 SCC 33, para. 93 (citations omitted): For example, in some cases, prior sexual activities may establish legitimate expectations about how consent is communicated between the parties, thereby shaping the accused’s perception of communicated consent to the sexual activity in question at the time it occurred. American scholar Michelle Anderson puts it this way: “… prior negotiations between the complainant and the defendant regarding the specific acts at issue or customs and practices about those acts should be admissible. These negotiations, customs, and practices between the parties reveal their legitimate expectations on the incident in question.” These “negotiations” would not, however, include an agreement involving broad advance consent to any and all manner of sexual activity. As I will explain, a belief that the complainant gave broad advance consent to sexual activity of an undefined scope will afford the accused no defence, as that belief is premised on a mistake of law, not fact. See also R. v. Sweet , 2018 BCSC 1696, para. 141 : ... consenting adults may enjoy the personal autonomy to establish rules such as “no means yes”. If so, in my view, this passage suggests a corollary requirement to establish an alternative “safe word” or other mechanism to ensure that each party is also able to maintain their personal autonomy to put an end to unwanted sexual activity. Application A contract cannot provide advance consent, therefore it is irrelevant as to proof of consent during the acts. However, advance agreements can (and several courts suggests should ) set out the expectations about how consent will be communicated. Any evidence of such agreements would be relevant to establishing the defence of "mistaken belief in communicated consent." None of this would assist an accused in the circumstance where a court finds that any consent was vitiated because the accused deliberately inflicted pain or injury that gave rise to bodily harm (this position has not been confirmed by the Supreme Court). If you are simply asking how to prove a fact in litigation, see this Q&A . 1. Since this is a judicially-developed limit, the conception of "bodily harm" used here does not necessarily have to match that codified in the Criminal Code. But: "The common law definition of 'bodily harm' has been substantially incorporated in s. 245.1(2) of the Criminal Code, and means 'any hurt or injury to the complainant that interferes with the health or comfort of the complainant and that is more than merely transient or trifling'" ( R. v. Martineau , [1990] 2 S.C.R. 633 ).

Is a shop that prints your photos on cakes allowed to print photos including people wearing (licensed) brand t-shirts?

A large supermarket chain in the UK allows you to have photos printed on to cakes (they print it onto a layer of icing, then stick that on a cake). It's someone's special birthday and my wife took in a photo of the family (11 of us) to have it printed. The store refused because I was wearing an (officially licensed, and maybe even bought from that store!) Mario t-shirt. It's clearly visible, but it's just a t-shirt on one person out of eleven on a photo. I tweeted them about how ridiculous this is (surely it falls under fair dealing - photo shops don't refuse to print all photos of people wearing licensed t-shirts, or with company names/logos in them?) and got back essentially the same response: I'm very sorry to hear about this. Unfortunately we are unable to do this for you, I know it is a frustration but we do not own the rights to this image and branding. I'm sorry for the inconvenience caused. To what extent is the shop right about being able to print this photo on my cake? They're right and this is not allowed It's probably allowed but they're just being cautious It's ridiculous nonsense

The store is, as far as i can see, not using the trademarked image to sell their cake. Your family does not intend to sell anything at all. This photo, from the description, could not reasonably be confused with an official image from the trademark holder. (all of this is based on your description, of course). Therefore, the trademark holder probably won't sue for trademark infringement, even if they somehow heard of this event, and if they did sue, they would quite likely lose. You would be making a copy of a presumably copyrighted image. You might have an active defense, but that is very hard to be sure of in advance. (Note that "fair use" is a very specifically US legal concept, and would not apply in the UK. The roughly comparable concept is "fair dealing" but that is more restrictive, and follows somewhat different rules.) In any case, it is possible that the rights holder would sue, and if the situation were a bit different (the was only one person pictured, making the shirt with the protected image very prominent, for example) there might be a larger chance of such a suit being successful. No business is going to want a bakery department manager deciding whether a particular use of a particular image does or does not infringe IP rights, and whether it does or does not expose the business to significant risk. Just to get an opinion from their lawyer on whether this image infringes would probably cost them several times the price of the cake with image printing. The store has no doubt written its guidelines to err well on the side of caution, because one suit, even if they won, would cost far more than the profits of many cakes, and if they lost, could have a very negative effect on their bottom line indeed. The store is entitled to restrict what business it does to keep itself safe from lawsuits. It is going to keep well on the cautious side, in all likelihood, and so it should. I fear you will have to find a store with a different policy, or use a different picture.

Can a website incur liability for linking to a funding campaign for a lawsuit against it?

A large website that hosts user-created content has recently announced that it is redacting links to a fundraising campaign for a lawsuit against it "under direction from [its] legal team." Is there a theory of liability under which there is some legal risk for hosting said links? Assume any action would be under Second Circuit and New York state law.

Yes The directors of a company have a fiduciary duty to act within the law for the benefit of their shareholders - not to their customers, not to the government, not to the environment and not to the public. A lawsuit against the company will incur financial loss irrespective of if it is won or lost. It is difficult to see how it is in the shareholder's interest for the company to be enabling the funding of a lawsuit against it.

Do Twitter disclaimers saying &quot;opinions are my own&quot; give any legal protection to the account owner?

A larger number of twitter accounts have a biography stating that tweets are their own opinion not that of their company. An example: Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer Does this actually protect the employee from being reprimanded because of a tweet? I've done some research and the only semi-reputable site I could find is this Forbes article stating that a disclaimer will not protect you. However when researching the attorney they quoted, Dan Schaeffer, I find nothing other than the bio posted on his firm's website.

The purpose of that disclaimer is not to prevent reprimands or legal action. It's really as simple as it appears -- it's to inform the readers that the tweets in fact contain the opinion of the person who wrote them and are not intended to be understood as the official position as that person's employer. This is especially important for people who occasionally or frequently convey their employer's official position. It's not supposed to be some kind of magic word that causes something to happen. It's just an attempt to convey accurate information and avoid misunderstandings.

Obligated to pay very late invoice?

A law firm did a lot of work for my company. He sent us a first invoice and we paid it. Nine months later, he told us that he forgot to bill us for some of the work that he did for us and he sent us a second invoice. Let's assume for the purposes of this question that he did all the work described in the two invoices and that the work was satisfactory. We are annoyed to receive a second invoice nine months late. We already closed the books for last year and it messes up our budgeting. Do we have a legal basis for not paying or asking for a discount for the second invoice?

Unless there is a term in your contract that time bars late invoices you have to pay providing it was ladled within the statute of limitations wherever you are. The shortest SoL I have ever encountered is 4 years so that is unlikely to help?

Can/should a lawyer encourage technically true, but misleading, answers?

A lawyer cannot knowingly allow or encourage a defendant to commit perjury by lying on the stand. However, can they encourage a lie by omission? So for an example If I tell the police that I didn't have any blackmail material on some person when they asked me if I committed blackmail, but neglect to point out I still blackmailed them by bluffing them into believing I possessed the material. Or claiming I don't have a copy of some information their looking for but withholding the fact that's because I gave the information to a friend to hold for me etc. Can a lawyer encourage these sort of misleading, but technically true, answers with the explicit intent of trying to mislead investigators, or jurors, into making a presumption they know isn't true? Would a lawyer encouraging this sort of behavior risk either legal sanctions or disbarment if it was known they were doing it?

This may not be perjury new-south-wales australia Perjury is defined in s327 of the Crimes Act 1900 as making a false statement or oath in connection with judicial proceedings, material to the proceedings, knowing the statement is false or not believing it is true. So ommission is not perjury but there is a fine line there - you have to believe the statements you do make are true. If you confine yourself to purely factual but misleading statements it is possible for you to genuinely believe they are true. There is a distinction in Australian law between statements that are false and statements that are misleading; perjury requires the former. But it's still illegal for the person on the stand s319 contains the general offence of Perverting the Course of Justice: A person who does any act, or makes any omission , intending in any way to pervert the course of justice, is liable to imprisonment for 14 years. As well as the lawyer s323 defines the crime of Influencing witnesses or jurors which involves doing any act to cause a witness "to give false evidence or withhold true evidence or to not attend as a witness or not produce any thing in evidence pursuant to a summons or subpoena".

Could Trump shoot 100 House Democrats and avoid prosecution, at least while in office?

A lawyer for Trump named Consovoy said in court that Trump was immune from prosecution even if he shot someone in the street. If Trump killed 100 House Dems, then the Democrats would certainly no longer control the House.

This is technically an open question, but there is a general consensus that Consovoy's argument is unprecedented and unsupportable. If the president can be dragged into civil litigation over private matters in the middle of his presidency, Clinton v. Jones , 520 U.S. 681 (1997) , it seems unlikely that the courts would give him a pass on prosecution for a midterm murderous rampage. If Consovoy is right, though, the answer would have to be that yes, Trump could avoid prosecution. Posing the question that way sort of helps to highlight the problem with Consovoy's theory. As I understand it, Consovoy's argument is that impeachment is the only remedy for crimes committed by a president. But if the president can just kill of Congress, there's no one left to impeach him, leaving the country with no way to remove him. So again, the answer is almost certainly no.

Can a lawyer ethiclly have a person in a 3 way call attempt to gain bank account information?

A lawyer in a 3 way call used my sister-in-law to gain information from my bank accounts. The lawyer kept quiet and had my sister-in-law ask questions. My bank told her that they could not help her. Can a lawyer do this? Ethically?

If the lawyer honestly and reasonably took the position that it was legal for your sister-in-law to ask these questions, and try to get answers, then the lawyers actions would have been permitted by legal ethics in many jurisdictions. The bank might have refused to answer because it was legally prohibited from doing so, or because it was against the bank's own policies to provide the information. Or possibly the bank should have provided the info, but the specific bank employee was misinformed. Without knowing what info was requested and what jurisdiction this was in, there is no way to know what the legal position on the questions might be. In general, a lawyer may not ethically advise someone to commit a criminal act, nor assist someone in committing a crime, nor advise how to commit a crime. But even if it was a crime fro the bank to provide the information requested, it might not be a crime for the sister-in-law to ask for it. And it might only be a tort, not a crime, for the bank to provide the information, or it might not be illegal at all. Of course, some lawyers violate legal ethics, just as some people commit crimes, even though the law forbids this. It is often hard to get enforcement action on alleged violations of legal ethics, depending very much on the details of the case.

Is a lawyer allowed to &quot;rescue&quot; his witness on redirect, and if so, when?

A lawyer puts up an expert witness to testify on a technical matter. The opposition leads him through several questions on "cross," and then concludes with, "So it is possible that X could have occurred?" (X being an event that helps the cross examiner's case.) The witness says "yes," and means to say "but that is not likely" when the cross examiner cuts him off. Can the first lawyer then "redirect" with questions like, "So you say X is possible? How likely do you think this is? Why do you think this is unlikely?" etc. Under what circumstances "can" this be done? ("Can" in this context has two possible meanings. 1) is "legally admissible or allowable. 2) is legally "advisable.)

This is pretty much the entire purpose of a redirect, and almost always permissible. If your witness has given an unhelpfully incomplete answer, it is not just "advisable" to ask those follow-up questions, but perhaps mandatory as an ethical matter.

Is it advisable for a person write his own contract if he is good in english but don&#39;t know legal jargon?

A lawyer scared me by saying, yes you can right your own contract but chances are most of your clauses won't hold in court cause you don't know legal jargon. However, I know english and my english is somewhat ok. I've written technical procedures before. To be specific I'm writing a legal document for a contract agreement between myself and a sharholder of my company.

It depends How good is your (legal) English? For example, do you know the legal difference between "will", "shall" and "must"? Or, the difference between "employee", "subcontractor" and "worker"? Or the difference between "bankruptcy", "insolvency" and an "act of bankruptcy"? Contingency What are you going to put in your dispute resolution clause? Do you prefer mediation, arbitration or litigation? Will it be a one size fits all or will it be escalating? What happens if one of you dies? Or emigrates? Or divorces? Or is convicted of a crime? A financial crime? A violent crime? A sexual crime? Or what if such is just alleged but not proven? What happens if the company ceases to exist? Or is sued? Or is acquired by someone else? Or by one of you? Who is responsible for insuring the subject matter of the contract (if anyone)? To what value? If the person who should doesn't can the other person effect the insurance and claim the premium as a debt due and payable? Not all of these will be relevant to your contract. Familiarity How familiar are you with this sort of contract? Is this something you do all the time or is this a one off? For example, I am happy to enter a construction contract without legal advice because that's my business and has been for many years - I know my risks and how to manage them, inside and outside the contract. However, when I set up shareholder's agreements, wills and business continuation insurance with my partners, we went to a lawyer. What is your relationship with the other person i.e. how much do you know and trust them? Stakes If the contract is not very important (which is something that varies with the participants, for some people a million dollar contract is not important for others a $5 one is), so that if, by screwing up, you are OK if you lose everything you've staked then write it yourself. Alternatively, if the contract is vitally important to you and your heirs and assignees unto the 6th generation, I'd get a lawyer to write it - its pretty cheap insurance. How long the contract lasts will be a factor in this - a contract that exposes you to risk for 3 months is different than one that does so for 25 years. Basically, its a risk reward calculation. TL;DR Contracts only matter when relationships break down. If you reach for the contract then you can expect that the other party will be playing for keeps and that contract is your only defense against the worst they can do. If you are happy with your skills in mitigating against a cashed-up opponent who wants to see you go down no matter the cost then draft it yourself.