Datasets:

vblagoje

/

Law-StackExchange-Deduplicated

like 0

Website project canceled. Do I need to Restore old page?

A person contacted me to create a website for him for a fixed price. I verbally agreed. After the client always asked for more functionality, I decided to define the scope in a written contract, also because I was not sure if the client will pay. He disagreed so we cancelled the project. His domains are now on my server, technically their on my name but I will transfer them back to him. Before my work he already had a side. My backup got corrupted and it will be a hard time tp restore it. I want to know if I do need to restore his old website? As it was never discussed at the start of the project, even the backup was just something I did optionally and not because the client asked me to do one and i agreed. Do i need to legally restore it to his old site?

Website project canceled. Do I need to Restore old page? You seemingly do. This is equivalent to taking your drivable car to the mechanic for maintenance or improvements. If the contract is cancelled for whatever reason, it would be unacceptable that the mechanic returns you the car in a condition worse enough that you can no longer drive it. The transfer of domains & credentials to your server supports the presumption that you are responsible for the contents and functionality of the site for as long as the domains & credentials are under your control. To the act of returning what was given to you is attached the expectation that you would restore it to its former state if the contract is cancelled or rescinded. An alternative scenario helps making the point. Suppose you cancelled the contract upon realizing you are not proficient enough to create the website. It would be nonetheless reasonable to expect you to bring his site back to its original state. Absent a clause addressing the event of cancellation or rescission otherwise, there is no reason why your responsibility in this regard would depend on the cause for rescission. Furthermore, the formation of the initial [verbal] contract tends to indicate that you are more proficient in the matter than the client. This places on you the burden of taking sufficient precautions by directly securing a backup or at least requiring your client to create one. The fact that your backup got corrupted is rather tantamount to not having done a backup at all. Something that might favor your position is the common practice that many IT service providers recommend that users always have a backup, whence at this point average person "should not" (?) need to be reminded to do backups when transferring his data or systems to a provider. This argument might not be strong enough to release you from your responsibility to secure a backup for yourself, though. The stronger the client's expertise in IT matters, the likelier that his failure to produce a backup will release you from having to restore the site (the mere fact that the client asked you to create a website does not conclusively preempt the possibility that he might also be proficient in the matter).

Where can I find the tax waiver rules for New Jersey?

A person dies in the state of New Jersey. When do you have to file form L-4? Note: It seems to me that if all the beneficiaries are class A then there is no real need to file form L-4 because there is no tax due. However, I do not know what the law says in this case.

When do you have to file form L-4? When one of the conditions for Form L-4 Affidavit Requesting Preliminary Waivers: Resident Decedents are met: A complete Inheritance or Estate Tax return cannot be completed yet; or All beneficiaries are Class A, but estate does not qualify to use Form L-8 ; or All beneficiaries are Class E, or Class E and Class A. For awareness, Form L-8 Affidavit for Non-Real Estate Investments: Resident Decedents is for the release of: New Jersey bank accounts; Stock in New Jersey corporations; Brokerage accounts; and New Jersey investment bonds. NB, L-8 cannot be used for real estate, which requires Form L-9 Affidavit for Real Property Tax Waiver Resident Decedent

Getting an EIN number for a Trust and Section 645

A person dies with a revocable trust that becomes irrevocable after the person's death. The trustee of the irrevocable trust wants to get an EIN number. If in the process of getting the EIN number he/she selects to have the trust file under Section 645 does that eliminate the need to file a separate tax return for the trust? That is, the income for the trust can be reported on the estate's income tax return. Bob Sherry

If the trust's income is reported under the estate given an election under 26 U.S.C. § 645, it does not need to apply for a second EIN while the estate continues to exist.

Parent dead without a will

A person dies without a will in California, US, and one of several children proposes to take control of real estate. Under what conditions is this legal? How can such action be challenged, if it can be? Assume that title remains in the name of the deceased person.

When a person dies intestate, California law (or the law of any other state) does not allow a presumed heir to unilaterally legally take over the estate, or part of the estate. This most likely involves a court procedure to decide who gets what. However, if all parties agree, it would be possible for one or more heirs to occupy the house without them owning it – this creates a legal mess that can be difficult and costly to untangle, so presumed-heir squatting is not a good idea. Ultimately, the property will have to go through probate in order for it to be sold to someone else. Obviously, property taxes and other assessments must be paid, but the state does not care who writes the check. There are also liability issues, if the property damages other property (example: the underground oil tank ruptures and pollutes the neighbors' property). If one of the heirs disputes the arrangement, they can sue to force proper disposition of the estate. Creditors may also have a legal claim against the estate. A person can petition the court ( here is the form ) to be appointed as the personal representative of the deceased. If someone else has "taken" the property, this petition triggers questioning as to who is entitled to a share of the estate, and the court will assure that it is distributed according to law, and if this is an adversarial process, each interested party may need to hire their own attorney (thus it is best to reach an agreement beforehand).

Does a destroyed file allow for an expungement?

A person goes to the courts to requests a record of their criminal misdemeanor court case from over 15 years ago that ended in a Nolle Prosse . The courts respond that they destroyed "the file". But the docket is partially visible online. If the courts can not produce the record of a case, does that allow for an expungement of the record? What situations allow for a case/arrest to be expunged?

Short answer: No. If a court destroys the criminal file due to age, the defendant's criminal record lives on in law enforcement databases, be it local, state, or federal. In San Diego, the Superior Court records are open to inspection. Court case files are public records and subject to public inspection. California Rules of Court, rule 2.400(a) states that all papers in the court files may be inspected by the public in the office of the clerk. Rule 2.550(a) says that unless confidential or sealed by law, all court records are presumed open. However, again, this does not impact a criminal history report retained by law enforcement. To get the conviction literally removed from the criminal history report, the defendant will typically need a court order directing the law enforcement agency to remove the arrest and/or conviction. For example, in California, if the defendant can prove there was no reason to have arrested the defendant in the first place. Specifically, Penal Code section 851.8 (b) requires “any law enforcement agency” to destroy their records. “[Penal Code] section 851.8 is for the benefit of those defendants who have not committed a crime. It permits those petitioners who can show that the state should never have subjected them to the compulsion of the criminal law -- because no objective factors justified official action -- to purge the official records of any reference to such action. . . ...” (People v. Matthews (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 1052, 1056.) (Emphasis added) In People v. Scott M. (1985) 167 Cal. App. 3d 688, 700 [“Section 851.8 is for the benefit of those defendants who have not committed a crime.”].) Factual innocence may be determined based on circumstances at the time of arrest or any meritorious defense. Recent case law establishes the pivotal time for viewing the evidence is when the motion is heard. The statutory language “necessarily means that the existence of reasonable cause depends on the current evidence rather than simply the evidence that existed at the time that the arrest and prosecution occurred.” (People v. Laiwala, 143 Cal. App. 4th 1065, 1068 & n. 3 (2003) (emphasis added). Keep in mind in California, "expunge" does not mean to seal or destroy, but officially dismisses the conviction - leaving the public record intact. The best place to start is contacting your local public defender and ask about post conviction relief or record sealing if your arrest did not result in a conviction. Getting free advice never hurts.

When can a payment hearing be adjourned without a decision?

A person has a validated court order from the Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT). The CRT does not have authority to enforce its orders but small claims court does. In the payment hearing the debtor told the judge that he had just filed to dispute the decision made by the CRT. The judge "believed" him and adjourned the hearing to a future date. To me this seems like abuse of of process, the CRT doesn't even issue a validated order until the deadline to dispute is passed. The judge did not seem too concerned about this point, though granted they were probably not familiar with the details of the CRT. Is this allowed to happen, and if not can anything be done? From the CRT website You need to give the BC Provincial Court a validated copy of your CRT order. This will be sent to you after the time limit for making a Notice of Objection has expired (approximately 29 days after the date of the CRT decision). If you don’t receive a validated copy of your order after 40 days, please contact us. The judge ordered the debtor to supply the creditor with a copy of the dispute to the decision, and financial information. What if the debtor does not supply this information, can a debtor be found in contempt of court in small claims?

Just to hit the specific point in the question beyond what @DaleM mentioned, judges have very broad discretion to continue hearings and extend deadlines that have not already expired upon the request of a party, except in a very narrow class of cases that provide otherwise. The standard for doing so in the jurisdictions where I have practiced is "good cause" and I suspect it is similar in B.C. Allowing a few days to figure out what is going on in the CRT matter and, in general, affording a party an opportunity to make arguments along those lines, while not immediately ruling on the merits, wouldn't be an abuse of discretion which would be the standard by which a decision to continue a hearing would be reviewed on appeal (except that it is really a higher standard to review it, because it is a non-appealable, non-final interlocutory order that could only be immediately reviewed for extraordinary causes). Hearings get continued all the time, when the requests are made before the hearing is held or during the hearing, at this level of the court system. The reasons can be as mundane as "my car broke down", "my babysitting arrangements fell through", "I'm actively working on getting a lawyer to help me," and "a winter storm interfered with my ability to prepare for the hearing because the power went out at my home/office most of yesterday." Courts also not infrequently will continue a hearing sua sponte (i.e. without any party requesting it) because some emergency matter has come up on the judge's schedule (e.g. in the counties where I practice, domestic violence restraining orders have priority over almost everything and any available judge can be interrupted in the middle of another hearing for half an hour or so to deal with one), or in the judge's personal life (I once had a hearing where the judge started to collapse on the bench in the middle of a three day trial that had to be continued for five months after he was rushed to the hospital and then recovered.) Another fairly common reason to continue a hearing, that happens maybe one hearing out of five or six in my world, is that it takes longer than anticipated for some reason for the parties to present their evidence and make arguments and the allocated time for the hearing runs out, due to no real fault of the parties, so additional time is squeezed in a week or two later. For example, one of the courthouses where I practice frequently is next to a fire station and in the event of a major fire, the commotion as fire trucks rush out to respond to the fire can make it impossible to hear what is going on for as much as fifteen or twenty minutes, which can disrupt the schedule in a short hearing. In contrast, if you miss a hearing or deadline entirely, your excuses have to be vastly more impressive (e.g. "I was hit by a bus on the way to court and was taken to the hospital.", something that I've had come up in cases I was involved in, although not personally, knock on wood, three or four times). In general, there are lots of ways to slow down a judicial proceeding, and there are few effective ways to make it go faster or insist that it stays strictly on schedule.

What time protection does the Fraud Act of 2006 offer to the accused?

A person has been threatened with Fraud Act for a claim he made a year back. The claim was approved by the other party and there was a payout. After a year, the party threatens to charge with fraud and says the claim was fraudulent. Unfortunately, due to the time lapse, the person does not recall the specifics of the episode and why he made the claim. Gathering of evidence also is difficult, and the accuser is also wrong in not having done the due diligence in approving the claim. What provisions does the Fraud Act of 2006 carry to protect the accused? What does it take to argue that the accused was intentional in his act of making the claim?

What time protection does the Fraud Act of 2006 offer to the accused? None. Fraud is what we call an "either way offence" and there is no time limit on bringing a prosecution. What does it take to argue that the accused was intentional in his act of making the claim? Evidence of his intent, in particular anything that can be shown to be dated when the claim was made. (He should consider seeing an experienced lawyer who specialises in this area.) ETA Following the OP's comment that this was a claim for £5:00. I'm not overly familiar with the prosecution policies of the Train Operating Companies and/or British Transport Police but if this was an isolated incident (ie not a regular occurrence or part of wider organised criminality) I would say that it is possibly a toothless threat - de minimis non curat lex (the law does not deal with trifles).

Refused a subject access request

A person has made an email allegation to my daughters school that I have been emotionally abusing my daughter. The school have decided not to take this any further due to the fact they believe its hearsay and they have seen no evidence to support the claims. I requested a SAR but was denied as it held the names of a third party (presumably the persons daughter who was playing with my daughter at the time) and the school have stated they will delete the email. The person has also sent abusive messages to both myself and my wife and contacted the police who have stated they will not take it further as its a civil issue. However this person has been subtly intimidating my wife when they pick up the children from school and I wish to find exactly what allegations was said to go to my solicitor to take this person to court. I have since requested the school to issue a statement to say what the allegations were without naming the third party but have been ignored. Is there any way I can gain access to this information to use as evidence for a court claim. This is under UK law.

Issue a witness summons This will require you to initiate your case, presumably for defamation, first. Once you have done that, you can issue a witness summons to the school for them to produce the email (and their responses and records of the actions they took). In the meantime, since they have indicated their intention to destroy it, you may want to seek an injunction preventing that. You may find that there is insufficient evidence to maintain your case and have to pay everyone’s costs but that’s the risk you take.

Are there different penalties for crimes against a PCSO as opposed to a police officer?

A person has recently been arrested for the murder of a Police Community Support Officer (PCSO) in Kent, England making me wonder: Is the murder/assault/other crimes against a PCSO subject to the same enhanced sentencing guidelines as against a police officer, or is it simply treated as an assault on a public employee (like an ambulance drivers)? Especially regarding murder sentencing/whole life terms, which have special police enhancements: does police include PCSOs?

Are there different penalties for crimes against a PCSO as opposed to a police officer? No a PCSO is an Emergency Worker so the starting point and aggravating features for sentencing are the same. Regarding murder sentencing/whole life terms, which have special police enhancements: does police include PCSOs? I have not been able to find any citable sources that can directly answer the question, but Section 3(1)(b) of the Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018 defines a PCSO as an Emergency Worker: a person (other than a constable) who has the powers of a constable or is otherwise employed for police purposes or is engaged to provide services for police purposes Section 4(1)(2) of Schedule 21 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 lists examples when a whole life order may be appropriate, including at s.4(1)(2)(ba): the murder of a police officer ... in the course of his or her duty This list is neither exhaustive nor definitive so it is likely that, based on the Emergency Worker definition and as long as all the relevant criteria are met, the murder of a PCSO may well be covered by this provision. I note that the investigation in to the murder of Julia James is ongoing and potentially sub judice so my only observation is that according to media reports she was not on duty at the time of her death so s.4(1)(2)(ba) may not be applicable.

What is the format of an affidavit of declaration for signing in the vernacular language of a deceased person?

A person has signed in her vernacular language in some official documents and she has passed away. In her identity document, her name is written in English. As a nominee, her son is asked to provide an affidavit which will declare that the person who has signed in vernacular language and the person whose identity proof is going to be provided are the same. What could be written in the affidavit for such case?

The idea is that the son would need to attest to the fact that the person who signed one document as அகமகிழ்தினி is the same person identified on another document as "Akamakiltini" are the same person. That would be so even if the signed document had மலர்மதி for a signature, though in that case the affidavit may need to explain the discrepancy. If the son is familiar with his mother's writing and can swear that the signature of document A that looks like "அகமகிழ்தினி" is indeed how his mother wrote her name, and that her name is indeed (in Latin characters) Akamakiltini or some variant spelling, he would state that basis. Or, he might attest that "my mother often wrote மலர்மதி when she signed her name".

How can I determine if a person filed a case against me?

A person in a different state claimed to have filed a case against me for posting something on Twitter (cyber bullying). That was 6 months ago. In the meantime I was out of the country and did not receive any documents from the cops or courts. Does this mean they didn't really file a case? I got a background report on me and it does not show any record against me.

You know that a judicial proceeding has been filed against you when you are "served" with notice. In fact, legal proceedings cannot generally proceed without somebody swearing that you were served notice. If a criminal complaint is being pursued against you then you might also learn of this fact when an investigating law enforcement agent contacts you to question you or arrest you. "Filed a case" could mean all sorts of other things. For example, it could be that they filed a police report, or filed a complaint with some company or non-law-enforcement entity. It could be that they have in fact filed a claim in a court of law and whoever is serving process just hasn't been able to find you. In any of these events I don't know of any way that you could proactively determine that without knowing exactly where and how the "case" was "filed." Actually, if a criminal complaint was filed against you and approved then a court in another state could have issued a warrant for your arrest. Contact your local police and they should be able to do a nationwide search for open warrants on you. Police will not typically release information on "open investigations." So even if you knew the exact agency where it was filed they may not tell you anything. If they decided not to investigate it then you might have a right to request the complaint under open-records laws – that depends on the state and the agency.

Would a lifetime gym membership be subject to bankruptcy proceedings?

A person in the state of Washington purchases a gym membership that entitles them (and them alone) to visit the gym for the rest of their lifetime, in exchange for a single lump sum payment. A few years later said person fails to pay down their debts and declares bankruptcy. Would the court be able to order the gym to transfer said membership to a creditor? Or perhaps pay out a pro rate lump sum to the creditors in exchange for canceling said membership? Would it matter if the lifetime purchase is for something more substantial than a gym membership? I.e. do the rules change if you've contracted Hilton to provide you a free room in any hotel for the rest of your life?

Would the court be able to order the gym to transfer said membership to a creditor? Or perhaps pay out a pro rate lump sum to the creditors in exchange for canceling said membership? Would it matter if the lifetime purchase is for something more substantial than a gym membership? I.e. do the rules change if you've contracted Hilton to provide you a free room in any hotel for the rest of your life? What happens varies a bit depending upon the kind of bankruptcy. In a Chapter 7, all property and contract rights of the bankrupt debtor vest in the bankruptcy trustee when the bankruptcy petition is filed, by operation of law, with certain exceptions. (Chapters 11, 12 and 13 which are reorganizations are conceptually more complicated and I won't address them at length. But, in a reorganization, the title to the debtor's property doesn't necessary vest in a distinct bankruptcy estate at a single moment in time and instead can continue to be owned by the debtor subject to various bankruptcy related obligations.) Certainly, a right to use a hotel for life, which is very close but not identical to a legal life estate in a time share, would be a bankruptcy estate asset and would be vested in the bankruptcy trustee. The bankruptcy court is fairly limited in how it can adjust the rights of third-parties who are not creditors of the bankrupt, although it is not entirely without any authority to do so. It can invalidate "ipso facto" clauses in contracts that are triggered only upon bankruptcy, it can unwind preferential payments and fraudulent transfers made prior to filing for bankruptcy, the trustee can invalidate contracts that a third-party lien creditor could invalidate, they can declare restraints on the transferability of contract and property rights that are invalid under state law invalid , and so on. But, generally speaking, the property rights of a party are what they are defined to be unless a specific exception applies. In some cases, if an asset is not exempt from creditors claims, but is also not transferrable, the bankruptcy court could probably compel the bankrupt debtor to buy that asset back from the bankruptcy estate at fair market value, on some sort of financing terms that made it possible to do so, so that the creditors of the estate are not harmed by the lack of transferability. A fact pattern involving a membership in a Surf Club worth several hundred thousand dollars is explored in 2014 ruling in Feaster v. Surf Club , an adversary proceeding in a debtor-member's Chapter 13 bankruptcy, although it doesn't address all of the issues in this question.

Was it double homicide?

A person is accused of two counts of murder, because the victim was a pregnant woman. The lawyer representing the defense makes the proposal that it couldn't be two, because legally, only one death involved was human. Assuming the accused is convicted of the murder of the woman herself, what about the second death? Is it still considered murder? Why?

This is going to vary by jurisdiction. Under the Wisconsin first-degree intentional homicide law, it counts as two offenses, because the law explicitly says so: (a) Except as provided in sub. (2), whoever causes the death of another human being with intent to kill that person or another is guilty of a Class A felony. (b) Except as provided in sub. (2), whoever causes the death of an unborn child with intent to kill that unborn child, kill the woman who is pregnant with that unborn child or kill another is guilty of a Class A felony. There are similar provisions in the first-degree reckless homicide law, the second-degree intentional homicide law, the second-degree reckless homicide law, etc. The National Conference of State Legislatures has a page which lists fetal homicide laws, and says 38 states have them. (Although it's strange to me that they cite Wisconsin's separate antiabortion law , instead of the law I cited that's literally in the homicide law.)

Can the possible existence of a will be ignored

A person is currently suffering from a degenerative brain condition affecting memory. They have previously told their family that they did make a will, and had it stored with a solicitor in a named town. However they cannot remember which solicitor it was, and the likely time frame is 20-30 years in the past. When this person dies, how much effort must the family put into searching for the will? Can they simply ignore its possible existence and proceed as though the person had died without making a will? If the family contact solicitors in the named town, do the solicitors have to disclose the existence or contents of the will before the death? Does it make a difference whether a family member has a lasting power of attorney?

As I understand it, a UK solicitor will generally not reveal the content of a will while the testator is still alive, unless the testator has specifically left instructions to do so. But the existence of a will is not protected in the same way, and might be revealed. Once the testator has died, the family must make a reasonable effort to find a will if one exists before anyone can be appointed administrator and the estate processed on an intestate (no-will) basis. It is good practice to keep a copy of a will where it can easily be found, such as in a safe deposit, along with a note about who has custody of the original. But not everyone does that.

Is it murder to kill someone who's just about to die?

A person is falling into a pool of lava. If another person were to shoot them as they're falling, would the killer be charged for murder?

Since we don't have a system of robot justice, it's impossible to say whether a prosecutor would file charges in this bizarre circumstance, since filing charges is discretionary. However, this situation does fit the description of murder. It is intentional, it causes death (maybe, vide infra ), it is not legally justified (as self-defense, or as an act legally sanctioned by a state executioner), the victim is a person. It is not sanctioned by any "death with dignity" statute. The one issue that might be effectively argued by the defense assuming the irrefutability of the factual claims of your scenario is that perhaps the relevant crime is assault with a deadly weapon, since it probably could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the victim died from the shooting, and not from being incinerated by lava. It depends on where the person is shot, and with what.

Firearm restriction while open carrying in Florida

A person is going fishing out into the Everglades. They make the decision to open carry a firearm. Are there any restrictions as to the type (Shotguns, Rifles, Pistols, etc) of firearms a person can open carry?

In the state of Florida, any weapon that can be legally owned can be open carried while fishing.

Is it perjury to report not being a parent if one has an adopted child?

A person is on the witness stand. He has an adopted child under 18 but no biological kids. He is asked if he is a parent. He says no. Did he commit perjury?

In new-jersey , the offence of perjury is defined at 2C:28-1 of the Code of Criminal Justice A person is guilty of perjury, a crime of the third degree, if in any official proceeding he makes a false statement under oath or equivalent affirmation, or swears or affirms the truth of a statement previously made, when the statement is material and he does not believe it to be true. The Code also provides an opportunity for retraction. Assuming that the statement is material, whether answering "no" is perjury will depend on the witness's understanding of the question and his belief about the truth of the answer. If we assume that the witness understands the question to be about parentage in general, including by adoption, and if we assume that they know they have an adopted child, the answer "no" would be perjury. If instead we assume that the witness understood the question to be narrowly about biological parentage, or if they had forgotten at the time of their answer that they had an adopted child, then the answer "no" would not be perjury.

Explain: indemnify and hold harmless (seems contradictory)

A person is presented with a contract with a consulting company, of which he will be a client Section 8. Indemnification (see below) seems to me to be contradicting itself, but I could be misunderstanding something. Could someone please give me a plain explanation as to what this paragraph is saying in regards to indemnification and hold harmless? 8 Indemnification Each party hereto (the "Indemnifying Party") agrees to indemnify and hold harmless each other party (each, an "Indemnified Party") and all employees, representatives, directors, officers, shareholders and persons affiliated with the Indemnified Party against all claims, damages, losses, liabilities, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, settlement costs and any reasonable legal, accounting or other expenses for investigating or defending any actions or threatened actions)(collectively "Losses") incurred by the Indemnified Party arising out of or resulting from (a) the gross negligence, willful misconduct or fraud of the Indemnifying Party or (b) a breach by the Indemnifying Party of its representations and warranties, covenants or other obligations under this Agreement. In addition, except in the case of fraud or willful misconduct, the Client agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Dara and its respective employees, representatives, directors, officers, shareholders and person affiliated with them against all Losses incurred by them in the performance of their obligations under this Agreement.

It seems to me that this section says that if any party commits "gross negligence, willful misconduct or fraud" then all costs and damages that might result from this fall on the party committing such violations. In the absence of such willful misconduct or fraud the client holds the consulting firm harmless and covers all losses (as defined in the section) resulting from the consulting firm carrying out its side of the contract, or trying to. There does seem a slight inconsistency as regards any "gross negligence" which is not also "willful misconduct or fraud", as the first part of the section puts any losses for "gross negligence" on the party who is negligent, but the second part does not include "gross negligence" in the things that the client does not indemnify the consulting firm for.

Is it renter's responsibility to cover overcharge by a submetering company?

A person is renting a house. Per the rental agreement, it is their responsibility to cover the water and sewer bills. The house is located in a community which is serviced by a submetering company. The submetering company owns and maintains the meters and sends the bills out to the property owners. Payments go to the submetering company, not the city. The water is billed at tiered rates which are set by the city. The tiers work like this: for the first 2000 gallons of water consumed the household pays $1.40 per thousand gallons, for the gallons 2001 through 5000 it pays $3.00 dollars per thousand gallons and so on. The top tier rate of $14.00 per thousand gallons kicks in at 25000 gallons per month. A similar system works for the sewer. On the paper, the submetering company does not charge anything above the city rates, except for a small fixed maintenance and administration fee, which does not depend on the consumption rate. Now, here is the fun part. Due to a clerical error, the city and the submetering company treat the whole neighborhood of about 200 properties as a single unit. This means that the consumption from all the properties of the whole neighborhood is added together for the purposes of calculating the tiers. The submetering company then divides them among all the households. Effectively, that means the tier levels for each household are first 10 gallons, then 10 through 25, etc. That's gallons, not thousands. Taking the first shower or two in the beginning of a month kicks the resident right into the top tier, where they stay for the rest of the month. Every household pays at the top tier rate ($14.00) after they have consumed first 125 gallons of water during the month. This means that every month, a typical household's water bill is about $150 to $200 dollars higher compared to what it would have been had they been charged the city rates and tiers. The submetering company has explained it in writing. The property owners, the HOA board and the property management company are aware of this. Nothing is being done about it, except writing angry posts in the community Facebook group. This has been going on for almost four years. The lease is a standard form which has this clause: Tenant shall pay for all utilities services during the Lease Term and connection charges and deposits for activating existing utility connections to the Premises except for ________, that Landlord agrees to provide at Landlord’s expense (If blank, then "NONE"). The blank is left blank. There is nothing specifying the rates of the services in the lease. Is there any recourse for a renter to avoid the overcharge caused by a clerical error? If and when this situation is resolved and the property owner receives their money back or an account credit, is the renter entitled to what they have overpaid during the lease? Does it matter if it happens before of after the lease will have ended? This is in Florida, U.S.

Is there any recourse for a renter to avoid the overcharge caused by a clerical error? Probably not. Also, I am skeptical that it is a true clerical error as opposed to a bad policy due to a decision made by the developer who may not have been able to get the city to provide individual taps to each residence. If and when this situation is resolved and the property owner receives their money back or an account credit, is the renter entitled to what they have overpaid during the lease? The renter should receive the credit. Does it matter if it happens before of after the lease will have ended? Logically, it shouldn't.

Testamentary Trust

A person is thinking about leaving his money to four people. I will call them p1,p2,p3 and p4. When he dies he wants his money to go into a trust. In addition, he wants p1, p2 and p3 to be able to take out a small percentage of the trust every year. When three of the following people are dead: p1,p2,p3 and p4 ; he wants the money to go to the remaining survivor. Is there any problem doing this? Would this be considered a QTIP trust?

Is there any problem doing this? This is not a problem. This is a typical and plain vanilla testamentary trust. Would this be considered a QTIP trust? No. QTIP stands for "qualified terminable interest property". A QTIP trust is a trust for the benefit of a surviving spouse that is allowed to qualify for the marital deduction from gift and estate taxation despite the fact that it would not qualify for that deduction in the absence of the tax code provision authorizing the QTIP election. It allows the decedent spouse to exert more control over the final disposition of the trust assets than would otherwise be possible while still qualifying for the marital deduction.

Is this fraud in Victoria?

A person knocked my neighbours house, an old lady who has been living there for many years. The person was a draughtsman representing the owner of an adjacent property. He claimed that he was designing some town houses for the adjacent property and asked for permission to remove a tree on the old ladies property. She said that she would get back to him and wanted to look at his designs. I studied the designs and in my opinion, the problem with this tree, which he called a weed, was pretty much 100mm inside the the garage that he wanted to build and had been there for over 20 years. This is Victoria so the tree may have encroached on the neighbous property, but the designs that he provided were, in my opinion, misleading in that the placement of the tree was not in the actual place. Is it fraud asking for someone to give up their right to keep an encroachment by, in my opinion, to lie and/or use deception?

Dishonesty is a required element of fraud in all Australian jurisdictions Being wrong is not the same as being dishonest. So, absent evidence that the person knew the tree was incorrectly shown and knowingly used that to achieve their objective, this isn’t fraud. There may be civil remedies (if harm actually happened) but no crime.

General bankruptcy inquiry in Germany

A person lives in Germany and owns a business which is in debt. They are afraid they will lose their child and be sent to "debt jail". Is this a real possibility? Is there any liability protection between an individual and their business in Germany?

As in most of the world, there is a BIG difference between a person running a business and a person owning a company which runs a business. In the first case, the person is liable for all the debts of the business, in the second case, providing they have fulfilled the legal duties as am owner/director (as applicable) they are not liable for the debts of the company. One of those legal duties is to stop racking up debts you can't pay. In either case, your friend needs professional advice (legal and/or accounting) NOW! A person who is insolvent (cannot pay their debts as and when they fall due) can seek protection from their creditors through bankruptcy. German bankruptcy law, by most standards, is brutal but not so brutal as to take away parenting rights or put the person in jail.

Tax fraud, revealed on the show

A person on disability, supposedly can only make $1000/month without having to report that income to the IRS. If a person on the show is shown to make more than they should, revealed in a case before Judge Judy, does she report this to the IRS?

Neither "Judge Judy", nor anyone connected with the show, is to the best of my understanding required to make such a report to the IRS, or to any other government agency. But neither are they forbidden from making a report should one of them choose to do so. For the matter of that, you, or anyone who saw the show, could make a report. I did not see this particular show, and I don't know how clear it was that the person was in violation. It might be that some exception applies. Also, news reports say that the IRS is currently underfunded and overworked. A disabled person making a bit over $1000 per month probably does not owe a large tax bill, even if in violation. Such a case might well not be a priority for the IRS. Oh by the way, failure to report income is not "tax fraud", that is making false or misleading reports, and I think there is also an intent requirement. "Failure to file" is illegal, but under a different provision.

A person owes money to the state but has changed ownership on all estates to from hers/his to that of relatives

A person owes money to the state but has changed ownership on all estates from hers or his, to that of relatives. The writ of execution can't really confiscate these estates, at least without a warrant, because they are all other people's property by now. Is the law about this pretty much identical in any state or are there some radically different examples from various states (i.e. in one state it would never be confiscated, in one it wouldn't need a warrant, etc.)? In Israel for example the debtor's (former) estates could be confiscated, but only after a warrant, and I wonder about other states.

united-states Meet the word "clawback". The general rule is that anything you do simply for asset protection can be undone by the government or courts. See the excellent book by Adkisson and Riser titled Asset Protection . First, the creditor is going to ask about all your assets including transfers. You have to answer truthfully, or else you open a whole other can of worms. The creditor and court will look at the character of these transactions. Suppose you sell a Ferrari worth $200,000 appraised value, to your brother for $155,000. However, it was an open eBay auction. Plaintiffs review it, hoping to find it was a "vest pocket" sale rigged to be unappealing to anyone but family. Wrong: it was a competent and earnest listing, which did attract 12 stranger bidders, and 3 bidders took up your offer to let them inspect the car. And according to Ferrari brokers that price was realistic given the soft market. Your brother simply outbid them, for nostalgia reasons . You did get the money and did use it to settle with creditors. That sale will be considered legitimate, because there's extensive provenance held in reliable third party hands (eBay). You sell the Ferrari for $100 to your brother. The court will presume that you intend to buy the car back for $100 after your legal troubles have cleared. This sale will be declared invalid, the Ferrari clawed back, and the creditor will be able to target that asset. The same thing can happen if you are insolvent, expect to enter bankruptcy, and pay a creditor "out of turn". E.G. you settle your debt with the country club (so you can keep attending) before you pay your tax bill. The creditors, IRS or court can "claw back" that payment. That happened to my family's business once. Meet the word "Penalties". OK, so what does a dumb crook do? They lie about their assets. They testify "I crashed the Ferrari on the property, it was a basket case. I parted it out and chopped up the rest, threw it in the weekly trash week by week". And they can produce no documentation of any part sales. Meanwhile, plaintiff had already pulled DMV records and found it's currently registered... to the brother, with a DMV sale price of $100. They sent over a detective, who has pictures of it sitting in the brother's garage. And plaintiff gleefully maneuvered the dumb crook into a lie under oath. And now they face judicial punishment - including harsh fines, and jail for contempt of court or refusal to disclose. This bypasses the Fourth Amendment, so there is no trial for proof of guilt. But it's a government agency, not a private party All the moreso, then. Government has the right to bypass some of the rules for private parties - such as being able to do asset search, subpoena, or attach assets without filing a lawsuit. The IRS is probably the most experienced at pursuing asset hiders. They have "their own" Tax Court which does exclusively tax cases.

Printing and other rights in respect of a pseudonymously authored text posted online

A person posts a text to Usenet that he has signed using an obvious pseudonym that does not include a functioning address for himself that does not refer to a publisher other than himself. Together with the text he includes a notice saying that further publication in any medium except as a Usenet article which is identically accredited and contains an identical notice is strictly prohibited unless he, proving his authorship, specifically issues a licence for such publication that in particular printing rights are strictly reserved, which he defines as meaning that it should be assumed that printing his text is strictly prohibited unless he, proving his authorship, specifically issues a licence to do so. A second person reads the text on Usenet and publishes it in print form or as an e-book without having been granted such a licence. Would the author be able to win a claim against that person for copyright violation? Assume of course that he identifies himself and proves his authorship when making the claim. I am interested in answers for both the English and the United States jurisdictions. I am not sure what grounds the second person might reasonably adduce in defence against such a claim, but they might include for example that regardless of the content of the notice the text should be considered to be in the public domain by dint of having been posted to Usenet that if a pseudonymous author chooses to make himself uncontactable, unlike the many anonymous and pseudonymous authors who can be contacted through their publishers, then his assertion that he reserves rights is absurd other grounds. Note: I have read R Deazley and K Patterson, Guidance Note: Copyright in Pseudonymous and Anonymous Works , 2nd ed. (2017), which references statutes relevant to the English jurisdiction and also the Berne Convention but does not cover the case where a text is accredited to a pseudonymous author without a publisher being specified other than himself and where the author issues a notice of prohibition as described and retains the ability to prove authorship at a later date.

In the US, the author would be able to wind an infringement lawsuit against the re-publisher. Title 17 , the US copyright law codified, grants the author the exclusive right to authorize republication, and does not require that a person use their real name. The argument "It was on the internet, it's in the public domain" is utterly without legal merit. The same goes for the assertion that a person loses his rights if he is uncontactable. The author has stated the terms of the license, so there isn't even a reasonable argument that the infringement is innocent (unknowing: "I thought it was with permission). There is no requirement that you have to allow a potential user to hassle you about the license terms. The one thing that is special regarding anonymous and pseudonymous works is that under 17 USC 302 , "copyright endures for a term of 95 years from the year of its first publication, or a term of 120 years from the year of its creation, whichever expires first". For a work whose author is identified, copyright "endures for a term consisting of the life of the author and 70 years after the author’s death". This assumes that the host site has not preempted author's license: Stack Exchange, for example, preempts an author's exclusive right, so you can copy stuff from here accorting to the SE terms of usage.

A work is under CC-by-ND but author permits fan fictions

A person posts an e-book on some web site and attributes it as CC-by-ND. Then he creates a public discussion in Vkontakte with the subject ”Post fanfics of %e-book's name% here“. Nevertheless, is it legal to post fan fictions in that discussion (without asking the author first)? To post anywhere outside of that discussion?

It's probably legal to post them there, it's probably not legal to post them anywhere else. A copyright owner is free to grant multiple licences over their work (except that they can only grant 1 exclusive licence). In this case he has granted a general CC-by-ND licence to everyone. He has also granted a licence for derivative fan-fic but only if it is posted where he says. At least, anyone sued for copyright breach would have a very strong defence along those lines.

India: What happens when flat buyers not interested in claims but in flat's registry? How can IRP help in that?

A person purchases a flat and pays 100% of the flat's value including all other formalities. In return, the builder provides possession but not the registry. What's next? The Buyer is not interested in money but registry.

In the US (and, as this is an old Common Law concept, the UK), a court can order "specific performance" (also sometimes called "replevin"), where a party can be compelled to perform specified actions, generally to the completion of a contract. Since you have completed your end of the contract, and they are apparently refusing to do their end, you may have a lawsuit for breach-of-contract. Since British Law has some influence on Indian Law, this remedy may be available to you. One complication that I see, is that their ability to transfer the registration to you may be blocked by insolvency/bankruptcy, if the registration has value and if they have unpaid creditors. I would recommend talking to an Indian lawyer concerning a breach-of-contract lawsuit (and mention to them that your goal is to obtain the registration, rather than monetary compensation), and to explore your options. Source: https://smallbusiness.findlaw.com/business-contracts-forms/what-is-specific-performance-as-a-legal-remedy.html

Is it fraud to receive coronavirus mortgage relief when you left your job for non-COVID reasons, such as a divorce?

A person quits their job non-COVID related reasons. The person moves out of the state and abandoned the home. During that time, this person makes a request to receive COVID relief on their mortgage. Is this illegal? Also does the spouse have a legal obligation to report it?

Disclaimer: Assuming you meant USA No. The criteria are so vague that it can include almost anything, like cannot find a new job because everything is down, extra expenses, etc: For homeowners with mortgages covered by the CARES Act, you only need to explain that you have a pandemic-related financial hardship, directly or indirectly related to the pandemic. (Emphasis added) CFPB As noted in a comment by @bdb484, there are different programs, so it might depend which one and which relief.

Which jurisdiction applies to copyright violations on the internet?

A person residing in country A takes a work by an artist in country B and puts it onto a website they own but which is hosted in country C which is intended for an audience of people in country D. The artist in country B did not give permission for this and wants to pursue legal actions. Which countries copyright laws apply to this case? Let's assume that A, B, C and D all signed and ratified the Berne Convention, but their implementations in local laws differ in ways which are relevant to this case.

Jurisdiction is generally a matter for courts to decide. For example, in Kernel Records Oy v. Mosley, 694 F. 3d 1294 (2012) , the plaintiff, having had their work published in Sweden, had filed a claim there, and lost. They then took the claim to the United States. Copyright infringement is generally actionable per se - no damage needs to actually be proven or sustained. Typically, the rule is that the proper law will apply. This is the state that seems to have the closest and most real connection to the facts of the case. Now, where there is more than one jurisdiction in which a claim may be brought - as in your example - a plaintiff may research the relevant statutes to determine which jurisdiction is most likely to afford them the most favourable outcome. It's called forum shopping . It is likely that the proper law will be that of A or C. This depends on a number of factors: Whether the infringing party profited from the infringement. If the infringing party profited from the act, then you are likely to want to bring the matter in A, so that you can recover damages. Whether the infringing party has any presence in B. If the party has a presence in B, then a claim in B is likely to be more cost-effective. Again, depending on the laws of the country, it may not be possible for the artist to bring a claim against the infringing party if they have no local presence. Some countries have laws that explicitly allow extraterritorial service. Whether the hosting service was aware of the copyright infringement. If the hosting service was aware of the infringement and failed to prevent it, then you may be able to claim for contributory infringement - they could then, depending on their contract/agreement with the infringing party, be able to claim for damages. The Napster case may be somewhat relevant to this, but it's hard to say anything concrete when working with hypothetical countries. At the very least, a claim against the hosting service - which may just be an injunction ordering the removal of the content - could be fruitful. The actual laws of the countries involved. If the artist has sufficient money, they can just choose the forum that is most favourable to them. In short, private international law is a tricky subject and there are so many factors that need to be accounted for.

Serving as a trustee of a trust

A person serves as a trustee of an asset protection trust without compensation. Suppose there is a problem and some of the money is missing from the trust. Could the trustee be sued and have to pay money? Would it be a valid defense that since the trustee was not paid there was no contract and therefore the trustee is not liable?

Could the trustee be sued and have to pay money? Yes. Would it be a valid defense that since the trustee was not paid there was no contract and therefore the trustee is not liable? No. There are no gray areas on either of these points. This is clear "black letter law."

Does filing for guardianship require consent?

A person turned 18 some time ago and his parents haven't started filing for guardianship until now. I've heard that by law if parents haven't filed for guardianship before the child turns 18, the child is technically his own guardian, although I'm not sure if this is accurate. However, my question is this. If someone's parents file for guardianship and go to court, will the parents need the child's consent to become the child's guardians?

In the United States, the answer is no. The entire point of guardianship is that the ward is not competent to make legal decisions himself; the court appoints the guardian to consent to things on the ward's behalf. So the parents wouldn't need the child's consent, but they would need to demonstrate to the court that the child is incompetent to make legal decisions and that they are the best people to serve as guardians. To the best of my knowledge, granting guardianship over an adult is almost always limited to cases of serious mental incapacity, such as a vegetative state, mental retardation, Alzheimer's, etc. Is someone is aware of guardianship and researching it online, that is probably a good sign that the person is not a candidate for guardianship.

Are text messages and social media posts enough to charge someone with a crime?

A person vandalized a ups type work van by opening the brake bleeder valves , causing the owner of van to nearly crash when leaving for work . Despite there being no hard evidence , just a police report , are suspects texts and posts claiming responsibility enough for a charge and or prosecution ?

It depends. Confessions, in whatever form, are problematic because the person who made them can simply say later "I was lying" or "My phone was stolen, someone else said that". Social media posts and texts are not made under oath. It may come as a surprise but not everything posted on social media is 100% true. If the info they contain is not something that anyone other than the perpetrator would know at the time they were posted then they may be sufficient on their own. In conjunction with other evidence it may secure a conviction. Failing that, it could certainly assist an investigation.

How hard is it to sue and win an employer wrongful termination or other suit

A person was hired for computer programming work. He was hired on salary. It was expected to be a full-time, 40 hours per week thing. The company has traditionally, when asking people to work a little overtime, has allowed comp time later to make up for it. Soon after being hired, the employee discovered the group he was hired into to be on a 'death-march' Within a few week of the hire date, the company then required the employee to work late every night, often until 10 or 11pm. They still required the employee to be in at the normal time of 9am and no later. They then required mandatory Saturday, Sunday AND holiday work with the same hours. The employee averaged 70, 80 and often 90 hours of work per week. The company kept saying that the project should be finished soon and after that they could offer return to normal work ours and with comp time. This went on and on with excuse after excuse being given to the employee as to why the project kept going on and on. After 6 months of this much work, the project was finished. The employer terminated the employee as soon as it was finished with no explanation. Even if the position was classified as 'exempt' couldn't this be classified as so egregious as to be negligent or even abuse of the employee. What would the chances be of being able to sue for some form of back make-up pay? The company terminated 5 people on that day, all over the age of 40. They hired several others near the same time, all in their 20s. Could that be a reason for suing as well?

In Texas, as in most of the US, the law is "Employment at Will". This means that an employer is free to fire people at any time, for any reason, or none, as long as it is not for one of the few reason forbidden by law, such as racial or age discrimination. Hourly employees are entitled to overtime pay in such cases, but "exempt" employees are not. Nor are they entitled to comp-time as a matter of law, that is at the option of the employer. (The question seems to imply that the employee in question was "exempt" but does not actually say so.) The only really effective recourse against that sort of "death march" is to quit and find a better job, or to threaten to do so while they still need you, unless the conditions return to acceptable ones. I have heard of people in such a situation who "get sick" every day at 5:30pm, because local law forbid requiring ill employees to work. But that is pretty much inviting an arduous and possibly expensive administrative and/or legal battle, and will depend on the specifics of the state/local law. In any case, it is too late for the person in question to try that. On the facts as stated, there might be a valid claim of age discrimination. But additional facts would be needed to establish this, and it would be in my view unwise to try it without consulting a good employment lawyer. Such a lawyer could advise exactly what must be proved and how, and what the probable chances of any recovery would be.

Are foreign *assets* (not income), pre-dating moving to the US, taxable?

A person who immigrated to the US 10 years ago still has two bank accounts abroad that she did not close. No money has been added to the accounts since then, there was no activity and no interest generated, i.e. there was no income. She has not reported the foreign accounts on a FBAR form nor on her tax returns, although it represents more than $10,000 total; she would like to regularize her situation. The specific question is: will these assets be considered as income by the IRS, even though the account money predates her becoming a US person? Even if there was no income, is it possible that the person still had to pay other taxes related to foreign assets (i.e. does the IRS tax assets, not only income?)

will these assets be considered as income by the IRS, even though the account money predates her becoming a US person? No. Even if there was no income, is it possible that the person still had to pay other taxes related to foreign assets (i.e. does the IRS tax assets, not only income? There are fines related to failure to disclose foreign bank accounts which are quite draconian. The fines are high out of concerns about money laundering and terrorism funding, without a legislative, IRS or judicial recognition that these issues can arise in far less nefarious circumstances. But the fines are not truly taxes. They are fines for failure to file an information tax return or make a disclosure that is required by statute. If the disclosure had been made in a timely manner, there would have been no actual tax due and it is not illegal to have the accounts, so long as they are disclosed. Resolving an irregularity of this kind is quite tricky, can go very badly if done incorrectly (e.g. hundreds of thousands of dollars of civil tax fines or worse and possible impairment of immigration status), and calls for specialist international tax administration counsel. I've encountered a case like this in my own practice and referred it out to specialist counsel rather than handling myself, even though I regularly handle less demanding international tax questions in my practice. This is a "brain surgery"/"rocket science" class difficulty problem as far as lawyer expertise requirements are concerned.

Can a UK retailer refuse full settlement of debt by a third party?

A person who is hospitalised and unconscious receives an outstanding invoice (of small value, say less than £50) from a UK postal retailer. A friend picks up the invoice, calls the retailer, explains the situation, and offers to settle the invoice on the spot and in full. On what grounds, if any, can the retailer refuse the payment? Are there any circumstances in which refusal of an offer of full payment by a third party constitutes a waiver of all or part of the debt?

Whether or not this would be allowed would generally call for a more fact rich situation than the one presented in the original question, that would cast light upon why a retailer might be inclined to refuse to accept payment. Hypothetical legal questions that presume that people are acting irrationally for no good reason are generally ill posed and don't have meaningful answers. Sometimes, there might be a legitimate privacy interest implicated if the invoicing party acknowledged a payment from a third party. For example, suppose that the invoice was for a paternity test and payment would confirm that the incapacitated person actually obtained a paternity test. Sometimes, there are legal rights beyond payment that are implicated and the reasonableness of a refusal might hinge on those rights. For example, suppose that the invoice was for an option to keep using an oil well. Payment of the invoice by the deadline would keep the oil well operating and the land owner sending the invoice might prefer that it not be paid so that the oil well would be shut down. Quite a few contracts are structured in this way. Maybe the invoice was for the right to purchase a first edition of a book when it was finally released, for example, and not paying it would free up a copy for someone else at a price that had increased in the meantime. Or, suppose that the invoice were for unpaid taxes and payment of the taxes would prevent property from being seized for sale by tax authorities, and the taxing authority would prefer that the invoice was not paid so that the valuable property could be liquidated. But, it is hard to imagine that there would be any reason that an ordinary retailer with an ordinary bill would ever refuse payment, although I suppose that this might trigger an interest or penalty amount owed under the contract for late payment. If that were the case, the principal of mitigation of damages, which says that a party to a contract must take all reasonable steps to mitigate their damages, might obligate the retailers to accept the payment or forfeit the penalty amounts that the retailer could have avoided as damages by accepting payment. I doubt that an undelivered tender of payment from a third party would eliminate the obligation, but, it might limit the damages that could be claimed as in the scenario above.

Can you revoke consent to record a conversation in Texas?

A person who was conversing with me in my house, revealed after the fact that they recorded a personal conversation. I became concerned where this was being stored (for later use) and if it was shared with anyone other than the person recording it. I'm aware that in Texas, it is a one-party consent state. I have a couple of questions I could not find in the law. if you inform the person that you revoke consent or expicitly state you do not give permission to record, does that override the one-party rule? I understand they may have the right to record without my consent, but if they choose to share that recording with another person (and not just keep for their own record), does a new consent rule come into play? Can I have the person sign a document stating that they will not record any conversation shared in certain settings (e.g. anywhere on my property such as home or car)? Will that override the one-party consent? Is there any way to block consent to record legally, either in writing or verbally, in the State of Texas? Thank you, Chris

Since your consent is not required in Texas, revocation is irrelevant. Restrictions of use of recordings flow from the legal nature of the recording itself, so there is no provision saying, for example, that only one party needs to consent for just recording, but all parties must consent to make any use of the recording. Since these laws were devised to regulate the practice of wearing a wire and collecting evidence of crimes, requiring consent from all parties would be counterproductive to the purposes of the law. You could try drafting a contract where you pay people to not record you (anybody who doesn't sign, you shouldn't talk to them), but enforcement could be tricky, so I would not try a DIY contract: get a lawyer. You would have to show that you were harmed by them making an unconsented recording. It should be in the form of a contract where you give something of value in exchange for something of value, which is a thing typically enforced by the courts. Also bear in mind that even in an all-party state, if you know that you are being recorded, you cannot just say "I do not consent", you have to stop talking. Continuing to talk when notified that there is or may be a recording constitutes implied consent, which is why on the phone companies often announce via recording that the conversation may be monitored, and they do not ask "Do you consent". By not hanging up, you consented.

Is it defamation if the defamatory comments were unintentionally published?

A person writes down defamatory statements, and they accidentally are communicated to someone else. Is that considered defamation?

Defamation is the act of one party making untrue factual 1 statements about another party and communicating them to a third party. Publishing - for defamation law simply means communicating the information to a 3rd person(s) and the defamer must be involved in the communication, either actively or by negligently allowing it to happen. If I say nasty and untrue things about my brother to my brother that is not defamation. If I say them to my wife, then that is defamation 2 . If I write the same things in an email to my brother or record them in my private diary that is not defamation. If I copy someone else into that email or allow my diary to be read by someone else then that is defamation 2 . 1. I know "untrue factual" sounds like an oxymoron but the idea is they have to be untrue statements about things that are objectively true or false ("X is a serial killer" X is either objectively a serial killer or they are not) not things which are not objectively true or false ("X is not a nice person" there is no objective standard by which X's "niceness" can be measured - this is an opinion). 2 The damages that flow from a defamation suit depend on how badly the person's reputation was damaged. In cases where the information has only limited distribution (like me to my wife) the representational damage is insignificantly small. There have been cases pursued and won (usually in the context of acrimonious family relationships) for such limited distribution, however, damages awards are usually similarly limited ($1 and no costs order being typical).

Copyright and Encrypted Backups

A person's computer stores a variety of copyrighted files which they have a license to use and store (such as video games, operating system files, and purchased or freely available media). However, generally these licenses prohibit redistribution. Also, some material (such as ripped audio CDs) may not have a formal license agreement. Can a person legally make a backup image of their computer and store it in the cloud? Or would they be illegally distributing copies of all of this material by giving a copy to the cloud storage provider? And does this calculus change if the person encrypts their backup image first, using a key that only they have access to? Or are they then illegally distributing a derivative work (the encrypted image) of the copyrighted material? Finally, does the calculus change if the service being used to store the (encrypted) image is not a centralized cloud storage service but a new-fangled distributed system like Storj, where the task of actually storing the data is farmed out to a lot of other people's computers?

I believe DMCA settled this question once and for all, in favor of broad permission to replicate copyrighted software for the purpose of making backups. The government basically doesn't want to be in the business of regulating or litigating legitimate backups. However, these backups cannot be sold or shared.

Who has standing for wrongful death claims?

A person's estate, relatives, and dependents generally have standing to sue for damages under wrongful death statutes . Do any other persons or entities have standing to sue for damages under those or any similar or analogous statutes? For example: A decedent's employer who has lost income due to business disruption from the unexpected loss of the employee? An employee of the person who reasonably expected long-term employment? E.g., a nurse who provided care for a chronic health condition of the decedent?

In the United States, wrongful death is generally a statutory cause of action, rather than a common law tort, so the potential plaintiffs are generally limited to those specifically identified in the relevant statute. In California, for instance, California Code of Civil Procedure Section 377.60 limits the action to the following plaintiffs: The decedent’s surviving spouse, domestic partner, children, and issue of deceased children If there is no surviving issue of the decedent, the persons, including the surviving spouse or domestic partner, who would be entitled to the property of the decedent by intestate succession. If they were dependent on the decedent, the putative spouse, children of the putative spouse, stepchildren, or parents. A minor who resided for the previous 180 days in the decedent’s household and was dependent on the decedent for one-half or more of the minor’s support. In the absence of a constitutional problem (an equal protection violation, most likely), courts have no authority to extend standing to anyone outside the statutorily designated categories. Ferry v. De Longhi Am. Inc. , 276 F. Supp. 3d 940, 948 (N.D. Cal. 2017) (“The decision of the Legislature as to just how far to extend a statutorily created right of action ‘is conclusive, unless it appears beyond rational doubt that an arbitrary discrimination between persons or classes similarly situated has been made without any reasonable cause therefor.’”)

What could be the legal consequences of the "street justice" beating of a person by another?

A pervert walks past some kids and sexually exposes themselves. They then walk towards the father of the children they just exposed themselves to, as words were exchanged. The father proceeds to exact some street justice and beats the pervert up. Could the father face legal consequences? Could the father use self defense as a defence against any charges? Such a situation is reported here . Since a state is necessary for jurisdiction, let's use Florida as an example.

Beating a person up is a crime in every jurisdiction. No privilege to commit assault is created if the person has offended someone, although self defense (or defense of others) is a defense, in case the person is beating someone up. It may be against the law to expose your genitalia in public in your location, and you may call the police to seek justice. In Washington, a first offense of indecent exposure to a person under 14 is a gross misdemeanor. However, the law only allows up to 364 day in prison, and not a beating, for violating the law.

Are Police legally allowed to confiscate a Camera and Phone over "suspicious activity"?

A photographer is recording from a public sidewalk when he is confronted by Police. He refused to give his information because he had committed no crime. The Police then tried to claim that he was loitering in order to arrest him. Under threat of arrest, he gave his name and information to the Police. Afterwards the Police confiscated his camera and phone under "suspicious activity". Did the Police act legally when they confiscated his property? Since the photographer was conducting a 1st amendment protected activity. Could he have been charged with loitering? Here is the video for reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWOtUDf0elQ

The district court judge, as reported in this news story has held that there was probable cause to arrest Daniel Robbins in this case, and that his rights were not violated. If this ruling stands, officers acted legally, although they might still be required to return the phone with the images. Whether there is probable cause for an arrest (or a search) is always a very fact-based issue. I have not found the judge's actual decision, only a news summary of it, which can often be misleading. Specific facts about exactly what Robbins did or said may be important in determining whether there was in fact probable cause. It appears that Robbins intends to appeal this decision. If he does there may be an opinion from a Circuit Court of Appeals expanding on whether there was probable cause or any violation of rights, and why. Previous cases have established that normally there is no reasonable expectation of privacy for acts performed in public; that one my photograph or video record such public acts legally from anywhere that one may legally be; that there is a right photograph or record police officers engaged in official actions or the use of police powers; and that laws attempting to forbid such recording are unconstitutional when so applied. However, it seems from the news story that here the police officers were off-duty and not engaging in any official acts or use of police powers. That might change the ruling. I rather expect the district court's decision to be overturned, but there is no case exact;ly on point that i know of, and one can never be absolutely sure what a court will do in a particular case. I can see why police officers may have felt threatened, and why the Judge may have been inclined to sympathize with them, although I think the decision was incorrect. But a Judge of the Appeals Court might possibly feel the same way. Until the Appeals Court rules, one cannot be sure what the law in this matter will finally be. (It is possibly, but statistically a bit unlikely, there there will eventually be a ruling from the US Supreme Court on this case.) This article from Nolo Press discusses the issue of recording police, primarily in the context of police who are performing their official duties. It says: Almost every court to consider the issue has determined that the First Amendment gives you the right to record (pictures, video, and audio) police officers in public while they are performing their duties. But that doesn’t mean you’re allowed to record if you’re doing so surreptitiously (secretly), interfering with the officer, or otherwise breaking the law. The courts' primary rationale for allowing police officer recording is that the First Amendment includes the right to freely discuss our government, and the right of freedom of the press and public access to information. Given the prevalence of personal filming devices, more and more “news” is being gathered and disseminated by members of the public. The courts have found that freedom of the press applies to citizen journalists and documentarians just as it does to formal members of the press. (See, for example, Glik v. Cunniffe , 655 F.3d 78 (1st Cir. 2011) .) The Nolo article goes on to discuss whether a Section 1983 Federal suit against police officers who arrest someone recording their actions will succeed, indicating that this will depend on the specific facts of the case. The Nolo article mentions that one is not allowed to interfere with an officer during process of recording. What exactly constitutes "interference" is not fully clear, and will depend on the facts of a specific case. The Nolo article mentions other circumstances when recording an officer may not be legal.

How can Patient get a compounded medication tested, to determine if it was negligently compounded?

A physician prescribed his lay Patient a medication that must be compounded. After consuming this medication, Patient suffered atypical serious side effects. After examination, a physician reckons that the end product may not match his prescription, and the Compounding Pharmacy may be negligent. Here is one real life example . Incorrect dispensing. A key consideration is a pharmacy dispensing error. In Australia, a number of cases were reported in 2018 and 2019 where 1% atropine was dispensed to children where 0.01% atropine had been prescribed. In response, Optometry Australia recommended that atropine prescriptions include the specific note 'MUST BE COMPOUNDED' to avoid this dispensing error. But Pharmacy denies any wrongdoing, and insists that it dispensed the correct medication. Question How can Patient get his compounded medication audited and inspected, to determine if the pharmacy dispensed exactly what the doctor ordered? Would Patient submit a sample of this medication to a laboratory? What kind of laboratories can assist Patient? For example, presuppose a physician prescribed 0.01% Atropine. Then Pharmacy labelled the end product 0.01% Atropine. But it's impossible to distinguish 0.01% from 0.02%, 0.05%, etc. Atropine by eye. How can Patient determine if pharmacy truly dispensed 0.01% Atropine, or negligently dispensed some other wrong concentration?

You get a lab to test it You should clearly document the chain of custody (ideally with photos) from the unopened packaging to the lab. Any decent sized city will have several labs with the capability to tell you what’s in a pill and provide an expert report.

How much change to a company’s copyrighted picture is needed?

A picture of a slipcover on a company's website- a company's sofa will always look the same. If you had the sofa picture would look the same so how can it be modified enough? I understand you can't put picture in a stock image of a room but can you draw an outline around it in a color- is that enough? What if an outline is drawn of it and slipcover fabric swatch is imposed in paint 3D- can you use it to list on a marketplace site? How much modification is needed? And it doesn't matter they no longer sell cover, it's discontinued but they still keep copyright?

The question has two false presuppositions. The first is that copyright only prohibits exact copying, and you can reproduce inexactly as long as the result is "different enough". Actually, the original work is protected against any copying and reproduction, and only the copyright holder can authorize making a "derivative work". So there is no "needed degree of change" – you have described copyright infringement. Second, copyright exists until it expires, many years in the future: copyright does not evaporate in case there is no current commercial exploitation of a work.

How closely must a lawyer follow a client's directives?

A plaintiff launches a lawsuit with a very complicated set of facts and law. The client says, "I want you to focus on issues X, Y, and Z, because those are the ones that I am most comfortable and familiar with, and forget about, or at least downplay other issues. The law firm replies, "there are plenty of other issues here that could generate a higher award if we delve into them. The law firm then proceeds to do so, at the neglect of the client's three main concerns. Does the lawyer have the right to do this? How closely must the law firm focus on issues X, Y, and Z if the fee arrangement is 1) "straight fee," versus 2) "mostly contingency"? (I would guess that the lawyer would have a greater right to underweight the client's preference if the client provided mainly the "opportunity" and counsel is taking most of the financial risk via contingency. Whereas, if it were "straight fee," then the client would be paying the lawyer to "ventilate" issues X, Y, and Z in court.)

Issues of strategy rest with counsel, not the client. Thus, in the situation you posit, the lawyer is not required to follow the client's desires. One might observe, however, that a competent lawyer will avoid the conflict entirely by addressing the issue before accepting the client. If the client is firm in wanting to direct the lawyer's negotiation or litigation strategy, and the lawyer is unwilling to do so, the lawyer should decline to take on the case. When I practiced, prospective clients who wanted to run things were very politely declined and shown the door. I don't see anything unethical about accepting such conditions from a prospective client, but the attorney isn't required to do so, and can decline the employment.

What exactly does it mean for a case to be dismissed?

A plantiff did not attend the hearing. Consequently the adjudicator dismissed his case. What does this mean? I roughly understand that it means the defendant is absolved of the charges and that the plantiff can not reopen the case (or charge for the same thing again) without proving he had a very good reason for missing the hearing (e.g. was in a hospital).

Not necessarily. It depends on the type of dismissal. The term prejudice helps better describe your question. You have described a dismissal with prejudice : the case can not be re-litigated. But it's just as likely the case could have been dismissed without prejudice . Meaning, the plaintiff could restart the case at any time. Or, alternatively, file a new case on the same facts. (You might be thinking about double jeopardy which is prohibited and applies to criminal cases involving an acquittal.) The with prejudice vs. without prejudice decision is often left to the discretion of the judge (or adjudicator) depending on the type of proceeding. And sometimes the decision is determined by procedural rule. You must read the notice or order of dismissal to determine what type of dismissal it was.

Is it legal to seek someone out to make them violate a restraining order?

A plot device I have seen on several TV shows is person A has filed a restraining order against person B, and then person A intentionally gets near person B to make person B have to run away to make sure they don't violate the restraining order. John Oliver does it to Ken Jeung in this clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUDYH_5szo4&feature=youtu.be&t=14m6s Is person A breaking any laws if they do this? Would this count as person B violating the order if they didn't back away?

Restraining orders are a matter of state law and the technical answer will vary by jurisdiction. However, abusing a restraining order to harass someone is the kind of behavior that will make you look unreasonable to a judge (and unafraid of your abuser) and hurt you in subsequent actions before that judge, such as in a divorce or when you are seeking to extend the duration of that order. In addition, the court can issue a restraining order against you. In theory, such abuse of an order may also make you liable for criminal or civil penalties related to the state's harassment or anti-stalking statutes, but you would need to review the law in the particular state. In practice, it is likely that the judge or commissioner reviewing a case will listen to the facts and tell you to knock it off, whether they put it in an order or not. Regardless of the particular outcome, it is just a bad idea. However, for an understanding of the law in a particular state, ask a lawyer admitted in that jurisdiction to advise you on the consequences of that course of action.

Buying Organs in different Jurisdiction

A podcast indicated that it is illegal to buy \ sell a kidney in everywhere but Iran and was labelled a 'repugnant' transaction. If an American who was critically in need of the organ went to Iran to receive a kidney, does American law provide for policing / enforcing law for an act that takes place in country XYZ?

42 USC 274e(a) says It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly acquire, receive, or otherwise transfer any human organ for valuable consideration for use in human transplantation if the transfer affects interstate commerce. The preceding sentence does not apply with respect to human organ paired donation. And: (3) The term “interstate commerce” has the meaning prescribed for it by section 321(b) of title 21 which says The term “interstate commerce” means (1) commerce between any State or Territory and any place outside thereof, and (2) commerce within the District of Columbia or within any other Territory not organized with a legislative body. Travel to Iran to obtain a kidney does not constitute an instance of interstate commerce, but the law is stated more broadly, as affecting interstate commerce (the reason for inserting that clause in the law is to relate it to a constitutional power of Congress). Which brings us to Wickard v. Filburn , where the court rules that growing wheat and feeding it to your own cattle affects interstate commerce. The interpretation of the law has not yet been tested, to determine whether a US person traveling to another country and having an organ implanted for valuable consideration "affects" interstate commerce, so that they have violated US law.

Can a police officer film me on their personal device in my own home?

A police officer was allowed into my home by another occupant before I arrived. During the encounter, I began recording the situation. After attempting to have me remove my sunglasses and stop recording, he pulled out his personal phone and began filming me. Since this happened on private property, using his personal phone, is it possible for me to request the media he took of me be destroyed, returned, proof of no copy, or so on? Would this put his device in the public domain?

The video is a record created and possessed by the government, documenting government activities. It is a government record, and probably a public record under the Illinois Freedom of Information Act . As such, you would almost certainly be unable to force its destruction, and it's more likely that the public would be able to access it.

What are some remedies for a poor person if a petty rich guy buries him with frivolous lawsuits?

A poor, jobless person made a careless remark about a rich and petty person. The rich person gets to know about it and sues the poor person for defamation. Does the poor person need to hire a lawyer to defend himself against the lawsuit? Lawyers charge by the hour. The poor person can hardly afford lawyers. What are some cost-effective remedies a poor person can take if a petty rich person buries his poor victim with frivolous lawsuits? Answers in the context of U.K, U.S, Australia are welcomed.

Such a lawsuit is known as a strategic lawsuit against public participation , or SLAPP. In the United States, several states have enacted laws that penalize those whose file SLAPPs. The provisions of these laws vary from state to state, but they usually allow a defendant to file a motion to dismiss on the grounds that their statements were constitutionally protected free speech about a public figure. These laws may allow discovery to be halted until the motion to dismiss is decided; they may also require a plaintiff who files a SLAPP to reimburse the defendant's attorney's fees, possibly also with punitive damages. Some state's laws require the speech to be before a government forum (as opposed to, say, on Twitter), or to be aimed at procuring government action. And several states have no such laws at all. A summary of various US states' anti-SLAPP laws can be found on the website of the Public Participation Project, an organization advocating the establishment of such laws. Note that these motions to dismiss are not always brought by "the little guy" against "the big guy". A notable recent case was Stormy Daniels's libel suit against Donald Trump, which was dismissed earlier this year. Daniels had filed suit against Trump claiming that one of Trump's tweets about her was defamatory. Trump moved to dismiss under Texas's anti-SLAPP law, on the grounds that his tweet was protected political speech about a public figure (namely Daniels); and the judge agreed.

Are "Social Media Reacts"-videos on youtube legal?

A popular idea behind multiple youtube channels is to pick a certain topic (say, a tv-series) and then post the reactions that people have to that topic on social media, whether that be a post on twitter or an uploaded image (like a meme) on instagram or facebook. Here's an example from football: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPuEqdf-za0 Is there any illegality to such videos? Specifically, I am wondering whether using people's posts on social media (containing only text) and presenting them in a youtube video is lawful, and how it depends on whether the name or profile picture associated with that social media account is visible, and also whether there's an issue if the post on social media contains not only text, but, say, an image, which may be their own creation or taken from somebody else (or a combination, for example one of those "meme"-images with photos overlayed with some funny text). Does this change the issue?

This is going to depend a good deal on there exact nature of the clips being reused. it will also depend, at least somewhat, on what country or countries the various parties are in. General Principle The general principle is that a peerson's post on social media is protected by copyright, just as all original works are. It is a copyright infringement to copy and redistribute the, unless permission has been granted by the copyright holder (normally the author in the case of a social media post, as those are rarely sold) or an exception to copyright applies. Permission There are various ways in which permission might be granted. The re-user might directly email (or otherwise reach out to) the original author and ask , and be granted permission. The original author might have released some or all of his or her posts under a permissive license. Some social media might require that posts be released under a permissive license, or otherwise automatically grant such permissions. Remember that Wikipedia, for example, mandates that all posts and contributions be released under a CC-BY-SA license, although posters have the option to add an additional alternate license, or more than one. Exceptions The most obvious exception is Fair use, if the parties are (or at least the re-user is) in the US. People sometimes speak as if fair use is a world-wide legal rule. it is a very specifically US legal concept. Some other countries have a somewhat similar concept, known in English as "Fair Dealing". It is, i understand, rather moore limited than fair use. This law.se question and its answer discusses fair use in some detail. Most of the posts being reused here have no market, and so their re-use cannot harm the market. That would weigh for fair use. If the re-user uses the whole post, or a substantial part of it, that would weigh against fair use. If the re-user inserts significant comment on each re-used post, that would be analytical if not transformational, and would weigh for fair use. If the re-use is monetized, that would weigh against fair use somewhat. In short, we cn't tell in general if fair use would apply to any particular post being re-used. it might or it might not. Specifics will control, and ultimately it is a judgement call to eb made by a court, if the matter comes to that. Enforcement Unless the copyright holder for a given post files an infringement suit, or files a take-down notice, or complains to the host site, there will be no enforcement and no consequences. If a complaint or a take-down is filed, the host could remove the content, cancel the re-user's account, or both. If the user has monetized the re-use, ad revenue can be redirected to the copyright owner. If the copyright holder files an infringement suit, and wins, there will be an award of damages, which might be quite small, or rather large. But with no market for the original, and probably little or no income from the re-use, low damages are more likely than high. And the original copyright holder would have filing fees, legal expenses, and possibly other expenses in advance. There are firms with which one can register one's copyrighted work, who search for it being improperly used and take action, in return for a small up-front fee and a share of any damages recovered. But posters of general opinion on social media seem unlikely to use such services. Conclusion Such a “Social Media Reacts”-video is somewhat risky, from a copyright perspective, but the likely negative outcomes are not large. Asking permission whenever possible, and trying to stay within the fair-use principles (if they apply) will reduce those risks.

Prescriptive Easement - how exactly does this apply to utilities?

A prescriptive easement in my state (MT) is defined as: "A prescriptive easement is a right to use the property of another that is acquired by open, exclusive, notorious, hostile, adverse, continuous, and uninterrupted use for a period of 5 years." Source: Montana Code Annotated 2021 23-2-322 Question is in relation to overhead power lines that are very old and is 2 fold: What right in exact footage does this grant? Or, is this basically up to the power company to make a statement about what is reasonable / normal for them? I can find no case law where it was challenged, and so am unsure. The power company does have a statement that they "require a 10 foot right of way." With lack of an actual written easement (prescriptive only), would this apply just cause - it's their rule as printed? Would my pedestal (ok, really the power company owns it, not me) qualify for me to have access to it (for the purpose of turning my power on/off etc) under this prescriptive easement? Note: My home and pedestal have only been here for 2 years. I'm assuming all of this would need case law/for someone to challenge it, specifically in my state. Is this mostly correct? In lieu of that, maybe I don't sweat it / assume i'm good with my pedestal where it is and my access to it till someone challenges, and then after 3 more years the prescriptive easement takes over anyway?

What right in exact footage does this grant? Or, is this basically up to the power company to make a statement about what is reasonable / normal for them? I can find no case law where it was challenged, and so am unsure. The power company does have a statement that they "require a 10 foot right of way." With lack of an actual written easement (prescriptive only), would this apply just cause - it's their rule as printed? This is determined as a question of fact in the event that the scope of the easement is litigated considering all of the facts and circumstances admitted into the trial court record as evidence at trial. Since there isn't a written easement, the determination has to be based upon actual use and necessity over the prescription period and there are all sorts of factors and arguments that can lead to the being larger or smaller. The answer would also be influenced by how the issue presented itself in a court. One of the concerns about overhead power lines is the extent to which another use interferes with the operation of the activity that benefits from the prescriptive easement, this might be one thing for tall trees, another for activities that have significant electromagnetic output that could interfere with the lines, and a third for the erection of a fence that could interfere with the ability to line maintenance trucks to access the lines. It might be different for a high voltage trunk line and the local line getting electricity to the houses on a particular block. It might depend upon what kind of vehicle utility companies used to tend to these vehicles and could conceivably, for example, be reduced if it becomes possible to maintain these lines for air based drones rather than ground based crane trucks. Would my pedestal (ok, really the power company owns it, not me) qualify for me to have access to it (for the purpose of turning my power on/off etc) under this prescriptive easement? Note: My home and pedestal have only been here for 2 years. I don't understand what this part of the question is asking.

What is the benefit of a large lawyer team?

A pretty common trope in different kinds of media is the idea that large corporations or rich people can screw people like they want and get away with it, because they have oh so many lawyers at their disposal. Mr. Burns from the simpsons comes to my mind immediately. Is there any truth behind this assumption? Can a large lawyer team render you invulnerable to certain lawsuits? I have no experience with any real applications of jurisprudence, so I find it really strange. Some points I can think of: When the lawsuit is so large and complicated that you need the manpower to sift through all its aspects. Still, if you poisoned an ecosystem your guilt should be provable and you would be condemned no matter the number of lawyers. Intimidating your opponent with the number of your lawyers to make them concede to a extrajudicial solution. It's just a code for bribing the judges. But none of those would explain this phenomenon properly. Is it even a real thing?

There are times when having a large law firm work on a case can be an advantage. It is rare for the number of lawyers working on a particular case to be more than three or four plus a few paralegals, even in a case where there are virtually unlimited resources at a party's disposal. In those cases, the primary benefit of having a large law firm at your disposal is that by paying top dollar for those attorneys, you may (but certainly don't always) get particularly competent attorneys at firms that have good systems in place. If you are willing to spend the money you can also have the attorney and paralegal team work exhaustively to leave no stone unturned in terms of legal research, style and proofreading, "wild goose chase" factual and legal research of matters like trial court arguments from other cases that the opposing counsel has participated in, and trial presentations with lavish presentation quality. For example, in one case where my firm was litigating against a large law firm in state supreme court arguments, the firm had seven law firm partners who had served as clerks in that court earlier in their careers participate in mock oral arguments to help the appellate lawyer who would be presented the case in oral arguments to the Colorado Supreme Court prepare (with four members of your core team and seven mock justices plus some paralegals participating this was a $5000+ per hour activity). A typical run of the mill appellate brief prepared competently might take 100 hours, while a large firm might devote 800 hours to the same task (both of these are hypothetical round numbers suggested just to get the point across). This incredibly intense working up of cases, moreover, often involves attorneys who aren't really starting from scratch as they has handled many similar cases before in their careers, while their smaller firm competition may have only encountered the issues presented for the first time. You are also paying for connections and experience. For example, a large law firm may have an easier time retaining the most decorated expert witnesses to argue on their behalf. These attorneys may also have handled numerous cases in front of the judge or judges who will be deciding the case (and if they haven't someone else in the large firm probably has) and thus can better predict what approach will be received best by that particular judge. The exception to the rule that the maximal economies of scale are reached with a quite small group of lawyers is that in addition to this core group of lawyers, some cases, such as class action lawsuits, or cases involving complex transactions (e.g. construction project disputes in a large project with hundreds of contractors) may require an immense amount of factual discovery in the trial court in the form of depositions of dozens or hundreds of people with relevant knowledge, and/or review of vast volumes of documents (e.g. I've had several cases with whole rooms stacked floor to ceiling with relevant documents in banker's boxes). In cases like those, you need an army of senior paralegals and junior attorneys to interview witnesses, take depositions and review and summarize documents to get to the bottom of the factual matters needed to prove a case. The down side of this approach, however, is that it is extremely expensive relative to the alternatives per task, and frequently impossible to recover your costs and attorney fees from the other party, perhaps because they aren't permitted to be awarded, perhaps because a judge would find some or all of your fees and costs to be unreasonable, or perhaps because the other side simply can't afford to pay them. So, using a firm like this really only makes sense if the stakes involved are very high, or if there are long term strategic reasons to litigate. Spending $1,000,000 on attorneys' fees and costs is a very expensive way to litigate a $100,000 one off dispute. But spending $1,000,000 on attorneys' fees and costs is perfectly sensible if there is $100,000,000 in controversy in the case at hand, or if a favorable outcome will influence the outcome of a large number of future disputed of the same type. The other dirty little secret is that lots of the work done by large law firms for which their clients pay an immense amount of money isn't done very well. One inherent down side of being large is that a large law firm is bureaucratic and prone to the kinds of mistakes that all large organizations have, for example, in diffusing responsibility for mistakes that can allow mistakes to fall through the cracks. Also, while the typical large law firm lawyer is typically more knowledgable than the typical small firm lawyer about the field at issue, this doesn't always happen. Sometimes junior attorneys get assigned too much responsibility on cases in areas where they have blind spots in their knowledge, and sometimes a large firm attorney ends up working a case due to personal connections with the client rather than because that attorney is the most qualified person in the firm to handle it. Also, while some very brilliant lawyers do indeed work at large law firms, technical competence isn' the only consideration in hiring. Successful large firm lawyers need to be team players, need to conform and function well in a large bureaucracy, and need to have the social capital to be comfortable on a day to day basis with the firm's other lawyers and their affluent and big business clients. Many large firm lawyers have those soft skills while having only competent rather than excellent legal acumen. Further, since most large law firm lawyers go straight from law school to a big firm (sometimes with a detour clerking for a judge for a couple of years), and large law firms handle mostly very big cases that are usually settled by lead attorneys before going to trial, most large law firm attorneys aren't particularly experienced at trial work. Some large law firms compensate for that by laterally hiring former prosecutors, former criminal defense lawyers and former high volume personal injury litigators to do that work, but often, large law firms have few lawyers in the courtroom with much trial experience relative to how many years they have practiced law. They may be very well prepared, but often there is no substitute for hands on trial experience. Still large law firms tend to fight extremely hard in trial, but tend to be pushovers in settlement discussions. This is driven by the reality that the client will incur huge amounts of attorneys fees and costs to go the distance, and by the fact that professionally, the worst thing that a large firm lawyer can do it to have an unexpected and unpredictable bad outcome at trial. So, large firm attorneys seek to give their clients low expectations about what is possible in litigation in order to make it possible to make cases with significant uncertainty go away with settlements larger than would really have been necessary to settle the case with a more total client litigation and settlement cost sensitive law firm.

GDPR. Where to store users consent?

A pretty straightforward question, I think. When it comes to holding records that users consent has been provided, I can only imagine I would use some sort of php code to store data/records into .txt document? However, I kinda doubt this could be used as a evidence in the future should it be required due to the nature of .txt file. Obviously, it can be edited at any time without any trace. Which kind of indicates the records about consent might have been put there manually after the claim has been raised by the user? As if, forging the evidence. I tried looking into the information provided by the ICO itself, to find how to correctly store this kind of data (not how to collect it, but where to store it) but can't find anything like that. Perhaps anyone has any clue where does the data need to be stored for it be accepted as an evidence if required? Thanks a lot!

How to store consent According to the ICO, you need to store the following: Who consented the name of the individual, or other identifier (eg, online user name, session ID). When they consented a copy of a dated document, or online records that include a timestamp; or, for oral consent, a note of the time and date which was made at the time of the conversation. What they were told at the time A master copy of the document or data capture form containing the consent statement in use at that time, along with any separate privacy policy, including version numbers and dates matching the date consent was given. If consent was given orally, your records should include a copy of the script used at that time. How they consented For written consent, a copy of the relevant document or data capture form. If consent was given online, your records should include the data submitted as well as a timestamp to link it to the relevant version of the data capture form. If consent was given orally, you should keep a note of this made at the time of the conversation - it doesn’t need to be a full record of the conversation. Whether they have withdrawn consent And if so, when. Source (p33/34) Would a txt file of users who had consented be acceptable The ICO provides this example as unacceptable: You keep a spreadsheet with ‘consent provided’ against a customer’s name. Source (p34) This shows that a TXT file of usernames would not be acceptable, as there is not enough information stored What would be acceptable You would want a table that looks something like this | UserId | Date | PolicyRevision | Method | WithdrawalDate | How to verify this data has not been modified You could store a hash of the row on some form of blockchain, to prove that after the stated date the consent had not been modified, this would prevent having to store a copy of the user's ID on the blockchain. It would not prevent forging consent at the time you claim it was given, but short of having the user digitally sign the transaction with some key that you do not have access to, there would be no way to prevent this.

Why don't prisoners go through rigorous life transforming training in prisons?

A prisoner can be forced to learn and train on what they are naturally/ philosophically opposed to. For instance, in general, prisoners can be taught army-style discipline training, and forced to study, and sit for exams/tests. if someone is jailed for breaking some kind of law, he can be forced to study law books and pass the law test. and so on...

The purposes of criminal justice include (this list is based on the Sentencing Act 1991 in Victoria): Deterrence Rehabilitation of offenders Denunciation ('this behaviour is wrong') (Retribution can also be a purpose.) What the question is talking about is rehabilitation. As discussed in the book 'Starship Troopers', you can't expect a person to improve their behaviour if they are not shown how. Some simple examples in practice include violent offenders being sent to anger management classes, or bad drivers being sentenced to remedial training. Why aren't all offenders put into rehabilitation programs? Some reasons include: Cost. It would be very expensive to offer all the rehabilitation which would help all offenders. Often this kind of thing is court-ordered, so if the judge does not know about relevant programs or does not assess the offender's needs correctly, then the offender will not be sent to them. The offender is unwilling to participate in programs that are available, and there are limits to how much coercion a given society is comfortable applying. There is no 'one size fits all' rehabilitation. Some people need to talk about what makes them use drugs, others need to talk through their childhood issues, others need training so they can get a job and not fall back into bad habits when they are released from prison. Perhaps North Korea has a great curriculum for putting lots of people in a camp and they come out model citizens, but I'm not aware of the details. Can a person really be forced to do anything? Even the army can't do that. The army might put you in prison, but that's redundant for a person who is already a prisoner. You can always threaten to kill them, I suppose, whip them, or brainwash them with electrodes perhaps, but that depends on your principles as a society. I think it's fair to say that, these days, the trend is towards what the question suggests, which is putting as many offenders as possible into rehabilitation. In 2014 it was reported that Texas took the money it would have spent on building a new prison and used it on rehabilitation instead, and there were suggestions that that worked well.

Does an illegal clause create liability, or just invalidate the contract?

A private company in Arizona wanted to bring me on as an independent contractor to research what they need to do for (ISO/etc) standards compliance. I was asked to sign an NDA before learning details; I reviewed the NDA, rejected it, offered instead my word not to steal their stuff, and was accepted. The CEO is moving away from NDA's, anyway. But there may be a few people who have already signed it, and this worries me, because I wonder if the company can get in trouble later just for trying to contractually take away someone's rights. Legal compliance isn't my department (I'm not a lawyer), but it's close enough to my other duties that I would write up a cost-benefit proposal for paying a lawyer to write up a new (safe) NDA that can replace the old NDA (which ought to be terminated if there's any risk to letting it remain in effect). The document combines the NDA with a non-compete. The early (NDA) sections restrict the use of company documents for "the pursuit of profit or employment with" followed by a list of potential clients, including "Legal representatives of ANY kind". The late (non-compete) sections have nothing to do with documents anymore, but (switching out the company name for "EMPLOYER") does have this clause: If CONSULTANT's employment with EMPLOYER terminates for any reason, the CONSULTANT shall not, for a period of one year from the date of termination, have any business dealings whatsoever, either directly or indirectly or through corporate entities or associates with any customer or client of EMPLOYER or its subsidiaries or any person or firm which has contacted or been contacted by EMPLOYER as a potential customer or client of EMPLOYER; No restrictions (of industry) apply here, but taken in context with the NDA section (which implies intended clients), any legal representatives who were ever approached as potential clients (even if they immediately said "not interested" and refused to hear more), up to every legal representative anywhere if included in a marketing campaign that broad, would be off-limits for business dealings of all kinds. Such as, for instance, hiring a lawyer to review a contract before employment. No lawyer reviewed this contract with him before he began using it: "I did not have a lawyer draft it actually, and I just added a ton of shit in there and wrote it in about 5 minutes as an afterthought late at night about a month ago." I asked a lawyer from out-of-state (about this and other clauses), who noted that he was not giving legal advice, but this particular clause was unconscionable and (unless Arizona had some weirdshit rules) illegal. This is not the worst contract I've seen written by a non-lawyer, and I expect to see more people trying failing to create an enforceable contract because they think it will save them the money of hiring a lawyer; I believe the theoretical aspect (not my specific situation, which is more of an example) will be generally useful for employers to be aware of what penalties their company may risk facing later on. I don't expect to be lucky enough that this precise clause has come up in prior case law; I'm hoping for other instances of illegal clauses, so I can include links in a risk analysis to show any general trend of "this has or has not been problematic for similar cases".

Restraint clauses , restrictive covenants , or non-compete clauses are fairly standard in professional contracts. You would usually find, in a well-drafted restraint clause, cascading duration and geographic limitations. For example, it might read: ... as a potentional customer or client of EMPLOYER. This shall apply: For 12 months; or, if that is found to be unenforceable, For 6 months; or, if that is found to be unenforceable, For 3 months; or, if that is found to be unenforceable, For 1 month and within a radius of: 20km; or, if that is found to be unenforceable 10km; or, if that is found to be unenforceable 5km; or, if that is found to be unenforceable 1km from the work location . These cascading clauses are designed to protect the employer in situations where a court finds the original restraint to be unreasonable and unenforceable. The usual remedy for an unreasonable restraint clause is that a court will simply nullify it, or reduce it to a more reasonable time and geographical scope. However, if it materially changes the nature of the contract, then the contract as a whole may be voided.

Can HTML formatting be copyrighted?

A private website that publishes the Constitution of Pakistan carries the following copyright disclaimer: We reserve all rights to the HTML formatting and presentation of the entire Constitution and all accompanying documents as presented here. No reproduction of the HTML formatting is permitted without our express written permission. Source My question is, does HTML formatting meet the the threshold of originality ? Or is this text likely just a deterrent?

Unless there is something special in Pakistani case law on this topic, it would pass the originality requirement. In my opinion, it is actually very well laid out, and it is clearly not just slapping a few tags on plain text. This article does not indicate any particularly high standards for originality in Pakistan.

Attorney Sanctions

A pro se litigant in NY, who has been litigating a complex matter for over 10 years, is finding that the opposition's papers have increasing false citations and gibberish in them. A good example is a recent appellate rebuttal which contains literally dozens of legal claims, followed by scores of cases. Sounds impressive, except that in only but a few of those citations, does the cited case have anything to do with the claim of the attorney. In other words what on the face is made to appear as a well supported argument, has in fact no support, and dozens of cases which have nothing to do with the point of the argument and would frustrate a reader researching the arguments. This type of false buttressing of arguments has escalated, and the pro se litigant is considering countermeasures. Some may be quite ineffective. However one that has been discussed would be to make a motion to the court, for sanctions against the attorney, with the cause being something like frustration of legal process. There are numerous examples in federal (US) courts of pro se litigants being censured for "gibberish." Probably more applicable is fraud on the court. However, legal texts have printed little on this topic, and there are very few cases similar that come up with searches. However this quote from recent cases seems appropriate: In a recent case, the Court of Appeals described fraud on the court as: willful conduct that is deceitful and obstructionist, which injects misrepresentations and false information into the judicial process "so serious that it undermines ... the integrity of the proceeding" .... What might be effective methods to reduce this frustration of legal process?

The simplest method is to demonstrate the falsity of the claims: this is simpler than pursuing punitive action against the opposition because in addition to demonstrate the falsity of the claims, you have to demonstrate willfulness and deceitfulness of the oppositions actions. In reading appellate decisions, you will often encounter statement by the higher court that the losing part urges so-and-so, or that the lower court applied a law or doctrine incorrectly, and they explain why that is in error. Such snippets are an excellent model for rebutting incorrect legal claims, although they are usually just the "executive summary" of the refutation. If one side cites Bronston v. United States, 409 U.S. 352, Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 and Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 as case-law support for the proposition that courts should defer to the interpretation of government agencies whether the agency's answer is based on a permissible construction of the statute, so long as Congress has not spoken directly to the precise issue at question, a refutation would draw on those decisions to show that the three citations do not support the proposition (in my example, it would be unnecessary to do this because it is patently obvious that this is a wildly irrational argument, but many cases depend on a deeper reading of the case law). Rather than focusing on accusations of gibberish, you could focus on establishing the lack of legal merits behind the opposing side's claim.

Does EU consumer law apply on products purchased in the EU but used abroad?

A product (computer) was purchased in a EU country, from a EU retailer, by a EU citizen, and paid for from a EU bank account, but is currently being used outside the EU (in Asia) because the owner is abroad. The product has now developed a significant fault. It is now outside of the 1-year warranty offered by the manufacturer, but is well within the time frame for warranties against defects guidelines of the EU overall as well as of the specific EU country. If the owner were in the EU right now, the manufacturer, or at least the vendor, would be obliged to give a repair/replacement (based on experience of owners currently in the EU). The question is, does the owner resident outside the EU temporarily, have any recourse under EU consumer protection law in this case? Can s/he make a claim under EU consumer law being resident outside the EU, or must he get back to the continent to have legal protection?

You have the right to get the computer fixed by the original seller if it doesn't last for a reasonable amount of time. For that you would have to go to the original seller or return the computer to the original seller. You may claim your rights for example in the UK for up to five or six years. Say this computer breaks after 18 months in Australia, you could gather proof in Australia that (a) it is broken and (b) it had a problem when you received it. Then you would have over three years time to take it back to the UK together with that evidence. Altogether, this isn't very practical. For example, the seller can just refuse a repair (whether they have the right to do so or not), and then you would have to sue them from another country, which would be very difficult in practice.

Supervision of minors - to what age?

A program for children like a school or camp is required to supervise the children under their control. Until what age is one required to provide supervision to minors?

This varies dramatically between states in the US. Here is a list which shows minimum ages from None to 14 years old.

If A fails to pay C under a contract between A and B to do so, can C sue A?

A promises B to pay C a sum of money, say Rs.500. However, A does not pay the amount to C. Can C take legal action against A for non-performance?

Nobody can take action against A. In order for anybody to obligate A, they must give something to A, which is not the case here (there has to be "consideration"). In this case, we don't even know if B is alive or A and B speak the same language. You can make a promise to a tree, or to a person who doesn't understand you. Only an agreement can be binding, and we have no evidence that there is any meeting of the minds, or even a second mind. You can remedy this, e.g. A promises B to pay C Rs. 500 if B gives him an egg. C could not sue unless the local law recognised a third-party beneficiary right to sue (this right is apparently not recognized in India, but is in the UK). Since C didn't (given the fact in front of us) rely on this promise, there will be no suit. But perhaps C could fix that by releasing B from an obligation to return a hatchet based on the Rs. 500, and also by being sure that this all took place in the UK. Or, you could remedy this by making C part of the agreement, so that A has a contract with B and C.

Permission to use images of property

A property management company wants to use images of the properties which it manages within its portfolio on its website and social media/marketing materials. They are just images of the building/block of flats or estate as a whole taken on public land not private. Does the company need to get permission from the owners to use these images?

Yes Such images are almost certainly subject to copyright protection. (Unless the building, and the images, are old enough to be out of copyright, which is unlikely.) They may not be reproduced or distributed without permission from th copyright holder. While the applicability of a "fair use" or "fair dealing" exception to copyright is always individual and fact-driven, the situation as described would be very unlikely to have such an exception apply. The use would be for a commercial purpose, would not be transformative, and would involve the whole image or a significant part of it. Whether the images were taken on public land or private would not matter. The management company would need to obtain permission from the copyright holder. This is likely to be the photographer, but might be someone else. If the images were released under a permissive license, such as a CC-BY license, that would constitute permission. But a license with a "share alike" clause, or a 'non-commercial" clause, would not constitute permission for that sort of use. Beware of free image sites. Many images posted on such sites claim to be under permissive licenses, but are actually unauthorized, and the purported "license" is not worth the electrons used to transmit it. It is probably safer for the management company to hire a photographer to take whatever pictures it wants to display on its site, or have one of its ordinary employees snap a cell-phone shot. Then proper permissions can be assured.

What legal relief is available when a neighbour uses my address as his own for communication without written consent from me?

A property, say plot no.31, was sub-divided into two parts. After subdivision the plot number on record for the newly created subdivision was, say, 31-A; the original plot number remained 31. The division was challenged, and the challenge dismissed at all levels after the first initial success. Many years later, after the challenger passed away and that sub-division was inherited by the challenger's heirs, it was discovered that even after dismissal the challenger continued to use the postal address of the challenged sub-division. This continued for years even when the heirs too knew from record that the address was 31-A instead of 31. When asked the postal department stated the address being next door, all mail was delivered assuming the misstated address to be simple oversight by the sender/s. Even assuming defence by 31-A claim the misrepresentation was by oversight, it comes across as far-fetched for such oversight to continue for whole decades. What legal relief is available when a neighbour uses my address as his own for communication without written consent from me? Is the the postal department also culpable? EDIT: To follow up with @eis' answer that tort demands establishing damage here is my concern. Documents which establish proof of address s.a. Utility Bills - telephone, energy, water service lose clarity. If so inclined, one may call this behaviour causing loss of value to the property simply because it amounts to squatting - if only on paper. EDIT 2: Pursuant to the comment by R.M below, an additional question that comes to mind is as follows - Could such use of my address as an alias for their own address serve to establish 'proof of residence'? For instance, some days ago I encountered a pizza delivery boy waiting outside my premises. Upon enquiry he intimated the pizza was to be delivered to them but the address given by them was mine.

Mark the mail delivered as "addressee unknown, return to sender" and give it to the postal delivery person next time around. If the mail stops getting through, the neighbor will update their address.

What legal remedy available for Proprietor firm an accused to deal with138 of NI act Dishonor of cheque

A proprietor firm "ABC Traders" continuously do's the business with a Private Limited Company. The "ABC Traders" gets credit upto 70 Lakh from the said Private Limited Company. Later point of stage the "ABC Traders" incurred loss and the bank account gets NPA, during the crisiss the proprietor firm gradually reduced the credit limit from 70 Lakh to 21 Lakh. The proprietor firm receives the email from the said Private Limited Company, states that We had countless discussions about the long pending credit issue of ABC Traders and you are asking some more time, each and every time. In all the discussions, you asked for a week’s time and not kept your words. We forced to believe that you are not showing any interest to clear the long pending credit. Now company decide to put the cheques for collection. We request you to clear the cheques by arrange the required funds and honor it. The total outstanding amount for "ABC Traders" is 21,11,365/- we already gave the account statement for your information. We would like to clear the issue and continue our business with you smoothly. Hope you understand and settle the balance and help us to serve you better The ABC Traders replied to the said email conversation, states that we are not in position to settle in one shot immediately, we will reduce the dues in each purchase transaction by paying extra amount approx 25K to 50K along with the invoice amount. But the said Private Limited company deposited the cheque (Un-dated blank cheque) without getting confirmation. Also filed a case under section 200 Cr.P.C. for an offense under section 138 and 141 of the negotiable instrument act. Note: The said private limited company did not get any confirmation regarding the payment and deposited the cheque which was given for security purpose at the time of inception of business. What is the legal remedy for the ABC Traders to prove innocence ? Also the said case is maintainable ? Location: Tamilnadu, INDIA.

If ABC Traders cannot settle it’s debts as an when they fall due then they are insolvent. Their correct course of action is to appoint an administrator to determine if they can trade out of the situation or should be liquidated. If they don’t, and they keep trading, the directors/managers of ABC Traders can be held personally liable for future debts incurred and may be committed an offence punishable by fines and/or imprisonment. Private Limited Company is entitled to get its money on the terms it agreed with ABC Traders. It is free to agree to an extension of those terms but doesn’t have to. It can take any legal collection action it deems appropriate including using collection agencies or suing in court. Once it has a court judgement and if ABC Traders doesn’t pay, it can apply to have ABC wound up. If ABC Traders sent a cheque, Private Limited Company is entitled to bank it.

If the grand jury refuses to indict, can the prosecutor try again?

A prosecutor seeks an indictment for Charge X, but the grand jury returns a no-bill. Is the prosecutor free to seek another indictment on Charge X from the same grand jury, or from a different one? Does it matter if the prosecutor has new evidence? Is there any limit on how many attempts the government can make? Is the answer different between the federal government and the states?

The General Rule Even if the charge is presented to a grand jury and it declines to indict, exactly the same charge that one grand jury declined to indict upon can be presented to a future grand jury and produce a valid indictment. A charge upon which a grand jury declines to indict is often not presented to a future grand jury as a matter of prosecutorial discretion or prosecutor's office policy, but generally this is not a mandatory rule. There may be some jurisdiction in the U.S. where this is not the case, and such a statute would not be unconstitutional if it were, but I am not aware of any state where this is prohibited, and I do not believe that this is the case in federal court. Justifications For The General Rule One reason that it is not a mandatory rule is that there is no practical way that a defendant could enforce the rule if it was a mandatory rule. Grand jury proceedings are secret (at least until an indictment is produced and then only as pertinent to the defendant indicted on the charges producing an indictment). Generally, even the judges in the court calling a grand jury have no access to its proceedings until it issues an indictment, and then has only slightly more latitude to review its proceedings than a defendant in the case. Agreements To Dismiss A Case Distinguished A prosecutor with jurisdiction over a criminal case that is presented to a grand jury could reach an agreement with a defendant that is binding not to prosecute on a charge in the future, but again, that would be an affirmative act of a prosecutor agreeing to honor a grand jury "no bill" and there would be no legal requirement that the prosecutor do so. Practical Limitations Note, however, that there is a downside to repeatedly bringing a case to a grand jury after receiving one or more "no bills". A prosecutor has a constitutional obligation arising under the Brady v. Maryland , 373 U.S. 83 (1963), to disclose all exculpatory evidence known to the prosecutor to the defense, upon request. Usually, when a grand jury declines to indict there is something in the evidence presented to it that is exculpatory. A repeated presentation of charges that one or more prior grand jury rejected that ultimately produces a grand jury indictment would usually be strongly suggestive of the fact that there is exculpatory evidence in existence that may not have been disclosed to the final grand jury and that needs to be disclosed to the defense prior to trial. Also, many criminal charges have a statute of limitations, and charges cannot be presented to a grand jury after the statute of limitations for the offense has expired.

Deleting incriminatory emails

A public European school has an IT department with a person responsible for all mail related tasks, including the mail server. Once that responsible sent an incriminatory email to a specific group of teachers, that use email accounts where the content is stored in the school mail server. One of the teachers from the target group replied. From the content of the reply one can see what the responsible said initially is nonsense. Then, the responsible deleted all the emails initially sent. Is this allowed?

There is no general legal obligation to preserve correspondence There are laws against destroying evidence but for them to come into play there would have to be a civil or criminal case underway. From your question it doesn't seem that anyone is being sued or investigated by police so there is no evidence tampering involved. Individuals and organisations are free to delete whatever they want from their computers unless and until they should be aware that it is or may become evidence. Whether the deletion complies with internal organisation policies and procedures is not a legal matter except in so far as it exposes the deleter to employment sanctions.

Is it legal for a public US university to advise its employees to purchase from businesses owned by people of color?

A public US university I'm familiar with is promoting an anti-racism initiative. As part of this initiative, a web article posted on the university's diversity web portal (which was advertised in an email newsletter to the university community) contains a list of suggested actions that employees and departments can take to advance the cause of anti-racism. One of the actions on the list is to support businesses owned by people of color. The recommendation is accompanied by links to various lists of black-owned businesses in the region. Is it legal for a public US university administration to advise its employees to patronize businesses owned by people of a specific race, both in their private lives and in the transaction of official university business?

Advising employees to take some lawful action is legal, and is speech protected by the US Constitution. Campaigning for a political candidate could jeopardize the university's tax-exempt status, but there is no law requiring a university, even a government university, to remain politically neutral. That alone answers the question. Whether or not the university could itself pursue racially-weighted business policies depends on what they are doing and what state it is in. It is generally legal to adopt policies that address discrimination, but 9 states have laws banning affirmative action. The cases Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger establish that "blanket policies" run counter to the requirements of the 14th Amendment, but race can be used as a factor in making decisions. Here is a list or affirmative action related decisions in the US. As applied to a state's affirmative action programs, the standard of legality would be having a clear goal of limited scope without other workable race-neutral means to achieve it.

How can an archive claim copyright on very old documents under English law?

A publicly-funded archive in England provides a service to allow members of the public to copy, with a copier on site and for a nominal fee, documents. The documents are very old, so that any person involved in their creation died long ago, and their copyright would normally have expired. The archive stamps the new copied document "Copyright retained by owner of original document", with the implication that the original document is on loan to the archive and this stamp is a requirement of the loan conditions. Creation of the new paper copy by pressing a button on the copier involves no significant creative input. How can either the archive, or the original document owner, claim any copyright, either on the original document or the new paper copy?

You are reading more into this than it says: Copyright retained by owner of original document This simply, means that by giving you a copy they are not transferring ownership of the copyright. That is, if copyright exists, then you don't get it and neither do they claim ownership of it: it stays with whoever owns the copyright. If copyright has expired then the stamp has no meaning at all. Also, you say "The documents are very old, so that any person involved in their creation died long ago, and their copyright would normally have expired." - be careful, copyright lasts a long time after death - 70 years in the UK. If the person was alive in 1947 the copyright is still in force.

Does the U.S. Supreme Court have jurisdiction over the constitutionality of an impeachment?

A question arose on Politics SE asking why the constitutionality to continue an impeachment trial (whose prime purpose is, presumably, to remove an official from office) after the official has left office has not been decided. There was a disagreement in the comments: While it is almost universally agreed that there is no judicial review of how the trial was conducted, including its result (because it's the Senate's supreme privilege), the case was not so clear with a review of whether the impeachment was constitutional to begin with. Could the Supreme Court declare an entire impeachment process unconstitutional?

Part of the problem you'll find is that there are so few impeachments in U.S. History (Only 21 articles of Impeachment have ever been drafted, of which only 8 resulted in convictions) and SCOTUS is so selective on cases it chooses to hear, that only one case has ever been heard and that was upheld ( Nixon v. United States ). In that case, SCOTUS ruled that it did not have jurisdiction to rule on the legal question before it (was the new trial format a proper trial by the senate), but did not have an opinion one way or another to suggest that SCOTUS could not review other cases that come before it. One of the reasons they also haven't is in order to have a legal case in the U.S., the plaintiff must suffer actual harm. More impeachments ended without a conviction than with either acquittal (8), resignation before trial conclusion (4), and expulsion from senate (1, and will never occur again as Congressional office holders are not impeachable following this particular case). Since no harm was caused and courts do not rule on hypotheticals, a case with actual harm (conviction) must occur in order for SCOTUS to even consider hearing the case. Nixon does not bar SCOTUS from hearing more appeals resulting from Impeachment, it only bars those relating to the manner in which the senate chooses to hold the trial.

Documentation for "appropriate, standard legal practice" in rendering written decisions

A question arose while reading "Impartial hearings under the IDEA: legal issues and answers." IHO = Impartial Hearing Officer in a special education impartial hearing (a type of administrative hearing). Does the IDEA provide any standards for IHO competence? The IDEA competency standards require IHOs to: [...] (iv) possess the knowledge and ability to render and write decisions in accordance with appropriate, standard legal practice . 20 U.S.C. § 1415(f)(3)(A) (2008). The IHO who wrote the decision I'm appealing did an incredibly slapdash job, with spelling errors, grammar errors, factual errors and incorrect references. I would like a reference I can cite that shows that submitting a decision by "appropriate, standard legal practice" means, among other things, proofreading your document, or at least running your decision through a spell checker! (I don't mean the documentation would say that specifically, of course.)

You are wasting your time trying to argue that spelling errors, grammar errors or incorrect references are examples of " in appropriate, standard legal practice" because they aren't. They are certainly examples of poor English and writing skills and possibly of a less than professional approach, however, that is not what is required. You are on slightly better ground with an argument about incorrect facts except that it is quite likely that such errors will not be overturned by a court because providing the IMO has complied with the general requirements of Adjudication under administrative legal principles or the specific requirements of the statute they are entitled to be wrong . That is the adjudicator is expected to carry out their decision making role in accordance with the law and providing they have done so, it doesn't matter how many other people (including judges) think they made the wrong decision - it was their decision to make. Further, even if you could demonstrate that the particular IHO was not competent to be an IMO, it does not follow that a decision made while they were an IMO is therefore void. To have the decision reviewed you would need to demonstrate that it violated a general provision of administrative law, such as by failing to hold a hearing in accordance with the relevant law or failing to afford one of the parties natural justice or that the IMO had acted outside jurisdiction.

Do contracts require pages or clauses numbered?

A question asked by another member about missing pages in a lease brings to my mind the question of whether there is a legal requirement for contract pages to be numbered so that it is e.g. obvious when a plaintiff or defendant has simply omitted inconvenient pages ? I generally see clauses being numbered, but I don't know if this is a requirement or not - I have no legal training myself. I am particularly interested in my own country (Ireland) and the UK and EU but other jurisdictions are of naturally of interest.

I do not believe that there is any requirement to number clauses, paragraphs, or pages, and I have certainly seen contracts where none of these are numbered. It is a common practice to number provisions in some way, in particular to make reference from one to another easier. But not all contracts include such internal references. Contracts presented in electronic form, such as on a web page, may not have any clear concept of separate pages, and so page numbers would be pointless on such contracts. Page numbers on contracts printed out are common, but I do not know of any legal requirement for such numbers. For contracts presented in electronic form, one can ensure against unauthorized modification by including a checksum or hash of the contract text. If a one-way hash function is used, it will be quite hard to produce a text with a different content but an identical hash value. This technique could also be used on printed contracts. However, I do not recall seeing this technique used in practice.

Can an unwritten law be considered a law, with legal effect?

A question came up with a friend over dinner. In societies that have no written language, are their laws considered to have legal effect? Does a law have to be written down in order to be considered a law and enforced?

Different socities, including some that are not considered sovereign nations, create laws, that is enforceable rules of conduct, in different ways. Not all write them down. But they are all Law in that they are rulwa that societies can and will enforce mon their members. I recommend reading Legal Systems Very Different from Ours by David D. Friedman (Professor of Law at Santa Clara University). There are free versions available on the web, and the final version is available from Amazon . It includes chapters on several systems where law is not written, including: Pirate Law Prisoners’ Law Romani Law Comanche, Kiowa and Cheyenne: The Plains Indians Somali Law Other chapters deal with systems where law may have been written, but its method of formation and operation are very different from the models usually discussed on this site. This include Roman law, Imperial Chinese law, Jewish law, Early Irish Law, and the law of saga-period Iceland.

How to go about learning cyber security if possessing such software (hacking software) is highly and explicitly illegal in my and most countries?

A question for "ethical hackers" or cyber security professionals. I am very interested in the world of cyber security and all aspects of it. I am genuinely interested in the security aspect of it and from a highly ethical and moral perspective. I have purchased "self-teaching" online courses for learning cyber security, this is also dubbed loosely "ethical hacking". At this point we should not debate my intentions with such activities and I wish you to take them as genuinely ethical. I do understand that many high level organizations such as the NSA, Intelligence Agencies in many countries etcetera do monitor these activities heavily. Therefore I'm sure any such research would be monitored one way or another--- enough said on that. My question here is, how is it possible to learn in this direction if my country and many others forbid even the possession of software for "hacking" despite intentions? This seems one of the main tools used to learn vulnerabilities and how to defend against them. For ones own security purposes as well as better security for others also and my own software development securities. While I understand the intentions behind such laws being directed at nefarious intentions, what about progress in this direction, what about people who want to enter the field or simply learn for ethical reasons? According to the criminal code of Canada there is no grey area, see first link below. An FYI of how I intended to go about learning "hacking" ethically. By using my computer to break into my old brick laptop and learning from there. I wouldn't use such software to hack anyone else unethically, just not interested. References: https://www.itworldcanada.com/blog/understanding-canadian-cybersecurity-laws-interpersonal-privacy-and-cybercrime-criminal-code-of-canada-article-4/440337 https://devcount.com/is-ethical-hacking-legal/ Criminal Code of Canada

...many [countries] forbid even the possession of software for "hacking" despite intentions That is not the case in the united-kingdom where accessing a computer, and possessing the tools to do it, are only offences if the activity is unauthorised . In fact, private entities and government departments are encouraged to carry out authorised penetration tests to identify vulnerabilities in their systems. [by] using my computer to break into my old brick laptop... This is perfectly legal as you have authorised access to the brick. The relevant offences are at s.1 to s.3A of the Computer Misuse Act 1990 , in particular: s.1 - Unauthorised access to computer material. (1) A person is guilty of an offence if— (a) he causes a computer to perform any function with intent to secure access to any program or data held in any computer, or to enable any such access to be secured; (b) the access he intends to secure, or to enable to be secured, is unauthorised ; and (c) he knows at the time when he causes the computer to perform the function that that is the case [...] Sections 2, 3 and 3ZA (not reproduced here to save space) follow similar wording for unauthorised access relating to such things as commiting other offences, impairing a computer's functionality, or creating serious damage to health, infrastructure etc. s.3A - Making, supplying or obtaining articles for use in offence under section 1, 3 or 3ZA [...] (3) A person is guilty of an offence if he obtains any article— (a) intending to use it to commit, or to assist in the commission of, an offence under section 1, 3 or 3ZA, or [...] (4) In this section "article" includes any program or data held in electronic form. [...] So, hacking is not always unlawful - all it needs is the right permission from someone who is authorised to give it. Edited To Add This is also the case in canada (the subject of the OP's first linked article) where s.342.2 of the Criminal Code makes an exception for having a lawful excuse to possess "hacking tools": (1) Every person who, without lawful excuse , makes, possesses, sells, offers for sale, imports, obtains for use, distributes or makes available a device that is designed or adapted primarily to commit an offence under section 342.1 or 430, knowing that the device has been used or is intended to be used to commit such an offence , is (a) guilty of an indictable offence... (b) guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction. [...] (4) In this section, device includes (a) a component of a device; and (b) a computer program within the meaning of subsection 342.1(2).

What does "Materially Non responsive" mean?

A question is posed and an answer is supplied. If the response does not actually answer the question, is this what is meant by materially non-responsive ?

Materially non-responsive means that the answer was "non-responsive" (i.e. it didn't answer the question being asked) in a significant and relevant manner. "Material" means in a matter this is significant and relevant to the issue being considered in the relevant context. For example, if someone is asked, what is the state and city where this incident occurred, the answer "somewhere", while technically true, is materially non-responsive as it doesn't provide enough information that is available to the person asked to be a meaningful answer to the question of which city and state was involved, while the answer "Denver" might technically be non-responsive since it doesn't include a state, but this is not "materially non-responsive" if "Denver, Colorado" can be inferred from context.

Leasing terminology in the USA: What is the difference between "Lease Contract" and "Contemplated Lease Contract"?

A question on the leasing terminology in the USA: What is the difference between "Lease Contract" and "Contemplated Lease Contract"?

Based on simple English, a "Lease Contract" is what you have between a lessor and lessee. A "Contemplated Lease Contract" is what you have when you are thinking about forming a "Lease Contract".

Does the United Kingdom have any copyfraud legislation?

A quick and (hopefully) simple question: Does the United Kingdom have any Copyfraud legislation? The linked Wiki page shows that the U.S. probably does, but it doesn't seem to be a specific offence in the U.K. I have a list as long as my arm to ask why but I don't think it is necessary to bring all that up at this point. Failing that: is there any legislation in place that could give the same result, albeit probably in Civil Law? Please do complain if I'm not making any sense. I shall try harder.

I don't think there is any quick and easy answer to your question (law is often like that, which is why professional lawyers can make a living), but there are a few useful points to be made. Although it is difficult to prove a negative, I don't think there is any specific crime or cause of action here. The copyright legislation summary makes no mention of falsely claiming copyright (though bear in mind that the legislation is in many different places, and even the Intellectual Property Office says "we cannot guarantee the accuracy" of their summary); and the fact that the only definition of "Copyfraud" is in a Wikipedia article about an emotive word coined by an American professor shows that this is not a term recognised by the law, which would be very likely if it were explicitly proscribed. Whether the conduct you mean falls under any other statute is something you would have to ask a lawyer; despite the evident opinion of the Wikipedia author, 'demanding payment you know not to be due' is not the same as 'asserting a right that on careful investigation is not justified', and each case will turn on its facts. However: I have spent more hours than I care to remember explaining that 'threatening somebody with a lawsuit' is neither illegal nor tortious, whatever you may think of the morality. If somebody claims that you owe them money and you deny it, the way to decide the point is a court case; unless they take you to court, you need pay them nothing. So what you might call 'threats of legal action' they would call 'explaining the reality of the legal system'. If the claimant does take you to court, there will undoubtedly be legal fees; but in the UK, unlike the US, legal fees are paid by the loser. Since part of the definition of "Copyfraud" is that the claimant plainly has no right to this money, the court will find against him and order him to pay your costs. If it is an egregious case, the costs will be ordered "on the indemnity basis", which means that instead of paying any costs you can prove to be reasonable, the claimant will have to cover any costs you incurred unless he can prove them unreasonable. It is possible that the CPS could prosecute this as extortion, or the Department of Trade call it "unreasonable restraint of trade"; but before they would even consider either, there would need to be proof that the claimant knew he was not entitled to royalties. If there hasn't been a court case, nobody knows for certain.

How legal is offering abandonware for download?

A quick background to my project (it's essential to the question, as you'll see later): My project offers a multiplayer server platform for server listings for a game (Crysis Wars), allowing players to connect to these servers (note that it's not a gameserver); the online platform (called GameSpy) went bankrupt and closed down in 2014, leaving the game (and many others) without any multiplayer capability. The project has a fair few users, and now I'm looking to expand. I am considering advertising on a well-known gaming website, and offer a copy of the game for download from the project's website to enable people who don't have the game to play . I'm questioning the legality of this since the game can still be purchased from online retailers (but not from the publisher's own store), however it should be noted that the game is abandoned : No updates in almost six years; Not possible to verify whether a copy is genuine or not (no way to verify the serial keys); I'm pretty certain that almost 100% of copies using my system are pirated/non-genuine (I can't verify this of course, but as 44.8% of users are Russian this is probably the case) If I do offer a copy of the game (clean, no modifications) for download on the project's website, how legal is this? Should I obtain written permission from the game's developer first? I acknowledge that I could potentially be sued by the game developer/publisher for 'financial loss', however this is questionable since the game is abandoned (I'll be surprised if they've made any money from it in the past two years!). If it matters, I'm located in Guernsey with the service (and the project's website) running from Ireland.

It is possible to abandon copyright ... maybe. However, this game has not been abandoned. When the owner of the company was liquidated, the copyright became the legal property of the liquidator in trust for the creditors. It is for him or her to decide how to deal with the property but the copyright still exists until 70 years after the author(s) death. If you allow downloads you are breaching copyright unless you have permission (or you meet the Fair Dealing criteria - you probably don't). The person to seek permission from is the liquidator od the company. If you get sued they do not need to demonstrate financial loss - copyright claims can either be pursued for actual or statutory damages, that is, a fixed amount per violation. In addition, in egregious cases, copyright violation is a crime prosecutable by the state.

Are the police compelled to share a criminal's details with the victim?

A quick hypothetical. If I was assaulted, and provided video evidence to the authorities which the police used to successfully catch my assailant, would the police have to share my assailant's details with me? Let's assume that the assailant was given a formal warning but not charged, and I wanted to pursue civil action, but I didn't have the assailant's details. Could the police refuse to tell me? (Not concerned about the the likelihood of a civil case succeeding, just a hypothetical) Specifically I'm asking about the UK. Do the four UK Nations vary at all in this regard?

No. The police cannot determine if you have a lawful reason to know the details. Not their job. You can file your civil case using fictitious defendant name and then just apply for a court order to disclose who the guy actually is as part of the disclosure process. Provided that the court is satisfied you have a case, it will grant such order and the police will have to obey it.

Rabbinical courts in Israel throw people in jail?

A rabbinical court in Israel on Thursday sentenced to five years in prison a man who for years has refused to give his wife a divorce. ... In Orthodox Judaism, a marriage cannot be undone unless the man consents to a get — the Hebrew word for divorce. Rabbinical courts — which in Israel function as family courts as part of the judiciary and have executive powers — cannot force a man to give his wife a get but they can impose harsh punishments on men the judges determine are unjustly withholding a get and turning their wives into what is known in Judaism as agunot, or “chained women.” ... “I will never give her a get. Even if she gives me back the apartment and the property, my tefillin and prayer shawl, she will not receive a get,” he told the court. A woman who does not receive a get is called an “agunah,” or chained woman, and cannot remarry. If she does remarry without a get, her children are considered “mamzerim,” or bastards. On the second article Sara Hill comments: "The Rabbinate only has jurisdiction over Jews. I suppose the Imams have jurisdiction over Moslems and the Christian authorities have jurisdiction over Christians but I don't know the exact details." What are the legalities of this? In particular, are Jews (usually by birth) and Catholics (baptised as children) subject to religious courts even if they are not religious?

The article "Enforcement of Religious Courts' Judgments Under Israeli Law" (Asher Maoz, Journal of Church and State 1991) is useful in understanding the legal underpinnings of this question. The beginning point is the Palestine Order in Council 1922 (this is from the UK Privy Council), where religion-based courts are established, so sect. 52 is about Muslim courts, 53 (later repealed) is about Jewish courts and 54 is about Christian courts. Section 53 was replaced with Rabbinical Courts Jurisdiction (Marriage and Divorce) Law, 1953 , stating that marriage between Jews follows Jewish law, and says that rabbinical court has exclusive jurisdiction. Article 6 of that law allows a district court enforce a final judgment by a rabbinical court by imprisonment. Muslim courts similarly have exclusive jurisdiction over Muslims, though it is wider (it pertains to all matters, not just marriage). Actual enforcement apparently involves the Chief Execution Officer . Basic Law 15 gives the Supreme Court supervisory power over all courts, including religious courts. So rabbinical courts don't have unfettered power to do whatever they want (under Jewish law), but there is direct state sanction of imprisonment as a penalty for not obeying a rabbinical court decision, there is non-religious execution of court orders, and there is secular supervision. Since civil marriage is non-existent in Israel, there is no choice (if you want to have the wedding in Israel) but to go to the recognized religious authorities, which seems to make Cyprus a popular wedding venue. A Roman Catholic divorce is not possible in Israel, a Muslim one is, and I really cannot tell about the various Orthodox Christian churches.

What is the motivation for legally forcing sellers to determine the minimum price of food by multiplying it by 1.1?

A radio advertisement for a food distributor said that they sell their food to fight the current crisis at "prix coutant" (cost price). However, it was followed by a very speedy text saying that, according to the law, the actual cost price was actually 1.1 times the real cost price. This seems confirmed by this governmental source , saying: À compter du 1er février 2019 et jusqu’au 15 avril 2023, le prix d’achat effectif est affecté d’un coefficient de 1,10 pour les denrées alimentaires et les produits destinés à l’alimentation des animaux. From February 1 2019 until April 15 2023, the effective purchase price is multiplied by a coefficient of 1.10 for foodstuffs and animal feed. I think I am misunderstanding something here, but what I understand is: I am a food seller, I buy some food at 1€ I want to make an advertisement and want to sell the food at cost price I cannot do so; I am actually forced by law to sell it at 1.1€ (so I am still making a profit) Is that correct? What is the motivation behind this?

The law against revente à perte (resale at a loss) is an anti- dumping law intended to prevent predatory pricing . As explained in the Wikipedia article for the case of Keck and Mithouard : The aim of this law was to prevent retailers engaging in 'cut-throat competition' by dumping excess produce onto the market, and forcing competitors out of business.

What legal consequences would someone face for intentionally destroying an embryo conceived via IVF but not yet implanted?

A random debate somewhere else made me curious about this question. If someone knowingly and intentionally destroyed an embryo conceived via IVF but not implanted yet what kind of consequences do they face? Is the potential life treated differently or is this just destruction of property? Is there any state where someone doing this would potentially face manslaughter or murder charges, due to some variant of a 'life starts at conception' anti abortion law?

Is there any state where someone doing this would potentially face manslaughter or murder charges, due to some variant of a 'life starts at conception' anti abortion law? Not really. Those laws are currently unconstitutional. A state could certainly prescribe some criminal punishment in a case like this one, but punishing under existing manslaughter or murder laws would almost surely not be upheld under existing law (subject to change without advanced notice by the U.S. Supreme Court). If someone knowingly and intentionally destroyed an embryo conceived via IVF but not implanted yet what kind of consequences do they face? Is the potential life treated differently or is this just destruction of property? This is a tough question that probably doesn't have a uniform answer under the law of all U.S. states. For one thing, it isn't clear who, if anyone, has property rights in the embryo. It is certainly conceivable that a state might instead conclude that the donor receiving the IVF treatment has only contract rights in it (and breach of a contract is not a crime). It might be viewed as a property destruction case. There might be a specific statute on point. There might be a civil lawsuit remedy. In most states, this would be an issue of first impression and a court would look a competing ways that cases had been handled in other jurisdictions to decide what to do in its case.

Could you steal money from a criminal organization and publicly declare it without legal repercussions?

A random idea I had based on shows like squid game, or others that feature death games. In a real world setting in the USA, you have knowledge and details of an ongoing criminal organization without ever participating or working with them. You intend to come forward to the police with that knowledge with the intent of taking down or hindering said criminal organization before filing for witness protection. Let’s say in front of you is a lockbox containing ten million dollars in illegally gained dollars by the organization. You decide to take it on your way out. Could you publicly and legally declare the money you stole without any legal repercussions?

Stealing money is theft, see RCW Chapter 9a.56 in Washington, and analogous laws in other jurisdictions. What you describe is theft, as defined under RCW 9A.56.020, and that is a crime. Defenses are available only in case of an open taking made under a good faith claim to title to the property ("it's my money"), or an irrelevant defense related to pallet theft from a pallet recycler. There is no exception arising for goods "in the possession of a criminal organization". There is also no applicable attainder process for declaring an organization to be a "criminal organization" to which such an exception could be referred, in Washington or any other state that I am familiar with. At the federal level, 18 USC Ch. 96 does not have a provision for declaring some organization to be a "criminal organization", but it does prohibit using proceeds from "a pattern of racketeering activity " that a person or organization participated in, to support a business engaged in interstate or foreign commerce. There is an extensive but specific list of trigger crimes, which are all federal crimes. Supposing that a state wanted to make it legal to steal from criminals, there would have to be a suitable definition of "criminal". Compare the various sex offender laws, where under dell-defined circumstances, a person is legally declared to be a sex offender required to register. If the property is in fact the proceeds of a criminal activity (not merely "in the possession of a criminal") or is used to support criminal activities, it might be seized under civil forfeiture statutes. However, those statutes only allow the government to seize the property – vigilante civil forfeiture is still theft, a crime for which you can be prosecuted. The state might seize such assets and, when challenged in court, may have to prove that the assets a seizable (this is highly jurisdiction-dependent). The prospects that a prosecutor will turn a blind eye to a theft on the grounds that the victims are criminals is pretty small. More likely, everything gets seized and everybody gets prosecuted.

Limitations on US DEA

A rather disreputable source, Buzzfeed News, says The DEA is limited by statute to enforcing drug-related federal crimes. But on Sunday, Timothy Shea, a former US attorney and close confidant of Barr's who was named acting administrator of the DEA last month, received approval from Associate Deputy Attorney General Bradley Weinsheimer to go beyond the agency’s mandate “to perform other law enforcement duties” that Barr may “deem appropriate.” So far, the only other mentions of this I can find cite Buzzfeed News as their source. But my question(s) are: If this statute exists, where is it? and is it legal for such an approval to be given by anyone other than Congress? I was unable to find such a limitation in in Title 21.

The statute creating the DEA is 87 Stat. 1091 , transmitted to Congress by Nixon under the provisions of 5 USC Ch. 9 . This reorganization transfers functions "which relate to the suppression of illicit traffic in narcotics, dangerous drugs, or marihuana" from Treasury to the Attorney General (but still allows Treasury to continue to keep drugs out of the US). This reorganization created the DEA as an agency under Justice (sec. 4), but it says nothing about what this agency is allowed to investigate/enforce.

How does GDPR affect game data and how it is processed?

A real-time strategy game's data involving player points is available publicly (the point data is paired with their username). A player gains points through actions such as 'attacking' and 'building'. An unaffiliated 3rd party processes that data (in particular, it accumulates statistics on point change) to generate 'heatmaps' of player activity which can help deduce player online times (which has a direct impact on game strategy) and publishes it on their website. For players with high activity, this may lead to sleep pattern/time zone deduction. Does GDPR affect the publication of game data like player points?

Sleep pattern and timezone deduction are arguably not "personal data" within the meaning of the GDPR. Personal data is defined in Article 4 as: any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person (‘data subject’); an identifiable natural person is one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data, an online identifier or to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of that natural person; So, if the published data is solely activity that could theoretically create a heatmap of activity and determine someone's timezone and does not include any other data (e.g. their online tag/identifier, etc.) then publishing just the activity data would not seem to involve any GDPR personal data obligations. However, if the published data can be correlated with other identifiers or other data that can directly or indirectly identify a specific person, then you have a duty as the controller to take appropriate steps to safeguard the privacy of that person. That may include limiting the data you publish to third-party processors in such cases.

Can a company make a late payment charge that is greater than the maximum permitted by law?

A reasonably large online services provider includes the following in their Terms of Use (my emphasis). If Your credit card is declined, You agree to pay Us the fees within thirty (30) days of notification from Us, and pay (at Our discretion) a late payment charge of 1.5% per month, or the maximum permitted by law, whichever is greater . By accepting these terms, am I accepting that they can make a late payment charge (of 1.5% per month) that is greater than the maximum permitted by law?

Terms of a contract that are opposed by a law or statute are invalid to the extent that they require a breach of said law or statute. Thus: the maximum in law is the highest payment they can ask for, because that is by definition the highest payment they can legally expect. Stating that you must pay some arbitrary amount and maximums be damned, may be grounds for a consumer law action. However, IANAL, so specific details for your region should be discussed with someone there who is.

Are Michael Cohen's False Statements About the Law Grounds for Disbarrment?

A recent NPR article revealed that in making a threat of a lawsuit, Michael Cohen materially misrepresented the law in claiming that one cannot rape their spouse. This strikes me, as a layperson, as rather unethical behavior. Is it grounds for action from the bar association that he's licensed under, whether that be disbarment, censure, or something else?

Cohen has ethical problems, but this is probably pretty far down the list. If he were lying about the law, though, that could be treated as a violation of Rule 4.1 of the New York Rules of Professional Conduct : In the course of representing a client, a lawyer shall not knowingly make a false statement of fact or law to a third person. It could also be a violation of Rule 8.4: A lawyer or law firm shall not ... (c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; Although these would be violations of his ethical obligations, they probably do not rise to the level of seriousness that would result in any meaningful punishment. Disbarment would be extremely unlikely, though a censure is conceivable. If someone reported the offense, I would actually expect that the state would decline to investigate at all. Of course, all of this assumes that he was deliberately lying about the state of the law, which I think overestimates his competence. More likely, he's just an idiot and didn't know that he was wrong. Importantly, being wrong about the law isn't unethical; it's a presumption at the foundation of our adversarial justice system.

Is it Illegal to shred Sheriff's department records in Georgia?

A recent New Yorker Article describes an incoming sheriff, replacing an old (corrupt) sheriff on his first day: "when he unlocked the doors to the sheriff’s office on his first day on the job, January 1, 2017, he found nine industrial-sized trash bags full of shredded papers. Jail trusties—model inmates who did menial jobs at the sheriff’s office—told him that they’d spent two weeks destroying paperwork, at the previous administration’s instruction. “They had wiped stuff off the computers,” Dix said. “They had even taken notebooks off shelves and shredded the documents.” I know states often have data retention laws for public records. Does Georgia have any data retention laws, and could the old Sheriff be charged with a crime for destroying documents, or potentially even evidence?

Yes, the State of Georgia has laws regarding data retention in terms of public records, but the article doesn't nearly have enough information to answer the 2nd half of your question. Different kinds of public records are subject to different periods of time they are required to be kept available. Here's a list of them. One issue is that just by reading the story we don't have enough information as to what records were destroyed, and without knowing that it's not certain whether a prima facie violation of the law had occured. Not all documents under the possession of the sheriff is subject to these laws, and certainly the sheriff spent enough time in office to claim that plenty of records were no longer required to be kept by the time he left it. The state also has a specific exception that states "provided, however, that an investigation or prosecution shall no longer be deemed to be pending when all direct litigation involving such investigation and prosecution has become final or otherwise terminated". Ga Code 50-18-72(a)(4) Furthermore, even if it does constitute a violation in this case, the penalties are exceedingly low on the criminal justice totem pole. The same statute indicates that the crime is a misdemeanor subject to $1000 in fine or civil penalty for a first offense, $2500 for each additional offense in the 12 months after the first, and the law also explicitly states that the charged defendant will not be arrested prior to trial unless they fail to show up to their court date. For a first offender it's extremely unlikely that they would serve much time at all even if they went to trial and was convicted by a jury, and in all likelihood there would be a plea bargain to something even more minor. There is also a particular high intent requirement here, that of "knowingly and willfully", with a good-faith exception to boot. There are more defenses that avenues of prosecution looking from the outside. Although there is an additional penalty for destroying records specifically to hamper an investigation into the entity in question, because there wasn't an active investigation when the records were destroyed nor was an investigation into the sheriff's conduct ever launched, that also would unlikely to apply. So chances of any serious prosecution being launched several years after the fact based on what's going to be a misdemeanor at most seems extremely unlikely.

Has any legal system ever enforced all of its laws?

A recent Travel Stack Exchange question about an immigration provision in the federal code lead to a bunch of respondents noting that the law in question is simply not enforced, with one person openly disparaging it as “nonenforced and nonenforceable.” Obviously there's a problem at some level (legal/moral/philosophical/practical...) at laws that are not enforced. But is that an impossible ideal? My question is therefore, have there ever been legal systems that have enforced all of their laws? Edit: The question is not whether the police always catch the criminals, or whether any state has been sufficiently totalitarian to be aware of all crimes. What I'm curious about is a government that refrained from making laws that it couldn't plausibly enforce, or systematically removed laws that it turned out not to be able to enforce.

Of course not No enforcement by humans is omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent, therefore, lawbreaking that is unseen, beyond power or unknown is not enforced. Further, as Terry Pratchet put it “The good are innocent and create justice. The bad are guilty, which is why they invent mercy.” Since everyone is a little of both, humans have always wanted their justice tempered with mercy. That’s why the executive, be it an ancient king or a modern police officer, has always had the right to turn a blind eye.

Is there a term for set/prescribed measures of damages?

A recent answer answers the question with another question, that of what damage the plaintiff has actually suffered . Yet certain statutory/case regimes have guidelines for compensation that are blind to actual damage suffered. For example, where one can make out that a breach of the equality act has taken place, the Vento scale applies, even if it didn’t actually result in £900 worth of suffering. Likewise, if a breach of either s213(3/6) HA2004 can be demonstrated, then the value of claims under S214 is prescribed by a set formula, regardless of actual impact to the applicant. Can anyone think of any further examples of this, and Is there a name for this kind of prescribed, impact-blind regime for damages measures?

Statutory Damages … the amount awarded is stipulated within the statute rather than being calculated based on the degree of harm to the plaintiff. Liquidated Damages Parties to a contract are free to agree on the amount of damages that will be payable for a class or classes of breach. For example, it is very common in construction and engineering contracts for a per diem to be set for late completion. Such damages must be a genuine pre-estimate of the damage that might be suffered by the breach. If they are excessive, they will be set aside as an unlawful penalty clause. Nominal Damages Some corners of the law allow a suit to be brought in the absence of actual damage in which a successful plaintiff is awarded $1 or similar nominal sum. Such a victory can still be important in jurisdictions where costs follow the event i.e. the loser pays the winner’s costs. Many such regimes are statutory in nature and involve areas where damage can be hard to quantify, particularly in advance - IP law, anti-competitive behaviour, consumer protection, unlawful discrimination etc. in essence, this is still statutory damages. One area of non statutory (i.e. common) law where this applies is defamation. Notably, it does not apply in the largest area of tort litigation - negligence.

What sorts of “necessities” could married women enter contracts for?

A recent answer by @Ohwilleke on the historical status of married women lists the limited types of contracts they could enter into. One of these of those for necessities. What is referred to by this?

The same sorts of necessities children can enter contracts for Necessities means pretty much what you’d think it means - the things that are necessary to maintain your life and lifestyle. So, food, clothing, shelter, utilities, entertainment, transport, education etc. all appropriate to the person’s economic circumstances - bus fare for a poor person, chauffeur drive limousines for the super wealthy.

Does a purely accidental act preclude civil liability for its resulting damages?

A recent answer by Dale M. States that: A pure accident without any negligence on your part does not expose you to liability. Is this the general rule? What is the basis for that being so if it is? If you weren’t negligent then sure you didn’t do anything wrong, but it’s definitely more your fault than the person whose property you damaged, so why should they have to suffer rather than you? All jurisdictions welcome, but please specify a particular jurisdiction for which your answer applies when answering.

In Common Law Countries In common law countries, Dale M. is right (the vast majority of the time). Without negligence there is usually no liability for damage to property in an accident. The general rule in the common law rule is that "shit happens" and no one is responsible for the damage, when no one was negligent and everyone defendant acted reasonably under the circumstances. The "shit happens" defense is generally a valid defense to a claim for property damages or personal injury in common law countries. "No negligence despite causation" findings are rare in auto accident or plane crash cases (absent truly extraordinary weather conditions or freak intervening causes like meteors falling from the sky that cause car accidents), but are common, for example, in professional malpractice cases. For example, suppose a reasonably competent surgeon does surgery on you in a fairly high risk case. The best surgeon in the hospital could have saved you. You didn't get that surgeon and died. There is no basis for a suit for medical malpractice against the surgeon since the surgeon was not negligent, even though the surgeon was not perfect. Also, sometimes the victim is the person primarily or totally at fault. For example, suppose a drunk driver T-bones your WellsFargo armored cash delivery car, which is built like a tank, in violation of a red light, with their SmartCar, and the SmartCar is totaled, while your armored car doesn't even have a scratch. Your car was a cause of the damage to the drunk driver's vehicle, but you have no liability for the drunk driver's losses, because you weren't negligent. Strict Liability Exceptions To Negligence Based Liability There are some exceptions if you have provided a warranty, guarantee, or insurance that the property won't be damaged (since contractual liability is generally strict liability unless otherwise provided by agreement). For example, you might be liable under a lease for any damage in excess of reasonable wear and tear from any cause other than the landlord's negligence. Sometimes there can be negligence by someone your are responsible for even if you aren't personally negligent (which is called "vicarious liability"). There is strict liability for accidents caused by defective products even in the absence of negligence, and for accidents caused by ultra-hazardous activities (e.g. explosives). U.S. states are divided about liability for animals that roam free with the main divide being between fence in states (mostly in the eastern U.S. and other more urbanized places) and fence out states (mostly in the west and more wild frontiers). There are a few other exceptions, but they are rare and somewhat inconsistent between jurisdictions. Comparative Fault Also, the modern trend in common law countries is to allocate liability for accidents based upon comparative fault or modified comparative fault. So, everyone who was negligent (including the victim), or would otherwise have had strict liability for the damage, is assigned a percentage of fault (adding up to 100%) that is their share of responsibility for the overall loss. If no one is negligent at all, there is no recovery. In modified comparative fault, if the victim is at least either 50% or 50%+ at fault (depending upon the state), there is no recovery. Some systems of comparative fault make negligent people who owe money jointly and severally liable with a right to contribution if you pay more than your fair share of the loss. Other systems limit each person's liability to their percentage of fault with no implicit guarantee of other negligent parties who are judgment proof. Who Determines Liability And Damages? In the U.S., and a small number of other jurisdictions, liability and damages are frequently decided by juries (and there is a right to a jury the vast majority of the time even if it isn't always elected). In most common law jurisdictions, liability and damages are always or almost always decided by judges (exceptions apply in perhaps 1% or less of cases). In Civil Law Countries In civil law countries (continental Europe, Quebec), the standard of liability for accidents in the absence of special cases like the ones discussed in the common law is that you are liable for damage that is your "fault." See, e.g. this article discussing civil law tort liability under Central American civil codes. It states: Much like in Europe (think of art. 1382 of the Napoleonic Code), in the Central American civil codes, the concept of tort ordinarily rests on a general clause imposing fault-based liability, though it is possible to identify among these civil codes some interesting variations. For example, only in Honduras (art. 2236) and Panama (art. 1644) tort liability is characterized using elements such as: action or omission, fault or negligence, and obligation to compensate. Whereas, Costa Rica (art.1045) and Nicaragua (art. 2509) add other elements to the characterization, such as fault and imprudence, and in the Nicaraguan text, the notion of malicious acts is also included. The Salvadoran Civil Code (arts. 2065 and 2080) is rooted in the classic construction of delict, quasi-delict or fault, although it also adds features such as malice and negligence. The exception to this trend will be the Guatemalan Civil Code (art. 1645). Although it uses terms such as intention, carelessness or recklessness as defining criteria, this provision is not really describing a fault based liability model, because it contains a rebuttable presumption of fault or negligence. The civil law concept of tortious fault is not spelled out in great detail in civil codes, although there are a few specific situations that are covered (e.g. bailments when your property is in the possession of another person and collapsing buildings). Civil law countries have instead been developed in legal doctrine in those countries that is not apparent from the civil code text. Basically, civil law tortious fault involves some culpability greater than mere "but for" causation of an accident, but involves a lower threshold of wrongfulness than the concept of "negligence" in the common law, which is a failure to act as reasonable person would have to prevent harm to others under the circumstances. You can have civil law tortious fault even if you were acting as a reasonable person, but you still have to have at least done something slightly wrong. So, there is still a "shit happens" defense in civil law countries, but it tends to be much harder to establish. Who Determines Liability And Damages? In civil law countries, the call is always made by judges (or by panels of judges in cases involving larger damages).

Does common law encompass criminal law?

A recent answer distinguishes the two but I had always thought that common law includes both civil and criminal components. Does it not?

Yes. And also no. See What is the difference between Common Law and Civil Law in the U.S.? A common law system is a common law system and that obviously encompasses criminal law. But that’s not the only definition of common law. In most common law jurisdictions, most crimes are now statutory crimes. That is, what they are and the punishment for them is detailed in an Act of Parliament (or local equivalent). However, the codification of what were once common law crimes is not (and arguably cannot) be complete. There still exist common law crimes which can be pulled out when needed. For example, in DPP v Pusey , the defendant was pulled over by several police officers and, while this was happening, a large truck collided with the stopped cars and the police officers were killed. While they were dying Pusey took out his phone and recorded their deaths while mocking and taunting them. This was not against any statutory criminal code in Victoria. So, the Director of Public Prosecutions pulled out the archaic common law offence of outraging public decency . In addition, statutory crimes are necessarily interpreted by judges and aggregate a collection of common law rulings around them.

Can I be sued if if the law says I am not liable?

A recent answer had this law quote shall not be liable for damages in any action brought in a Federal or State court and this explanation they cannot be sued over their actions I posted a comment This statement is not accurate "they cannot be sued over their actions" they can be sued, anyone can be sued for anything in the US, per the law they can not be found "liable for damage" not the same thing. Then I went looking for reference that supports my comment, and did not find one. Can I be sued if if the law says I am not liable?

They can still be sued - they just can’t be found liable For example, as an adjudicator, I have immunity for acts and omissions done in good faith as an adjudicator. A suit could be brought alleging lack of good faith and/or acting as other than an adjudicator. If these were proved (and barring corruption it’s a very high bar) the adjudicator would be liable. However, adjudicators are often joined with the claimant (usually the Respondent is the plaintiff) and the ANA (Authorised Nominating Authority - the organisation that appointed the adjudicator, who also have immunity) not so they can be held liable but so that they can be subpoenaed and forced to give evidence - if they aren’t parties to the suit they can refuse to do this. My standard response when this happens is to write to the court saying “I submit to the decision of the court save as to costs” meaning I am not going to contest anything unless you try to make me pay costs - which I don’t have immunity from.

In the U.S., what happens to intellectual property that has escheated to a state government?

A recent answer to a question here about the legality of publishing a work for which the copyright owner cannot be found mentions If the owner has no legal heirs, in most jurisdictions the property escheats to the government (in the US to the state government). How do U.S. state governments normally deal with such intellectual property whose copyright has escheated to the state? Do they auction it off? Release it as public domain? Something else? I know that U.S. federal government publications are normally released into the public domain , but I'm not sure if that applies to the state governments at all or if it would apply in the case of orphaned works that have escheated to the state.

If the owner of the intellectual property leaves property subject to the jurisdiction of the state of Washington, and it is determined that the owner is dead and has no heirs, then per RCW 11.08.140 it is designated escheat property. Then the following sections specify that title to the property vests in the state. The Department of Revenue has jurisdiction over that property, which has the duty to protect and conserve the property for the benefit of the permanent common school fund. There is no general answer to the question of what would best benefit the school fund. Any form of giving it away would not benefit the school fund, at least if there was an viable option for sale / licensing. There are provisions that relate to the possibility that an heir is eventually uncovered, but I will assume that no heir ever appears. Ohio law is similar. The decendant's property escheats to the state in case there is no heir. Then under ORC 2105.07 , the prosecuting attorney of the county in which letters of administration are granted upon such estate shall collect and pay it over to the county treasurer. Such estate shall be applied exclusively to the support of the common schools of the county in which collected.

Can the Speaker of the House expel senators from the Hall of the House before all electoral votes have been counted?

A recent article in The Atlantic 1 goes through some rather dire hypothetical scenarios in which constitutional crises arise during the upcoming Presidential elections. One of their scenarios considers a situation where the count of electoral votes (which takes place in the Hall of the House as required by the Electoral Count Act 2 , but is presided over by the President of the Senate as required by the Constitution) has not been completed yet and the Speaker of the House expels the senators: Before Pence can move on from Pennsylvania to Rhode Island, which is next on the alphabetical list as Congress counts the vote, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi expels all senators from the floor of her chamber. Now Pence is prevented from completing the count “in the presence of” the House, as the Constitution requires. […] However, the Electoral Count Act has the following language in Sec. 7: […] Such joint meeting shall not be dissolved until the count of electoral votes shall be completed and the result declared; […] The language of the Act is rather dense, so maybe I'm missing something, but to me this sounds that the Speaker of the House is not entitled to act as laid out in the Atlantic scenario?

That scenario is a bit fanciful. Under the law, the president of the Senate presides and maintains order for this joint session, so any expulsion declaration from the floor would be out of order. Each house can set its own rules, but those rules cannot contradict the law of the United States. Supposing that she managed to expel them physically, that would just delay the process.

Which legislation makes abortion illegal in Scotland?

A recent article in The Scotsman said that— ... thanks to archaic Victorian laws means [abortion] is still technically punishable by jail sentences ... What is the legislation that has this effect?

Like a lot of Scottish criminal law , there's no specific legislation, but it is illegal through common law. This was also true in the rest of the UK until the 1800s, when statutes were passed with the aim of making abortion law clearer (generally forbidding it). This didn't extend to Scotland leaving much of its abortion law unclear. The 24 weeks limit that the Scotsman article references is from Section 1 of the Abortion Act 1967 (as amended) . This act did apply to Scotland. The act specifies conditions under which abortion within the first 24 weeks is legal , and that it is always legal when there is grave risk to the woman's health. When the circumstances of the pregnancy fall outside the provisions of the act, the existing Scottish common law prevails. For further information, this UN document provides a good summary of abortion law in the UK.

Is it true that a suit of defamation could require "very little effort"?

A recent comment at SE Meta stated: my reading of US law is that under certain circumstances, the plaintiff need make very little effort to successfully bring a suit of defamation. This strikes me as absurd, because even if the plaintiff has a strong case, there is still a lot of work to be done in bringing any sort of suit. What do the legal experts think? Does the quoted comment hold water? (In case this is helpful: here is a succinct outline of the context that led to this question: https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/334399/summing-up-the-main-issues-the-story-so-far )

Is it true that a suit of defamation could require “very little effort”? No. Definitely not. The Wikipedia article (and understandably the comment on which it is premised) leaves out many details about substantive and procedural law which are essential in US jurisdictions. For instance, the [Wikipedia] item of " 1. accusing someone of a crime " is insufficient for the falsehoods to be considered defamation per se . The crime of which one is falsely accused needs to be considered an infamous crime or involve moral turpitude. Under [US] defamation law, a crime is deemed serious or infamous when it is classified as felony or its punishment could exceed one year of prison. The case law cited in Lakin v. Rund , 896 N.W.2d 76 (2016) reflects how this criterion is uniform among US jurisdictions. Another difficult issue in defamation lawsuits is the need to prove the defendant's mental state known as actual malice . Even where there is clear proof of a defamer's actual malice, a plaintiff can be denied justice because of judge's arbitrary choice to side with the defendant (just like with non-defamation lawsuits). For case law from various jurisdictions regarding defamation law and actual malice, you might want to see the citations in my briefs in the SCOTUS here and here . Most of the records in regard to the latter case are available here . Defamation lawsuits are not exempt of having to comply with the procedural laws involved in judicial proceedings either, nor is the discovery, drafting, or legal research any simpler for being a lawsuit about defamation. In the context of the comments that prompted your question here, the "repeated violations" that SE imputed to former moderator Monica would hardly be grounds for a viable lawsuit against SE for defamation per se or otherwise. Here are some reasons: Rejecting a policy of gender pronouns such as the one SE seeks to impose is not considered an infamous crime. There is no legislation to that effect, at least yet. An actual refusal to adhere to that policy hardly involves moral turpitude. Far from involving corruption (i.e., moral turpitude), the controversy about gender pronouns touches on some of a person's deepest beliefs. Thus, the "offense" of opposing such a policy cannot be said to constitute an act of moral turpitude. The previous two items rule out a viable claim of defamation per se. Thus, Monica would have to prove that SE's falsehoods about her (whatever they are) caused her concrete losses (a typical example is lost income ) by prompting others to dissociate from her. I am unaware of whether Monica's situation would fit in this scenario. You are right in that a claim of mental distress is not viable either. Note from here or here that in a claim of Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED) (1) the conduct must be intentional and reckless; (2) the conduct must be extreme and outrageous; (3) there must be a causal connection between the wrongful conduct and the emotional distress; and (4) the emotional distress must be severe Any claims of harassment that might be available to Monica would not be against SE, but against the specific individuals who engaged in harassing her directly. Depending on the methods and severity of the harassment, Monica might be able to obtain injunctive relief --typically in the form of restraining orders-- against those specific individuals. It is noteworthy that not all criticism or heckling at or about Monica would be cognizable as harassment.

Avoiding agreeing to, or amending, digital contracts (redux)

A recent question asks whether one can escape the terms of an adhesion contract by orally rejecting the terms while making a confirmation in writing. It seems likely the answer is no, as the written confirmation is an objective manifestation of assent to the bargain. But what if the customer doesn't actually provide written confirmation? For instance, UPS stores ask customers to sign a digital contract as part of each transaction. It includes standard business-friendly terms for arbitration, class-action waiver, etc., and presents the customer with a signature box before proceeding to complete the transaction. So imagine the following: Buyer asks UPS deliver a package overnight. UPS offers overnight delivery for $50. Buyer agrees. Clerk processes the transaction and asks Buyer to agree to sign the agreement to standard UPS terms. Buyer reviews the terms and does not like them. Instead of signing in the signature box, Buyer takes the pen and writes something like: "No." "Decline." "These terms are unacceptable." "I reject the arbitration clause." Or "I agree only to pay $50 in exchange for overnight delivery." The clerk either does not notice or does not care that Customer has not actually signed his name to the contract and completes the transaction. UPS loses the package. Buyer sues. UPS moves to compel arbitration. Must Customer arbitrate?

Option 1: The contract is not formed By writing a non-confirmation and explicitly denying the contract, the contract does not fulfil the meeting of the minds . There is no renegotiation, as the agent of the company is not allowed to negotiate. In a strange fashion, UPS would not be entitled to $50, but the customer is not entitled to any delivery, storage of the parcel or even to leave it at the company - and can't sue for the loss of more than the $50 because that is the total extent of their damages: the unjustly paid fees. Option 2: The contract is still formed as offered by UPS In the alternative, the contract has to be followed as written originally. In that case, the customer is obligated to arbitrate. In fact, the signing (or marking) of the terms of service might be simply acknowledgment of the standard contract, which was formed moments prior to the moment the customer handed over the package and paid. The customer did not get any verification of the altered terms of service from the clerk - who couldn't negotiate those deals to begin with - and instead accepted the terms by not taking back the parcel. Would the customer truly want to deny the offered terms, he'd have canceled the transaction and taken the parcel. Instead, he left it with the clerk and paid the transaction, which in itself makes a contract formation by action , very much akin to how you form a contract under the standard terms of the store by paying at the cashier for a bottle of soda. Non-Option: altered deal The clerk is not tasked with negotiating or accepting different terms from those that UPS declares. If the clerk just failed to notice the attempted altered deal, we are back to the two options above: either there is no deal, or the deal is as originally offered. Would the clerk has actively agreed to a deal that fall outside of his tasks, the whole situation collapses to a variation of Option 1, where there is no valid contract between UPS and the customer. However, in this case, the clerk is liable for the damage to the parcel and the damage to UPS.

What happens to businesses, properties, entire towns and counties after the US Supreme Court ruling on Tribal Lands?

A recent ruling by the Supreme Cour t basically just said that half of the State is Tribal Lands. Tribal Lands are not taxable from what I researched. There are entire towns, counties, homes, businesses all owned by non-Native American people on tribal lands. Two Questions They ( non-native Americans ) no longer own the land, so what happens to the tax laws in regards to property they never owned? What legal avenues could the Native Americans do if they wanted all non-native Americans to leave?

The opinion in McGirt did not say that "you no longer own the land": nothing regarding property has changed. The ruling holds that Congress did not disestablish the Creek reservation, contrary to the position argued by Oklahoma. The primary consequences relate to enforcement of state law, and state taxation (really, a consequence of state law enforcement). In that respect, property questions on the Creek reservation are not different from the same question on any other reservation (likewise, law enforcement questions). Congress has always permitted the sale of reservation land by a tribe to non-members. Apart from the jurisdiction question for the underlying crime in question (and future enforcement of e.g. hunting and fishing regulations), the effect will be on jurisdiction questions, and the tax question (states cannot tax Indians on Indian land).

Why are envelopes allowed for registered letters?

A registered letter ensures that once someone signed it off, they cannot claim that they are not aware of the content (generally speaking). Why someone would not bring to court the empty envelope claiming that this is what they received? This is easily countered by sending a letter which has the address directly printed on it and accordingly folded. One of the possible limitations is the number of pages (it works best with one) but I can imagine that one can put more pages and it is less credible to claim "we just received page one" than "the envelope was empty". But even limiting the question to one page and since the act of providing paperwork to the adversary is so important in legal proceedings (and often requires registered letters, at least in France and generally EU) I am wondering why empty envelopes (and how to counter them) is not an issue.

As I understand it, legal procedure in Common Law jurisdictions (e.g. the UK) is primarily based on evidence given by a person. Paperwork exists to verify that someone has not misremembered something, but even when you have paperwork you need to have someone testify that this is the right paperwork and it hasn't been forged. A piece of paper on its own means nothing. In practice of course the two sides will agree to accept routine matters rather than dragging lots of third parties (e.g. the post office employees) into court to no point. In the case of a letter where you need to prove it was received, the sender will testify that they sent the letter and that the copy they have introduced into evidence is a true copy. The proof of delivery merely shows that the item wasn't lost in the post. If one party testifies that they sent a letter and the other testifies that they merely received an empty envelope then someone is lying, which is a crime meriting further investigation.

Event waiver needed?

A relative has an event based business (LLC). So far, events for her group have all taken place in restaurants in the city where she resides. Our question relates to liability and need for a waiver, both in the event that a group member gets injured or causes damage. We assumed so far that if a group member gets injured in a business establishment such as a restaurant then it would be the restaurant owner who has potential liability and that if a group member causes damage to a business establishment, it would be the group member's potential liability. But is that the case? In other words, does an event organizer have liability in such cases by virtue of having organized and implemented the event? Would the location of the event matter e.g. a hike through a state park?

does an event organizer have liability in such cases by virtue of having organized and implemented the event? Potentially yes. Both a liability waiver and an indemnification clause that would require the group member and/or restaurant to pay lawyers to defend you and pay damages incurred if you are sued and lose would be the typical arrangement.