Search results

Information that is publicly disseminated is not protected. If you've entered into an agreement with a company, that agreement can be enforced. As stated, the site is free to do what the care to do to thwart your efforts.

Well, I wouldn't say on its face there's no federal due process requirement. The fifth amendment is pretty clear. However, I can almost bet there is "due process." Due process doesn't mean that there has to be some prior action taken, just that there's a procedure for challenging it.

Legal as will the cops come? No, not likely a problem. As Zig points out, it may violate Amazon's terms. Unless you egregiously interfere with their site, they probably aren't going to sue you. WHat they can (and probably already have means in place) is thwart your ability to access the...

As TM points out the law allows them to attach your payment. If you want to argue that you shouldn't owe the money they're reclaiming, then follow the state info I posted above

The check you get from the feds is never a "tax return" anyhow. The tax return is the thing you file. The check is a refund. You're operating under the fallacy that tax refunds are the only thing that is attachable for state child support arrearage. That's far from the truth. All sorts...

"OR" doesn't work that way in Virginia. It merely indicates survivorship rights.

I'm going to have to disagree with the judge. Oregon has specific rules on maternity leave. However, while the employer policy doesn't sound quite in compliance to the law, it may be. The law varies based on the size of the employer. Further, the state does indeed pay a percentage of...

Tell your mom to get every document she has and bring it to the local SS office (best to call first, many have irregular hours). They deal with this sort of thing all the time.

Actually right to work specifically means the employer and union can't make an agreement to exclude non-union employees (or require employees to join the union). But it is correct that this is often confused with "at-will employment" which is the rule in 49 states, which says the employer...

It's doubtful that a family is the sponsor. Au Pairs may be placed with a family, but the sponsor is the organization that did the placement. The family however could be held responsible if you continue to work for them without legal authorization.

As you were told elsewhere: he could be arrested and/or deported. If they are working illegally there may be repercussions for that. Even if they aren't deported, they will likely be barred from reentry (for a substantial period of time). They should talk to an attorney. If they have...

You can not get a felony CONVICTION expunged. PERIOD. IPS is not a diversion, you still have that conviction. You can get it sealed. However, I do not believe that will affect your state (and hence Federal) gun prohibitions. You must wait 20 years to apply for a new FOID and even then...

Unless you're talking about Florida State footballers (which I doubt) your 130 IQ doesn't seem to handle basic spelling and grammar.

If this home is financed, do you have an agreement to lease or are you just in violation of YOUR contract with the lender?

TC is correct. It is untested at this point since the statute says "held by husband and wife" not "held by married couples." It will take a court case or a revisit from the legislature (or potentially both). Of course, it won't be an issue if deeded that way until either someone tries to...

I give up. How did a divorce action get into this? You were talking about criminal prosecutions and replevins before. What does FBI investigations in procesecutions have to do with changing a judge under 51.05? What on earth is rule 47.145. Rule 47 has exactly one section and it...

Your posts are incoherent. If you talk to the court like you speak here, you're are likely not to get anywhere. The advice to obtain an attorney is a wise one.

Your initial post is a bit hard to follow. But if you're wanting to know if an conviction that was supposed to be expunged (or that was) can count against you as a prior the answer is most certainly yes. That is an exception specifically called out by the Missouri expungement statute.

Right, I wasn't arguing with that. I was talking about AJ's comment that they wouldn't renew the policy with damage to the vehicle.

I've never seen an insurer know or care if repairs were done. What they WON'T do is pay out on unrepaired damage from a previous accident (whether they paid it or not).