farmteam

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 29, 2012 -> 01:47 PM) I'm taking all of Soxtalk to a patio party. Just buy a share in the damn team, at that point.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Mar 28, 2012 -> 10:27 PM) Tex, The best advice any lawyer can ever give you is, consult a lawyer that specializes in that area in that state. Every state has different laws with regard to employment. Many attorneys would gladly meet with her at no charge, but she may have to spend a few hundred dollars in the process. That being said, I assume that this matter is worth far more than a few hundred dollars. Do you want your mother to take a risk? Do you want to make sure that whatever happens at least she got good advice? If the answer is yes, strongly advise your mother to meet with an attorney before signing anything. At minimum having an attorney may give her leverage for a better deal. That being said, your mother is may be right, what they are doing is may be legal, they are offering her a severance package and she is signing away her rights. But that does not mean the act of eliminating her position or terminating her, etc is legal. It does not mean that she may not have legal recourse for their actions. But in most states you can legally sign away your rights for consideration. I have seen these agreements in Illinois, you really need to know what you are doing to fully understand the dynamics. There is age discrimination, medical leave, state specific labor laws, contract law, a miss understanding of any of these areas could result in your mother signing away her right to considerably more money. This is 20 years of your mothers life, I have to believe this is an important decision. Seconded. This is a great answer. Interestingly (to me, anyway), I just finished up a brief that dealt solely with the FMLA (Family and Medical Leave Act). That by no means I can give you adequate advice (as the quoted post mentions, that requires knowing way more about the applicable law and your mother's situation...and not to mention I'm only a law student, not a lawyer), but I will say that, in general, an employee is eligible for up to 12 weeks of leave under the FMLA. There are two types of FMLA claims employees make -- "interference" (where the employer does not let the employee take leave) and "retaliatory" (where the employer retaliates in against the employee in some way because the employee took FMLA leave they were entitled to). Sounds like your mother's claim falls under the latter category. Here is a link to the pertinent federal regulations, if you're curious. By no means should you look at that and decide on your own if your mother has a claim, but if you want a general guide as to what sorts of things qualify, and what rights the employer and employee each have, that's a good place to start.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Mar 29, 2012 -> 01:25 PM) Lol rick morrisey ?

QUOTE (fathom @ Mar 29, 2012 -> 09:07 AM) Averaging 10 assists a game in college basketball is almost impossible. Add in the fact IU plays in the Big 10 with a lot of quality defenses, and I would say it would be impossible for Ferrell to average 10 assists a game. Kendall Marshall is one of the best passers I've ever seen in college basketball, and he averaged 9.7 assists per game for a run and gun offense with NBA quality players around him. As for the McDonald's game last night, the talent level continues to dwindle it seems. Shabazz was pretty impressive, but after that, the talent level quickly faded. Never seen so many missed dunks by players simply not elevating high enough. Scouts absolutely ripped on this class all week, saying they've never seen so few potential pros on the McD roster. Admittedly, 10 was a bit too much hyperbole on my part. I'll settle for "top 5 in assists every year" which starts next year, as Crean has already said Ferrell is running the show, I think.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Mar 28, 2012 -> 09:28 PM) Rock just posted an article going into the severe back issues he has, including losing feeling in a foot and needing a brace just to walk on it. That's not something you can really just deal with as a coach, it's something that can permanently stop him from continuing. Ah, must have missed that link. Yeah, I definitely understand that then. That's too bad.

Yogi Ferrell looking studly in the McD's game. I can see him being the type of player that may only put up 8-12 points in the Big Ten season, but he'll also average 10 assists/game.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Mar 28, 2012 -> 07:15 PM) Right, but thats the way champs are crowned in that league, kind of like the new Big Ten in football. And I get the frustration, like I said earlier I prefer Chris Jent taking over for Matta when he's done in the next couple of years over someone like Groce. I would be incredibly disappointed to hire Groce. Is Matta really going to retire that soon? He's not that old.

Also, as to an earlier discussion (I think between StrangeSox and Y2HH) about whether scholars thought the Court would strike down the bill: Recent precedent (specifically Raich v. Gonzales, but the groundwork was in Wickard v. Filburn) suggested that this bill would certainly be ruled constitutional; at least, it would be constitutional on Commerce Clause/Necessary & Proper Clause grounds. I basically wanted to reach through the internet and punch Scalia in the face when I listened to a bit of yesterday's oral argument. Rather, I wanted to go through the internet and read his concurring opinion in Raich back to him. If anyone wants to go into more detail on that last point, there's actually an interesting blog post by Randy Barnett (lead consul in Raich, and I think he is for this health care litigation as well) about how Scalia could distinguish his opinion in Raich, but I thought it seemed a bit tenuous. Apparently the current Court disagrees with me.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 28, 2012 -> 03:35 PM) Wait, what? I must have missed something here. Are you saying that there are words in the legislation that SPECIFICALLY says that if the courts strike down the mandate, the rest of the legislation becomes null and void? See Balta's post above for what the Health Care Bill actually says, but yes, in general bills can have severability clauses that specifically state "If this part is later found to be unconstitutional, the rest of the bill is still in effect [or, the rest of the bill is void as well. Both happen]." I'm not sure if it's common practice, but it's definitely not unheard of.

QUOTE (Heads22 @ Mar 28, 2012 -> 04:31 PM) K State I hear is interested in Boyle, Eustachy, Jank and someone else... As in the Colorado coach? I know he was at Northern Colorado before that -- does he have some deeper connection to the area that might prevent him from heading somewhere else? I mean, K-State is a step up, but it's not such a massive step that it's reasonable to think he just might like where he's at better.

QUOTE (Rex Hudler @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 11:02 PM) Mike Davis and Kelvin Sampson are available. Bruce Pearl too! I'm betting the Illini fanbase would LOVE Pearl or Sampson as their head coach.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 05:14 PM) IF that's the way it's going to be then there ought to be at least term limits on the court so that the court can shift as society shifts more readily. That would take an actual amendment, wouldn't it? All federal judges serve as long as they are in "good behavior" (aka Life), according to Art. III of the Constitution.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 08:04 AM) At least when terra Nova ended, you could look at that first season and say they told 1 complete story arc. Can't do that here. Agreed.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Mar 26, 2012 -> 01:48 PM) He was rivals recruiter of the year in 2006. The guy brought in really good talent at OU as well. Getting Walter Offut to transfer in was a HUGE coup. He will recruit very hard, especially in indiana (surprise!). Also his teams play a much more uptempo attacking style than Weber has been using of late so that will be a welcome addition for UI fans. I know Armon Bassett also transferred there. He was a stud as a sophomore at IU, but then left in the post-Sampson exodus. Heavy rumors he was also one of the dudes dealing, though.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Mar 25, 2012 -> 03:04 PM) I am right there behind you, should be a close one to the end. I can't win now because of you! We have the identical Final Four winners and you're 5 points ahead right now. Damn.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Mar 23, 2012 -> 05:28 PM) First of all, Kentucky isn't out for revenge. They are out to win a championship. But it would be more shocking, just for a different reason...because it's in the tournament, and it's not in Indiana. I'd agree that they're out to win a Championship as the top priority, but I'm guessing getting payback added some fuel to the fire. I also don't think "in the tournament" makes a difference. Both teams are young and don't really have tourney experience.

Ouch. Well, I take solace in the fact that we bring EVERYONE* back (only significant loss is Verdell Jones, and he was the 7th best player) AND bring in one of the top recruiting classes next year. Here's to hoping they gel together well. Also, Oladipo's eyes looked scary. He's a tireless worker, I have no doubt he can add an outside game this summer. If he does that, he's 1st or 2nd team all-big ten next year, no doubt. *This assumes Zeller stays. I'd be pretty surprised if he left. My gut tells me junior year, just basing it on what I know of his family and whatnot; that said, if he does really well next year and could be a lottery pick I could see him going after that (his soph year). But, I really don't see him going this year.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Mar 23, 2012 -> 09:01 AM) Anybody else incredibly bored by this year's tourney? The Duke/Missouri upsets were fun (for some of us), but with no buzzer beaters, no great individual performances, it feels like this tourney has been pretty blah so far. Definitely, I was just thinking that today. Here's hoping IU can stun everyone again tonight. Actually, I think this win would be more shocking than the first, if only because of the "Kentucky out for revenge" angle.

One article on the possibility of Stevens-to-Illinois brought up something I hadn't realized: Stevens would have more Final Four appearances than any other coach in the conference except for Izzo. Tubby Smith only has 1, really? I would have thought he'd have 2 or 3.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Mar 23, 2012 -> 11:05 AM) FWIW I was saying that I, personally, was unaware of what a 'forcible felony' is. It is defined here: http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/776.08 "and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual." That's just weird. I feel every other jurisdiction says deadly force may be used in self-defense ONLY if deadly force is being used against the victim. This opens it up way more.

I thought I noticed Crean dropping a lot more religion in interviews. A note at the end of this post mentions it.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Mar 22, 2012 -> 01:49 PM) It's the British version of the site. Do they have the same issue with that word as we do? Even if they didn't, though I believe they do anyway, Abercrombie would (or should) know that it could be seen/discussed here, and if nothing else would just look bad.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 22, 2012 -> 05:44 PM) I'm a fan of the fact that the Bush v. Gore case literally says that the case cannot be used as precedents in other cases (and the Supreme Court has thus far followed that standard). Which may be the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard about the Court doing. It's more common than you'd think.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Mar 22, 2012 -> 01:42 PM) And by the way, the justifiable force statute is premised on the fact that YOU (the shooter) are not doing something illegal. I'd say starting a fight is an illegal activity (battery) making this entire statute inapplicable. Since there's some pretty strong evidence out there that the dead guy was being followed and harassed, it's entirely proper (and reasonable) for a jury to conclude that Zimmerman started the brawl, engaged in criminal activity (battery) and was therefore not afforded the protection of the statute. That's why my point 2 comments ago about punching people in the face to justify killing doesn't work. I was gonna say, isn't this is all based on an affirmative defense (self-defense)? Which then includes, obviously, that the defendant didn't instigate the incident?

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Mar 21, 2012 -> 04:55 PM) My ex's first year of student loans is something near or over 10%, she was getting them at the worst possible time in 2008. Ahem. Don't get me started.