Law/Legal Thread

[maggsmaggs]

If you have consensual sex with someone and they do not disclose they have an STD, do you have grounds for civil negligence?

Maybe. Was the person wearing protection? If the person with the STD took steps to not spread the disease, then maybe not, because they wouldn't be negligent. If no protection was involved, then there probably is a cause for negligence. Some states also have statutes on point.

 

There's also damages issues. If you do not get the STD, you may not have true damages, although you might have mental pain/suffering, thinking you did have an STD. I hope you are asking for a friend...

Edited March 7, 2015 by maggsmaggs

[pettie4sox]

Maybe. Was the person wearing protection? If the person with the STD took steps to not spread the disease, then maybe not, because they wouldn't be negligent. If no protection was involved, then there probably is a cause for negligence. Some states also have statutes on point.

 

There's also damages issues. If you do not get the STD, you may not have true damages, although you might have mental pain/suffering, thinking you did have an STD. I hope you are asking for a friend...

 

I'm just asking but are you a lawyer? No I'm not asking for myself, I'm asking for my sister. I might need a criminal defense lawyer at some point myself.

[maggsmaggs]

I'm just asking but are you a lawyer? No I'm not asking for myself, I'm asking for my sister. I might need a criminal defense lawyer at some point myself.

I am an attorney, but do corporate/real estate, not litigation. Another problem is whether the lawsuit is worth the time and energy. Obviously, litigation is expensive and if the STD is curable then the damages might not be big enough to even warrant a lawsuit. It would be tough to convince a good attorney to take a case in which he or she might spend a good chunk of time only to have a judgment or settlement of say $1000. His or her cut would generally be about 33% of that, so only $333.

 

There are just a lot of variables with the situation presented.

[pettie4sox]

I am an attorney, but do corporate/real estate, not litigation. Another problem is whether the lawsuit is worth the time and energy. Obviously, litigation is expensive and if the STD is curable then the damages might not be big enough to even warrant a lawsuit. It would be tough to convince a good attorney to take a case in which he or she might spend a good chunk of time only to have a judgment or settlement of say $1000. His or her cut would generally be about 33% of that, so only $333.

 

There are just a lot of variables with the situation presented.

 

It's a non curable STD. I feel bad for her. We all take a risks with sex in this promiscuous ass world. I'm going home next week and if I run into this guy he's pretty much done for.

[maggsmaggs]

It's a non curable STD. I feel bad for her. We all take a risks with sex in this promiscuous ass world. I'm going home next week and if I run into this guy he's pretty much done for.

Well, if that is the case, it is a much more serious issue in which you would be wise to speak to a personal injury attorney. Most consultations are free and most you pay nothing unless they win the case, which is generally 33% of the judgment/settlement. The financial situation of the guy is also a key factor in determining whether or not someone will take the case.

 

But this goes without saying, don't stoop to this guy's level and get yourself into trouble for criminal battery/assault or worse.

[LDF]

Well, if that is the case, it is a much more serious issue in which you would be wise to speak to a personal injury attorney. Most consultations are free and most you pay nothing unless they win the case, which is generally 33% of the judgment/settlement. The financial situation of the guy is also a key factor in determining whether or not someone will take the case.

 

But this goes without saying, don't stoop to this guy's level and get yourself into trouble for criminal battery/assault or worse.

 

there was a time, i thought, that one can go and press criminal charges. btw, talking about revenge on a forum is really not a way to go.

[maggsmaggs]

For pettie4sox:

 

http://www.thetelegraph.com/news/news/1525...-giving-her-STD

[pettie4sox]

For pettie4sox:

 

http://www.thetelegraph.com/news/news/1525...-giving-her-STD

 

Thanks for this.

[2nd_city_saint787]

Debated about putting this in the catch all, but it's legalish I suppose...

 

A little under 2 months ago I was in a car accident, me and the lady both have insurance. She was at fault.

 

I have an older car, the blue book value is only 1,200, the estimated damage on the vehicle is over 1,700, thus the car would be considered "Totaled" from an insurance standpoint,

 

My car also has failed emissions due to a missing cylinder which is causing the egr sensor to not show up in emissions.

 

So I've gotten 2 temporary 30 day plates because why fix the problem if the car is gonna be totaled eventually right?

 

Well Indiana only allows 2 30 day temps, and my 2nd one expires in 2 weeks.

 

I've contacted my insurance company weekly and they're STILL waiting to hear from the person who is at fault.

 

Is there anything I can do? A quick google search of the ladies name tells me she's an insurance agent in Chicago and gives me the number of her work. Would it be wrong/illegal to POLITELY call her work and ask her to call her insurance company?

 

I really don't have the money to fix a car that more than likely will be totaled as soon as they get a hold of her. The money I do have is gonna have to go on top of the 1200 or whatever I get from the insurance company to get a new car.

Edited March 26, 2015 by scs787

[2nd_city_saint787]

Allow me to bump this with a simplified question....Would it be harassment to call her work and politely ask her to call her insurance agent? A friend of mine, who works for All State suggested I sue her, but again, money is tight. Do pro bonos still exist?

[farmteam]

Allow me to bump this with a simplified question....Would it be harassment to call her work and politely ask her to call her insurance agent? A friend of mine, who works for All State suggested I sue her, but again, money is tight. Do pro bonos still exist?

Look into small claims court/conciliation court. It's made for claims like this. You don't need a lawyer for that. Check out this link.

Edited March 27, 2015 by farmteam

[farmteam]

A kid I know was at the Sox game on Saturday night with his parents and sister. Just to paint a picture, he's 22, his dad is 52 and his mom about the same age. They are in the ramp heading out and a 60 year oldish man, with his wife, comes up to his mom, puts his hands on her shoulders, says "Happy Mother's Day" and makes a move as if he is going to try kiss her. His dad intervenes and starts yelling at the man. The guy runs off but the kid I know chases him down and knocks him on down. His sister was trying to stop him and chased him and the guy's 90 lb 60 year oldish wife starts swinging her purse and hitting his sister. Then Sox security broke it up.

 

So the old man started it with what seems like sexual harassment towards the kid's mom but the kid was the first to get physical. If the old couple tried to sue, what would typically be expected in court? Thanks to any responders.

Since it sounds like the situation was basically over (guy was running away) when your friend chased him, it wouldn't really be any help that the creep "started" it. There's no self-defense or anything there. But, your friend's family could threaten to counterclaim for some sort of assault or sexual battery for the old guy's initial actions, as well as for the wife's assault and battery on your friend's sister, which might be enough to just make them go away.

[LDF]

Thanks farmteam. I feel like a couple decades ago the kid could have hurt the guy for touching his mother and everything would be fine legally. Oh well.

 

maybe, the fact is he is 22 yo, not a juvenile and he chased him.

 

get a great lawyer and go after the sexual assault factor. also get a lawyer to make sure on any civil actions that they might want to pursue.

 

good protection in this day and age.

[pettie4sox]

Yeesh. I would hope a judge wouldn't even entertain a lawsuit as the whole situation is ridiculous. Your friend acted out of line though. He should have let it go after he fled.

[LDF]

the law of the land is fvvck up, but it is the only law that in the most part good.

 

i have been sued twice for hurting someone in a altercation.

 

i am the son of a single mother, my pop died in 69. this is 76 in chi. jewel parking lot. this idiot comes speeding around the corner and almost hit my mother, she dove and hurt her hip. i was waking up, this guy, who was way older than i and the race is not the subject, came up and was yelling at her.

 

the point is, i lost my temper and hurt him bad. i beat him up and at the end, took his leg, put it on the bumper and i step on it. i kinda lost my temper.

 

i was sued for $20,000. which in 76 was a lot of money.

 

the point is, sometimes it take time to think what you are about to do.

Edited May 13, 2015 by LDF

[farmteam]

Yeesh. I would hope a judge wouldn't even entertain a lawsuit as the whole situation is ridiculous. Your friend acted out of line though. He should have let it go after he fled.

That would be pretty nice sometimes, but they have to go through the motions (literally).

[pettie4sox]

Yeah it's easy to say that but from his POV, I can understand. If someone put their hands on my mother, my blood would immediately start boiling and what happened from there I am not sure I could control.

 

I wasn't trying to be dismissive in my post. I would have had words with the guy myself but I sure as hell wouldn't get physical. I'm a black man and if put my hands on a white guy, I better make sure he physically started it.

 

All in all, the law will not say "The guy touched the man's mother so he was entitled to physically assault him." I was simply speaking from that perspective.

Edited May 13, 2015 by pettie4sox

[LDF]

I wasn't trying to be dismissive in my post. I would have had words with the guy myself but I sure as hell wouldn't get physical. I'm a black man and if put my hands on a white guy, I better make sure he physically started it.

 

All in all, the law will not say "The guy touched the man's mother so he was entitled to physically assault him." I was simply speaking from that perspective.

 

in today's world, esp with how the press will spin doctor anything, esp if it can cause controversy, they will run with it. i say, the defense route, if it happens in the immediate area of you and involve you or family, then make sure it is worth going to jail. but, and i do mean but, do not chase that person, do not grab him and start a altercation, react to physical violence, words is not going to hurt no one. it is not kool spending time in jail.

 

then i tell them, i seen some of these so called tough guys come in and start to cry, when they get locked up. i seen them do that after a day in jail.

 

jail, esp today, is not a sunny resort vacation. only life or family endangerment is worth that gamble. today it doesn't take much to sue someone.

[pettie4sox]

Anybody here deal with divorces in Illinois?

[cabiness42]

Free legal lesson for the day:

 

Indiana Code Title 32 Article 21 Chapter 13 Sections 4-5

 

Except as provided in section 5 of this chapter, a homeowners association may not adopt or enforce a rule that

prohibits a member of the homeowners association from displaying

a sign on the member's property during the period:

(1) beginning thirty (30) days before; and

(2) ending five (5) days after;

the date of the election to which the sign relates.

 

A homeowners association may adopt and enforce rules

relating to a sign described in section 3 of this chapter if the rules do

any of the following:

Indiana Code 2015

(1) Restrict the size of a sign if the rule permits a homeowner to

display a sign that is at least as large as signs commonly

displayed during election campaigns.

(2) Restrict the number of signs that may be displayed if the rule

permits a homeowner to display a reasonable number of signs.

(3) Restrict the locations where a sign may be displayed.

However, a restriction under this subdivision may not prohibit

the display of a sign:

(A) in a window on the homeowner's property; or

(B) on the ground that is part of the homeowner's property.

 

I just got to call my HOA and tell them where they can stick their violation letter.

[southsider2k5]

Free legal lesson for the day:

 

Indiana Code Title 32 Article 21 Chapter 13 Sections 4-5

 

Except as provided in section 5 of this chapter, a homeowners association may not adopt or enforce a rule that

prohibits a member of the homeowners association from displaying

a sign on the member's property during the period:

(1) beginning thirty (30) days before; and

(2) ending five (5) days after;

the date of the election to which the sign relates.

 

A homeowners association may adopt and enforce rules

relating to a sign described in section 3 of this chapter if the rules do

any of the following:

Indiana Code 2015

(1) Restrict the size of a sign if the rule permits a homeowner to

display a sign that is at least as large as signs commonly

displayed during election campaigns.

(2) Restrict the number of signs that may be displayed if the rule

permits a homeowner to display a reasonable number of signs.

(3) Restrict the locations where a sign may be displayed.

However, a restriction under this subdivision may not prohibit

the display of a sign:

(A) in a window on the homeowner's property; or

(B) on the ground that is part of the homeowner's property.

 

I just got to call my HOA and tell them where they can stick their violation letter.

 

They sent you a violation letter after the election? Smooth.

[cabiness42]

They sent you a violation letter after the election? Smooth.

 

Letter was mailed on the 30th. Got it in the mail on Election Day.

[bigruss]

A friend of mine is going through the nightmare of having bug beds in her apartment, any suggestions for how to threaten legal action against the landowner as it has been like 4 weeks and hasn't been resolved yet (bed bugs weren't wiped out, she's been living with a friend for the time). She doesn't want to pay her rent until it's resolved, good idea/bad idea? Appreciate the feedback.

[ChiSox_Sonix]

A friend of mine is going through the nightmare of having bug beds in her apartment, any suggestions for how to threaten legal action against the landowner as it has been like 4 weeks and hasn't been resolved yet (bed bugs weren't wiped out, she's been living with a friend for the time). She doesn't want to pay her rent until it's resolved, good idea/bad idea? Appreciate the feedback.

 

Get the health inspector involved. The landlord should be afraid of getting on their bad side. We threatened to do that in college when we had a safety issue and magically our landlord sent someone over the next day.

[Chisoxfn]

So did the police open up all the doors or did the police open up drawers and other items? I'd argue that for a well being check (if they thought something was wrong with a person, and they just opened doors to ensure their wasn't a wounded or dead body in the house, I don't know that I necessarily see an issue. If they opened up and started digging through actual drawers, etc., than not being a lawyer, I struggle as to what would drive the probable cause.

 

It sounds like it was the dogs that actually did the damage, after being let back in by your mom. Yes, it would have been nice if the police officers shut the doors they opened, but in the grand scheme, how would they possibly know that they should have shut all the doors (it isn't that big of a deal to leave a door open or not; Could it even have been a procedural item to leave the doors open after they had checked a room). As they are going through the house, you have to remember, they are going through it based upon a police call and doing a general check to make sure the residents are okay.

 

Might be the minority on this but ultimately while it is an annoyance, think about the alternative and how relieved you all would have been if they went in and your mom or someone in your family had suffered and injury and weren't able to get to the phone. Please note, my opinion would differ drastically if they were digging through and not purely looking for an injured individual. Now sure about the "knowing" your family line the lawyer gave you and what that actually means.