Basic legal things everyone should know

[supafrey]

[ QUOTE ]
In practice, an acorn for $1000 or whatever would never be valid consideration.

[/ QUOTE ]

What are you basing this on? There are numerous cases that have established the precedent pretty securely against what you're saying here. From my understanding judges want ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with wasting time putting value judgements on what kind of consideration is "valuable" enough to count, and as such say even the above examples are sufficient.

[DrewDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
If you are taken to the drunk tank, or are held by the police for any other reason, you must identify yourself to the police. You cannot withhold your name.

If you do this you will be charged with Obstruction of a Peace Officer

[/ QUOTE ]

I call BS on this one; please provide statute or code provisions that back this up.

[DrewDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
PS, Someone said above that you should refuse a breathalizer if you're drunk and get pulled over. Is this true? Why is this better than submitting to a breathalizer? What happens to you when you refuse to take a breathalizer versus what happens when you fail one?

[/ QUOTE ]

It differs from state to state, but in many states the penalty for refusing a breathalyzer test is an automatic suspension of the driver's license.

[/ QUOTE ]

Note that this is in addition to DUI charges. My girlfriend is prosecuting such a case. Guy refused breathalyzer, got automatic license suspension, and is now being prosecuted for a DUI based on the testimony of police officers (odor of alcohol, field sobriety tests).

According to the gf, it's generally smarter just take the breathalyzer. (Except maybe if you can afford to hire a great lawyer and dodge the DUI? I dunno.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Your gf is wrong and probably biased because she's a prosecutor. Yes, you can still be charged with DWI/DUI, but the prosecution's task is much more difficult without a breathalyzer test.

Failing a breathalyzer test makes a DWI/DUI conviction much more likely, and don't forget that if you are convicted, you're most likely going to lose your license anyway.

Also, in your example, the defendant performed field sobriety tests. He shouldn't have done that either. If you'll look at my original post in this topic, you'll see I said you should refuse ALL tests and say nothing.

For some reason, people get fixated on ZOMG I'LL LOSE MY LICENSE. This is dumb, because (to repeat, sum up and emphasize):

1. Losing license >>>>>>>>>>> DWI conviction
2. Even if you lose your license, you can still drive to work/school and get exceptions for other necessities
3. If you get a DWI you'll lose your license anyway

People should pretty much accept the fact that if they get pulled over while driving drunk, they're going to have a license suspension no matter what. Quit worrying about the damned driver's license and avoid avoid avoid a criminal conviction at all costs.

[DrewDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In practice, an acorn for $1000 or whatever would never be valid consideration.

[/ QUOTE ]

What are you basing this on? There are numerous cases that have established the precedent pretty securely against what you're saying here. From my understanding judges want ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with wasting time putting value judgements on what kind of consideration is "valuable" enough to count, and as such say even the above examples are sufficient.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't spend a lot of time researching case law on consideration, but at least in law school, it was hammered into us over and over that the law does NOT determine if there was "valid" consideration, only that there was consideration, an actual bargained-for exchange.

So yes, you can exchange a hawk's feather for a piece of real estate.

[Oski]

[ QUOTE ]

So yes, you can exchange a hawk's feather for a piece of real estate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except, of course, where the transferor of real property is a debtor. In that case the transaction will be subject to the jurisdiction's fraudulent transfer statute. In such cases, the consideration has to equal fair-market-value.

[supafrey]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

So yes, you can exchange a hawk's feather for a piece of real estate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except, of course, where the transferor of real property is a debtor. In that case the transaction will be subject to the jurisdiction's fraudulent transfer statute. In such cases, the consideration has to equal fair-market-value.

[/ QUOTE ]

nice catch, but I fear this thread is teh derailed.

[fnord_too]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

So yes, you can exchange a hawk's feather for a piece of real estate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except, of course, where the transferor of real property is a debtor. In that case the transaction will be subject to the jurisdiction's fraudulent transfer statute. In such cases, the consideration has to equal fair-market-value.

[/ QUOTE ]

nice catch, but I fear this thread is teh derailed.

[/ QUOTE ]

But at least this is bringing home another very good point:

Law is not intuitive, nor is it always even clear to lawyers. (Differences of opinion make court cases, too)

Basic criminal question: You have the right to a trial by jury; can you opt for a trial where a judge alone rules? If so, are there any advantages to trial by judge? or maybe better asked, under what circumstances should someone facing criminal charges opt for a trial without a jury? (Again if this is even an option) does the prosecution have to agree?

[NNNNOOOOONAN]

say there's a chick right.
and she's heavy into BDSM S&M type [censored] right?

i mean like some intense needles, bruises whips torture stuff.

and you meet to have a "play session."

and before you do, you have her sign something saying that she's completely willing and this is all consensual.

then you totally just have your way with her, like crazy mad.

then you're done and she's all roughed up and what not.

then she goes to the cops and cries wolf.

will that thing she signed keep your ass covered?

totally serious question. not trying to troll at all, i promise.

[fnord_too]

Another topic that would be good for this thread is basic bankruptcy law. I studied this a bit but it is not as clear as some things in my memory.

When you declare bankruptcy, you gain protection of your house and vehicle (though there are some exceptions here: I think the value of the house that one can protect varies by state, and you are not allowed to pour a bunch of money into your house in preparation to declare bankruptcy). I believe that one must settle with their creditors but the settlement can be substantially less than the actual debt, except for certain items like criminal fines and student loans. (Did congress just pass a law protecting credit card companies, too? I think they did, which sickens me.)

As I said, I don't recall many of the details (I cannot even recall the order you pay people off in a business bankruptcy, though I remember equity holders split any money left over after everyone else has been paid).

But I think this topic, both personal and business, is something that everyone should have at least some knowledge of. Not only in case you fall on hard times, but also for dealings with others. (One generic question: If someone uses their house collateral or a guarantee, then defaults on your agreement and declares bankruptcy, are you SOL? What if they use non protected collateral then declare bankruptcy, defaulting on your agreement? Is that collateral considered part of their assets or does it default to you?)

[bobman0330]

Bankruptcy is really complicated, but here's the gist.

-You (individual or business) file.
-The court goes through all your assets and figures out what you have. (In a Chapter 13 case, they look at your future earning power as an asset to some extent too, IIRC.) You have a few exemptions.
-The court figures out what you owe. Secured creditors (like the bank that has a mortgage on your house; or your car lender) have priority over general lenders (like CC companies - this is why CC rates are so much higher than car rates, which are higher than mortgage rates).
-The court distributes your non-exempt property, and all your debts are discharged except for student loans and a couple other things. I'm almost positive CC debt gets discharged.
-If it's a chapter 13 or chapter 11 case, you probably have post-discharge payment obligations that continue on.