Basic legal things everyone should know

[DrewDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hard to say without seeing the release form... my hunch is that you might still get arrested and charged but the release form would help you get the case dismissed. It would depend a lot on the nature of the complaint and how aggressive the DA was.

[FlyWf]

[ QUOTE ]
[ 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.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe. Nominal consideration(the penny in exchange for $600) is not good enough. It will be up to the court to determine if you bargained for that hawk feather.

Real basic legal knowledge that not a lot of people seem to be aware of is that courts are not robotic contract fulfillment machines, all courts try to advance the cause of justice to the extent they are able. I can't hire you to mow my lawn with a provision that if you don't do it you have to pay me a million dollars.

[Rococo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hard to say without seeing the release form... my hunch is that you might still get arrested and charged but the release form would help you get the case dismissed. It would depend a lot on the nature of the complaint and how aggressive the DA was.

[/ QUOTE ]

People are throwing around a lot of absolutes, but the reality is that the law varies from state. Certainly in this example I would expect that the law will vary state by state. In this case, I think that the answer generally will have more to do with the conduct than the release form. To take the crudest example, knife fighting, dueling with pistols, etc., is illegal in every state, regardless of whether both parties consent.

[Riverman]

Unless there is evidence of coercion, fraud, duress, etc., courts will find pretty much anything to be valid consideration.

In short, if the parties willingly made a deal they thought was fair the court will enforce it.

[DrewDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ 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.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe. Nominal consideration(the penny in exchange for $600) is not good enough. It will be up to the court to determine if you bargained for that hawk feather.

Real basic legal knowledge that not a lot of people seem to be aware of is that courts are not robotic contract fulfillment machines, all courts try to advance the cause of justice to the extent they are able. I can't hire you to mow my lawn with a provision that if you don't do it you have to pay me a million dollars.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you kind of have it backwards... actually, the courts' first policy consideration is to enforce contracts and only not enforce them if there is a clear reason not to.

In other words, the duty of the courts is to enforce contracts unless it would create a miscarriage of justice, not "advance the cause of justice" no matter what the contract says.

[FlyWf]

You phrased it better than I, on second reading my "to the extent they are able" is unclear and possibly misleading.

[Zeestein]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hard to say without seeing the release form... my hunch is that you might still get arrested and charged but the release form would help you get the case dismissed. It would depend a lot on the nature of the complaint and how aggressive the DA was.

[/ QUOTE ]

The dude is prima facie guilty of battery if he went to town, the release is a mitigating factor and might also be used in the volenti non fit injuria defence, which is a complete defence under common law. Whether the defence suceeds depends on the terms of that form and your contract with the woman overall as compared to the reasonableness of what actually occurred. For example if she has a broken arm and requires 10 stitches that form is gonna be pretty useless, sorry to say.

[gusmahler]

[ QUOTE ]
- US Patent law is different than every other country in the world, in that it's "first to invent" rather than "first to patent". That is, in every other country you have to actually patent something to protect it. In the US as soon as you invent it it's protected, you just have to have some kind of documentation/publication to prove it.

- The catch to the above rule is that, once you invent something, you have one year to patent it. After that one year expires, it's pretty much a race to see who patents it first.


[/ QUOTE ]What you said is mainly correct. But it's very misleading to say that your invention is protected in the US as soon as it is invented. It's protected ONLY if you file a patent application for it. The difference is that the US gives you a 1 year grace period.

[ QUOTE ]
- One useful tip is to claim as many possible references as you can on your IDS form. I don't remember the exact rule, but I believe one your patent is approved, all considered references on the IDS can never again be compared against it again.


[/ QUOTE ]Not quite true. That patent is presumed to be valid over the cited art. But that presumption can be overcome.
[ QUOTE ]
- Almost all patents are rejected under USC 103b rather than USC 102. Basically 102 is rejection on something that is the exact same invention as yours (per claim). A 103 lets examiners combine multiple patents where features would obviously combine together.

[/ QUOTE ]Not true. First off, you mean 103(a), not 103(b) (which is rarely used). Second, Examiners seemingly look for 102 rejections before they rely on 103 rejections.

[ QUOTE ]
- Other obvious rejections fall under 101, but you'll rarely run into them. These state things like the invention must actually do something, the language must be clear, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]101 covers utility (the invention doing something). 112 covers clarity of language, support in the spec, etc.

[NNNNOOOOONAN]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hard to say without seeing the release form... my hunch is that you might still get arrested and charged but the release form would help you get the case dismissed. It would depend a lot on the nature of the complaint and how aggressive the DA was.

[/ QUOTE ]

The dude is prima facie guilty of battery if he went to town, the release is a mitigating factor and might also be used in the volenti non fit injuria defence, which is a complete defence under common law. Whether the defence suceeds depends on the terms of that form and your contract with the woman overall as compared to the reasonableness of what actually occurred. For example if she has a broken arm and requires 10 stitches that form is gonna be pretty useless, sorry to say.

[/ QUOTE ]

that's dumb. she wanted it bad.

[Sparks]

I'm on the golf course and tee it up on a long par 5 along the perimeter of the property. Instead of hitting the low drawing stinger I intended, I over-cook it and snap the ball out of bounds left, over the fence and right through the living room window of Mr. Smith.

Mr. Smith calls me over to the fence line as I walk down the fairway (laying 3) and says, "Dude, I have your Pro V1 with two dots, you broke my window."

I say "Sorry. Talk to the golf course management, they are responsible. Can I have my ball back though?"

I'm quite sure that errant shots on golf courses which damage property off the course, are 100% the responsibility of the course. You must be playing normally and not negligently.

I'm sure this is true, but have never tested it in court. Can anyone confirm?