Legion World Forums LEGION OUTPOST Mission Monitor Board Quislet's Super Law Firm...of Space!

Way to go Quis.

Quis, I'm writing a brief and all I really want to say to opposing counsel, is "F*** you, it's not my client's fault that you committed malpractice. Hope you get sued big-time a******.!" Can you think of a nice way to say this and make the judge like me at the same time?

Do you really want to put it nicely?

As for the judge, I suggest a bouquet of flowers and a box of chocolates. Just hope the judge isn't a diabetic with hayfever.

Sage advice as usual, counsel.

My definition of diplomacy is being able to tell someone to go to hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip.

Congrats on 3500, Quis!

Plus, it's cool to be online at the same time as you.

Quis,

I got a bad elvabird egg omelette from Breakfast at Tiffany's. Any chance I could end up with all of Miss Spiffany's daddy's dazzle gems?

Misty

Probably not all of the dazzle gems.

You would most likely get your medical expenses paid for. And then you could put in for "pain & suffering". Depending on how much actual pain & suffering you had, would help the trier of facts to determine how much compensation you should get. For example, if all you suffered was a queasy stomach but managed to keep the elvabird egg omelet down, you'd probably only get a glance at a dazzle gem. If on the other hand, the omelet caused you to go into convulsions and you had to go to the hospital for a couple of days, you might get a couple of dazzle gems. Now, if you had died as a result of eating the omelet, your family could have cleaned up.

Certain LWers have broken my heart.

Can I sue?

You can always sue. Whether you will be successful is another story.

From a quick glance, you can no longer sue for breach of promise to marry. However, you can sue to recover gifts given for the engagement.

Dear Super Lawyer.....of Space


If the head of the sexcurity office gets drunk and fires all the staff on a whim in one night can they claim compensation for the loss of their jobs.

And as a supplementary question. Can he REALLY use security office funds to pay child maintenance like he claims he can.?

Quis, since I witnessed what really happened, would my testimony, if it didn't line up with Myriad's, be of any use in deciding the outcome of this case?

Well, I've never paid a dime for any of my children, since they all usually end up older than me for some reason...

That depends. Do they have an employment contract or are they employees at will? Basically, if you don't have an employment contract you are an employee at will.

If you have an employment contract, the terms of the contract will governs the termination. If you violate any terms of your contract, you would be considered in breach of the contract and you might actually owe your employer money. If on the other hand, the employer fires you in violation of the contract, the employer is in breach and would probably owe you at least the money you would have earned for the contract length.

With employees at will, the employer can fire the employee at any time for any reason* or no reason with no notice needed. Conversely, the employee can leave the job for any reason or no reason with no notice.

*there are public policy reasons that can trigger a wrongful termination claim. One such one is if the employee got fired for not attending a political rally the employer wanted all employees to attend. There may also be statutory reasons, such as anti-discrimination laws that prevent an employer for firing an employee because of her/his race, religion, or national origin. (Of course only a really stupid employer would say, "I'm firing you because you are a Baptist", but an employee could prove disparate treatment, such as being fired for something a non-Baptist did, but didn't get fired for)

I would have to know if he has an employment contract and if that was a negotiated term. It is also possible that there is a provision for such an expenditure in the General Laws of Legion World. Otherwise, it does sound like embezzlement.

That would be a question for the trier of facts (either the jury or the judge, if there is no jury). The trier of the facts does decide which testimony is believable and which is not.

Cobie,

You are mistaking me for the trier of the facts. My role here is to educate people on points of law, not to make decisions.

Hey Quis. You still answering questions? I've got a trademark one that I could use your help with.

If someone has a trademark on a term (let's use Legion World as an example) can I trademark LegionWorld (exactly as spelled)?

LL,

Unfortunately I never studied trademarks & copywrites. So I have no answer for you.

A non-lawyer answer though: I do know of Fox v Franken where Fox News wasn't able to claim a trademark for "Fair and Balanced" Franken also won because his book was considered satire. (Also Donald Trump wasn't able to trademark "You're Fired") However Legion World & LegionWorld are not really common words or phrases. I also know of a pizza chain in RI (Back in the 80's) who called themselves "Pizza Pizza" Little Ceasars successfully sued them and they had to change their name. They changed it to "Pizza Pie-er".

Trademark law is tricky, so don't rely on the above. I know they have a separate bar exam for patent law (not sure if that also includes trademarks)

I can't speak to the copyright issue. However, my thought is that you might open yourself up for a tradename infringement claim due to the similarity of the names that could reasonably lead to confusion in the marketplace. It's been a long time since I did any of that type of work, but I do recall a trial I did where "Chronicle Publishing" sued "Chronicle Publications" for tradename infringement and prevailed. However, on the issue of damages, the jury found none.

I wonder if Brainiac 5 won't be needing your services soon.

If he's the "adult" in the new Legion, and enticed or encouraged Lyle - obviously still under parental authority - to run away from home and join a group of questionable legal standing - couldn't Lyle's parents take him to court for child endangerment or something? What can parents do if their underage kids run away and join a cult?

Legally parents have custody of their children until they are 18 or the custody is taken away from them. Custody has two parts. Physical custody and legal custody. Legal custody is the right to make decisions for the child. In a divorce situation, both parents could retain legal custody while one gets physical custody.

So, Lyle's parents could sue for interference with custody. Lyle however could counter sue for emancipation. If he can show that he voluntarily left home and is self-sufficient, then he can terminate the custody himself.

Hey Quis, How ya doin? Hanging in there after the World Series celebrations?

I have one for you ripped from 'Today's Headlines'. I was watching Good Morning America this morning and saw a report on a mom out in Washington state (definitely Pacific Northwest of the US, if I'm not remembering the correct State).

Anyway... it seems like the mother of this 16 year old girl eavesdropped on a phone conversation. The conversation was between the daughter and her (no-good) boyfriend. It seems detectives were around to the house earlier asking the mom questions about the boyfriend, whom they suspected in a series of purse snatchings (to make this germaine to your office, lets call them Space Purses).

Anyway, the daughter was talking on the phone to her boyfriend but left the door to her bedroom cracked and the mother easvesdropped. The mother later testified against the boyfriend, based on what she heard of the conversation. This testimony got him convicted.

The State Supreme Court threw out the conviction (unanimously) because of the State's right to privacy laws. The Judges said that the daughter's right to privacy (even though it was in her mother's home) superceded any parental rights the mother had.

My question to you is... could the mother have her child sign a waiver of these privacy rights while inside her home, upto the age of 18? I realize that a 16 year old probably isn't going to sign that waiver, so I was thinking that the parent could get an eight or nine year old to sign it. I know that a minor can't enter into a legally binding agreement without parental consent, so the mother would have to sign the waiver as well, on her minor child's behalf. What are the chances that this waiver, signed by the minor child and parent, would hold up under legal scrutiny?

If you care to comment on parental rights vs. a child's right to privacy, I'd be interested in hearing that too. Especially as it pertains to the physical presence of the parent's home and property.

Well, I would want to read the opinion by the State Supreme Court and have to check out that state's right to privacy law before I could really comment.

I doubt that such waiver (which is kind of like a contract) would be enforcable. The reason being (IMO) is that a minor would not be able to understand the ramifications of such a waiver. It is this lack of understanding that is why minors are able to avoid contracts (the parental consent is really just another name on the contract that the creditor can enforce the contract against). Back to the waiver, having the parent also sign would be useless, because it is the parent requesting the waiver in the first place. It would be like a doctor requesting a patient sign a waiver of malpractice and then signing on the patient's behalf.

In regards to parental rights vs a child's right to privacy, that appears to be a very complex issue. Factors such as the age of the child, the safety of the child, parental responsibilities towards the child, the circumstances of the breach of privacy mean that each case can be different. So I would want to adopt a case-by-case approach rather than a hard rule.

I figured it would come down to something like that. The one Legal Aspects course that I had to take in college filled my head with just enough legalese to be dangerous but not helpful. It seemed to me that an argument could have been made for my scenario, but I wanted a more informed opinion. Thanks.

Another one I've been thinking about here lately... and I don't want to get into the politics or beliefs, but I want to know how the law reconciles the following:

How can Scott Peterson be convicted of two counts of murder, one for his wife and one for the fetus inside his wife? I guess what I'm having trouble with is how is the death of the Peterson fetus different LEGALLY from abortion? How does the law differientiate between Scott Peterson's actions and a Doctor performing an abortion? To me it seems like both actions result in the same thing, and if Scott Peterson is charged with murder, then the Doctor could be charged with the same.

I have heard a quote from a law professor to the graduating class:

Three years ago when you arrived here if you were asked a legal question, you would have had to answer "I don't know." Now after all your study and hard work, if asked a legal question, you can confidently answer "It depends!"