Thread of legal hubbub

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Wed Mar 29, 2017 10:25 am

Federal judge tosses suit against property owner who shot down hovering drone
A federal judge in Louisville has dismissed a suit seeking damages against a property owner who shot down a hobbyist’s drone in 2015.

Senior U.S. District Judge Thomas Russell dismissed the suit against self-described “drone slayer” William Merideth, citing a lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction, Ars Technica reports.

The suit by hobbyist John David Boggs had sought a declaratory judgment that a drone is an “aircraft” under federal law, that Boggs’ drone was operating in U.S. airspace, and that property owners can’t shoot at drones in this airspace. The suit also sought $1,500 in damages.

Russell wrote in a March 21 opinion that the suit was essentially a garden-variety state tort claim that should not be in federal court. Although the Federal Aviation Administration has an interest in enforcing regulations governing federal airspace, “its interest in applying those regulations in the context of a state tort law claim for trespass to chattels is limited or nonexistent,” Russell said. At most, the FAA regulations are ancillary issues in the case, he concluded.
So, not on the grounds that it's okay to shoot trespassing drones, just that the FAA has no reach when it comes to this kind of claim.

Kind of ballsy to claim your toy is an aircraft when things go sour for you. I imagine/hope aircraft that enjoy protection by the FAA also have some restrictions on them that preclude them from flying around in people's backyards.

tifosi77
Posts: 51511
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Batuu

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby tifosi77 » Wed Mar 29, 2017 11:08 am

Image

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Thu Mar 30, 2017 12:11 am

I hate everything I write to the point that I induce writers block on myself and end up turning some things in late. But, when I go back a few weeks later and read some of my legal analysis it's actually very good, at least relative to my peers. It's really crippling and I can't wrap my head around it. I've never had this problem before. I hope it goes away next semester but for now it's quite debilitating. Finals are in a few weeks and then I can finally catch my breath.

Kraftster
Posts: 2073
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 5:22 pm

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Kraftster » Thu Mar 30, 2017 8:36 am

I hate everything I write to the point that I induce writers block on myself and end up turning some things in late. But, when I go back a few weeks later and read some of my legal analysis it's actually very good, at least relative to my peers. It's really crippling and I can't wrap my head around it. I've never had this problem before. I hope it goes away next semester but for now it's quite debilitating. Finals are in a few weeks and then I can finally catch my breath.
Madman, Architect, Carpenter, Judge. Live it. Breath it. Be it.

tifosi77
Posts: 51511
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Batuu

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby tifosi77 » Fri Mar 31, 2017 3:11 pm

Federal judge tosses suit against property owner who shot down hovering drone
A federal judge in Louisville has dismissed a suit seeking damages against a property owner who shot down a hobbyist’s drone in 2015.

Senior U.S. District Judge Thomas Russell dismissed the suit against self-described “drone slayer” William Merideth, citing a lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction, Ars Technica reports.

The suit by hobbyist John David Boggs had sought a declaratory judgment that a drone is an “aircraft” under federal law, that Boggs’ drone was operating in U.S. airspace, and that property owners can’t shoot at drones in this airspace. The suit also sought $1,500 in damages.

Russell wrote in a March 21 opinion that the suit was essentially a garden-variety state tort claim that should not be in federal court. Although the Federal Aviation Administration has an interest in enforcing regulations governing federal airspace, “its interest in applying those regulations in the context of a state tort law claim for trespass to chattels is limited or nonexistent,” Russell said. At most, the FAA regulations are ancillary issues in the case, he concluded.
So, not on the grounds that it's okay to shoot trespassing drones, just that the FAA has no reach when it comes to this kind of claim.

Kind of ballsy to claim your toy is an aircraft when things go sour for you. I imagine/hope aircraft that enjoy protection by the FAA also have some restrictions on them that preclude them from flying around in people's backyards.
Meant to elaborate on this after posting the Archer gif, but then Tif happened and I forgot.

Anyway, if the UAS weighs more than half a pound it kind of is an aircraft and has to be registered with the FAA and carry its registration number on the fuselage. But there's a weird regulatory gray area that I don't think has been resolved as yet: FAA jurisdiction effectively stops at 500' AGL as flight below this altitude (higher in congested areas, of course) is generally not permitted under civilian control, with the necessary carve outs for takeoff and landing evolutions. Drone ops are limited to below 400', and in this particular case from KY the guy was allegedly flying below treetop height with a camera-equipped UAS. To me, that is eminently shoot-down-able, local firearms laws notwithstanding.

The gray area comes in the form of outdated case law. The most current case that I'm aware of dates to WWII and involved low-flying military aircraft scaring chickens to death. The court ruling states landowners have “exclusive control of the immediate reaches of the enveloping atmosphere,” and at least as much of the space above the ground as they can occupy or use in connection with the land. Obviously, that's pre-drone tech and doesn't really work in the context of a UAS. It will be interesting to see how this evolves.

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Fri Mar 31, 2017 3:26 pm

Agreed.

I'll pop some popcorn and we can wait together.

As you noted, it seems municipal firearms laws seem to curb most of these possible incidents. It's the only thing that might stop me. ;)

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Fri Mar 31, 2017 3:28 pm

Source of the post Madman, Architect, Carpenter, Judge. Live it. Breath it. Be it.
Doctor, Lawyer, Indian Chief...

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Wed Apr 26, 2017 2:27 pm

http://www.scotusblog.com/2017/04/view- ... l-waiting/
… a cellphone ringtone goes off. The Supreme Court police department has been especially vigilant in keeping visitors from bringing such devices into the courtroom since a couple of high-profile protests involving hidden pen cameras in recent years.

But cellphones do occasionally end up in the ornate courtroom and announce themselves. Today, the culprit is a 23-year veteran of the bench. Justice Stephen Breyer looks a bit sheepish as he maneuvers to silence his phone’s lively chime.
Image

tifosi77
Posts: 51511
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Batuu

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby tifosi77 » Wed Apr 26, 2017 2:47 pm

It will be fun to play 'spot the ringtone' in a couple days when they publish the audio of the week's arguments.

Shyster
Posts: 13093
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Fri Jul 07, 2017 9:46 pm

Good news. The Third Circuit today joined every other circuit that has addressed the question and held that individuals have a First Amendment right to film police officers who are performing their duties in public.

http://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/161650p.pdf

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:37 pm

S2E2 of Always Sunny completely ignores the doctrine of Adverse Possession. Which is annoying because they actually shot a scene consulting a lawyer.

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby dodint » Fri Aug 11, 2017 10:50 am

http://blogs.findlaw.com/greedy_associa ... -jail.html
Lawyer Forges Vacationing Judge's Signature, Gets a Year 'Vacation' in Jail

Jose Manual Camacho pleaded guilty to 14 felony charges related to forging the signatures of judges for cases he was working on. He probably would have gotten away with it too, if only he had minded judge Garcia-Wood's vacation schedule.

As a result of his guilty plea, Camacho was sentenced to 364 days in jail, as well as 10 years of probation. While some might think the sentence is too light, particular for 14 felonies, Camacho did admit guilt and he cooperated with authorities. Additionally, it's not likely he'll be able to practice again anytime soon, or ever.
Brilliant.
While one might expect that former attorney Camacho would have been handsomely profiting off the forged signatures, that was anything but the case. Apparently, he was not making any additional money, but was merely trying to avoid the procedural delays of getting judicial approval on the structured settlement deals he frequently worked on.
Super brilliant. One could argue (they did) that he was just working in the best interest of his client. ;)

Freddy Rumsen
Posts: 35313
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Freddy Rumsen » Sat Aug 12, 2017 1:57 pm

1) Do all court proceedings have a court reporter present?

2) If so how would I go about getting copies of a court case I am not immediately related to for a related matter concerning non-judicial mediation.

Shyster
Posts: 13093
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Mon Aug 14, 2017 4:22 pm

1) Do all court proceedings have a court reporter present?

2) If so how would I go about getting copies of a court case I am not immediately related to for a related matter concerning non-judicial mediation.
1) Not necessarily, no.

2) What documents are you looking for? Documents like the complaint, answer, motions, etc. would be public records that could be obtained at the courthouse, and in some localities are available online. Not all documents are public, however. Mediation statements and documents related to mediation are typically confidential because they relate to settlement negotiations, and they usually aren't filed of record.

Freddy Rumsen
Posts: 35313
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Freddy Rumsen » Mon Aug 14, 2017 6:29 pm

1) Do all court proceedings have a court reporter present?

2) If so how would I go about getting copies of a court case I am not immediately related to for a related matter concerning non-judicial mediation.
1) Not necessarily, no.

2) What documents are you looking for? Documents like the complaint, answer, motions, etc. would be public records that could be obtained at the courthouse, and in some localities are available online. Not all documents are public, however. Mediation statements and documents related to mediation are typically confidential because they relate to settlement negotiations, and they usually aren't filed of record.
I'm part of an "investigation" into the conduct of a person who we believe may or may not have made false/incriminating statements during a child support hearing and I was curious if there were transcripts we could examine.

Shyster
Posts: 13093
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Mon Aug 14, 2017 7:06 pm

I'm part of an "investigation" into the conduct of a person who we believe may or may not have made false/incriminating statements during a child support hearing and I was curious if there were transcripts we could examine.
I don't practice family law, so I can't say for sure whether such a hearing would be transcribed. I can say that commonplace hearings like that in civil court are not usually transcribed.

Freddy Rumsen
Posts: 35313
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Freddy Rumsen » Mon Aug 14, 2017 7:23 pm

Ok, appreciate it. :)

NTP66
Posts: 60742
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby NTP66 » Wed Aug 23, 2017 6:24 pm

Met with a lawyer today to create a living will and trust. Everything was pretty straight forward, and to my surprise, the biggest issue for us is going to be deciding who will be executor and guardian with regards to our daughter. Our first choices are all back home in Pittsburgh, but I'm worried that it might be a bit of a burden if they have to continually drive across the state to handle probate and the like.

AuthorTony
Posts: 8950
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:18 am

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby AuthorTony » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:30 pm


Shyster
Posts: 13093
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby Shyster » Fri Sep 01, 2017 10:02 pm

I have many differences with Richard Posner when it comes to legal philosophy, but it is undeniable that he has been an extremely productive and influential jurist for decades. His sharp questioning at oral argument is one of the main reasons I have been regularly listening to the recordings of oral arguments from the Seventh Circuit. Best wishes, and I hope Judge Posner enjoys his retirement.

This will leave the Seventh Circuit with four vacancies out of its 11 seats, which will be the highest vacancy percentage of all of the Courts of Appeal. There are also a bunch of active commissioned judges on the Seventh who are really up there in age: Flaum is 80; Kanne is 78; and Rovner is 79. Those three could have gone senior years ago. It's entirely possible that over the next couple years over half of the judges on that court could be appointees of President Trump.

MWB
Posts: 8175
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 10:04 pm

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby MWB » Fri Sep 01, 2017 11:34 pm

I moved out of the place I rented for 3 years at the end of July and bought a house. The rental agency said "all security deposits will be processed and you will be receive an itemized security deposit statement within 30 days of move out and key return." Today (32 days by my count), I got an email saying they were not able to get an estimate for tenant damages prior to the deadline and attached an interim security deposit form, which only showed my security deposit. They extended the date to return deposit by 4 weeks. The place had no damages and is in great condition. Does anyone have any experience with this or know what the deal could be?

slappybrown
Posts: 16580
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:19 pm
Location: Lifelong Alabama Football Fan

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby slappybrown » Sat Sep 02, 2017 12:06 am

I moved out of the place I rented for 3 years at the end of July and bought a house. The rental agency said "all security deposits will be processed and you will be receive an itemized security deposit statement within 30 days of move out and key return." Today (32 days by my count), I got an email saying they were not able to get an estimate for tenant damages prior to the deadline and attached an interim security deposit form, which only showed my security deposit. They extended the date to return deposit by 4 weeks. The place had no damages and is in great condition. Does anyone have any experience with this or know what the deal could be?
What state are you in? I know some states have a statutory requirement that landlords return the deposit and notice of any dedication within a certain amount of time. You can probably find out by googling it. If your state does, use it as a hammer. If it doesn't I would still call and demand the money back now.

MWB
Posts: 8175
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 10:04 pm

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby MWB » Sat Sep 02, 2017 9:32 am

I'm in NC. It says they have 30 days to return deposit, but if the extent of the damages can't be determined in 30 days, an interim accounting shall be provided no later than 30 days after termination, with a final accounting done within 60 days. But the "interim accounting" gave me no indication of what the problem was. I've emailed them about this and will call when they are open again, so we'll see.

slappybrown
Posts: 16580
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:19 pm
Location: Lifelong Alabama Football Fan

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby slappybrown » Sat Sep 02, 2017 9:42 am

If you want to be aggressive and need the cash, email them, cite the statute, advise them that they've failed to comply and that accordingly the full amount is due immediately (if the statute has penalties for failure to comply within the period cite those as well). What they sent you probably complies with the interim accounting provision (they know what the deposit is, but don't know what damages are yet, so that's why you got that half-assed doc to technically comply with the statute) but you can push them if you want. They obviously are familiar with the requirements but if you keep on them they may just figure you're more trouble than it's worth and cut the check if they are truly backed up (no clue how big of a complex it is).

MWB
Posts: 8175
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 10:04 pm

Thread of legal hubbub

Postby MWB » Sat Sep 02, 2017 2:26 pm

Thanks for the info and advice. Not in dire need of the money, it's more the principle of the matter and that they've been crappy to deal with since I've been there. Just want to be done with them.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 110 guests