Was SB an attorney for the parents and Brian? If he represented the parents as one entity and Brian as another does client/attorney privilege still hold when the client has died?
What is the general view on Lawyerly as a source of news about law-related topics. Is it biased?
On the other hand, which newspapers tend to give the best news about updates about the law? (I mean law topics, and not case law updates)
I can utter some buzzwords and rattle off basic numbered elements, but I canโt structure or remember the rules in a way thatโs going to sound elegant or flowyโฆ is the bar gonna think Iโm dumb and just give an automatic fail? Lol. I hate this.
In my opinion the term YOLO is WAY overused! As a Minecrafter (haters gonna hate) I have realized after griefing or as some non-gamer people like to call it: stealing. But anyway they normally say something like this in the chat: "YOLO!!!11" and the person comes back to mind their house demolished. But in real-life someone might do some crazy crap such as drive his mother-in-law's Mustang off a bridge singing YOLO happily all the way down. Just for future notes, he won't be so happy when the beautiful interior is being ruined by flooding water. Now we're getting in to more debatable topics: so if your good at debating grab your briefcases and get ready for a rumble in the court-room! (lawyer puns everywhere) What if I told you when you say YOLO you are lying to yourself? Well I just told you so how do you feel? Some of you #YOLOSWAG followers out there would down-right hate me. But if you are a Christian such as myself, you believe in God. If your Buddist or Islamic you believe in a different higher power. But I believe we are all entitled to our own beliefs. So same with Atheists you believe in the Big Bang and Evolution or maybe some other type of theory. Now if your religious you believe you go to Heaven or Hell. If you DO go to Heaven then you have ANOTHER life. If you do go to Hell, well your screwed. So if you're an Atheist then you may believe in the reincarnation theory. So if you believe in that, boom another life (possibly) either way. So I believe they should the phrase to YCLT (you can live twice) have fun pronouncing that though. This is my first post so be gentle to the new born redditor. Goodbye for now!
Long time skulker, first time poster. Keen to read the lawyerly.com.au articles about the Dick Smith class action; not keen to pay for them. Hereby seeking that they be posted for general consumption. Can compensate with copious COVID-19-INCH memes. Will also guarantee no copyright issues*. Whoโs picking up what Iโm laying down?
*for me
(I stole this from /r/bestoflegaladvice.) Top Trump mind SpezIsAChild posted a thread to /r/legaladvice asking about why no lawyer in town will represent him. Naturally, when presented with fairly normal responses for his situation, he gets very combative:
> Why are lawyers such cowards?
Because that's a good way to get the subreddit run by lawyers (and a cop, apparently) on your side. Thread is locked pretty quickly as the moderators of LA and BOLA are top notch.
This is, however, pretty boring stuff compared to the train wreck that is this guy's life. Dude's fucking broke! Whatever happened to all that winning and how Trump fans were all TRUE MAXIMUM POWER ALPHAS?
Lots of standard conspiracy theory nutjobbery:
> Snoops fact check: water is actually clear... butttt... since we hate trump... it's TOTALLY TRUE!!
Yeah sure snopes.com is totally fake news right whatever
>$20 says nobody but the NYT wrote that op-ed
You don't have $20 to your name, chucklefuck! With gambling skills this good, I can understand why he's bankrupt.
Miscellaneous misogyny:
> Not pictured: Kamala Harris, who's blowing Booker in the stall because he said he'd endorse her in 2020
>
>...
>
> Truly empowered women never feel the need to be sluts
And there's so much more.
Responding to an earlier (now deleted) post by Robert_dfinity
Wanted to send you my thoughts on Lino and Glenn (which are reconcilable in my opinion), as well as some other musings. First, both decisions emphasize the need for โsignificant effortsโ on the part of the investor to reap the benefits of the investment promised by the promoter, and it was those same efforts (existent in Lino but non-existent in Glenn) that differentiate the two cases.
In Lino, plaintiff, to derive value from the franchise he purchased, had to โopen a sales center, staff itโฆrecruit distributors to the [Franchise International] programโฆand devote his best efforts to [the] businessโ to do so. Thus, it was the time and expense [$60,000 in 1970โs USD] of his efforts that made those efforts โsignificant.โ
In contrast, Glennโs fraudulent investment scheme required little effort by its investors. There, to make money, investors had to recruit others to sell Dare to be Great, Incโs (โDAREโ) self-help plan. However, creating those plans and marketing materials, organizing the promotional meetings and ultimately making the sales were all done by DARE. So, even though Glennโs investors made some efforts to generate income with their investments, it was DAREโs (the seller) efforts that gave the investment โvalueโ and made it an investment contract under Howey.
That said, I think differentiating the investorsโ efforts in both cases misses the point. Itโs not about the quantity of effort made by the investor to create an expectation of profit that decides whether an investment is an investment contract under the third Howey prong; itโs the control exerted by the promoter over whether the investment generates profits.
Another case, SEC v. Koscot Interplanetary, Inc., 492 F.2d 473 (5th Cir. 1974), better illuminates whatโs going on behind Lino and Glenn. There, the Koscot Company, a subsidiary of Glenn W. Enterprises, ran a cosmetic sales and marketing scheme (very similar to the pyramid-like scheme of DARE). Koscot promoted its Koscot cosmetics plan, whereby you sold cosmetic kits to individuals who in turn sold them to other individuals, etc. The 5th Circuit found that the Koscot Companyโs control over promotional efforts turned the purchase of the cosmetics by investors into a security. The reason this occurred was that Koscot investors only made money by bringing other investors into the Koscot scheme through Opportunity Meetings, which were run according to a preordained script t
... keep reading on reddit โกI was halfway through a five-minute explanation of why I ate the last banana yesterday when I suddenly stopped, turned my husband and said, "...you don't care, do you?"
He laughed and said, "Nope. But I get it."
And we spent some time reminiscing together about our abusive childhoods. He was telling me about how when he was young, his parents would buy a gallon of milk, use half of it for baking, and then let the rest spoil. This would happen week after week. But of course, as soon as he poured himself a glass of milk, someone would be banging down his bedroom door insisting that they had plans for that milk that they had never told him about.
Never any warning, right? Never any explanation. We would go about living our lives completely as normal, until one of them took umbrage to some harmless thing we did and geared up for a screaming match or broke out the whipping rods.
We're both still paranoid to this day. The last soda in the box will sit in the fridge for days because deep in both of our lizard brains is mortal terror at the idea that someone else secretly wants it and there'll be hell to pay if we take it. It's not going to happen. My husband and I have an excellent, loving marriage, and we've worked hard to build a calm, happy home where nobody has to live in fear. But even absent the threat, the fear remains.
The sad thing is, the explanations didn't actually help at all. They were necessary, of course - what's a narcissistic horrorshow without the standard interrogation full of unfair questions? But it never helped. There was never a reason good enough.
Hell, my father used to brag about what a reasonable parent he was because he would "always give my kids a chance to explain themselves first." He'd tell us how lucky we were to have a dad who "could be reasoned with." But of course he couldn't. He was always, always right, and God help you if you ever implied that he was being unfair.
So how about you guys? Anybody got an elaborate justification for why they needed longer than thirty seconds to use the bathroom? Why they took a slightly different route home from work than usual? Why they persist in ordering objectively inferior pizza toppings?
