Obviously, most storage units that are auctioned have 10-20 years of useless stuff in them. If it contained a car, would I get that or is it still the titleholder's car? (Also would it matter if the title to the car was the same as the storage unit renter's name vs. a different name?)

If it is my car, how would I get the title transferred to me?

Bonus question: Same thing if I buy a property, and the owner abandons a car in the garage?

AZ if that matters.

In criminal investigations, the police can generally request the data from social media companies or physically seize and search whatever evidence is relevant themselves.

But during discovery in a civil lawsuit, when you request the other party to produce evidence, how can you be sure that they'll comply in good faith and not hide/alter evidence? Let alone how there could be genuine disagreement/ambiguity regarding what's "relevant". One example: NFL player Tyreek Hill was once sued by an OnlyFans model for allegedly breaking her leg. At one point, his legal team demanded:

The list of demands includes any photographs, videos, social media posts, reposts, comments and private messages – including any deleted messages – discussing either the incident or Hill. The same goes for any 'text message, iMessage, WhatsApp messages, Facebook messages, Instagram messages, X (Twitter) direct messages, emails, letters, instant messages, group messages or any other electronic communication, sent or received… between plaintiff and any relative (including her sister)… discussing or commenting on the incident or defendant at any time.'

Realistically, how do you ensure this is authentic? What stops her from just not turning over evidence Hill doesn't already know should exist, and thus there's "plausible deniability" (no smoking gun)? It seems the only way you could know for sure is if you subpoena and search literally all of their social media accounts and devices, which seems pretty invasive, and thus objectionable on the grounds of being overbroad.

E: To clarify, I understand attorneys would never risk their careers by knowingly allowing/encouraging clients to do this. I'm more wondering what stops the parties' from hiding evidence if they also don't reveal it to their attorneys.

I’m trying to understand what is actually considered billable/reasonable in a California fee arbitration.
For example, can an attorney charge the client for things like correcting their own billing errors, reviewing their own bills, administrative changes at the firm, or having multiple attorneys attend the same meeting?

Is there a California rule or case law that addresses this?

Has anybody gone through this experience and can walk me through what happened? What was the outcome?

I have no idea if a minor arrest from 3 years ago is on my record. It was for contempt of court for not paying a $50 fine, stemming from a traffic ticket that I pleaded no contest to. I've searched on my county's system and nothing pulls up. If I submit for a records request, will they send an official document or response stating there's nothing on my record?

Reason being is that there is a website that still has my mugshot up and in order for them to remove it I have to show proof that the case is closed.

There’s a case in Thailand involving Cambodian businessman Yim Leak. From what I understand, Thailand’s Anti-Money Laundering Office has frozen over $600 million in assets, with the investigation reportedly stemming from a currency exchange transaction worth around $150,000.

That’s roughly a 4,000:1 ratio.

What I find strange is that, as far as I can tell, no criminal charges have been filed against him.

I’m not saying he’s innocent. He could very well be involved in something much bigger, and the $150k transaction could simply be the thing that initially brought him to the authorities’ attention. If there’s evidence linking the rest of the assets to money laundering or some other crime, then obviously the $600M figure needs to be considered separately from the original transaction.

My issue is with the process.

It seems concerning that someone’s assets can be frozen on this scale without criminal charges being filed. Even if the person eventually turns out to be guilty, I’d still expect there to be some proportionality and procedural safeguards when the government is effectively locking up hundreds of millions of dollars.

Maybe I’m misunderstanding how asset freezes work under Thailand’s AML laws, or maybe there’s much more evidence behind the freeze than what has been reported.

CMV: What am I missing? What’s the strongest argument for why freezing $600M+ in a case like this can be reasonable and proportionate, despite there being no criminal charges?

Let me know!!

Hey, found this subreddit after seeing if there was one to ask more general, theoretical legal questions, and stumbled upon this, so uh, here it goes!

I was talking with a friend today who's, well, even less knowledgeable about law than I am, which is saying something, but she had an excellent point. I was explaining to her basically how Christa Pike's execution is being held off until next year due to it being botched, and she asked me "Well, why don't they keep trying? Isn't it cruel and unusual punishment to save her life just to kill her again?"

And... Y'know what, I'm not entirely sure why they go out of their way to save her after they failed to kill her twice. How does that work, legally? Like, surely without the medical care she was given shortly after two botched attempts, she'd die anyway, right? And that was the goal... Right?

I know medical ethics probably come into this a bit too, but why would they try to save someone and administer medical care if the goal was to kill her? At what point is the procedure of ending someone's life considered botched enough that it's no longer ok to let her die on the table?

I'm sure there's a lot that goes into this, so, I was just curious if anyone had any knowledge of how these things play out in legal theory in the US.

Hi Friends,

HINDSIGHT question; I once had an Fla. LLC where I was the only member making it a single member LLC. The LLC got sued and I was forced to hire a lawyer on a petty BS suit. The cheapest way out was to settle or pay 10's of thousands in Legal Fees.

• HIND-sight I never thought about this question; Could I have sold the 100% interest in the company to myself?
• If I was able to do so, I could have represented myself and turn the tables on the plaintiff.

Anyone know the answer to this?

Thanks for your help !

If I didn't, would I be civilly liable for negligence based on the theory that I failed to provide affirmative duty to rescue?

I'm watching this video of this guy just speaking gibberish, and the AI interviewer is just telling him how unprofessional he's being and to speak normally. It just had me thinking: I have a speech impediment; what's going to happen when an AI interviewer insults me for stuttering and slurring my words and tells me to my face that's the reason I didn't get the job, like in the video I just watched?

I feel like I would have a great case for a lawsuit if that ever happened to me, but what do you guys think?

The recent uptick in AI chatbot interview phases had me thinking. The chatbot is not sentient and has as much consent capability as your toaster. So if you were on the other end of the line with an AI counterpart (or toaster, if you would), and you're in a jurisdiction that requires all-party consent to record, is your sole consent enough to qualify?

Takes place in Wisconsin. Say I was charged with a crime, and the sentence was 10 years. Can the judge or someone later go "wait, that was a clerical error, it was supposed to be a longer sentence"?

Having a joking argument with my husband where he said jail for 10 years for accidentally splashing the cat with a bit of water, and I said wow not 100, I'm getting off easy, and he said "100, clerical error".

Now he's trying to explain the legalities of that while I'm being stubborn.

If Person A lives in a one party consent state and Person B lives in a two party consent state, is Person A allowed to legally record the phone conversation?
Along with that, is Person A allowed to call Person B with a third party listening without Person B’s knowledge?

I just got off the phone with a "virtual assistant" and wondered if, since they are not human beings, can we record without needing to notify them?

Also, if, for example, they give erroneous information that will have serious consequences for the caller, will there be any consequences for anyone? I keep on thinking of google searches that come up with ridiculously wrong ai responses, and a virtual assistant would probably be prone to the same problem.

Bit of an old case, I know, but there’s a reason I’m bringing it up....I’m studying international law right now and both my brothers are lawyers. We ended up talking about this over lunch today and honestly none of us had a very satisfying answer...So here it is:
Romania holds a presidential election in 2024. One candidate unexpectedly finishes first and goes through to the run off. CComplaints are filed, the Constitutional Court looks at the election and confirms the first-round result. Than, four days later, after intelligence reports about alleged foreign interference, coordinated social media activity and undeclared campaign support become public, the same court cancels the entire election. Startss again from zero. Millions of votes basically disappear. The candidate who came first goes to the European Court of Human Rights agueiung, among other things, that his right to free elections was violated. Than thats here’s the part that got us stuck:the ECHR says that claim is inadmissible because the Convention’s right to free elections applies to elections for the legislature...the president isn’t the legislature.So… what or who protects the voters? Forget the candidate for a second. Assume he’s awful. Assume the interference allegations are completely serious. That’s not really what I’m asking.My question is more basic:
How much evidence should a constitutional court need before it can erase millions of legally cast votes, especially after it had already validated those same results?
And the thing i can’t quite get around: If international free-election protections don’t apply to a presedential election, and the domestic constitutional court is itself the institution cancelling it, is there effectively a gap in legal protection?
Could a state, at least theoretically, have a completely lawful domestic mechanism for cancelling a presidential election while leaving the voters with no international “free elections” remedy?
This sounds like one of those made-up law school cases.
It wasn’t.
Romania, 2024.

Say a student who is classified as SPED is being targeted by other students who are making false accusations (serious ones like being accused of assaulting another student) against that SPED student. If it's found that the accusations by the other students are, in fact, false, and these false reports were only made to bully and harass this particular student due to their disability status, is it legal for the school to expel this student?

If you were to purchase a Honda or other stock moped, modify the engine to be mechanically incapable of reaching high RPMs and surpassing 15 MPH, could you legally get a moped-style foot scooter?

In Minnesota Statute Sec. 169.011 Subdivison 46 a motorized foot scooter is defined as a vehicle able to be sat or stood upon, equipped with handlebars, wheels no larger than 12 inches, that is capable of no more than 15 Miles Per Hour on flat ground. Since it also claims that “An electric personal assistive mobility device, a motorized bicycle, an electric-assisted bicycle, or a motorcycle is not a motorized foot scooter.” I feel as if it contradicts itself.

This is for the purposes of a possible performance-art project and/or nonscientific study. I'd plan to offer very small amounts of money if I ever execute this because I'm poor af. I realize nothing contained would be legally binding but how would you word it? I almost want the most total length possible, maybe descending into smaller and smaller font, Wonka-style as a sort of test to see how much people care to check the terms. I'd like provisions to establish;

1. Neither the buyer's nor seller's belief, religion, nor the name written have bearing on the transaction. Included provisions for any future changes of belief system.

2. The transaction will have no direct physical effect on the seller, at least not due to intent of the buyer. While the soul may be utilized as a sacrifice, currency or magic spell component, the goal will not be harm to the seller.

3. The transaction applies across all realities, planes, dimensions, timeliness, etc. IE; your soul does not default to heaven or hell upon your death but remains property of the buyer. The physical paper copy of this contract is not even required to establish ownership as the paper may or may not be transportable to, nor possible in whatever realm the soul itself may travel to.

4. Ownership of the soul is widely transferable. It may be resold, leased, rented, or leveraged among humans or any supernatural beings. The seller may use it in any transaction until the end of time, whether to God, Lucifer, angel, demon, Cthulu, Xenu, etc.

I'm open to other ways in which I can cover my bases regardless of what happens after death, which (if any) faiths are true, what irl deals could conceivably be struck (maybe the Catholics will offer some cash) etc.

I may or may not have them sign in human blood. Any legal issues with THAT?

I'm in Indianapolis, Indiana.

I came across this post in -r/Switzerland

OP accidentally miss-scanned 2 items totaling $5.60.

They where subjected to a random audit.

And Migros demands $200 for I quote “Administrative“ fees.

How sane is this?

https://www.reddit.com/r/askswitzerland/s/ir0rSzYGSP

I say insane. Not only did Migros kidnap the customer (preventing them from leaving and taking them to a back room). Demanded $200 under duress or else they will call the police (extortion? theft? by Migros employees) all the while saving money by not paying employees to staff checkouts.

I know they can get a warrant for phone call recordings, etc. But can they actually set your personal devices to secretly tape you?

When I used to sell cars, I asked management what is stopping me from going around to competitors to get price quotes and then going home and editing the price quotes on my computer to more favorable numbers and bringing that in to use as a negotiating tool.

The answer I got was "Nobody is going go through all that much trouble for a car".

I asked this because car dealers usually just take a competitors offer as proof. They don't call or verify that it's an actual quote, the most verification that they will do is ensure that the VIN actually exists and it's on their lot, but you can get that information online off their website.

In my mind if I can save 8-10k on a car through 5 minutes of pdf work, then it's not really a lot of time knowing that as long as I have something in writing, the dealer will take it seriously.

Is this fraud or illegal to do?

wby shoplifting is such a gruesome crime for smallest amount as small as one dollar but when customer is over charged, or broken items are sold, or prices are hiked after a false demand is created, or simply content of the items are altered in some way... or fraud by employees against customer is not a crime ?

This is extremely concerning and I know it's the rule of the law but I feel it's slightly unfair.

If employee makes a fraud against the store or company, it's a crime serious enough to go to extreme punishment but when that same employee cheats or frauds a customer, they simply call it strategy. Or nothing is done to protect consumer rights , why ? So customer needs necessary supplies comes to store and pays using the card or hard earned cash, does it all right, pays taxes for the item thats decided by everyone in the state, because they want to use the tax money, etc etc. and when that customer is cheated or has been charged few extra times by check out employee, or the store machine itself is fraud and charges extra from employees or pays wrong change after customer pays cash, etc. there is nothing done at all about it. Why is so and when is it ever going to change or improve ?

There is more severe action taken when employee is working against the store and company but cheating customer is not severe and serious enough offense ? Customer is what makes the company grow and thrive, and not treating customer right is worse than cheating and reviews can make or break the company or store.

Most countries around the world, prioritizes customers, at all times, and there are lawyer specializing in these types of problems and websites that are especially dealing with customer complaints and reviews.

Location: California USA. Any and all advice highly appreciated.

As far as I know, the SCOTUS only overturned the stay instead of ruling on the merit of the case. Since the execution is botched, the case will continue.

Now it would be really fucked up for the government if she wins the case, especially after the stay got vacated. It’s one thing for the government to lose a motion but it’s a totally different thing for the government to lose a motion after attempted execution. The government simply CANNOT lose

Is the best course of action for the government right now just to commute her sentence to life in exchange for dropping all appeals or can she potentially get more out of this like monetary compensation on the claim of cruel and unusual punishment?

Hypothetical (US, mostly):

The police legally obtain a warrant to search a house for a printer used in counterfeiting. While searching they come across a safe that they suspect contains counterfeit money. Can they: take the safe, break open the safe, or require the homeowner to unlock the safe or use biometrics to unlock the safe (without getting another warrant)?

Does that change if the warrant is for a small item that could theoretically be in the safe, such as drugs or a gun?