Can you waive the right to sue?
Of course. However you can not waive the right to sue or press charges in criminal matters. (That means that when behavior by someone reaches criminal level, it is not protected by any agreements. (Waiver of liability)
Do tenants even have the right to sue a landlord?
Disclaimer: I’m not a lawyer, so this isn’t legal advice. For that, you need a lawyer.Yes, they do. Tenants have the right to sue a landlord. Being a tenant doesn’t mean giving up your legal rights or protections.The exception, sort of, is if the lease contains a binding arbitration agreement. Even then, the tenant could attempt to argue that the binding arbitration agreement was invalid. (I’m not sure on what grounds, but you can attempt to argue almost anything.)Having said that, I’ve never seen a residential lease with an arbitration clause in it. I’m sure they exist, but they’re not common.The tenant would be well-advised, though, to have a solid case. Most landlords aren’t dumb. And most document situations and conditions better than tenants do. Further, in some states, corporations are required to be represented by a lawyer, even in small claims court. So it’s entirely possible that a tenant could sue a landlord in small claims court and find him/herself arguing not against the landlord but against the lawyer.
Does my husband's former employer have a right to sue him for downloading work after being let go?
If by "downloading work" you mean that after he was actually terminated and notified of that termination, he intentionally logged into his former employer's computing services and downloaded documents or other material belonging to his former employer? If so, not only can they sue him, but he probably committed at least one criminal act for which he can be prosecuted.I suggest you consult with an attorney, and for the love of Pete, stop talking about it on the Internet as anything further you say about this can be admitted into evidence against you or your husband.
Do I have the right to sue my towns code enforcement?
Well,not personally me. my friend is being harassed by our local towns code enforcement-the other day, he spotted a car across his house and he confronts the man,and he claimed to be in code enforcement and the head officer ordered him to "observe" his house. he specifically told the man to not enter the house without a search warrant. two days later,the head officer,two other code enforcement officers, the judge who signed the warrant for them (who is fully aware that he is fighting the accusations in court already!) and two officers arrive at the house he is renting to a few families (Latino families,this towns code enforcement is notorious for harassing Latino families disguising code inspection for immigrant inspection, New York Times even made an article about it!) and barge in the renting families home,lined them up and demanded to see their identifications. even the children,who range from 5 years old to 15. the kids were scared so they began to cry,and it just went on and on. he has had previous harassment from them due to renting out another house to another Latino family. so my question is,is what they are doing illegal and eligible to bring this to court? (stalking,harassment,etc.") I need a real and thorough answer. thank you!
Should I have the right to sue someone who hurts my emotions?
YES…you have the right but it will cost you money, time and many more things..To prevent behavior that can cause severe anguish, the law has created a tort called “Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED)”.An intentional infliction of emotional distress claim allows those who are emotionally injured by another person to recover for emotional injuries as well as any physical injuries that result from distress induced by the bad behavior, such as migraines, ulcers or a miscarriage.In order to prove intentional infliction of emotional distress, following must be shown :The defendant must act either intentionally or recklesslyThe defendant’s conduct must be extreme and outrageousThe plaintiff must have suffered extreme emotional distressThe plaintiff’s conduct must be the cause of that distressSome examples of behavior that may constitute intentional infliction of emotional distress include a person telling a parent their child has died, while knowing it wasn’t true; a medical professional telling a patient he or she is HIV positive as a joke; or a person threatening to shoot another person if he or she does not meet certain demands.Some behavior that may seem like intentional infliction of emotional distress but probably is not would include a person having an affair with a friend’s spouse; a landlord evicting a dying person who hasn’t paid rent for a few months; or an action that was intended as a harmless prank, such as toilet papering someone’s house.When determining whether intentional infliction of emotional distress has occurred, a judge or jury must take into account the emotional state of the victim and whether the plaintiff knew of that emotional state.It is not enough for the defendant to simply have behaved badly or even very badly – the behavior must be atrocious and harmful to one’s mental health.
What does it really mean when you have a right to sue letter from the EEOC?
The document which the EEOC sent to you is one that you must have in order for you to file your lawsuit in Federal Court. It is a prerequisite that before you can file a lawsuit in Federal Court for employment discrimination, you must first file a Charge with EEOC (which you have done) and that you receive the notice of Right to Sue, or Notice of Rights (as it is sometimes called), which you received today. You should not be concerned about the box checked. The language is merely an opinion by EEOC, and that opinion is not evidence which can be used during your lawsuit. That opinion is not binding upon the Court. The law says that an employment discrimination trial (based upon the filing of an EEOC Charge) is a "de novo" trial, meaning that any previous decision or opinion about the facts of your case a irrelevant -- everything starts anew. The reality of the situation is that the EEOC is, for all practical purposes, the "front door" to the Courthouse, because you are required to go through them in order to file your lawsuit. Yes, it is a good thing to receive a "right to sue" letter from EEOC if you desire to file a lawsuit for employment discrimination. The most important thing about that Notice is that you have 90 days from today to file your lawsuit. What you probably do not know is that nationwide, EEOC receives tens of thousands of charges every year and most of the Right-to-Sue letters issued on these charges have the same box checked. Most lawyers and judges realize that EEOC does not have the resources or ability to perform an in depth investigation of every charge, so they have to let most of them go out of their system with this box checked. So. don't worry about all of this; you should concern yourself with (1) getting your lawsuit timely filed and (2) getting your evidence of discrimination together so that you can either (a) win at trial or (b) put the defendant in a position that they are forced to settle with you. GOOD LUCK !!
Can a step father sue the father?
Who has legal custody of the children? What does the support order say? You can try and if you don't have the right to sue him the judge will throw your case out. The kids have rights to that money. It is meant for them. To give them the shelter, food, clothing, etc. they are entitled to. It isn't something you are entitled to so don't go into the courts with that attitude. It is being done for the sake of the kids. Why won't the biological mother go back to family court to enforce the child support order? She may want him to stay out of her and their lives, and does not want him to get any visitation. Alot of women make that deal. She is the one who would have the right to sue him. Talk to her. Tell her about how much better the kids' lives would be if he paid what he should be paying. If you have to go to counseling then do it before it destroys your marriage.
Are the liability waivers you sign waiving your right to sue legally binding as pertains to US law?
First- contract interpretation is going to be decided according to state law, so there are potentially 50 different answers.That said, state courts will uphold the provisions that say someone has no liability for a given action and that in exchange for some benefit you agree not to sue them.Said another way, if the health club wants you to sign that you release them from liability for any injury you might have on those torture rack machines, it is probably effective. Sometimes there are fact patterns and theories to get around that. Part of legal training and experience has to do with analysis of language to see precisely what it says and how it affects a given situation.Using the health club example, if you tear your rotator cuff using the pull down weights, the health club will likley winIf the club modified the machine, or saw you using it wrong and didn't stop you, you have a better chance, regardless what the paper says.Things like performance tickets may be handled differently because you have no chance to negotiate- it is a take it or leave it proposition. We call that a contract of adhesion and it is construed more strictly against the performance venue.However, kudos to you for reading the back of tickets purchase orders and fine print. Not many do. In my field there is an entire area of law that has arisen based on the interpretation of what the parties really meant when one tried to write a liability waiver into a contract.[For any Illinois lawyers, I am referring to Kotecki waivers]This is getting close to actual legal advice so I am adding the disclaimer. I am not your attorney. Feel free to show my post to an attorney who works in your state. You should rely on their advice, not just my information.