New topic
Printablematt said: XxAxX said: anything else is hearsay, or if actually stolen from the corporate entity, will be simply inadmissible.
Not necessarily. It may fall under the hearsay exemption for "party-opponent admissions." See Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(D). Many (most?) states have used the federal rules as the model for their own evidence rules. However, here in Washington state, they modified this rule, and it's harder to get such statements into evidence. Basically, in Washington, to get these statements in under the party-opponent admission exemption, the co-worker had to be authorized by the company to make the statement(s) on the company's behalf. Washington ER 801(d)(2)(iv). Bottom line: it depends upon 1) the court (Federal or state? If so, which state?) and the surrounding facts. Of course, all of the above is academic and doesn't answer nakedpianoplayer's question. And in any event, she should talk to her lawyer about it. For starters, this new information may require the amendment of past discovery responses under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(e), or the applicable state's version of this rule. (Disclaimer: While I am a lawyer, this post is for discussion purposes only, is not legal advice, and creates no attorney-client relationship.) SNAP !!! thats sexy 
no, seriously.... heres the way it works here in kansas from what i understand... no matter what you have on paper, it is only hearsay in court, you have to have each and every person show up to court to back what they have said... and while kansas is an 'at will' state.. and you can have your housing/employment taken at any time without reason... the fact is the woman DID offer reasons, reasons that lead to discrimination, and that part is illegal. i want her out of there before she is able to uproot any more families and cause any more troubles for people. and, to be honest, i said it before, i'll say it again.... it pisses me off when people who are in positions of power abuse their power and use it in ways that hurt people for no reason.... this move cost me a lot of money that i didnt have, upset my kids, stressed me the hell out, and made the last month of my life a living hell ! now its time for the answer, why did you do this to us ????? One of the best days of my life... http://prince.org/msg/100/291111
love is a gift 
an artist with no fans is really just a man with a hobby.... | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
I'd sleep with the judge!  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
oh, and while i know the HUD office i called is the 4 state region HUD office, that makes it a federal place that took my complaint originally.... but then was passed down to the city level to have it investigated, i dont know whether that makes it city, state, or federal.... im assuming that because federal did it first, thats most likely what it would be  ?One of the best days of my life... http://prince.org/msg/100/291111
love is a gift
an artist with no fans is really just a man with a hobby.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
althom said: I'd sleep with the judge!
ok, you do that, and see if that helps me out, k ? One of the best days of my life... http://prince.org/msg/100/291111
love is a gift
an artist with no fans is really just a man with a hobby.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
nakedpianoplayer said: althom said: I'd sleep with the judge!
ok, you do that, and see if that helps me out, k ? God...I hope it's not an old man again.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
althom said: nakedpianoplayer said: ok, you do that, and see if that helps me out, k ? God...I hope it's not an old man again.  One of the best days of my life... http://prince.org/msg/100/291111
love is a gift
an artist with no fans is really just a man with a hobby.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
tell the person "FUCK U, PAY ME!!" I will forever love and miss you...my sweet Prince. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
matt said: XxAxX said: anything else is hearsay, or if actually stolen from the corporate entity, will be simply inadmissible.
Not necessarily. It may fall under the hearsay exemption for "party-opponent admissions." See Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(D). Many (most?) states have used the federal rules as the model for their own evidence rules. However, here in Washington state, they modified this rule, and it's harder to get such statements into evidence. Basically, in Washington, to get these statements in under the party-opponent admission exemption, the co-worker had to be authorized by the company to make the statement(s) on the company's behalf. Washington ER 801(d)(2)(iv). Bottom line: it depends upon 1) the court (Federal or state? If so, which state?) and the surrounding facts. Of course, all of the above is academic and doesn't answer nakedpianoplayer's question. And in any event, she should talk to her lawyer about it. For starters, this new information may require the amendment of past discovery responses under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(e), or the applicable state's version of this rule. (Disclaimer: While I am a lawyer, this post is for discussion purposes only, is not legal advice, and creates no attorney-client relationship.) 
| |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| Sr. Moderator
|
nakedpianoplayer said: SNAP !!! thats sexy
no, seriously.... heres the way it works here in kansas from what i understand... no matter what you have on paper, it is only hearsay in court, you have to have each and every person show up to court to back what they have said...
I wish it were that simple.  Hearsay is a very complicated subject... when I took Evidence in law school, I think we spent about a month just on hearsay.Please note: effective March 21, 2010, I've stepped down from my prince.org Moderator position. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
moderatormatt said: nakedpianoplayer said: SNAP !!! thats sexy
no, seriously.... heres the way it works here in kansas from what i understand... no matter what you have on paper, it is only hearsay in court, you have to have each and every person show up to court to back what they have said...
I wish it were that simple. Hearsay is a very complicated subject... when I took Evidence in law school, I think we spent about a month just on hearsay.ok 
i need to get us a lawyer.... there is just to much stuff that we dont know what to do with
man, this shit is complicated !  One of the best days of my life... http://prince.org/msg/100/291111
love is a gift
an artist with no fans is really just a man with a hobby.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
matt said: XxAxX said: anything else is hearsay, or if actually stolen from the corporate entity, will be simply inadmissible.
Not necessarily. It may fall under the hearsay exemption for "party-opponent admissions." See Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(D). Many (most?) states have used the federal rules as the model for their own evidence rules. However, here in Washington state, they modified this rule, and it's harder to get such statements into evidence. Basically, in Washington, to get these statements in under the party-opponent admission exemption, the co-worker had to be authorized by the company to make the statement(s) on the company's behalf. Washington ER 801(d)(2)(iv). Bottom line: it depends upon 1) the court (Federal or state? If so, which state?) and the surrounding facts. Of course, all of the above is academic and doesn't answer nakedpianoplayer's question. And in any event, she should talk to her lawyer about it. For starters, this new information may require the amendment of past discovery responses under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(e), or the applicable state's version of this rule. (Disclaimer: While I am a lawyer, this post is for discussion purposes only, is not legal advice, and creates no attorney-client relationship.) here in MN i beleive the evidence would be inadmissible, if obtained like that. disclaimer: i'm not an attorney, nor do i WANT to be an attorney, i work for them and that's quite enough  any resemblance between legal advice and my words is pure coincidental | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
XxAxX said: matt said: Not necessarily. It may fall under the hearsay exemption for "party-opponent admissions." See Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(D). Many (most?) states have used the federal rules as the model for their own evidence rules. However, here in Washington state, they modified this rule, and it's harder to get such statements into evidence. Basically, in Washington, to get these statements in under the party-opponent admission exemption, the co-worker had to be authorized by the company to make the statement(s) on the company's behalf. Washington ER 801(d)(2)(iv). Bottom line: it depends upon 1) the court (Federal or state? If so, which state?) and the surrounding facts. Of course, all of the above is academic and doesn't answer nakedpianoplayer's question. And in any event, she should talk to her lawyer about it. For starters, this new information may require the amendment of past discovery responses under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(e), or the applicable state's version of this rule. (Disclaimer: While I am a lawyer, this post is for discussion purposes only, is not legal advice, and creates no attorney-client relationship.) here in MN i beleive the evidence would be inadmissible, if obtained like that. disclaimer: i'm not an attorney, nor do i WANT to be an attorney, i work for them and that's quite enough any resemblance between legal advice and my words is pure coincidental you guys and your disclaimers down on the bottom of your posts... you have seen to much legal stuff in your day  relax, im not gonna be evil with anyone ....
anyway, im a tad concerned, how am i supposed to prove my case then if none of this is admissible ? oh, ok, wait, i think i understand.... youre saying that she has to stand behind what she says, right ? i cant just say, well so and so told me.... right ? One of the best days of my life... http://prince.org/msg/100/291111
love is a gift
an artist with no fans is really just a man with a hobby.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
nakedpianoplayer said: XxAxX said: here in MN i beleive the evidence would be inadmissible, if obtained like that. disclaimer: i'm not an attorney, nor do i WANT to be an attorney, i work for them and that's quite enough any resemblance between legal advice and my words is pure coincidental you guys and your disclaimers down on the bottom of your posts... you have seen to much legal stuff in your day relax, im not gonna be evil with anyone ....
anyway, im a tad concerned, how am i supposed to prove my case then if none of this is admissible ? oh, ok, wait, i think i understand.... youre saying that she has to stand behind what she says, right ? i cant just say, well so and so told me.... right ? that's right. she has to step forward and give a statement, sign an affidavit, etc. if you stand up and say 'someone told me this', it won't work. at least, in MN* *STILL not legal advice | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
XxAxX said: nakedpianoplayer said: you guys and your disclaimers down on the bottom of your posts... you have seen to much legal stuff in your day relax, im not gonna be evil with anyone ....
anyway, im a tad concerned, how am i supposed to prove my case then if none of this is admissible ? oh, ok, wait, i think i understand.... youre saying that she has to stand behind what she says, right ? i cant just say, well so and so told me.... right ? that's right. she has to step forward and give a statement, sign an affidavit, etc. if you stand up and say 'someone told me this', it won't work. at least, in MN* *STILL not legal advice i can understand that 
but, in this situation, its a little bit different, well, maybe its not, who knows... the HUD investigators are going out to the property to go through records both past and present, statements of other tenents, they will also interview each person who works in the office... so, if i give her the answers shes looking for, and then the investigator person goes in there and asks the questions, then, isnt that enough proof ? see what im saying ??? and, if i seem jumpy - its because im running out of time, my appointment is in just over 2 hours  so, whatever decision i make i gotta do it quick !One of the best days of my life... http://prince.org/msg/100/291111
love is a gift
an artist with no fans is really just a man with a hobby.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
nakedpianoplayer said: XxAxX said: that's right. she has to step forward and give a statement, sign an affidavit, etc. if you stand up and say 'someone told me this', it won't work. at least, in MN* *STILL not legal advice i can understand that
but, in this situation, its a little bit different, well, maybe its not, who knows... the HUD investigators are going out to the property to go through records both past and present, statements of other tenents, they will also interview each person who works in the office... so, if i give her the answers shes looking for, and then the investigator person goes in there and asks the questions, then, isnt that enough proof ? see what im saying ??? and, if i seem jumpy - its because im running out of time, my appointment is in just over 2 hours so, whatever decision i make i gotta do it quick !i think so. matt could likely help. i think that could work. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
XxAxX said: nakedpianoplayer said: i can understand that
but, in this situation, its a little bit different, well, maybe its not, who knows... the HUD investigators are going out to the property to go through records both past and present, statements of other tenents, they will also interview each person who works in the office... so, if i give her the answers shes looking for, and then the investigator person goes in there and asks the questions, then, isnt that enough proof ? see what im saying ??? and, if i seem jumpy - its because im running out of time, my appointment is in just over 2 hours so, whatever decision i make i gotta do it quick !i think so. matt could likely help. i think that could work. well, you know how those damn lawyers are 
j/k
i dont wanna chase anyone down for legal help here.... i know he probably gets blindsided with people asking questions all the time 
i think im just gonna talk things over with this woman, shes not the lawyer, but shes the woman who's taking statements to find out if there was infact discrimination ... which if they find out there wasnt i will be shocked !
i just want to find a good, healthy, happy place to live.... life's to damn short for this shit. One of the best days of my life... http://prince.org/msg/100/291111
love is a gift
an artist with no fans is really just a man with a hobby.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
As I always say nobody likes a snitch...but fuck...if you have to use the information use it. You have to look out for number 1 and that is yourself. If this person gave you information that could get them fired, then they should of kept their mouth shut and not told you if they were worried about getting fired. Any good lawyer....if there is one  will tell you that you need to end this friendship with this person, its going to end anyway, because its a frienship built on information and a law suit...these are not normal circumstances that a friendship is built on. Also they are going to tell you to not discuss this issue with anyone besides them and the judge and jury. It just seems odd that this person would give you all of this information and then become your friend....It makes me think alterior motives are going on in this persons head. But that is cause I always think the worst of people until I know they can be trusted...yes I am fucked up for this, but that is besides the point. She has involved and compromised her job on her own, by giving you the information to begin with. If she thinks she is safe that is her own stupidity cause nobody is safe 100%. If she was worried about her job, she should of thought it through more, before she gave you that information.
Basically what I am saying is that...if you want to make yourself happy you need to do what you gotta do for yourself...fuck all this feeling bad shit for getting someone fired or what not...that is not going to make it any better for you. Don't tip toe around this shit, do what you gotta do....look out for number 1 and that is you. Just my 
*Disclaimer I am not a lawyer so you can take this advice and use it how you want Who needs a lawyer when you got my advice on life | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
what are you suing for? I mean, in terms of what damage are you going to inflict on your landlord for this? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
bizarre said: what are you suing for? I mean, in terms of what damage are you going to inflict on your landlord for this?
well, i will definately be suing for the cost of my move... other than that, just small things they couldnt fix with money even if they tried, like, my daughter lost her cat during our move... nothing is going to make her feel better about that  all of us lost the friends and support that we had in our neighborhood... now, yes, there were some CRAZY folks that lived near us - but there were also some good people that we got to know and were part of a 'support system' if you will.... i dont have any of that now. and the kids had to leave all of their friends behind.
i guess im angry because i know why she did it... and i know its wrong.... and there was nothing i could do to stop it. they should be responsible for the problems they caused us..... One of the best days of my life... http://prince.org/msg/100/291111
love is a gift
an artist with no fans is really just a man with a hobby.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| Sr. Moderator
|
nakedpianoplayer said: i need to get us a lawyer.... there is just to much stuff that we dont know what to do with
You don't have a lawyer? I'd strongly suggest getting one ASAP. Obviously the company is going to have an attorney(s) representing them -- in fact, I'm sure they already do -- and it simply isn't a fair fight if you try to represent yourself. A few times, I've gone up against pro se litigants (i.e., people representing themselves). I dislike doing it for various reasons, even though the lack of opposing counsel helps my client's case because the other party usually doesn't know how "the system" works. Please note: effective March 21, 2010, I've stepped down from my prince.org Moderator position. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
matt said: nakedpianoplayer said: i need to get us a lawyer.... there is just to much stuff that we dont know what to do with
You don't have a lawyer? I'd strongly suggest getting one ASAP. Obviously the company is going to have an attorney(s) representing them -- in fact, I'm sure they already do -- and it simply isn't a fair fight if you try to represent yourself. A few times, I've gone up against pro se litigants (i.e., people representing themselves). I dislike doing it for various reasons, even though the lack of opposing counsel helps my client's case because the other party usually doesn't know how "the system" works. i have made calls this week and am looking forward to a response soon i hope... things are getting crazy, and folks are asking me to make decisions that i dont know what to do about - its stessing me the hell out to be honest with you LOL... hopefully i will have someone very soon and i thank you so much for your (not legal) help
sidenote, it must be a great thing to know how to protect yourself in a world full of people that dont care about your personal rights and/or needs... i wish you well in your career and i hope you stand up for the lil guys out there  One of the best days of my life... http://prince.org/msg/100/291111
love is a gift
an artist with no fans is really just a man with a hobby.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |