#file court documents

[forecast0ctopus]

arthur (sopping wet, very confused, framed for murder) and merlin (probably having a heart attack, also very confused, got a law degree at some point?)

follow up to this because i just think its fun

[alexcabotgf]

not to be true crime posting on main but i think i'm falling down the wm3 rabbit hole again

[the-meme-monarch]

hi. i am back to reading an unauthorized fan treatise which i greatly recommend and so spoilers. absolutely obsessed how gottie started off writing this essay to prove rob and nathan were dating and went to further parasocial and stalkerish means and subsequently has gotten entangled with All The Shit of rob's past (and present!) dark web/criminal activity which caught his attention and he's going to further lengths in attempt to silence her Such As Breaking Into Her Home To Steal Her Laptop and all the while she finds the time to write Basically real person fiction about how she thinks him and nathan fell in love. she is Actively being targeted by an A-list celebrity.

[random-kazakh-stuff]

There is a common play on words in Russian about a town in Kazakhstan. It goes like this:

A: Где ты шлялся, пес? ("Where were you, dog?")

B: Где, где? В Караганде!("Where, where? In Karaganda!")

The play here is that Where and Karaganda(declenised, it's when you change the ending of a word, because grammar) have the same ending -de.

There is however many interesting things happening at the same time with this saying.

First of all, it's origin.

It can't be said when or where exactly this phrase appeared, but some argue that it could have been a common answer from people who had been released from Karlag(Karaganda Corrective Labour Camp) which around a million people went through from 1930 to 1959. It is suggested that people wouldn't want to say that they went to Karlag so they just dismissively answered that they were in Karaganda.

Secondly, there is the way the phrase traveled through the years.

Russian is spoken less and less in most countries that were once part of USSR. At the same time, there are young people today who have never learned the geography of other countries(in comparison to times in USSR when they would apparently learn about the entire USSR).

So there is an group of young people who might learn Russian and hear the phrase but never find out that Karaganda is a real plase, in Kazakhstan, and not a imaginary or a funny word.

There is also a monument for the phrase! where? guess.

The animal is marmot btw which is the symbol animal of Karaganda.

[ID: A photo of the monument on a sunny day. All of the figures are of a dirty coppery orange colour. From left to right: a man standing with a suitcase at his feet looking confused, and holding a hand close to his face as if looking out for the horizon; a signpost with arrows pointing to different directions, top to down: "Karaganda 0km", "Astana", "Moscow"; a sizeable marmot with a smug face leaning on the sign; a man in a cap spreading his arms, as if trying to explain something]

[femmefitz]

Image ID:

A tweet by Yaman Salahi with two screenshots of court documents attached. The tweet reads:

"A federal judge just ruled that the Biden admin appears to be supporting a genocide, but that he must dismiss the case under the political question doctrine despite preferring otherwise. Alarm bells should be going off in the White House and State Dept. Well done @theCCR."

The court documents read:

"United States District Court, Northern District of California.

Defense for Children International-Palestine, et Al.,

Plaintiffs

V.

Joseph R. Biden, et al.,

Defendants.

Case no. 23-cv-05829-JSW

Order granting motion to dismiss and denying motion for preliminary injunction. Re: Dkt. Nos. 19, 38.

Similarly, the undisputed evidence before this Court comports with the finding of the ICJ and indicates that the current treatment of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip by the Israeli military may plausibly constitute a genocide in violation of international law. Both the uncontroverted testimony of the Plaintiffs and the expert opinion proffered at the hearing on this motion as well as statements made by officers of the Israeli government indicate that the ongoing military siege in Gaza is intended to eradicate a whole people and therefore plausibly falls within the international prohibition against genocide. (See, e.g., Dkt. No. 19-6, Declaration of Drs. Cox, Stanford, and Trachtenberg at 9-14.)

It is every individual's obligation to confront the current siege in Gaza, but it is also this Court's obligation to remain within the metes and bounds of its jurisdictional scope.

Conclusion

There are rare occasions in which the preferred outcome is inaccessible to the Court. This is one of those cases. The Court is bound by precedent and the division of our coordinate branches of government to abstain from exercising judgment in this matter. Yet, as the ICJ has found, it is plausible that Israel's conduct amounts to genocide. This Court implores Defendants to examine the results of their unflagging support of the military siege against the Palestinians in Gaza. "

End ID.

[somerandomjewelleryonthefloor]

Really big Afonso x Joaquin x Marcus post rn:

Afonso x Joaquin is basically Afonso trying to handle horn dog man Joaquin from kissing him everytime they're in a space together.

Afonso x Marcus is basically Afonso trying to handle all the sweetness Marcus gives him and not die from all the sugar intake of sweetheart gifts and dates and get diabetes.

Afonso x Marcus & Joaquin is basically Afonso trying to handle horn dog man Joaquin from kissing him everytime they're in a space together, handle all the sweetness Marcus gives him and not die from all the sugar intake of sweetheart gifts and dates and get diabetes, and also Marcus trying to handle Joaquin from kissing him all the time too and Joaquin trying not to get diabetes from his sweethearting- ALL simultaneously.

2 calm energys x chaotic.

Their ship name is: MarJoaAfo/papercharmers

[advkaransinghlegal]

उधारी वसूलने के कानूनी उपाय क्या हैं?

उधारी वसूलने के लिए कई कानूनी उपाय हैं। यदि आपके द्वारा उधार दी गई राशि वापस नहीं की जा रही है, तो आप निम्नलिखित कदम उठा सकते हैं:

लिखित प्रमाण:

सुनिश्चित करें कि आपके पास उधारी के संबंध में पर्याप्त साक्ष्य हैं जैसे कि ऋण रसीद, चेक, बैंक ट्रांजैक्शन, ईमेल या संदेश के माध्यम से वार्ता��ाप।

नोटिस भेजें:

एक कानूनी नोटिस भेजें जिसमें आप उधारी के विवरण को स्पष्ट रूप से बताएँ और वापसी के लिए एक समय सीमा निर्धारित करें। यह एक औपचारिक प्रक्रिया होती है और इसे वकील द्वारा तैयार किया जा सकता है।

पुलिस में शिकायत:

यदि आपको लगता है कि उधारीदार धोखाधड़ी कर रहा है, तो आप पुलिस में शिकायत दर्ज कर सकते हैं। इसके लिए आपको उचित सबूत प्रस्तुत करने होंगे।

उपभोक्ता फोरम:

यदि उधारी ब्याज के साथ है और यह उपभोक्ता मामला बनता है, तो आप उपभोक्ता फोरम में शिकायत कर सकते हैं।

न्यायालय में मामला दायर करना:

यदि व्यक्ति पैसे नहीं चुका रहा है और अन्य सभी उपाय विफल हो गए हैं, तो आप उस व्यक्ति के खिलाफ सामान्य न्यायालय में मामला दायर कर सकते हैं। इस प्रक्रिया में वकील की मदद लेना उचित होगा।

मध्यस्थता और विवाद निपटान:

कई बार, कोर्ट में जाने से पहले विवाद को मध्यस्थता के माध्यम से हल करने की कोशिश की जा सकती है। यह एक अधिक सरल और त्वरित प्रक्रिया हो सकती है।

समझौता करना:

यदि आपकी स्थिति अनुमति देती है, तो आप उधारीदार के साथ समझौता करने की कोशिश करें। कभी-कभी, एक बातचीत से समाधान हो सकता है।

इंटरनेट और डिजिटल फोरम:

कुछ मामले, विशेष रूप से यदि वे छोटे हैं या छोटे ट्रांजैक्शन हैं, तो आप ऑनलाइन विवाद समाधान प्लेटफार्मों पर भी ले जा सकते हैं।

इन सभी उपायों के साथ-साथ, यह भी महत्वपूर्ण है कि आप सभी कानूनी प्रक्रियाओं और नियमों का पालन करें। सलाहकार या वकील से मार्गदर्शन लेना हमेशा फायदेमंद होता है।

Advocate Karan Singh (Kanpur Nagar)

navneet.25dec@gmail.com

8188810555, 7007528025

[nationallawreview]

Dependent Work Permits – Is the U.S. Catching Up with Other Immigration Destinations?

There are many ways in which the U.S. immigration system is lagging behind those of other countries. We still put physical visas in passports – something Australia stopped doing nearly 10 years ago when they converted to a purely electronic visa system. Our immigration system is predominantly paper-based, with limited options for electronic filings, an area where other countries have fully…

[beemovieerotica]

continually awed by how american states function like separate countries

I held back on getting my gender changed in the state of Georgia because it required filing a court case and appearing before a judge to prove that I had transitioned enough to warrant calling myself male on my documents. there was a strong possibility they could deny me because I hadn't undergone any type of surgery (a requirement under Georgia law that is waived only sometimes), despite passing as male 100% of the time.

this morning I went to the Maryland vehicle administration building and they had a touch screen with buttons that said "male" and "female."

I paused and asked the lady "I can choose male, right?" and she looked at me (again, I'm just some guy with a beard) (and I think she misheard me) and she was like "Oh! Do you want to be female now?" I said no, my Georgia license (directly in front of her) says female, they wouldn't let me change it, can I be male now?

she said to just pick whichever I wanted. I got my updated license in 5 minutes.

[courtcourierfortstjohn]

CourtCourier

Welcome to CourtCourier, your trusted partner in legal support solutions. With years of dedicated service, we take pride in being a cornerstone in the legal community, providing unparalleled process-serving expertise. At CourtCourier, we understand the critical role we play in the legal process, and our skilled team is committed to delivering reliable and efficient services.

Founded on the principles of integrity and professionalism, CourtCourier has become a beacon of trust for attorneys, law firms, and legal professionals across BC. Our mission is to seamlessly bridge the gap between legal documentation and its rightful recipients, ensuring that justice is served promptly and accurately.

What sets CourtCourier apart is not just our experience but our genuine love for the community we serve. We recognize the impact our services have on individuals, businesses, and the legal system as a whole. Our team is not only proficient in the intricacies of process-serving but is also deeply rooted in the values that define our local community.

Contact Info-

CourtCourier

Address- 6419 B Airport Rd, Fort St John, BC V1J 6A1, Canada

Phone- +1 778-760-3800

Business Email- service@courtcourier.ca

Website- https://courtcourier.ca/

Business Hour- Mon - Sun: 6am-8pm

Payment Methods- E-Transfer, Cheques, Credit Card

[courtcourierpentictonbc]

CourtCourier

Address: 129 Nanaimo Ave W. Penticton, BC V2A 1N2

Phone: 778-760-3800

Website: https://courtcourier.ca/

Business Email: service@courtcourier.ca

Hours: Mon - Sun: 6am-8pm

Payment Methods: E-Transfer, Cheques, Credit Card

Welcome to CourtCourier, your trusted partner in legal support solutions. With years of dedicated service, we take pride in being a cornerstone in the legal community, providing unparalleled process-serving expertise. At CourtCourier, we understand the critical role we play in the legal process, and our skilled team is committed to delivering reliable and efficient services.

Founded on the principles of integrity and professionalism, CourtCourier has become a beacon of trust for attorneys, law firms, and legal professionals across BC. Our mission is to seamlessly bridge the gap between legal documentation and its rightful recipients, ensuring that justice is served promptly and accurately.

What sets CourtCourier apart is not just our experience but our genuine love for the community we serve. We recognize the impact our services have on individuals, businesses, and the legal system as a whole. Our team is not only proficient in the intricacies of process-serving but is also deeply rooted in the values that define our local community.

[courtcourier]

CourtCourier

Welcome to CourtCourier, your trusted partner in legal support solutions. With years of dedicated service, we take pride in being a cornerstone in the legal community, providing unparalleled process-serving expertise. At CourtCourier, we understand the critical role we play in the legal process, and our skilled team is committed to delivering reliable and efficient services.    Founded on the principles of integrity and professionalism, CourtCourier has become a beacon of trust for attorneys, law firms, and legal professionals across BC. Our mission is to seamlessly bridge the gap between legal documentation and its rightful recipients, ensuring that justice is served promptly and accurately.    What sets CourtCourier apart is not just our experience but our genuine love for the community we serve. We recognize the impact our services have on individuals, businesses, and the legal system as a whole. Our team is not only proficient in the intricacies of process-serving but is also deeply rooted in the values that define our local community. 

Address: 3406 32nd Ave, Vernon, BC V1T 2N1 

Phone: 778-760-3800

Website: https://courtcourier.ca/ 

Business Email: service@courtcourier.ca 

Hours: Mon - Sun: 6am-8pm 

Payment Methods: E-Transfer, Cheques, Credit Card 

[sophiamcdougall]

You're a reasonably informed person on the internet. You've experienced things like no longer being able to get files off an old storage device, media you've downloaded suddenly going poof, sites and forums with troves full of people's thoughts and ideas vanishing forever. You've heard of cybercrime. You've read articles about lost media. You have at least a basic understanding that digital data is vulnerable, is what I'm saying. I'm guessing that you're also aware that history is, you know... important? And that it's an ongoing study, requiring ... data about how people live? And that it's not just about stanning celebrities that happen to be dead? Congratulations, you are significantly better-informed than the British government! So they're currently like "Oh hai can we destroy all these historical documents pls? To save money? Because we'll digitise them first so it's fine! That'll be easy, cheap and reliable -- right? These wills from the 1850s will totally be fine for another 170 years as a PNG or whatever, yeah? We didn't need to do an impact assesment about this because it's clearly win-win! We'd keep the physical wills of Famous People™ though because Famous People™ actually matter, unlike you plebs. We don't think there are any equalities implications about this, either! Also the only examples of Famous People™ we can think of are all white and rich, only one is a woman and she got famous because of the guy she married. Kisses!"

Yes, this is the same Government that's like "Oh no removing a statue of slave trader is erasing history :(" You have, however, until 23 February 2024 to politely inquire of them what the fuck they are smoking. And they will have to publish a summary of the responses they receive. And it will look kind of bad if the feedback is well-argued, informative and overwhelmingly negative and they go ahead and do it anyway. I currently edit documents including responses to consultations like (but significantly less insane) than this one. Responses do actually matter. I would particularly encourage British people/people based in the UK to do this, but as far as I can see it doesn't say you have to be either. If you are, say, a historian or an archivist, or someone who specialises in digital data do say so and draw on your expertise in your answers. This isn't a question of filling out a form. You have to manually compose an email answering the 12 questions in the consultation paper at the link above. I'll put my own answers under the fold. Note -- I never know if I'm being too rude in these sorts of things. You probably shouldn't be ruder than I have been.

Please do not copy and paste any of this: that would defeat the purpose. This isn't a petition, they need to see a range of individual responses. But it may give you a jumping-off point.

Question 1: Should the current law providing for the inspection of wills be preserved?

Yes. Our ability to understand our shared past is a fundamental aspect of our heritage. It is not possible for any authority to know in advance what future insights they are supporting or impeding by their treatment of material evidence. Safeguarding the historical record for future generations should be considered an extremely important duty.

Question 2: Are there any reforms you would suggest to the current law enabling wills to be inspected?

No.

Question 3: Are there any reasons why the High Court should store original paper will documents on a permanent basis, as opposed to just retaining a digitised copy of that material?

Yes. I am amazed that the recent cyber attack on the British Library, which has effectively paralysed it completely, not been sufficient to answer this question for you.  I also refer you to the fate of the Domesday Project. Digital storage is useful and can help more people access information; however, it is also inherently fragile. Malice, accident, or eventual inevitable obsolescence not merely might occur, but absolutely should be expected. It is ludicrously naive and reflects a truly unpardonable ignorance to assume that information preserved only in digital form is somehow inviolable and safe, or that a physical document once digitised, never need be digitised again..At absolute minimum, it should be understood as certain that at least some of any digital-only archive will eventually be permanently lost. It is not remotely implausible that all of it would be. Preserving the physical documents provides a crucial failsafe. It also allows any errors in reproduction -- also inevitable-- to be, eventually, seen and corrected. Note that maintaining, upgrading and replacing digital infrastructure is not free, easy or reliable. Over the long term, risks to the data concerned can only accumulate.

"Unlike the methods for preserving analog documents that have been honed over millennia, there is no deep precedence to look to regarding the management of digital records. As such, the processing, long-term storage, and distribution potential of archival digital data are highly unresolved issues. [..] the more digital data is migrated, translated, and re-compressed into new formats, the more room there is for information to be lost, be it at the microbit-level of preservation. Any failure to contend with the instability of digital storage mediums, hardware obsolescence, and software obsolescence thus meets a terminal end—the definitive loss of information. The common belief that digital data is safe so long as it is backed up according to the 3-2-1 rule (3 copies on 2 different formats with 1 copy saved off site) belies the fact that it is fundamentally unclear how long digital information can or will remain intact. What is certain is that its unique vulnerabilities do become more pertinent with age."  -- James Boyda, On Loss in the 21st Century: Digital Decay and the Archive, Introduction.

Question 4: Do you agree that after a certain time original paper documents (from 1858 onwards) may be destroyed (other than for famous individuals)? Are there any alternatives, involving the public or private sector, you can suggest to their being destroyed?

Absolutely not. And I would have hoped we were past the "great man" theory of history. Firstly, you do not know which figures will still be considered "famous" in the future and which currently obscure individuals may deserve and eventually receive greater attention. I note that of the three figures you mention here as notable enough to have their wills preserved, all are white, the majority are male (the one woman having achieved fame through marriage) and all were wealthy at the time of their death. Any such approach will certainly cull evidence of the lives of women, people of colour and the poor from the historical record, and send a clear message about whose lives you consider worth remembering.

Secondly, the famous and successsful are only a small part of our history. Understanding the realities that shaped our past and continue to mould our present requires evidence of the lives of so-called "ordinary people"!

Did you even speak to any historians before coming up with this idea?

Entrusting the documents to the private sector would be similarly disastrous. What happens when a private company goes bust or decides that preserving this material is no longer profitable? What reasonable person, confronted with our crumbling privatised water infrastructure, would willingly consign any part of our heritage to a similar fate?

Question 5: Do you agree that there is equivalence between paper and digital copies of wills so that the ECA 2000 can be used?

No. And it raises serious questions about the skill and knowledge base within HMCTS and the government that the very basic concepts of data loss and the digital dark age appear to be unknown to you. I also refer you to the Domesday Project.

Question 6: Are there any other matters directly related to the retention of digital or paper wills that are not covered by the proposed exercise of the powers in the ECA 2000 that you consider are necessary?

Destroying the physical documents will always be an unforgivable dereliction of legal and moral duty.

Question 7: If the Government pursues preserving permanently only a digital copy of a will document, should it seek to reform the primary legislation by introducing a Bill or do so under the ECA 2000?

Destroying the physical documents will always be an unforgivable dereliction of legal and moral duty.

Question 8: If the Government moves to digital only copies of original will documents, what do you think the retention period for the original paper wills should be? Please give reasons and state what you believe the minimum retention period should be and whether you consider the Government’s suggestion of 25 years to be reasonable.

There is no good version of this plan. The physical documents should be preserved.

Question 9: Do you agree with the principle that wills of famous people should be preserved in the original paper form for historic interest?

This question betrays deep ignorance of what "historic interest" actually is. The study of history is not simply glorified celebrity gossip. If anything, the physical wills of currently famous people could be considered more expendable as it is likely that their contents are so widely diffused as to be relatively "safe", whereas the wills of so-called "ordinary people" will, especially in aggregate, provide insights that have not yet been explored.

Question 10: Do you have any initial suggestions on the criteria which should be adopted for identifying famous/historic figures whose original paper will document should be preserved permanently?

Abandon this entire lamentable plan. As previously discussed, you do not and cannot know who will be considered "famous" in the future, and fame is a profoundly flawed criterion of historical significance.

Question 11: Do you agree that the Probate Registries should only permanently retain wills and codicils from the documents submitted in support of a probate application? Please explain, if setting out the case for retention of any other documents.

No, all the documents should be preserved indefinitely.

Question 12: Do you agree that we have correctly identified the range and extent of the equalities impacts under each of these proposals set out in this consultation? Please give reasons and supply evidence of further equalities impacts as appropriate.

No. You appear to have neglected equalities impacts entirely. As discussed, in your drive to prioritise "famous people", your plan will certainly prioritise the white, wealthy and mostly the male, as your "Charles Dickens, Charles Darwin and Princess Diana" examples amply indicate. This plan will create a two-tier system where evidence of the lives of the privileged is carefully preserved while information regarding people of colour, women, the working class and other disadvantaged groups is disproportionately abandoned to digital decay and eventual loss. Current and future historians from, or specialising in the history of minority groups will be especially impoverished by this.  

[rose-chateau]

It is literally so fucked up that the one (1) person in charge of your place of work is literally able to revoke a person's only source of income and subject that person to potential starvation and homelessness over sitting down at a fucking job.

[techminsolutions]

Landmark Ruling on Input Tax Credit by Honorable Madras High Court: Transforming GST Compliance for Businesses

A Groundbreaking Ruling on Input Tax Credit by the Honourable Madras High Court: Insights from SRI SHANMUGA HARDWARES ELECTRICALS Case In the intricate realm of tax compliance and regulatory frameworks, the Honourable Madras High Court has recently issued a landmark judgement that promises to significantly impact the way input tax credit (ITC) claims are approached in India. The case in question,…

[feminist-space]

"Balaji’s death comes three months after he publicly accused OpenAI of violating U.S. copyright law while developing ChatGPT, a generative artificial intelligence program that has become a moneymaking sensation used by hundreds of millions of people across the world.

Its public release in late 2022 spurred a torrent of lawsuits against OpenAI from authors, computer programmers and journalists, who say the company illegally stole their copyrighted material to train its program and elevate its value past $150 billion.

The Mercury News and seven sister news outlets are among several newspapers, including the New York Times, to sue OpenAI in the past year.

In an interview with the New York Times published Oct. 23, Balaji argued OpenAI was harming businesses and entrepreneurs whose data were used to train ChatGPT.

“If you believe what I believe, you have to just leave the company,” he told the outlet, adding that “this is not a sustainable model for the internet ecosystem as a whole.”

Balaji grew up in Cupertino before attending UC Berkeley to study computer science. It was then he became a believer in the potential benefits that artificial intelligence could offer society, including its ability to cure diseases and stop aging, the Times reported. “I thought we could invent some kind of scientist that could help solve them,” he told the newspaper.

But his outlook began to sour in 2022, two years after joining OpenAI as a researcher. He grew particularly concerned about his assignment of gathering data from the internet for the company’s GPT-4 program, which analyzed text from nearly the entire internet to train its artificial intelligence program, the news outlet reported.

The practice, he told the Times, ran afoul of the country’s “fair use” laws governing how people can use previously published work. In late October, he posted an analysis on his personal website arguing that point.

No known factors “seem to weigh in favor of ChatGPT being a fair use of its training data,” Balaji wrote. “That being said, none of the arguments here are fundamentally specific to ChatGPT either, and similar arguments could be made for many generative AI products in a wide variety of domains.”

Reached by this news agency, Balaji’s mother requested privacy while grieving the death of her son.

In a Nov. 18 letter filed in federal court, attorneys for The New York Times named Balaji as someone who had “unique and relevant documents” that would support their case against OpenAI. He was among at least 12 people — many of them past or present OpenAI employees — the newspaper had named in court filings as having material helpful to their case, ahead of depositions."