Would a novice gambler read through an attorney's bull crap rhetoric?
372354
The statute of limitations for each state is readilly available on the internet with a simple search.\n\nAttory Generals are not in the business of giving individuals legal advice.\n\nSo what is your problem here?  If the \nSOL has run out, you need to go back to court and get the judgement appealed and overturned.  Until that time the creditor can continue to garnish your wages.
365389
Contact a few gaming websites, and ask them to recommend an attorney.
628788
Any course of study will be okay, but an emphasis in logic and writing is best. I am a second year law student who majored in English and History, and by far, being a good writer has helped me thus far. Your ability to reason is something that is essential for law school success, so if you enjoy word games and different logic games, you will "like" reading and analyzing the cases. :o)
1009628
Here's a random sampling from DumbLaw.com:\n\nOrdinance number 223, of 09/09/19 prohibits the installation and usage of slot machines in outhouses.\n\nIt is against the law to serenade your girlfriend.\n\nThose wishing to purchase a television must also buy a license.\n\nThrowing a snake at anyone is illegal.\n\nThe mere possession of a lottery ticket is illegal in North Carolina and may result in a $2,000 fine.\n\nIt is illegal for the owner of a bar to allow anyone inside to pretend to have sex with a buffalo.\n\nIt is unlawful to change clothes in an automobile with the curtains drawn, except in case of fire.\n\nYou may not take a picture of a rabbit from January to April without an official permit.\n\nThe sale of gum is prohibited.\n\nNo person may water his lawn in such a way as to annoy his or her neighbor.\n\nIt is illegal to jump into a passing car.\n\nA law from the early 1900's prohibits men from going topless on the Boardwalk.\n\nCars whose license plates end with a 1 or 2 are not allowed on the roads on Monday, 3 or 4 on Tuesday, 5 or 6 on Wednesday, 7 or 8 on Thursday, and 9 or 0 on Friday from 7:00 A.\n\nIt is illegal for stores to sell corn flakes on Sunday.\n\nOne may not allow his or her dog to chase a squirrel in the summer.\n\nIt is considered an offense to shower naked.\n\nIf you are convicted of littering three times, you will have to clean the streets on Sundays with a bib on saying, I am a litterer.\n\nIt is illegal to have sex with a cow.
78206
No\n\nSome State Bar Organizations have rules as to attorney advertising.
616869
you may get a lesser sentence if it's a first offense, but i have to say if you were my kid i wouldn't pay for your lawyer.  good luck.
991737
Hi Flavormint!\nI've heard about the Lying Lawyer. He's a good family man but has a bad habit at the race track. He welshed on a loan so, some goons had to be sent out to collect a payment. When the good affable attorney couldn't cough it up and instead mooned them them with butt cleavage, they had to tie his fingers together in a most unpleasant way.\nFlavormint, my girlfriend was unfortunate to be applying as a receptionist that day when she had to witness the unfortunate events. I don't know if the Lying Lawyer is still practicing law or not.\n-Zealnik
523364
Your "question" is both incoherent and contains mainly opinions stated as fact.\n\nLet's start by pointing out that it is standard practice for an attorney to be a notary. Before you call somebody unethical you damn well better have a factual basis for doing so. You have nothing.\n\nI notice you make much of your mother having the quitclaim deed singed "for her own personal gain." I take it your regard people who do things for personal gain as scum. Well then kid just what the hell are you doing this for? For YOUR personal gain? Guess what that makes you?
576234
At the outset of any jury trial the judge will ask a number of disqualifying questions such as (they will be relevant to the trial at hand):\n\nDo you  know the defendant?\nHave you worked in law enforncement?\nHave you been convicted of _______?\nIs anyone in your family a police officer?\nWould serving on the jury of a 3 week trial induce an unreasonable burden (financial, family etc)?\n\nThe judge is probing to find jurors that might be biased. Answering yess to any of these initial questions will probably get you off. But if you do answer yes to these qustions, be prepared to elaborate on your response. Judges don't like jury jumpers. The judge will use the scorn of your fellow potential jurors to keep you from escaping easily. You'oll probably be further questioned in front of the entire group of potential jurors. \n\nIf this doesn't work. Then during the Voi Dire (when the lawyers start questioning) you will have a second chance. This round of questioning is meant to weed out jurors that might be detrimental to either sides particular case. Each side has a limited number of objections available to them and may have a number of jurors removed. These will be questions that obviously favor a specific side in the case such as:\n\nWould you be more or less likely to believe a member of the law enforcement community?\nDo you find someone more credible if they hold a higher educational degree?\n\nMy best advice would be not to outright lie, but stretch the truth. Don't be the first one to respond to a judges questioning. The first person is usually the scapegoat for the judges speech on how jury service is a civic duty. Choose your timeing wisely, because if you onject more than once the judge will recognize your evasive tactics. Also I would not try for the "unreasonable burden" argument. There are very few legitimate circumstances that fall under these category.
156267
You can author your own legal loop-holes. We all live our lives with "good faith" intentions.\n No one wants to spend time in a courtroom.
118128
Just try Googling "gambling sports" and maybe the words "discussion debate morality ethic" and see what comes up.  It's a common enough topic of discussion.  Try your local librarian, too - they are really very good at what they do, they want to help you more than I do, and it's free!
939957
I dont think anybody knows what 'spreadbetting' is but, unlike me, they dont have the balls to say!!!  :-)\n\nThanks for your comments on the 'Cheesy chat up lines' -  DITTO  :-)
248188
An ingenious modern game of chance in which the player is permitted to enjoy the comfortable conviction that he is beating the man who keeps the table.\n\nINSURANCE AGENT: My dear sir, that is a fine house — pray let me insure it.\n\nHOUSE OWNER: With pleasure. Please make the annual premium so low that by the time when, according to the tables of your actuary, it will probably be destroyed by fire I will have paid you considerably less than the face of the policy.\n\nINSURANCE AGENT: O dear, no — we could not afford to do that. We must fix the premium so that you will have paid more.\n\nHOUSE OWNER: How, then, can I afford that?\n\nINSURANCE AGENT: Why, your house may burn down at any time. There was Smith's house, for example, which —\n\nHOUSE OWNER: Spare me — there were Brown's house, on the contrary, and Jones's house, and Robinson's house, which —\n\nINSURANCE AGENT: Spare me!\n\nHOUSE OWNER: Let us understand each other. You want me to pay you money on the supposition that something will occur previously to the time set by yourself for its occurrence. In other words, you expect me to bet that my house will not last so long as you say that it will probably last.\n\nINSURANCE AGENT: But if your house burns without insurance it will be a total loss.\n\nHOUSE OWNER: Beg your pardon — by your own actuary's tables I shall probably have saved, when it burns, all the premiums I would otherwise have paid to you — amounting to more than the face of the policy they would have bought. But suppose it to burn, uninsured, before the time upon which your figures are based. If I could not afford that, how could you if it were insured?\n\nINSURANCE AGENT: O, we should make ourselves whole from our luckier ventures with other clients. Virtually, they pay your loss.\n\nHOUSE OWNER: And virtually, then, don't I help to pay their losses? Are not their houses as likely as mine to burn before they have paid you as much as you must pay them? The case stands this way: you expect to take more money from your clients than you pay to them, do you not?\n\nINSURANCE AGENT: Certainly; if we did not —\n\nHOUSE OWNER: I would not trust you with my money. Very well then. If it is certain, with reference to the whole body of your clients, that they lose money on you it is probable, with reference to any one of them, that he will. It is these individual probabilities that make the aggregate certainty.\n\nINSURANCE AGENT: I will not deny it — but look at the figures in this pamph —\n\nHOUSE OWNER: Heaven forbid!\n\nINSURANCE AGENT: You spoke of saving the premiums which you would otherwise pay to me. Will you not be more likely to squander them? We offer you an incentive to thrift.\n\nHOUSE OWNER: The willingness of A to take care of B's money is not peculiar to insurance, but as a charitable institution you command esteem. Deign to accept its expression from a Deserving Object.
103531
your local court house many times has information terminals available,  much is public information.  bca stuff can get pretty old so understand your sources - including this one.
776817
it would probably be advised that it is written by a lawyer
893941
That was bad advise from your attorney. Get a free consultation from another one. 10,000 dollars is too much to just "forget about" Did the morgage fall through on bad faith actions from yourself? And besides it the Principal of the thing!
116422
Your question is very vague. Even if you gave ALL the details and we had access to the files in the case, we still couldn't answer it any more than if we were shaking a Magic 8 Ball or reading Tarrot Cards.\n\nThe fact is, there are three people who have the best idea of his chances, the deffense attorney, the prosicuting attorney, and the judge. Your man probably doesn't even know very much himself.\n\nNo matter how good the evidence is, one way or the other, it depends on how it's interpreted by the judge and jury before a judgment can be entered.\n\nHe won't know until the judge hits the gavel with his final judgment.\n\nGood luck.