BSmack wrote: Pulling your plays straight out of the tard handbook eh?
BSmack wrote: FTFY
Fucking TEARS, Jerry.
It would take several blows to a Kansas Citian's head to make them this lame.
Moderator: Jesus H Christ
What? And risk being bored to tears by Dinsdale?The Whistle Is Screaming wrote:What next B, spelling & grammar smack?
It's always nice to see people using the very same lexicon I coined when I had their posting style in mind. Granted, I first dropped the term in regards to SD and KC fan... but still. You're forbidden from using those two words contiguously in a sentence. Sorry.BSmack wrote:Pulling your plays straight out of the tard handbook eh?
Sorry, but you didn't invent the term "tard handbook" any more than Al Gore invented these here Interwebs. I've seen and used that term long before I ever saw your nic around these parts.ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:It's always nice to see people using the very same lexicon I coined when I had their posting style in mind. Granted, I first dropped the term in regards to SD and KC fan... but still. You're forbidden from using those two words contiguously in a sentence. Sorry.BSmack wrote:Pulling your plays straight out of the tard handbook eh?
That would have been accomplished very easily with a simple drafting of a will.Jsc810 wrote:In a perfect world, that sperm donor wouldn't be recognized as an heir.
The idiots are the ones with no written statement of their last wishes on record. Especially if there is someone hanging around who is legally entitled to your estate that you don't want touching your estate. Maybe it's because I've already outlived my mother by 6 years, but it's simple common sense.RumpleForeskin wrote:Yeah, 'cus I'm pretty sure a majority of the people that fit in the demographic of single, 30, and no children usually draft a will at their age. Idiot.BSmack wrote:That would have been accomplished very easily with a simple drafting of a will.
NY makes a distinction between wrongful death and survival actions. I don't know exactly how the wrongful death fund works. My best guess is that it is designed to cover both, particularly given the amount of money involved.Jsc810 wrote:Is the compensation fund to compensate for wrongful death or a survival action? Or both? Or does NY make such dinstinctions?Terry in Crapchester wrote:It depends on how you look at it. If the compensation fund is essentially the equivalent of the proceeds of a cause of action existing on behalf of the kid at the time of his death, then it properly is property of his estate. With no one else in line, legally, to collect from the estate, it goes to the parents.BSmack wrote:BTW: As far as I'm concerned, neither parent should get a fucking dime from the compensation fund. Caldwell had no dependents of any kind. Why should the parents profit in any way from this?
Wrongful death action = suit to recover damages for the pain and suffering of the surviving spouse, children, or other relatives if no spouse or children.
Survival action = suit to recover for the pain and suffering of the deceased, which may be brought by the surviving spouse, children, or other relatives if no spouse or children.
War Wagon wrote:The first time I click on one of your youtube links will be the first time.
War Wagon wrote:The first time I click on one of your youtube links will be the first time.
Good luck getting a clean shot in. Even the voluminous fat that encases their jaws is adept with the IKYABWAI.It would take several blows to a Kansas Citian's head to make them this lame.
OOOHHHH...IN!!several blows
King Crimson wrote:anytime you have a smoke tunnel and it's not Judas Priest in the mid 80's....watch out.
mvscal wrote:France totally kicks ass.
Thanks for the info. It was a bit of a surprise to me that none of the debts were considered payable either. In this case, the suicide note was treated as the will, as it stated what he wanted done with all of his crap (including who he wanted his life insurance to go to). It was in the note that he specifically stated that he was giving the friend (one of my roommates) the money purely to pay off debt. Not sure why that didn't happen, as dude contacted the dead guy's creditors and was told the same thing by each (essentially "If he's dead, you can keep it").Terry in Crapchester wrote:Some debts are automatically discharged by operation of law upon death. Student loans are a good example of that. Otherwise, if an estate has sufficient assets, at least in New York it can be responsible for the dead person's debts. Creditors are not all treated equally, though. Court filing fees are paid first; then estate taxes, if any; then attorneys' fees and executors'/administrators' commissions; then funeral expenses and medical expenses relating to the dead person's final illness. Only then are ordinary debts the dead person racked up while alive paid, although those are entitled to be paid before any heir receives a distribution. Secured debts, such as a mortgage on a house or a properly filed lien on a car, are in better position than unsecured debts such as credit cards, of course.
I don't know exactly what happened in the case of your friend. Different laws may have come into play, perhaps. It's also possible that the creditors were afraid that if it went into court, and the guy holding the money had claimed that dead dude made a gift to him while alive, they were fucked.
War Wagon wrote:The first time I click on one of your youtube links will be the first time.