Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
New X-files has ups and downs. Sadly the end is very down. But there are multiple ups before then!
Also the end of the first episode with Mulder and Jeff Winger steamrolling through all the lore via tangentially related conspiracy buzzwords was like a parody of the show, played straight.
Hobby Lobby decision was actually about the corporation itself using birth control.
So like, it can't form subsidiaries or something?
If you have sex with a company and it spins off part of its business to a separate entity, you're required by law to remain on the spinoff's board of directors until it's at least 18 years old.
If you are representing a company and not a single human individual, you can have sex with a single/married/it's complicated human individual who works for that company, despite the fact that corporations are people, and might have some loophole you can stick a penis in
I know that's what it says, but I can't help but think that if you're providing legal counsel to a company and you're having sex with that company's direct representative (or person ostensibly in major charge of company operations) there's more than a few ethical violations occurring.
With some care, lawyers can pursue sexual relationships with employees of a client company, including in-house lawyers or other counsel working for the same client — provided they’re not supervising or directly consulting with the lawyer.
3DS: 2165 - 6538 - 3417
NNID: Hakkekage
0
LudiousI just wanted a sandwich A temporally dislocated QuiznosRegistered Userregular
"Cuck" has got barely any connection to the actual cuckolding, even as a metaphor I feel like it is one step too far removed so that trying to tie into some psychology of sex is missing the meaning.
Yeah, I think it's basically the 2016 equivalent of calling someone "beta" and used by the same crowd
It feels a little different because the nerd/streamer crowd uses 'cuck' as a vidya term now too.
Sorry, free speech doesn't work like that brothers, Hulk Hogan isn't the US Government, you can't just scream first amendment over and over or act like it's okay to do what happened because someone is racist. I hope you lose all your appeals, tabloid trash.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
If you are representing a company and not a single human individual, you can have sex with a single/married/it's complicated human individual who works for that company, despite the fact that corporations are people, and might have some loophole you can stick a penis in
I know that's what it says, but I can't help but think that if you're providing legal counsel to a company and you're having sex with that company's direct representative (or person ostensibly in major charge of company operations) there's more than a few ethical violations occurring.
With some care, lawyers can pursue sexual relationships with employees of a client company, including in-house lawyers or other counsel working for the same client — provided they’re not supervising or directly consulting with the lawyer.
Dwars door Vlaanderen is apparently still going ahead tomorrow
The protocol ceremonies will of course be more sober than planned and there will be a minute of silence before the start, because Belgium is in a state of mourning. Security forces in Roeselare and Waregem have said that the safety of the peloton and the fans will be assured, and the local governor is in negotiations with the ministry of Internal Affairs. If the government in Brussels decides that we should cancel the race, we accept that decision. But otherwise Dwars door Vlaanderen will go on as scheduled.
Going to be weird
0
HakkekageSpace Whore Academysumma cum laudeRegistered Userregular
I demand Law360 publish a follow-up article headlined "3 Situations Where Sex With A Client Might Be AWESOME"
3DS: 2165 - 6538 - 3417
NNID: Hakkekage
+2
Zen VulgarityWhat a lovely day for teaSecret British ThreadRegistered Userregular
If you are representing a company and not a single human individual, you can have sex with a single/married/it's complicated human individual who works for that company, despite the fact that corporations are people, and might have some loophole you can stick a penis in
I know that's what it says, but I can't help but think that if you're providing legal counsel to a company and you're having sex with that company's direct representative (or person ostensibly in major charge of company operations) there's more than a few ethical violations occurring.
With some care, lawyers can pursue sexual relationships with employees of a client company, including in-house lawyers or other counsel working for the same client — provided they’re not supervising or directly consulting with the lawyer.
lol good luck with that
0
TTODewbackPuts the drawl in ya'llI think I'm in HellRegistered Userregular
So apparently, Fallout 4: Automatron is actually not terrible.
If you are representing a company and not a single human individual, you can have sex with a single/married/it's complicated human individual who works for that company, despite the fact that corporations are people, and might have some loophole you can stick a penis in
I know that's what it says, but I can't help but think that if you're providing legal counsel to a company and you're having sex with that company's direct representative (or person ostensibly in major charge of company operations) there's more than a few ethical violations occurring.
With some care, lawyers can pursue sexual relationships with employees of a client company, including in-house lawyers or other counsel working for the same client — provided they’re not supervising or directly consulting with the lawyer.
lol good luck with that
Apparently California is very lenient. Time to move!
The rules in California — the only state whose conduct rules do not follow the ABA Model Rule format — direct lawyers not to employ coercion or require sex as a term of representation, but they fall short of the near-total ABA Model Rule ban.
Richard Hendlin, a former California deputy attorney general and San Diego county bar legal ethics committee member, said the state disciplinary bodies would find leeway for otherwise noncoercive relationships with a client employee who wasn’t in a direct legal supervisory role.
The California rule "at least gives lawyers a fighting chance to argue something like: 'Life is complex. These things require close analysis, and this didn't necessarily' hurt the client or the lawyer's work," he said.
3DS: 2165 - 6538 - 3417
NNID: Hakkekage
0
LudiousI just wanted a sandwich A temporally dislocated QuiznosRegistered Userregular
To be fair, or at least honest, my open mind to that gawker piece went out the door when he said "YEAH BUT HULK IS RACIST"
OK and chicken has protein what's that got to do with twinkies?
Frustratingly, gay marriage permissiveness will make it even easier for corporate dicks like Time Warner and Comcast to merge.
0
OnTheLastCastlelet's keep it haimish for the peripateticRegistered Userregular
My anxiety is off the charts. I paced and tried to sleep from before 1am to after 6am last night then just said fuck it and cancelled my whole day at work. I was already exhausted.
Gotta get this under control...
0
TTODewbackPuts the drawl in ya'llI think I'm in HellRegistered Userregular
To be fair, or at least honest, my open mind to that gawker piece went out the door when he said "YEAH BUT HULK IS RACIST"
OK and chicken has protein what's that got to do with twinkies?
Their claim is that Hogan wanted to have the tape suppressed because there are other tapes where he's super racist that he didn't want also getting out. They're trying to dispute his claim that the sex tape damaged him, by saying he only wanted to prevent the actually damaging tapes from coming out.
Posts
So like, it can't form subsidiaries or something?
Also the end of the first episode with Mulder and Jeff Winger steamrolling through all the lore via tangentially related conspiracy buzzwords was like a parody of the show, played straight.
tl;dr is, free speech, we did nothing wrong, Hogan's trying to protect his image, we're going to appeal.
It's going to be appealed, obviously. How friendly are higher courts to Gawker's claims?
fiver returns €275
If you have sex with a company and it spins off part of its business to a separate entity, you're required by law to remain on the spinoff's board of directors until it's at least 18 years old.
Also : "We totes didn't do anything wrong, we're being screwed!"
companies fuck people all the time
1) informed consent
2) informed consent
3) informed consent!
NNID: Hakkekage
these grapes, so sour
It feels a little different because the nerd/streamer crowd uses 'cuck' as a vidya term now too.
Is this a "the body has a way to shut down legitimate corporate takeover" deal?
Perfect 5/7 bet
Suits is a documentary
Is what I'm hearing
Going to be weird
NNID: Hakkekage
i thought the higher courts already made some judgements favorable to Gawker?
which is why Hogan went to trial court because instead of getting actual law based reasoning you can depend on emotional response...
Arch,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_goGR39m2k
lol good luck with that
Nice
What are your last two games?
Apparently California is very lenient. Time to move!
NNID: Hakkekage
OK and chicken has protein what's that got to do with twinkies?
it will make dinner taste better
It's more of the same type of quest writing, the robot customization is pretty cool
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
have sex with me
And for you impudence you shall have no supper, too
NNID: Hakkekage
Gotta get this under control...
No more dumpster diving.
Their claim is that Hogan wanted to have the tape suppressed because there are other tapes where he's super racist that he didn't want also getting out. They're trying to dispute his claim that the sex tape damaged him, by saying he only wanted to prevent the actually damaging tapes from coming out.
If I'm doing this right Piers should have a mild nosebleed.
I dunno if docking is still a thing in chat but