Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
PaperclipPerfector
6hr ago
(text post)
196 thread views
Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Item 1 of 7
Prominent publicly-traded mattress manufacturer Sleep Number has filed for bankruptcy, and has been taken private for 700 M$ by a Canadian mattress retailer. It claims that, of its 3000 employees, 38 bigwigs—including nine vice presidents and 13 directors—are important enough to the company's operations that they need to be enticed to stay during the transition to new ownership. It proposes to do so by giving to each of these employees a retention payment of approximately 48 k$.
The bankruptcy trustee objects to this idea, claiming that these payments would constitute illegal distribution of assets to insiders. But the bankruptcy judge overrules the objection. Despite being called vice presidents and directors, these employees are not members of the Executive Leadership Team (which consists of six senior and executive vice presidents in addition to the CEO), and are not members or appointees of the board of directors. Therefore, the employees in question are not insiders, and the retention payments are perfectly fine.
Item 2 of 7
Some borderline-shitpost writing
Previous discussion in this vein
Item 3 of 7
A truck is reported stolen by its owner. Two weeks later, a police officer pulls over a tow truck that is towing the allegedly-stolen truck. The tow-truck driver no habla inglés, but he makes a phone call to his English-speaking boss, who tells the officer that the owner of the property where the truck was stored thought the truck was abandoned and hired the boss to tow the truck away. However, the driver overhears the phone conversation and (through an interpreter) tells the officer that the boss told the driver a different story—that the boss purchased the truck from its owner and was in the process of selling it to a third party.
On these facts, the tow-truck driver receives a felony charge of receiving stolen property. However, the trial judge dismisses the charge, and the appeals panel affirms. Even assuming that the boss stole the truck (one judge on the panel cares enough to write a separate opinion complaining that the boss hasn't been charged with theft despite being unable to produce the allegedly-stolen truck's title), the prosecutor has produced no evidence whatsoever that the driver knew that the truck was stolen. Rather, the evidence shows that the driver had no idea that the boss was telling two different stories about how he obtained the truck (which would have justified him to suspect that the boss had stolen the truck) until after he was pulled over and overheard the boss's conversation with the police officer. And the crime of receiving stolen property requires proof that the alleged fence knew that the property was stolen.
(The driver remains on the hook for the less-serious offenses of driving without a license and without taillights.)
Item 4 of 7
Imagine that you object to a will as invalid, but your claim fails. Normally, you would pay your own attorney's fees. However, New Jersey apparently has a court rule allowing the probate judge to make the estate pay your attorney's fees if your objection "had reasonable cause".
Item 5 of 7
Hampton sends text messages to his ex-girlfriend, Stephanie. Stephanie's current romantic partner, Lawrence, sees the texts and calls Hampton on the telephone. An argument ensues. Hampton shows up outside Stephanie's apartment building, and Lawrence walks outside to have a fistfight. Less than a minute later, Stephanie walks outside and finds Lawrence beaten to a pulp while Hampton kicks him one last time and then is driven away by a friend. Lawrence is hospitalized for five months, and remains unable to walk without assistance.
Hampton is indicted for the second-degree felony of aggravated assault—attack resulting in "serious bodily injury" (inter alia, "protracted loss of function"), with a maximum sentence of ten years. The trial judge instructs the jury to additionally consider the "lesser included offense" of third-degree aggravated assault—attack resulting in "significant bodily injury" ("temporary loss of function"), with a maximum sentence of five years.
Hampton asks the judge to add instructions on two misdemeanor lesser included offenses, simple assault (attack resulting in mere "bodily injury"; maximum sentence six months) and simple assault with mutual combat (maximum sentence thirty days). But the judge denies the request. No reasonable jury could find that the impairment inflicted on Lawrence does not rise to the level of "significant bodily injury", so simple assault is not relevant to the jury's deliberations.
The jury convicts Hampton of second-degree aggravated assault, and the judge sentences him to seven years in prison. The appeals panel affirms the conviction, but remands for resentencing since the trial judge incorrectly counted Lawrence's "horrific" injuries in this case toward the "prior criminal record" aggravating factor.
Item 6 of 7
Mists of time past: My parents buy a corded lawnmower, and make me (and my brother) use it to mow the lawn.
2023: I stumble across an article claiming that battery-powered lawnmowers are far weaker than gasoline mowers. My own calculations on the basis of Home Depot product listings bear out the claims: 200–500 watts for battery mowers, 1400–1600 watts for corded mowers, and 2000–2500 watts for gasoline mowers.
Winter 2024–2025: I buy a vacant lot. Of course, it has no electric service.
Spring 2025: I buy a battery-powered lawnmower for use on the vacant lot. As indicated by my previous calculations, it is noticeably weaker than the corded mower that I have used for the past decade. In fact, despite being marketed as capable of handling a 1/2-acre property, its battery runs dry halfway through my 1/6-acre lot! I return the battery-powered mower in favor of a gasoline-powered mower, and use that for the 2025 lawnmowing season.
Winter 2025–2026: My contract with a homebuilding contractor does not explicitly mention lawnmowing, but does explicitly say that, if I am injured on the lot while work is ongoing, then I will not be covered by the contractor's insurance. I interpret this as implying that, during construction, lawnmowing will be performed by the contractor rather than by me. Accordingly, I sell the gasoline mower on Craigslist.
Late July 2026: The contractor previously razed all vegetation on the lot as part of excavation. But now the grass is getting pretty tall. I send an email complaint to the contractor. Its response: "We can take care of the grass. We were looking for someone to handle the mowing since we currently do not have anyone on staff available to maintain it."
Early August 2026 (one week later): The contractor still hasn't cut the grass. I attend the council meeting for final adoption of the municipality's new zoning code. Before the meeting, the code-enforcement official notices me, and informs me that he has sent to me an official letter telling me to cut the grass on my lot. I guess I'll have to rent either a gasoline-powered mower or a gasoline-powered generator from the local Home Depot.
Item 7 of 7
Raheem is standing on a street corner. Anwar drives up to him, and Anwar's passenger Kevon shoots him, but he survives. On the other side of the narrow, one-way street, Tiarra happens to be sitting in her parked car with her one-year-old child CC. She starts screaming, and Kevon turns around and shoots her dead. Both Anwar and Kevon are charged with, and convicted of, a laundry list of crimes—conspiracy to murder Raheem, attempted murder of Raheem, conspiracy to murder Tiarra, murder of Tiarra, and reckless endangerment of CC.
On appeal, Anwar admits that he conspired to kill Raheem, but complains that he had nothing to do with the crimes that Kevon committed against Tiarra and CC of his own accord. But the trial judge rejects this argument, and the appeals panel affirms. Anwar conspired to kill Raheem in a drive-by shooting, and it is reasonable to infer that Anwar contemplated the possibility that Kevon would additionally eliminate witnesses as part of that method of killing.
Why?
Direct quote:
The first sentence in particular seems like a pretty strong statement that I am supposed to limit my presence on the property. If I'm not supposed to be there, then no one but the contractor is left to cut the grass.
Not at all! It just means you don't get to sue if you step on a nail while doing the lawnmowing that is ultimately your job as property owner.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link