47

Generally speaking, there's nothing wrong with setting up shop to compete with someone, even if you hate them, and even if you hope to bring them to financial ruin. But there are laws surrounding what is and is not fair competition, and the behavior you're describing -- relying on greater resources to cut prices until a competitor folds up shop -- is known ...


42

There are legitimate apps that let you buy phone numbers. With the right app I can buy let's say a landline number in Kansas. I call you, and you will think it's some guy in Kansas calling you. That's totally legal, it's a genuine phone number, and just like I can buy 10 phones and have ten phone numbers, I can use an app to pretend to have 10 phones. I ...


19

Actually, he has been libelling you which is defamation in writing - slander is verbal defamation. Notwithstanding, if what he has done has or is likely to cause damage to your reputation and is a statement of fact that is not true then it is actionable. Neither name calling nor his opinion that you "are the worst person in the world" are statements of ...


18

City planing (Stadtplanung) may regulate the distance between businesses with similar offers that you have to follow to get a permit. Number 4 from this official German website seems pretty broadly applicable. "Unfairly acts (the person) who... hinders competitors in a targeted way". Though you would have to ask a lawyer if this was actually ...


9

Education in India falls under the concurrent list -- i.e. both state and union laws apply. However, there do not appear to be any codified "student rights". The relevant national body for "technical education" is the AICTE, which does have a mechanism for grievance redressal, this is often used as the primary source of complaints against ragging. You can ...


9

Yes. But you might not want to. The general rule of thumb is: anyone can sue anyone else, at any time for any thing. However, I believe in this case you would need to show actual damages. I don't think emotional distress qualifies as actual damages. That type of thing is usually awarded as an add-on to something like a personal injury case; it's usually ...


8

Overview The cop is basically wrong. Sexual harassment is not the only kind of harassment recognized by U.S. law. The question and the cop's answer to it, assume that simply asking certain questions is illegal or not illegal, but it isn't that straight forward. Words communicated verbally are part of the analysis, but not the entire analysis. It all depends ...


7

I will assume B.C. as your specific jurisdiction: there could be provincial differences. As phoog says, you certainly may mention this problem to management, who have an interest in keeping you happy. No law against that. As for the "legality" of sexual harassment, the CBA BC branch says that "Sexual harassment, which is discrimination based on sex, is ...


5

Defamation that is actionable in court in the United States consists of a false statement about a presently existing fact that damages your reputation and is not a matter of opinion. While not strictly required in a case involving private parties that is not a matter of public concern, most defamation cases require proof that the false statement was made ...


5

Law enforcement only investigates crimes, and they have significant discretion regarding which crimes to investigate. If they considered a crime to have occurred in your case, they could certainly seek a court warrant requiring Google to turn over IP addresses. More likely, you might have standing to seek relief in civil courts. In such a case, you could ...


4

Possibly but probably not. Sexual harassment is bullying or coercion of a sexual nature, or the unwelcome or inappropriate promise of rewards in exchange for sexual favors. If the word "babe" was used as a direct substitute for the word "Miss" without any sexual connotation then it is not sexual harassment. It was inappropriate and unprofessional and ...


4

In the United States, I would strongly expect that an accurate depiction of historical fact (even if uncomfortably graphic) would be protected under the First Ammendment. Otherwise, the government could functionally censor the worst parts of history (as being too awful to discuss or depict), which is exactly the kind of thing the First Amendment is designed ...


4

Who is going to read this nonsense? That is the question. If your former landlord is just posting this nonsense on your personal timeline, it’s irritating but honestly not “slander.” But if—for example—you have a local community group/page on Facebook and the claims of you damaging things were posted there you might have a case; how much you want to pursue ...


4

It seems like callous behavior which leads to a foreseeable death deserves a bigger punishment than just firing of the administrator. The starting point of the analysis is that no one is legally responsible, civilly or criminally, for a suicide unless that person intended that the person who committed suicide do so, which is almost certainly not true in ...


4

"Nexus" means "connection". A "causal nexus" in this context is a connection that causes harassment at work. There isn't any bright line dividing behavior on personal term that does or does not meet this test. The law does't work that way. Instead, there is a fairly vague test (in legal theory this is called a "standard" as opposed to a "rule") and there ...


4

Provided Bob's business practices are not anti-competitive and there is no direct personal confrontation or attempts to impede Alice's business by interference in her property, it is unlikely that this kind of practice is illegal. Many competing business owners do in fact hate each other and take legal steps to grow their own business at the expense of the ...


4

If this is not just hypothetical, Alice might need a German lawyer and not just some folks on an English-language internet forum. It is common that commercial rental contracts contain a non-competition clause for other, nearby properties held by the same landlord. So the situation in a commercial shopping mall would differ from the situation on opposite ...


4

If the factual information contained in her statement (without regard to the spin or interpretation she places on those facts, which are a matter of opinion) are true, she has every legal right and privilege to continue what she is doing. If the factual information is false in some material respect that damages his reputation, it would be possible for the ...


4

Start with the premise that Person A has so far engaged only in speech, which is presumptively protected by the First Amendment. So unless the speech is for some reason unprotected, the police should not involve themselves. This of course begs the question of whether this speech is protected. The First Amendment does not protect "true threats," ...


4

Yes, they seem to have broken the law. In California, notice must be given for an eviction. This can be a 30/60/90 day notice with no reason needed (typically because the landlord wants the property for something else) or a 3 day notice with cause- the most typical being not paying the rent. Note that COVID exceptions exist, though I don't believe they apply ...


3

You don't say who is telling you that you need to do these things, and it does matter. Educational institutions are required to maintain a discrimination-free environment, so if a student makes inappropriate remarks to another student, they have to address the matter (if they ignore it, saying "Boys will be boys", they can get sued). They will have ...


3

It would seem that any institution which accepts large payments under the guise of following a certain policy and then does not follow the said policy is, at the very least, committing fraud. Nope. If I accept a lot of money from you to deliver you a product and then do not deliver the product, that's normally just civil breach of contract. Fraud involves ...


3

For there to be criminal prosecution (the end point of a criminal investigation), there has to be a violation of a criminal statute. Title IX does not contain any such provisions. It is incorrect that an "institution which accepts large payments under the guise of following a certain policy and then does not follow the said policy" commits fraud. The Texas ...


3

You Have No Recourse You have no recourse, at least to the extent that the people communicating to your employer point out the particular Facebook posts that were made or accurately summarize or paraphrase them (if the content of the Facebook posts was misrepresented to the employer that would be a different story). A factually truthful statement (e.g., "...


3

From https://oag.ca.gov/consumers/general/collection_agencies10: If you are not the person the debt collector is looking for – for example, if your name is the same as the person who owes the bill – explain the mistake in writing as soon as possible. You may be asked to provide a drivers’ license or other proof of identification to show that you are wrong ...


3

At common law, a tenant is entitled to "quiet enjoyment" of the property. This means that the owner can only interact with the tenant as spelled out in the lease or in an emergency situation. First, calmly and quietly write down a list of your grievances. Then check your lease to see what the landlord is entitled to do. Cross off any grievances that are ...


3

It appears to be a grey area and does not appear to have an explicit definition aside from religion in many jurisdictions. Even those jurisdictions that discuss a broader definition, seem to shy away from actually doing so. Note that this is only a cursory search and experts in various jurisdictions may come up with more detailed results. This case seems to ...


3

FL 810.145 (c) - "Place and time when a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy" In Florida, there is no expectation of privacy in public. You can legally record both audio and visual anything you can see in public. As for the harassment, set up security cams and record as much of it as possible in order to provide the Police with evidence of any ...


3

If a newspaper publishes an article that is actually defamatory (i.e. publishes false statements that cause you quantifiable harm), and you successfully sue the publisher, you might get a court order requiring them to retract the statements or remove them from their web page. An archive like newspapers.com isn't making false statements, it is making true ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible