Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 19 of 19
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    24

    Default Re: A Class Action

    Quote Quoting flyingron
    View Post
    The fact you didn't avail yourself of what was available doesn't mean you didn't have it.

    Why do you think you need to do this. Even if you had a cause a "not for profit venture" is neither required, nor does it fulfill the needs to have a class action. It's harder to form a class action than it is for your individual suit. There's a bunch of things you need to have to have a class action that you don't have:

    1. You have to have an ascertainable class. You can't just say "I'm suing on behalf of all the downtrodden people in my situation." You have identify a specific group of people.
    2. You have to show that there are so many people in that class that you can't just sue on their individual behalfs. For instance, if something bad happens that affects me and my five neighbors, we'd have to join together for an action listing each of us rather than using a class action
    3. You have to show commonality. It's not enough that the "system" has harmed all these people. You'd have to show that the specific person you're suing (this particular police departement or whatever) is common toa ll of them.
    4. You have to show typicality. That is that all the actions, had they been brought invidually, have the same issues involved and the same prosecutions or defenses (i.e., cookie cutters of each other).
    5. You have to show that YOU as the person bringing the suit adquately represents all the others in the class.
    ...just to name a few.



    Impossible, pro se. You might be able to convince an attorney to take it on a contingent fee basis IF YOU HAD A CASE THAT HE COULD REMOTELY WIN. The problem is your case is so specious, that no attorney would risk his license even filing something so frivolous.

    This all ignores the fact that YOU DON'T HAVE A CASE for even your specific case, let alone to support a class action.
    Yes, it does; and, it is still an outstanding issue.

    To raise money in that manner and fashion.

    It is about equal protection of the law.

    It has an impact on the Poor and seeks to correct unequal protection of the law for Labor as the least wealthy in our Republic.

    How does a class action work on contingency?

    Any class action attorneys who work on contingency?

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    19,427

    Default Re: A Class Action

    Creating an organization doesn't generate money. Creating an organization is easy. Getting money is hard. Convincing your state and the feds that you should be tax-exempt is slightly harder (especially since all I'm seing this point is a private benefit motive). But getting people to donate to your cause is going to be the hard part.

    You had equal protection under the law. Just because you think you were treated unfairly doesn't put you in an "unequal protection" under the law.

    Again, just as no attorney will take you on a contingent fee for a class action because:
    1. You don't have a class
    2. You don't have a case that's winnable.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    15,932

    Default Re: A Class Action

    Quote Quoting Daniel Palos
    View Post
    I may need more money to afford better attorneys. Doctors at law may be inadequate and I may need, "surgeons at law".

    And, equal protection of the law is in our Constitutions and must protect any class involved or harmed by unequal protection of the law.

    Equal protection of the law should be a "slam dunk" for any competent attorney.
    Obviously you are not going to get the validation that you want on the Expertlaw forums. You might consider doing some actual studying while you are saving up the money for an attorney.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    291

    Default Re: A Class Action

    Quote Quoting Daniel Palos
    View Post
    There is no appeal to ignorance of the law, especially on law forums.
    Danny, to claim a violation the of Equal Protection of the laws, there must be a Federal Constitutional basis/question.

    The United States Supreme Court has ruled there is NO constitutional property right in employment, therefore no disparity claim, period.

    By the way, why are you Quoting Article 1? It has ZERO to do with it. Was that legal ignorance or just a mistaken quote?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    7,616

    Default Re: A Class Action

    Quote Quoting Daniel Palos
    View Post
    That is the whole point about unemployment compensation on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States. Anyone should be able to hire an attorney if they are willing to budget for it. Not having recourse to equal protection of the law for unemployment compensation on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States is detrimental to the Poor and our free State and it's security.
    This is not a problem that you can address in the courts. Unemployment compensation is a program created by state legislatures and the rights to benefits are defined solely by the rules of that state. There is no constitutional right to unemployment compensation nor any federal law that compels a state to even have such a system. As a result there is nothing the courts could do for you on this. You have to get your state legislature to change the rules to be more to your liking. So don't waste your time suing. Instead, put your money and energy into trying to convince your state legislators to enact the rules you want.

    And, by the way, this is not something that you could do as a class action even if there was some court remedy here to achieve what you want to do.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    6,663

    Default Re: A Class Action

    Quote Quoting Daniel Palos
    View Post
    it helps if you pay attention to the argument. Employment is at the will of either party and there is no reason for any work requirements for State administered benefits in an at-will employment State.
    There is in your state.

    To receive Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefit payments, you must meet all eligibility requirements when filing a claim and when certifying for benefits.

    Requirements to File a Claim

    When filing for UI benefits, you must have earned enough wages during the base period to establish a claim, and be:
    •Totally or partially unemployed.
    •Unemployed through no fault of your own.
    •Physically able to work.
    •Available for work.
    •Ready and willing to accept work immediately.
    •Actively looking for work.
    https://www.edd.ca.gov/unemployment/eligibility.htm

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    6,663

    Default Re: A Class Action

    The code you refer to is only one section (2922) that defines what termination of employment is.

    2018 California Code

    Labor Code - LAB
    DIVISION 3 - EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS
    CHAPTER 2 - Employer and Employee
    ARTICLE 4 - Termination of Employment
    It has nothing to do with a right to unemployment benefits.

    It says that if you don't have a contract of employment, that either party (employee or employer) can terminate employment. It is a basic definition of termination.

    These are the statutes that you should be reading if you want to know your rights to unemployment benefits.

    Unemployment Insurance Code - UIC

    DIVISION 1. UNEMPLOYMENT AND DISABILITY COMPENSATION [100 - 4751] ( Division 1 enacted by Stats. 1953, Ch. 308. )


    PART 1. UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION [100 - 2129] ( Part 1 enacted by Stats. 1953, Ch. 308. )


    CHAPTER 5. Unemployment Compensation Benefits [1251 - 1384] ( Chapter 5 enacted by Stats. 1953, Ch. 308. )

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    6,663

    Default Re: A Class Action

    It has nothing to do with unemployment benefits. If you don't meet the legislative intent of the requirements for UE benefits, you don't get them. There is no right to those benefits.

    What is for-cause employment? What is disparaged benefits?

    Now I see what the other members are saying about you. Verbal diarrhea that makes no sense at all.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    7,616

    Default Re: A Class Action

    Quote Quoting Daniel Palos
    View Post
    Our legislators have no authority to deny or disparage our privileges and immunities through unequal protection of the law.
    Unemployment is not a right afforded you by the federal or state Constitutions. It is a benefit program provided by the state. And the courts have consistently held that when it comes to benefit programs the government is free to decide who get the benefits and who doesn't. So you aren't going to get a court to say the state must provide greater benefits than the legislature decided to give.

    Quote Quoting Daniel Palos
    View Post
    I am a federalist. There is no provision for excuses in our federal doctrine.
    There is no federal issue present here. Unemployment is a state benefit program and the state gets to decide the rules for who gets the benefits of that program. The sooner you understand that what you want must be addressed in the legislature and not the courts the sooner you might be able to get what you want. Going to court isn't going to be a winner here, and the time you waste in court is time you could be spending on lobbying your legislators for what you want.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Similar Threads

  1. Lemon Law: How is a Class Action Organized
    By Nick003 in forum Cars and Dealerships
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-02-2017, 06:07 PM
  2. Post-Discharge Issues: Class Action Lawsuit
    By sadie291 in forum Bankruptcy Law
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-27-2012, 05:44 PM
  3. Defective Products: Class Action Suits
    By Samson in forum Accidents and Injuries
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-21-2007, 01:52 PM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources