What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

The Lawyer Thread Where We Stop Ruining Other Threads (7 Viewers)

Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
Ignoramus said:
Seems like as good a place as any to ask this.

In Texas, my FIL recently passed away and is survived by his wife. Evidently he had one bank account that did not have both of their names on it, just his. The bank is not wanting to release anything to his wife, even account information, unless she provides Letters of Testementary. This seems silly to me. Lawyer says that filing all of this will run about two racks.

Does this sound reasonable? What happens when someone doesn't have the money for that, does the bank just get to keep the money?
Click to expand...
It's tough to give you a full answer without a little more information (and I'm not a T&E) guy. But if your FIL dies and has an account on which his wife is not a co-owner (i.e. its not a joint tenancy account), then that account becomes a part of his estate. Which means the account would go through probate and be devised according to his will or by the state probate laws if he died intestate.

It might seem silly, but some spouses deliberately keep separate accounts and might want those assets to pass down different ways. I'd want to know if the 2K is to handle the entire probate proceeding, or if it's just to send something to the bank.
Click to expand...
Thanks. This is good info.
 
Yankee23Fan said:
Maurile Tremblay said:
With conflict waivers, I'm proposing to represent both sides on the Eminence matter.
Click to expand...
:lol:

I haven't really ventured into that thread. Synopsis?
Click to expand...
Imagine a twelve-year-old starting his own business while attending middle school.

Now take that twelve-year-old, put him in the body of an 18-year-old, tell him he's 22, feed him full of booze and weed, give him a job at Walgreens and a 3.0 at an online community college, and keep telling him he's your precious little entrepreneur.

Now imagine the attitude that kid has toward life, advice, and his own legacy in the world.

 
Yankee23Fan said:
Maurile Tremblay said:
With conflict waivers, I'm proposing to represent both sides on the Eminence matter.
Click to expand...
:lol:

I haven't really ventured into that thread. Synopsis?
Click to expand...
Eminence started a thread. It's many pages. He now wants it deleted. He's free to delete his own posts, but not to have other people's posts deleted. That's not satisfactory to him, and he's considering legal action.

 
Henry Ford said:
Yankee23Fan said:
Maurile Tremblay said:
With conflict waivers, I'm proposing to represent both sides on the Eminence matter.
Click to expand...
:lol:

I haven't really ventured into that thread. Synopsis?
Click to expand...
Imagine a twelve-year-old starting his own business while attending middle school.

Now take that twelve-year-old, put him in the body of an 18-year-old, tell him he's 22, feed him full of booze and weed, give him a job at Walgreens and a 3.0 at an online community college, and keep telling him he's your precious little entrepreneur.

Now imagine the attitude that kid has toward life, advice, and his own legacy in the world.
Click to expand...
I bet he becomes a lawyer.

 
drummer said:
Henry Ford said:
Yankee23Fan said:
Maurile Tremblay said:
With conflict waivers, I'm proposing to represent both sides on the Eminence matter.
Click to expand...
:lol:

I haven't really ventured into that thread. Synopsis?
Click to expand...
Imagine a twelve-year-old starting his own business while attending middle school.

Now take that twelve-year-old, put him in the body of an 18-year-old, tell him he's 22, feed him full of booze and weed, give him a job at Walgreens and a 3.0 at an online community college, and keep telling him he's your precious little entrepreneur.

Now imagine the attitude that kid has toward life, advice, and his own legacy in the world.
Click to expand...
I bet he becomes a lawyer.
Click to expand...
I guess there's a law school that will take anyone.

 
Henry Ford said:
drummer said:
Henry Ford said:
Yankee23Fan said:
Maurile Tremblay said:
With conflict waivers, I'm proposing to represent both sides on the Eminence matter.
Click to expand...
:lol:

I haven't really ventured into that thread. Synopsis?
Click to expand...
Imagine a twelve-year-old starting his own business while attending middle school.

Now take that twelve-year-old, put him in the body of an 18-year-old, tell him he's 22, feed him full of booze and weed, give him a job at Walgreens and a 3.0 at an online community college, and keep telling him he's your precious little entrepreneur.

Now imagine the attitude that kid has toward life, advice, and his own legacy in the world.
Click to expand...
I bet he becomes a lawyer.
Click to expand...
I guess there's a law school that will take anyone.
Click to expand...
More than one obviously

 
Zow said:
Yankee23Fan said:
Zow said:
Henry Ford said:
Otis said:
Just a word of caution, because I'm becoming a worrier in my old age. I'm not sure I would be comfortable airing details of active representations here. This place every so often intersects with the real world...
Click to expand...
That's fair, and I appreciate the thought.
Click to expand...
Arizona actually has an ethics opinion on this that I read a few years ago (because I'm a member of a criminal defense association here which has a brainstorming-type message board). IIRC the key is to keep the details vague enough that the average reader could not easily identify the actual case if he went looking for it. I think the issue for something like this board though is that we're crossing jurisdictional lines and it may be unethical to take "advice" on an actual case from someone not licensed in your jurisdiction.
Click to expand...
Trust me, I will not be using the argument, "because Zow" said so in any pleading or letter.
Click to expand...
I'd certainly hope not, but I think Otis's point rings true here because there is the unlikely but not impossible scenario where someone connects you to this message board (admittedly unlikely) and decides to scan it after a particular case of yours (more unlikely) and discovers that the argument you used to win a particular motion or whatever was actually crafted brilliantly by some guy named Zow (even more incredibly unlikely). That could get hairy.
Click to expand...
I'd be more concerned about the information posted being confidential, or a reflection of work product. It's not the fact that others are giving constructive ideas that would worry me, but the disclosure should someone (like an opponent) every connect the dots. A legal profession wheelhousing would suck.

 
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
This brings up my pet peeve with firms that: a) want you to help establish a "blogging presence"; and then b) don't want you to write anything interesting.

At my last firm, we probably had a meeting every two months or so about starting up a blog, but it always came down to, "why don't you just summarize new cases out of the area." And my answer was always because I don't read those types of blogs and I don't think anyone else does either. I can read cases myself. The only legal blogs I read are more substantive (like Patently Obvious, SCOTUSBlog, or Volokh).
Click to expand...
I get the daily email. Great blog.

 
"Yeah, I got the lawyer off a message board. He's VERY familiar with men's body hair removal and waxing, so I think we'll settle this one soon"

 
Otis said:
Zow said:
Yankee23Fan said:
Zow said:
Henry Ford said:
Otis said:
Just a word of caution, because I'm becoming a worrier in my old age. I'm not sure I would be comfortable airing details of active representations here. This place every so often intersects with the real world...
Click to expand...
That's fair, and I appreciate the thought.
Click to expand...
Arizona actually has an ethics opinion on this that I read a few years ago (because I'm a member of a criminal defense association here which has a brainstorming-type message board). IIRC the key is to keep the details vague enough that the average reader could not easily identify the actual case if he went looking for it. I think the issue for something like this board though is that we're crossing jurisdictional lines and it may be unethical to take "advice" on an actual case from someone not licensed in your jurisdiction.
Click to expand...
Trust me, I will not be using the argument, "because Zow" said so in any pleading or letter.
Click to expand...
I'd certainly hope not, but I think Otis's point rings true here because there is the unlikely but not impossible scenario where someone connects you to this message board (admittedly unlikely) and decides to scan it after a particular case of yours (more unlikely) and discovers that the argument you used to win a particular motion or whatever was actually crafted brilliantly by some guy named Zow (even more incredibly unlikely). That could get hairy.
Click to expand...
I'd be more concerned about the information posted being confidential, or a reflection of work product. It's not the fact that others are giving constructive ideas that would worry me, but the disclosure should someone (like an opponent) every connect the dots. A legal profession wheelhousing would suck.
Click to expand...
I often feel like there's a whole vocabulary I'm unfamiliar with. New York thing, or this board?

 
Henry Ford said:
Otis said:
Zow said:
Yankee23Fan said:
Zow said:
Henry Ford said:
Otis said:
Just a word of caution, because I'm becoming a worrier in my old age. I'm not sure I would be comfortable airing details of active representations here. This place every so often intersects with the real world...
Click to expand...
That's fair, and I appreciate the thought.
Click to expand...
Arizona actually has an ethics opinion on this that I read a few years ago (because I'm a member of a criminal defense association here which has a brainstorming-type message board). IIRC the key is to keep the details vague enough that the average reader could not easily identify the actual case if he went looking for it. I think the issue for something like this board though is that we're crossing jurisdictional lines and it may be unethical to take "advice" on an actual case from someone not licensed in your jurisdiction.
Click to expand...
Trust me, I will not be using the argument, "because Zow" said so in any pleading or letter.
Click to expand...
I'd certainly hope not, but I think Otis's point rings true here because there is the unlikely but not impossible scenario where someone connects you to this message board (admittedly unlikely) and decides to scan it after a particular case of yours (more unlikely) and discovers that the argument you used to win a particular motion or whatever was actually crafted brilliantly by some guy named Zow (even more incredibly unlikely). That could get hairy.
Click to expand...
I'd be more concerned about the information posted being confidential, or a reflection of work product. It's not the fact that others are giving constructive ideas that would worry me, but the disclosure should someone (like an opponent) every connect the dots. A legal profession wheelhousing would suck.
Click to expand...
I often feel like there's a whole vocabulary I'm unfamiliar with. New York thing, or this board?
Click to expand...
You really are new here.

Actually this may be in the FAQ. No shtick.

 
Otis said:
Henry Ford said:
Otis said:
Zow said:
Yankee23Fan said:
Zow said:
Henry Ford said:
Otis said:
Just a word of caution, because I'm becoming a worrier in my old age. I'm not sure I would be comfortable airing details of active representations here. This place every so often intersects with the real world...
Click to expand...
That's fair, and I appreciate the thought.
Click to expand...
Arizona actually has an ethics opinion on this that I read a few years ago (because I'm a member of a criminal defense association here which has a brainstorming-type message board). IIRC the key is to keep the details vague enough that the average reader could not easily identify the actual case if he went looking for it. I think the issue for something like this board though is that we're crossing jurisdictional lines and it may be unethical to take "advice" on an actual case from someone not licensed in your jurisdiction.
Click to expand...
Trust me, I will not be using the argument, "because Zow" said so in any pleading or letter.
Click to expand...
I'd certainly hope not, but I think Otis's point rings true here because there is the unlikely but not impossible scenario where someone connects you to this message board (admittedly unlikely) and decides to scan it after a particular case of yours (more unlikely) and discovers that the argument you used to win a particular motion or whatever was actually crafted brilliantly by some guy named Zow (even more incredibly unlikely). That could get hairy.
Click to expand...
I'd be more concerned about the information posted being confidential, or a reflection of work product. It's not the fact that others are giving constructive ideas that would worry me, but the disclosure should someone (like an opponent) every connect the dots. A legal profession wheelhousing would suck.
Click to expand...
I often feel like there's a whole vocabulary I'm unfamiliar with. New York thing, or this board?
Click to expand...
You really are new here.

Actually this may be in the FAQ. No shtick.
Click to expand...
I seriously check every time I see something like this. No wheelhouse in the FAQ. Also no onslaught, which someone's currently torturing me with in another thread.

 
Henry Ford said:
Otis said:
Zow said:
Yankee23Fan said:
Zow said:
Henry Ford said:
Otis said:
Just a word of caution, because I'm becoming a worrier in my old age. I'm not sure I would be comfortable airing details of active representations here. This place every so often intersects with the real world...
Click to expand...
That's fair, and I appreciate the thought.
Click to expand...
Arizona actually has an ethics opinion on this that I read a few years ago (because I'm a member of a criminal defense association here which has a brainstorming-type message board). IIRC the key is to keep the details vague enough that the average reader could not easily identify the actual case if he went looking for it. I think the issue for something like this board though is that we're crossing jurisdictional lines and it may be unethical to take "advice" on an actual case from someone not licensed in your jurisdiction.
Click to expand...
Trust me, I will not be using the argument, "because Zow" said so in any pleading or letter.
Click to expand...
I'd certainly hope not, but I think Otis's point rings true here because there is the unlikely but not impossible scenario where someone connects you to this message board (admittedly unlikely) and decides to scan it after a particular case of yours (more unlikely) and discovers that the argument you used to win a particular motion or whatever was actually crafted brilliantly by some guy named Zow (even more incredibly unlikely). That could get hairy.
Click to expand...
I'd be more concerned about the information posted being confidential, or a reflection of work product. It's not the fact that others are giving constructive ideas that would worry me, but the disclosure should someone (like an opponent) every connect the dots. A legal profession wheelhousing would suck.
Click to expand...
I often feel like there's a whole vocabulary I'm unfamiliar with. New York thing, or this board?
Click to expand...
wheelhouse: former poster known for creating idiotic threads.

at one point posted events from his personal life, but gave enough detail that someone who had too much time to burn searched up the real life people involved and made contact with them. this is wheelhousing.

 
onslaught is harder. I'd start with Rubinov's primer to provide a good explanation of the basics, but just be aware that most of his stuff got exposed as too limited at Munich '94.

 
My lawyer gig is instituting work-at-home days 3 days a week at the beginning of April. So, theoretically, I will only have to go into the office on Tuesdays and Wednesdays. Not bad.

 
Yankee23Fan said:
Henry Ford said:
Ned Ryerson said:
Interesting scenario- curious what the group thinks about this-

7 or 8 years ago I represented a law firm on an IP matter, really just a series of letters, nothing came of it. It was a one off thing, and I never heard from them again.

Cut to earlier this week, and I hear from a longstanding client who received a threat letter on an entirely unrelated matter from this same law firm acting on behalf of its client.

No conflict in representing my longstanding client here, right?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't be terribly concerned, but I'd remind the law firm who I am with a phone call before writing any letters. Something like "Hey, Jim, it's me Ned. I represented your firm on an IP matter many years ago. Listen, I have this longstanding client who received a letter from your firm..."
Click to expand...
I agree I would go this route.
Click to expand...
:goodposting:

Act above board - if you conceal it it looks like you know you're wrong to take the case.

 
-fish- said:
Henry Ford said:
Otis said:
Zow said:
Yankee23Fan said:
Zow said:
Henry Ford said:
Otis said:
Just a word of caution, because I'm becoming a worrier in my old age. I'm not sure I would be comfortable airing details of active representations here. This place every so often intersects with the real world...
Click to expand...
That's fair, and I appreciate the thought.
Click to expand...
Arizona actually has an ethics opinion on this that I read a few years ago (because I'm a member of a criminal defense association here which has a brainstorming-type message board). IIRC the key is to keep the details vague enough that the average reader could not easily identify the actual case if he went looking for it. I think the issue for something like this board though is that we're crossing jurisdictional lines and it may be unethical to take "advice" on an actual case from someone not licensed in your jurisdiction.
Click to expand...
Trust me, I will not be using the argument, "because Zow" said so in any pleading or letter.
Click to expand...
I'd certainly hope not, but I think Otis's point rings true here because there is the unlikely but not impossible scenario where someone connects you to this message board (admittedly unlikely) and decides to scan it after a particular case of yours (more unlikely) and discovers that the argument you used to win a particular motion or whatever was actually crafted brilliantly by some guy named Zow (even more incredibly unlikely). That could get hairy.
Click to expand...
I'd be more concerned about the information posted being confidential, or a reflection of work product. It's not the fact that others are giving constructive ideas that would worry me, but the disclosure should someone (like an opponent) every connect the dots. A legal profession wheelhousing would suck.
Click to expand...
I often feel like there's a whole vocabulary I'm unfamiliar with. New York thing, or this board?
Click to expand...
wheelhouse: former poster known for creating idiotic threads.

at one point posted events from his personal life, but gave enough detail that someone who had too much time to burn searched up the real life people involved and made contact with them. this is wheelhousing.
Click to expand...
Way to make a really juicy story sound really boring, Shakespeare.

 
Otis said:
-fish- said:
Henry Ford said:
Otis said:
Zow said:
Yankee23Fan said:
Zow said:
Henry Ford said:
Otis said:
Just a word of caution, because I'm becoming a worrier in my old age. I'm not sure I would be comfortable airing details of active representations here. This place every so often intersects with the real world...
Click to expand...
That's fair, and I appreciate the thought.
Click to expand...
Arizona actually has an ethics opinion on this that I read a few years ago (because I'm a member of a criminal defense association here which has a brainstorming-type message board). IIRC the key is to keep the details vague enough that the average reader could not easily identify the actual case if he went looking for it. I think the issue for something like this board though is that we're crossing jurisdictional lines and it may be unethical to take "advice" on an actual case from someone not licensed in your jurisdiction.
Click to expand...
Trust me, I will not be using the argument, "because Zow" said so in any pleading or letter.
Click to expand...
I'd certainly hope not, but I think Otis's point rings true here because there is the unlikely but not impossible scenario where someone connects you to this message board (admittedly unlikely) and decides to scan it after a particular case of yours (more unlikely) and discovers that the argument you used to win a particular motion or whatever was actually crafted brilliantly by some guy named Zow (even more incredibly unlikely). That could get hairy.
Click to expand...
I'd be more concerned about the information posted being confidential, or a reflection of work product. It's not the fact that others are giving constructive ideas that would worry me, but the disclosure should someone (like an opponent) every connect the dots. A legal profession wheelhousing would suck.
Click to expand...
I often feel like there's a whole vocabulary I'm unfamiliar with. New York thing, or this board?
Click to expand...
wheelhouse: former poster known for creating idiotic threads.

at one point posted events from his personal life, but gave enough detail that someone who had too much time to burn searched up the real life people involved and made contact with them. this is wheelhousing.
Click to expand...
Way to make a really juicy story sound really boring, Shakespeare.
Click to expand...
what's your favorite kind of bread?

 
-fish- said:
onslaught is harder. I'd start with Rubinov's primer to provide a good explanation of the basics, but just be aware that most of his stuff got exposed as too limited at Munich '94.
Click to expand...
I can't explain how frustrated and angry made-up things like this make me. When I don't understand something, I can't stop thinking about it. Even when it's not an actual thing that can be understood.

 
Henry Ford said:
-fish- said:
onslaught is harder. I'd start with Rubinov's primer to provide a good explanation of the basics, but just be aware that most of his stuff got exposed as too limited at Munich '94.
Click to expand...
I can't explain how frustrated and angry made-up things like this make me. When I don't understand something, I can't stop thinking about it. Even when it's not an actual thing that can be understood.
Click to expand...
Urge you to go back and read up on some of the onslaught threads here. Covered pretty extensively. You'll get it if you look long enough.

 
Otis said:
Henry Ford said:
-fish- said:
onslaught is harder. I'd start with Rubinov's primer to provide a good explanation of the basics, but just be aware that most of his stuff got exposed as too limited at Munich '94.
Click to expand...
I can't explain how frustrated and angry made-up things like this make me. When I don't understand something, I can't stop thinking about it. Even when it's not an actual thing that can be understood.
Click to expand...
Urge you to go back and read up on some of the onslaught threads here. Covered pretty extensively. You'll get it if you look long enough.
Click to expand...
Reading some of the old threads is fine as a basic primer, but the only way to make any real headway learning onslaught is to jump right in and start playing. Try a few different mobilization strategies and see if you can balance your overqueues. It's okay if your vulnerability quotient seems high at first. Just play around with it and have fun. You're not going to get a feel for it just by reading; you need live experience.

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
Otis said:
Henry Ford said:
-fish- said:
onslaught is harder. I'd start with Rubinov's primer to provide a good explanation of the basics, but just be aware that most of his stuff got exposed as too limited at Munich '94.
Click to expand...
I can't explain how frustrated and angry made-up things like this make me. When I don't understand something, I can't stop thinking about it. Even when it's not an actual thing that can be understood.
Click to expand...
Urge you to go back and read up on some of the onslaught threads here. Covered pretty extensively. You'll get it if you look long enough.
Click to expand...
Reading some of the old threads is fine as a basic primer, but the only way to make any real headway learning onslaught is to jump right in and start playing. Try a few different mobilization strategies and see if you can balance your overqueues. It's okay if your vulnerability quotient seems high at first. Just play around with it and have fun. You're not going to get a feel for it just by reading; you need live experience.
Click to expand...
This is actually great advice. No surprise; Maurile has always been one of the players here I've respected most. Would love to mimic some of your game.

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
Otis said:
Henry Ford said:
-fish- said:
onslaught is harder. I'd start with Rubinov's primer to provide a good explanation of the basics, but just be aware that most of his stuff got exposed as too limited at Munich '94.
Click to expand...
I can't explain how frustrated and angry made-up things like this make me. When I don't understand something, I can't stop thinking about it. Even when it's not an actual thing that can be understood.
Click to expand...
Urge you to go back and read up on some of the onslaught threads here. Covered pretty extensively. You'll get it if you look long enough.
Click to expand...
Reading some of the old threads is fine as a basic primer, but the only way to make any real headway learning onslaught is to jump right in and start playing. Try a few different mobilization strategies and see if you can balance your overqueues. It's okay if your vulnerability quotient seems high at first. Just play around with it and have fun. You're not going to get a feel for it just by reading; you need live experience.
Click to expand...
You realize that my crazy mind is now going to create a nonexistent game with its own rules around these things, right?

 
Eminence said:
Who do I summons? Bryant, Trembley, or Rudnicki?
Click to expand...
I haven't followed any of your other work here, and no offense meant, but that "homies" list really sucks.

Also it really bugs me that the first four have periods after their names and the fifth doesn't.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
There arent any real estate lawyers here though are there? RE lawyers bug the #### out of me. I can't count the number of times I had a deal about to be signed, eagerly waiting for a big fat commission, and some dumb #### RE lawyer jumps in and screws everything up.
Click to expand...
:waves:
 
Eminence said:
krista4 said:
Eminence said:
Who do I summons? Bryant, Trembley, or Rudnicki?
Click to expand...
I haven't followed any of your other work here, and no offense meant, but that "homies" list really sucks.

Also it really bugs me that the first four have periods after their names and the fifth doesn't.
Click to expand...
...and who exactly are you?:rofl:
Click to expand...
She's significantly more important, impressive, and accomplished than you are ever likely to be. Or, frankly, than I am ever likely to be.

 
Henry Ford said:
Eminence said:
krista4 said:
Eminence said:
Who do I summons? Bryant, Trembley, or Rudnicki?
Click to expand...
I haven't followed any of your other work here, and no offense meant, but that "homies" list really sucks.

Also it really bugs me that the first four have periods after their names and the fifth doesn't.
Click to expand...
...and who exactly are you?:rofl:
Click to expand...
She's significantly more important, impressive, and accomplished than you are ever likely to be. Or, frankly, than I am ever likely to be.
Click to expand...
:blush:

 
Baliff's Orders

Eminence, GTFO.

Henry Ford, hands to yourself. Mr. Krista knows how to use knives and ####.

Zow, I'm this close to being ordered by the judge to toss you out of courst for contempt for ####### around on your tablet.

 
Eminence said:
And evidently a crappy human being for randomly taking a stab at me.
Click to expand...
So much wrong in so few words. krista4 is awesome. The stab was non-random. And it was less at you than at those on your homies list.

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
Eminence said:
And evidently a crappy human being for randomly taking a stab at me.
Click to expand...
So much wrong in so few words. krista4 is awesome. The stab was non-random. And it was less at you than at those on your homies list.
Click to expand...
So despite the fact that I was having no direct conversation with her and that this thread is about lawyers, none of what she did was random. Okie.

Edit: Seemed like somebody trying to get a rub off my popularity. Maybe I'm wrong though, either way comment NOT appreciated by her.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Eminence said:
Maurile Tremblay said:
Eminence said:
And evidently a crappy human being for randomly taking a stab at me.
Click to expand...
So much wrong in so few words. krista4 is awesome. The stab was non-random. And it was less at you than at those on your homies list.
Click to expand...
So despite the fact that I was having no direct conversation with her and that this thread is about lawyers, none of what she did was random. Okie.

Edit: Seemed like somebody trying to get a rub off my popularity. Maybe I'm wrong though, either way comment NOT appreciated by her.
Click to expand...
:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

This reminds me of Netboy Reid.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

bigbottom
2024 Edition - Please help bigbottom win a Battle of the Bands and support Chance for Hope as a Bonus! Just a $10 donation makes a difference
Replies
26
Views
394
Mr.Pack
Mr.Pack
DJackson10
Work won’t allow me back after being injured because of limitations on a separate issue they had no issue with previously when doing this job
Replies
29
Views
1K
DJackson10
DJackson10
DJackson10
Got hurt after I left work 3 weeks ago and my employer is giving me a hard time since the issue
2 3
Replies
101
Views
3K
DJackson10
DJackson10

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 8 (members: 0, guests: 8)
Top