Wow.....Massachusetts Supreme Court upholds policy of charging $70 fee to innocent motorists ~ CarolinaWare's own: The WareHouse

Wow.....Massachusetts Supreme Court upholds policy of charging $70 fee to innocent motorists

Massachusetts Supreme Court upholds policy of charging $70 fee to innocent motorists

So you would think that outside of lawyer's fees, if you beat a case you don't have to 'pay' the State any money right?

WRONG! - (Charlie Murphy voice) Or at least in Massachusetts you would be.....Read on....

In Massachusetts, however, a new state Supreme Court ruling means drivers have to pay, win or lose. The Newspaper details the case of Ralph Sullivan, who was charged $70 in non-refundable fees even after he successfully fought a lane violation ticket ($20 for appealing the summons to a clerk, then another $50 to get the case in front of a district court judge). Sullivan argued to the Massachusetts Supreme Court that the policy violates the Equal Protection clause of the Constitution, as motorists are saddled with fees that offenders in more serious cases are not required to pay. The court disagreed and ruled against Sullivan.

In the ruling, Justice Ralph D. Gants writes, "Where the legislature provides greater process that imposes greater demands on the resources of the District Court, it is rational for the legislature to impose filing fees, waivable where a litigant is indigent, to offset part of the additional cost of these judicial proceedings."

Yeah....I might go AROUND MASSACHUSETTS at this rate.....Although I am never really driving up there...

Support

Let me be clear. I need you to SUPPORT the artist whose music you see/hear in the music player here. Some of them are my FRIENDS!! I want them to make money. So while I may put up a link here or there that they didn't 'endorse', it is only out of the love for their music and the fact that I want you to SUPPORT THEM. So please do. Seek out their music. Some of them are VASTLY UNDERRATED and your FAVORITE MUSICIAN loves them. So it isn't 'talent'. It is exposure. Which is all I am trying to give them here.. SO SUPPORT THEM!!!

Text Widget

Pictures/Women. I post 'em up ON THE REG. I post 'em, pay the compliments I want to when necessary and leave it at that. Period. If you happen to be the 'man in the young lady's life', don't worry dawg, I don't want your woman. I'm good.

If the fact that I do post up women means that you don't 'respect' any serious topic I discuss then your 'Fuck You and your respect ' is in the link below...Go ahead and read it....I think that should about cover how I feel about what 'you think'..

http://thewarehous.blogspot.com/2011/01/shoot-messengermiss-entire-fuck-outta.html

As for the 'woman' who are afraid of being 'exploited' by a site like the one I run here..Or who feel like I 'stole' your pics or something along those lines.. I have addressed you as well...

UPDATE: The Internet World has evolved. I will leave the disclaimer up however as most of you know, press is press to most people.

http://thewarehous.blogspot.com/2011/07/so-i-guess-i-have-to-be-bad-guy-it-isnt.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A%20blogspot%2FrDZx%20%28The%20WareHouse%29

I do occasionally interview folks so browse around. I don't call them interviews though. I call 'em 'Chats' 'cause that is usually what is like. Not claiming to be some CNN reporter over here. Just asking questions that many of us want answers to and some questions that some of you don't THINK TO ASK OR THINK CERTAIN FOLKS ARE GOING THROUGH/THINKING ABOUT/DOING. I like to dig deep so if you agree to an interview, be prepared. I might ask you anything. I probably will stay away from the majority of the 'standard' questions though. Just bare that in mind.

The popular posts usually contain enough POSITIVE examples of how this works great for both THE BLOG and the subjects of the posts. Usually, those post are a DIRECT RESULT of support from the young lady via a posting on THEIR OWN TWITTER, blog or Facebook. So thank you for that IN ADVANCE (and if you have done so in the past..) for that mutual support. It is appreciated. Truly.

Oh and one more thing...

I DON'T WATER MARK PICTURES THAT I DIDN'T EITHER TAKE OR WERE NOT ORIGINALLY GIVEN TO ME. I have seen folks RUSH TO DO IT and it is pretty damm sad. Not my style. I am not a fool. I know that most of what I do in regards to pictures can be replicated so there is no need to act like I'm out here doing more than what it is. I provide a space to see a collection of pictures in that regard. Nothing more. Nothing less. Watermarking pictures that aren't 'mine per say kinda comes off a little pompous to me. That's just me though..

I want you to be able to tell when I do TAKE THE PICTURE without me saying as much. What do I look like watermarking your pictures up if I didn't 'take them'?

You see the watermark on a picture here with the blog's name in it? Then you know I took the picture in some fashion. Screen shot. With the camera phone. With the Canon or the web cam. Or it was given to me for exclusive use. (At least at press time)

CarolinaWare's own: The WareHouse