Carrying driver's licenses across states?

Hatunen wrote:
>
>
> >
>
> I wasn't aware that the OP was driving a commercial vehicle.

Nor did I. I was just pointing out that AR seems to be more interested in
the money.

sechumlib wrote:
>

> > FWIW... my son has lived in Quebec for almost 7 years. He has lived in
> > several apartments. He still has a bed, dresser, desk, and a lot of clothes
> > and books here. He has a key to the house. He is a resident, so his Ontario
> > licence is perfectly valid.
>
> Now let me see. He's lived in QUEBEC province for that whole time, so
> his ONTARIO license is valid? Where's the logic in that??

He has been there as a student and has shared apartments with others. This
is his permanent address.

On Jun 21, 1:40 pm, Dave Smith <adavidsm...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> sechumlib wrote:
>
> > > FWIW... my son has lived in Quebec for almost 7 years. He has lived in
> > > several apartments. He still has a bed, dresser, desk, and a lot of clothes
> > > and books here. He has a key to the house. He is a resident, so his Ontario
> > > licence is perfectly valid.
>
> > Now let me see. He's lived in QUEBEC province for that whole time, so
> > his ONTARIO license is valid? Where's the logic in that??
>
> He has been there as a student and has shared apartments with others. This
> is his permanent address.

And they're cheaper in Ontario:)

John Kane wrote:
>
>
> >
> > He has been there as a student and has shared apartments with others. This
> > is his permanent address.
>
> And they're cheaper in Ontario:)

And less hassle. He was going to get a Quebec licence but would have had to
take a road test. He doesn't have a car, so he doesn't use his licence
there much anyway.

Hatunen wrote:
>
> >> He has been there as a student and has shared apartments with others. This
> >> is his permanent address.
> >
> >And they're cheaper in Ontario:)
>
> An he won't have to take a driver's test in French.

Not a problem. He is bilingual and works in French.
In Ontario you can take the driver licence in English, French, Greek,
Spanish, Italian, Chinese, Portuguese, Polish, Russian, Hindi, Finnish,
German, Croatian, Punjabi, Korean, Tamil or Somali.

"J. Clarke" wrote:
>
>
> >> Well, if it happens "any day" then you shouldn't have any problem
> >> citing a case, now, should you.
> >
> > Unfortunately, since these cases are rarely appealed they won't
> > be in legal references.
>
> Uh, there is a transcript made of just about every trial and those
> transcripts are public records. Please provide a reference to _one_ in
> which this occurred.


When did that start again? They have been taping trials for years and
there is not usually a transcript unless someone requests one, in which
case the court clerk has to sit down with the tape and type it up. People
don't usually ask for a transcript unless they are planning on an appeal.

On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 09:43:18 -0700, Hatunen <hatunen@cox.net> wrote:

>
>But if you take a job in Texas, you are almost certainly
>considered a resident

That not correct.

I could live across the boarder in Oklahoma and work in Texas.

His license could be still valid.

The op needs to choose. Is Massachusetts his primary residence or
secondary residence

How do people that live in Indiana for 6 months, Then live in Florida
for six months do this? Some work even.


Greg Rozelle

Dave Smith wrote:
> "J. Clarke" wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> Well, if it happens "any day" then you shouldn't have any problem
>>>> citing a case, now, should you.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, since these cases are rarely appealed they won't
>>> be in legal references.
>>
>> Uh, there is a transcript made of just about every trial and those
>> transcripts are public records. Please provide a reference to _one_
>> in which this occurred.
>
>
> When did that start again? They have been taping trials for years

Where? Last I heard CT had tried "taping trials" and found that the
tape was a disaster.

> and
> there is not usually a transcript unless someone requests one, in
> which case the court clerk has to sit down with the tape and type it
> up. People don't usually ask for a transcript unless they are
> planning on an appeal.

And then there are the jurisdictions in which the transcript is
available in real time.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

sechumlib wrote:
> On 2007-06-21 20:18:29 -0400, Dave Smith <adavidsmith@sympatico.ca>
> said:
>
>> "J. Clarke" wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Well, if it happens "any day" then you shouldn't have any problem
>>>>> citing a case, now, should you.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, since these cases are rarely appealed they won't
>>>> be in legal references.
>>>
>>> Uh, there is a transcript made of just about every trial and those
>>> transcripts are public records. Please provide a reference to
>>> _one_ in which this occurred.
>>
>>
>> When did that start again? They have been taping trials for years
>> and there is not usually a transcript unless someone requests one,
>> in which case the court clerk has to sit down with the tape and type
>> it up. People don't usually ask for a transcript unless they are
>> planning on an appeal.
>
> This varies a lot from state to state and I seriously doubt the truth
> of the statement on a national scale. Anyway, it doesn't matter. The
> transcript of some local trial court's decision from the sticks, even
> if available, means absolutely nothing legally except to the actual
> parties involved.

It means that such a scenario actually occurred in the real world rather
than in the imagination of some netizen.

> No lawyer has the time or need to research such cases as "precedent".
> Anyone who thinks a lawyer should do so is showing total ignorance of
> the way the law works and has always worked.

Who has suggested that "a lawyer" should "research such cases"? Are you
illiterate or something?

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Hatunen wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 22:25:08 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> <jclarke.usenet@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> Dave Smith wrote:
>>> "J. Clarke" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Well, if it happens "any day" then you shouldn't have any problem
>>>>>> citing a case, now, should you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately, since these cases are rarely appealed they won't
>>>>> be in legal references.
>>>>
>>>> Uh, there is a transcript made of just about every trial and those
>>>> transcripts are public records. Please provide a reference to
>>>> _one_ in which this occurred.
>>>
>>>
>>> When did that start again? They have been taping trials for years
>>
>> Where? Last I heard CT had tried "taping trials" and found that the
>> tape was a disaster.
>>
>>> and
>>> there is not usually a transcript unless someone requests one, in
>>> which case the court clerk has to sit down with the tape and type it
>>> up. People don't usually ask for a transcript unless they are
>>> planning on an appeal.
>>
>> And then there are the jurisdictions in which the transcript is
>> available in real time.
>
> Which? And in what percent of the jurisdictions is this true?

To tell the truth, I'd have to research that--the technology was just
coming online ten years ago when I left that industry.



--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)