Request for legal aid Thank you in advance Thank you for your help Thank you

Brother, society and the legal system are like this, if you don't fight back and scold or don't fight back, it will be tantamount to scolding in vain, and it won't make a big fuss, who will be held accountable if you don't make a big fuss, the police said it well, what really happened to him He was more horizontal than anyone else, I don't think there are a few people who don't fight back, or if you don't fight back, it's a coward, it doesn't matter, the man fights back, you just don't do it, it's OK to find something else, it's a personality, but it's better not to be impulsive in the future, remember, it's yourself who suffers so much, If you win the battle, you will be held responsible, including criminal liability, and then your problems.

1 Legitimate defense is to return fire when your life is in danger, and it is obvious that the opponent cannot be called with bare hands.

2 If you pinch your neck hard, it is an injury, and the severity depends on the circumstances at the time.

3 Both parties are only skin injuries, which cannot be regarded as minor injuries in the legal sense, and generally mediation, if the injuries are minor, you will be held criminally responsible.

4 It's just that those bullshit can't fight back, scolding and scolding, mediation, paying for medical expenses, and can't go to the criminal table.

Justifiable defense must be moderate, for example, your justifiable defense should stop at not letting him choke you, stop him from pinching you, and then you beat the other party, which constitutes excessive defense.

If you only stopped him from pinching you in the first place, and it was inevitable that you would have hurt him in the process of stopping it, it can be found to be legitimate defense.

If the injury is caused, each party is responsible for the loss and injury caused to the other party, and if the injury is minor, they may both bear the crime of intentional injury.

For civil disputes, it is best to negotiate between the two parties. In your case, it is best to negotiate a solution. It's not a big deal. Brother, please take a step back, take a step back and open the sky. You're wrong for not getting it right. To the boss, I want to ask for instructions, but I can't go to you.

There is some truth to what the police say.

1. If, upon evaluation, both parties are slightly injured, both constitute intentional injuries in accordance with the Criminal Law, and should bear criminal responsibility, and where the victim is at fault, it may be considered as a circumstance.

2. In civil matters, the other party shall be compensated for its losses and the liability shall be reduced according to the degree of fault of the other party.

1. The loan has not yet matured, and you can claim rights against it only when it expires.

2. This is a pre-marital debt and is to be borne by him personally. Debts incurred jointly during the marriage do not include this debt and should be paid by his personal property.

3. If you are divorced, when you divide the property, the creditor's right has not yet expired, you cannot claim it, if it is due, you can ask it to repay the debt, and deal with the divorce lawsuit. or a separate lawsuit. The premise is that the debt is due.

4. This creditor-debtor relationship occurs between you and your husband, and has nothing to do with his family.

5. If he admits the account, you don't need to go to the court to deal with this problem, you go to the court to deal with it, it is precisely because he does not admit the account or is unwilling to repay.

6. The materials that need to be prepared for the prosecution, the complaint, the identity information of the original defendant, the evidence, etc., you can call ** to the case filing division of the court with jurisdiction for consultation, I don't know **114.

7. The defendant is located and has left his habitual residence for one year.

You can only sue your husband, not before the divorce, and the place of sue is the court where the man's household registration is located.

If you don't drink alcohol, you won't be held responsible.

According to China's "General Principles of Civil Law", "Tort Liability Law" and other laws and regulations, in most cases, the drinker who has personal injury should be responsible. However, under special circumstances, the same drinker shall bear the corresponding legal responsibility

1) Blindly persuading drunk people to drink when they know that they can't drink.

2) Compulsive persuasion of alcohol even when the drinker knows that the drinker is not drinking enough.

In the event of an accident after drinking, what are the legal responsibilities of the drinker?

According to the provisions of the Tort Liability Law, the drinker shall make a necessary judgment on the amount and bearing capacity of the drinker, and give the drinker the duty of care to dissuade him as necessary. If the obligation is not fulfilled and the drinker is caused to be the first to drink, according to the degree of their respective faults, the organizer, the persuader and the drinker shall bear certain civil liability for compensation. However, the primary responsibility rests with the victims themselves.

According to your statement, the landlord has a serious liability for breach of contract.

In the lease of the house, the original tenant does have the right of first refusal, the landlord in the continuous state of your rent, renting the house to others, is a serious breach of contract, if you and the landlord can not negotiate, you can sue the court in accordance with the law, demanding compensation for your losses.

If the lease contract between you and you does stipulate the tenant's "right of first refusal", then your landlord's actions do constitute a breach of contract, and you should bear the liability for breach of contract, that is, continue to perform the contract or compensate for losses. However, since your landlord has signed a so-called "letter of intent" with someone else (according to you, this letter of intent is more like a lease contract), it is more difficult to continue to perform, so if you don't want to go to court, move and ask him to compensate you for your losses.

Of course, please consult for details.

If it is a gift contract and it has not been coerced, it can be found to be valid.

Legal basis. Article 54 One of the parties shall have the right to request the people's court or arbitration institution to modify or revoke the following contracts:

1) It was concluded due to a major misunderstanding;

2) It is obviously unfair at the time of the conclusion of the contract.

If one party uses fraud, coercion or taking advantage of the danger of others to cause the other party to enter into a contract contrary to its true intentions, the injured party has the right to request the people's court or arbitration institution to modify or revoke it.

Where a party requests a modification, the people's court or arbitration institution must not revoke it.

Article 55: In any of the following circumstances, the right of revocation is extinguished:

1) The party with the right of revocation has not exercised the right of revocation within one year from the date on which it knew or should have known the reasons for revocation;

2) The party with the right of revocation clearly expresses or waives the right of revocation by his own conduct after knowing the reasons for revocation.

Article 56 An invalid contract or a contract that has been revoked shall not be legally binding from the beginning. If part of the contract is invalid and does not affect the validity of the other parts, the other parts shall remain valid.

Article 57 Where a contract is invalid, revoked or terminated, it shall not affect the validity of the independently existing clauses in the contract on dispute resolution methods.

Article 58: After a contract is invalid or revoked, the property acquired as a result of the contract shall be returned; where it cannot be returned or it is not necessary to do so, compensation shall be made at a discounted price. The party at fault shall compensate the other party for the losses suffered thereby, and if both parties are at fault, they shall each bear corresponding responsibility.

Is it married or in a common-law relationship? A common-law relationship is an invalid agreement, and the marriage relationship must be combined with the specific circumstances.

Feelings have nothing to do with money, and the agreement is entered into under duress and is invalid. If A is asked for a break-up fee of 20,000 yuan, the court will not support B's claim. The law does not protect the so-called "break-up fee". If B wants to sue A with this agreement, let him sue.