作者查詢 / SCDAN
作者 SCDAN 在 PTT [ LAW ] 看板的留言(推文), 共24則
限定看板:LAW
看板排序:
全部Option1797Examination524Nantou115iOS102Lawyer76Gossiping47creditcard45Brand40Anti-Cancer36goodclass10334Doctor-Info33Stock33dog31Zastrology26consumer25LAW24MobileComm21Fund18Sony-style18Insurance16PttLifeLaw15Bank_Service13hypermall13Baseball12Headphone12IntlShopping12Golden-Award11Japan_Travel11CFP10Aviation9car9DigiCurrency9GetMarry9Lottery9MP3-player9Suit_Style9tax9Broad_Band8ForeignEX8Wikipedia8ChineseMed7NorthAmerica7Office7Philippines7TaiwanDrama7fashion6HK-movie6TW_Entertain6allergy5Hong_Kong5points5Depstore4Jeans4Mancare4Olympics_ISG4Printer_scan4Tea4Accounting3Aries3BabyMother3bag3CareerPlan3HK-drama3Jewelry3optical3OrixBuffalo3Crystal2Europa2Health_Life2historia2L_TalkandCha2media-chaos2money2PSP-PSV2shoes2THHS2Van2watch2Wine2WorldCup2Yakyu_spirit2YOLO2Capricornus1CarShop1cookclub1Digitalhome1Eason1ID_Problem1LCD1Leo1Libra1LivingGoods1Loan1NCCU_SRS1Nethood1NTCUST1Old-Games1PCCU_MLAW1PublicServan1regimen1stationery1studyabroad1TaichungBun1TransLaw1UniversityTV1VoIP1<< 收起看板(106)
3F推: 重製09/10 17:55
5F推:讓我想到以父之名的情節,驚慌立法?!09/07 17:43
2F→:從文義解釋,因為前訴是提婚姻無效,所以應該不能提後訴08/09 23:58
3F→:而學說上針對目地解釋來討論的是第573條應該不限於這三種訴08/09 23:59
4F→:訟,而應該再納入婚姻成立不成立之訴08/09 23:59
5F→:可是書上例子是前訴提無效之訴,後訴提成立不成立之訴08/10 00:01
12F→:感謝08/10 12:45
7F→:感謝樓上,可是根本未補正的話,第一審不是會直接裁駁嗎??08/04 00:19
8F→:因為第442條有修正,我去對照過前後文,有點懷疑當時修正時08/04 00:20
9F→:第444條沒有一同修正~~~08/04 00:20
14F→:感謝回答08/04 11:18
1F推:感謝回答07/11 13:37
1F→:感謝解答07/11 13:37
3F推:郭公:假執行一點都不假06/11 12:38
1F推:這不是應該交給律師嗎?!05/23 18:07
4F→:超過20%也不會有違法問題,只不過是超過部分沒有請求權問題05/20 19:32
21F推:題外話,要是你告客戶,這公司你還待的住嗎?小弟的疑問04/29 01:10
22F→:我想只能身段軟一點去拜託客戶了04/29 01:11