"...just to clarify though, legitimate expectations only arise where there's an issue of procedural fairness in administrative law - that is, when you are appealing a decision made by an administrative body. So it's not grounds for suing people in civil court. Estoppel fits nicely with what you're saying, especially promissory estoppel. If someone makes a representation or promise to you (in the absence of a contract) and you act in reliance of it, they cannot then turn it around on you - you had legitimate expectations. Get it?"
totally get it.
totally love it.
those two words look so pretty next to each other.
while i sleep (on her couch) she makes inspirational signs (this may be a subtle strategy to motivate me off her couch). then she pastes them up around the apartment.
like so:
today's series features three rules (to live by). these happen to be rules that have entered our lives this week. here's a brief explanation of each:
1. my feelings are valid:
this is basically a cheesy way of saying never apologize for the expression of any and all feelings - including the feeling to submerge your fingertips gingerly into an eyeball. (score)
2. legitimate expectations:
this fascinating legal term was introduced to us by my sister jude (a lawyer, don't call her 'jude law' - she's heard it before and it doesn't make her laugh) that involves suing people who lead you down a certain road but then try to pull a quick and dirty 180. whoa there - not so fast pumpkin. there may be grounds for a lawsuit here - grounds that include: