Can I be sued????

What is the name of your state? Virginia
thanks in advace for any help!!I was moving to durham found a house rent was 1550 per month gave owner 550 for partial deposit mailed out 3 seperate checks for balance meanwhile my husbands father has health issues arise we can't leave virginia at this time called owner explained situation told her to keep 550 for her time she assured me she would not cash remaining checks ..she did they were returned to her NSF I called my bank and stopped payment on them in case she tried to again now she wants me to make the checks right their was no lease signed she is threating criminal charges do i need to hire an attorny to protect myself.This is new to me not familiar with anything like this

the person could try, but with no contract i doubt it would go far

Her threat of criminal charges is empty because you did not commit a crime. If she wants the money, she will have to take you to small claims court, which she probably won't do. No need to consult a lawyer.

Sorry, but both responses you got are incorrect.

They would be correct if this were a simple issue of landlord-tenant, but they have overlooked the issue of NSF checks.
That is a crime in virtually every state and at least technically, you could have a problem with them.
From re-reading your post, it appears that the checks were NOT given in Virginia, but in some other unknown state ("we can't leave Virginia at this time"). Therefore, we can't tell if you might have a real problem with any violation of statutes in that 'other' state.

For Virginia, go to:
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/ps/police/police35l.html

I disagree. According to the poster, she told the landlady not to cash the checks, the landlady agreed not to cash them but cashed them anway. What crime is the poster guilty of? In CA at least, passing a bad check is not a crime unless the person has the intent to defraud, and I would be surprised if the mere act of bouncing a check is a crime in other states.

Your partly right....

"According to the poster, she told the landlady not to cash the checks, the landlady agreed not to cash them but cashed them anway."
*** The key here is that we are hearing only one side of this story and I will be dimes to dollars that the landlady will have a different version (right or wrong) if it comes to it.

"What crime is the poster guilty of?"
*** Can't say whether there was a crime or not, since the writer doesn't say where this happened. I do know that putting a stop pay on a check when there are NSF anyway is itself a crime in some states.

"In CA at least, passing a bad check is not a crime unless the person has the intent to defraud, and I would be surprised if the mere act of bouncing a check is a crime in other states."
*** I agree... in California. But again, since we don't know where this happened, we can't answer with facts as you have attempted.

Also, SUPRISE, if this happened in Texas, the 'stop pay' itself COULD be a crime:
Texas Penal Code:
§ 31.06. Presumption for Theft by check
"(f) If the actor obtained property by issuing or passing a check or similar sight order for the payment of money, the actor's intent to deprive the owner of the property under Section 31.03 (Theft) is presumed, except in the case of a postdated check or order, if:
(1) the actor ordered the bank or other drawee to stop payment on the check or order;
(2) the bank or drawee refused payment to the holder on presentation of the check or order within 30 days after issue;
(3) the owner gave the actor notice of the refusal of payment and made a demand to the actor for payment or return of the property; and
(4) the actor failed to:
(A) pay the holder within 10 days after receiving the demand for payment; or
(B) return the property to the owner within 10 days after receiving the demand for return of the property."

So, how about not making statements of fact unless we know the facts??
In this case, we don't know what state applies, therefore my post "Therefore, we can't tell if you might have a real problem with any violation of statutes in that 'other' state" is valid.