Categories
Archives
Search
It is interesting to note that many disabled persons, instead of slinking away and being embarrassed by their conditions, are asserting their rights. They already educate themselves with the basics of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, a law which protects them against discrimination and rules that establishments and such give proper accommodations for them.
Adopted to remove the barriers that prevented the society from benefiting from the participation and contributions of individuals with disabilities, the ADA took effect in July 26, 1990. Its Title I prohibits private employers, state and local governments, employment agencies and labor unions from discriminating against qualified individuals with disabilities - whether in job application, procedures, hiring, firing, advancement, compensation, job training and other terms, conditions and privileges of employment. It also has the qualifications of a person with disability. Four other titles of ADA includes other aspects where the issue of disability is very much considered: public services and public transportation, public accommodations, telecommunications and miscellaneous.
Many states have also adopted and enforce versions of the federal ADA. Now, on the Supreme Court rulings posted by Peggy McGuiness at Opinio Juris, referred to by Walter Olson on March 2, 2005 at the site, http://www.overlawyered.com/archives/cat_disabled_rights.html several important and interesting issues about the ADA were raised.
An argument ensued at the Supreme Court when the Department of Justice (DOJ) sided with a group of disabled cruise passengers who sued Norwegian Cruise Lines (NCL) for failing to provide the kinds of accommodations required on public transportation under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The defendant, NCL argues that they should be exempt from ADA regulation in the same way that they are exempt from federal labor laws because their ships fly under the Bahamian flag. The DOJ and the plaintiffs argue that the ADA can be applied to foreign flagged vessels operating in US waters precisely because they come in and out of US jurisdiction and operate as a public accommodation.
Now, this is really quite an ruling since it essentially goes beyond the international law, which maintain that ships are generally only subject to the jurisdiction of the state under whose flag they sail. Infact, cruiselines choose to register under foreign flags precisely to avoid certain regulatory restrictions and costs (i.e., taxation, labor and employment laws).
The DOJ ruling favoring the disabled has become a broad application of the ADA to foreign-flagged vessels. This might even be conceivably applied not only to cruise ships, but also to every merchant marine vessel that ever enters US waters. But cruiselines are not interested in complying with the nation’s stringent ADA since compliance in those circumstances would be extraordinarily expensive and a burden on trade.
I think there’s nothing wrong with the ruling, though. It’s just that, public services, transportation and all other busness establishments must not just think about the expenses that go with compliance on several laws. They must simply learn to respect the rights of disabled citizens.
About the Author
For additional Information about the articles you may visit http://www.wheelchairspower.com
Litigation Funding offers financial resources to plaintiffs that are the victims of personal injury by the negligent acts of another. It is simple reality in the United States legal system that financial strength plays a significant role in the ultimate settlement or judgment amount of legal claims. Fortunately there are litigation funding companies like Global Financial (http://www.glofin.com) that offer funding services to Plaintiffs which can help level the playing field with deep pocketed defendants.
Litigation Funding is offered to plaintiffs with a legitimate legal claim, however, there are no credit checks or income verifications. The funding company advances cash to the Plaintiff in return for a portion of their potential legal claim proceeds. If the legal claim is successful then the litigation funding company receives their capital back plus fees, however, if the case is lost for any reason, the plaintiff keeps the money without obligation to repay the funding company. This type of contingent advance is not a loan but rather an investment which is speculative and repayable only upon some unknown and contingent event. In fact, it is very similar to the fee that a Personal Injury attorney charges its clients.
It is clear that large insurance carriers for defendants in personal injury cases will make low ball offers to see how desperate a plaintiff may be. They are using their financial superiority in hopes of achieving a settlement amount that is lower than the ultimate value of the plaintiffs claim. It seems to be a game of cat and mouse in which the cat represents the defendants insurance carrier and the mouse represents plaintiff. Fortunately, litigation funding companies like Global Financial (866-709-1100) can help level the playing field for personal injury victims and allow plaintiffs to receive a full and fair settlement or judgment.
It is important to note that Litigation Funding can be considered as a form of insurance against a potential loss in the legal claim. In other words, the plaintiff receives a financial guarantee that they will receive a financial recovery regardless of the outcome of the legal claim. If there is no financial recovery from the legal claim then the plaintiff will still obtain a financial recovery from the claim by keeping the cash advance received from the litigation funding company without obligation to repay any amount. If, however, the legal claim is successful, the plaintiff is only obligated to repay the cash advance they received plus fees. Regardless of the outcome, a plaintiff is guaranteed a financial recovery and that is assurance or insurance no matter how you look at it.
About The Author
Wensley McKenney is a graduate of Tulane University and has 15 years experience in the financial and legal fields. His firm Emerson Capital, Inc. has raised more than $125 Million of public companies.
Yes, of course. I was unable to find any attorneys that are only bicycle accident lawyers in Los Angeles, but there are a lot of lawyers that specialize in accidents in general and they can offer you all the help you might need at the court.
Where can I find them?
As everybody else they can be found on the Internet. Type “bicycle accident lawyers Los Angeles” phrase in your search engine and you’re going to receive at least 10 attorneys’ sites. But before you choose, check their records and make sure their bills won’t be too high - it is easy to spend so much money on lawyers that in the end you start to wonder why you have sued somebody in the first place.
What are my rights after a bicycle accident?
Under California law you have substantial rights if only you had a bicycle accident. “Lawyers Los Angeles” website (www.losangeles-lawyers.com http://www.losangeles-lawyers.com) can provide you all information you might need. You have rights to compensation of medical expenses, lost income, property damage, pain and suffering, future medical expenses, loss of future enjoyment of life, scaring and disability. As you see there are quite a lot rights and they are limited by one thing only - the California law sets strict time limits of taking actions. In some cases you can have only a few months. Of course if only you keep to these limits, there is a good chance of winning a few dollars and all bicycle accident lawyers in Los Angeles will be more than eager to help you.
Where’s the catch?
It’s simple - if you request the help of lawyers you have to be prepared to spend some time and money on them. A typical bicycle accident lawyer in Los Angeles will take at least about 30 per cent of money you will win (plus expenses), so in some cases it is simply not cost-effective. Of course if the accident was a serious one and you have a chance to gain more than a few hundred dollars, there can be something to fight for. Just don’t let the lawyers take control of the situation - and check the bills they send you.
Dave Hoffman is the founder of Personal Injury Atorneys a website providing information on personal injury law.
The following crossed my desk recently. The author gave me permission to share her story:
“Please alert people to something we’re experiencing right now - having to clean up the mess of someone not naming more than one person as beneficiary on a life insurance policy. We are having an impossible time trying to get the funeral expenses paid for my sister and my mother. They died within four days of each other, and they left each other as beneficiary of their life insurance policies.
‘If the person listed as a beneficiary dies, the insurance benefit goes into their estate.
‘The problem is, neither of them had a will, either.”
(Aside: This means that both estates, the mother’s and the daughter’s, will have to be probated by the Court, and the Court will decide who gets what. The process can be lengthy, and it can be expensive. The family might not see the funeral money for a while.)
“Also, please alert people to be sure that the person they choose to be their medical decision maker - the person who has Medical Power of Attorney - is willing to do what they would want done. Review the mental capacity of the appointed person regularly.
‘My 85 year old Mother couldn’t bring herself to honor my sister’s Living Will that said she wanted to be allowed to go. The doctor wouldn’t write a letter stating Mother wasn’t capable of making these decisions for my sister, who was in a coma.
‘So, my sister was put on life support, even though there was no hope that she would ever awaken or live a productive life. She lingered for months on a ventilator.
‘My family and I wish we had thought about all these things sooner. We are taking a closer look at our own papers now.”
She is soooo right.
Life insurance is something we all tend to forget about. When you started that new job, you made out your employer’s insurance beneficiary papers on the first day. Have you thought about them since?
What about your Medical and Financial Powers of Attorney (you do have them, don’t you?). If you’ve designated your spouse on one or both, what happens if you’re in an accident together? Is there a secod person named who can step in?
If you made arrangements for your children when they were babies, are there things you should change now thatthey’re older? Now that several years have gone by, would you still appoint the same people to care for your children in the event of a catastrophe?
Do you have a will? If not, some stranger in a black robe is going to be making decisions for you one day.
What about your parents? If one of them has passed away, has the survivor made the necessary changes to legal documents?
If one parent is in poor health or getting confused, is he or she still the only one legally appointed to make decisions for the other?
This doesn’t really have anything to do with your age. Everyone over the age of 18 should give some thought to these questions, and then take action. Should you do something about it right now, before something goes tragically wrong?
You Betcha!
© 2004 Molly Shomer, All Rights Reserved.
You are free to use this article as long as you include complete attribution, including live web site link and email link. Please notify me where the material will appear. The attribution should read:
“Molly Shomer helps when you’re struggling with eldercare. Find articles, resources, tools and support at http://www.eldercareteam.com
In April, 2004, the FAA updated and revised the Practical Test Standards (”PTS”) for the Instrument Rating. The new standards went into effect October 1, 2004. Of particular interest to instrument flight instructors (”CFII’s”) and pilots holding instrument ratings is a substantial change in the requirements for administering an Instrument Proficiency Check (”IPC”).
Prior to October 1, 2004, a CFII had discretion regarding what PTS tasks he or she could require for an instrument rated pilot to demonstrate instrument proficiency. That discretion allowed a CFII to be flexible in order to accommodate/address a pilot’s strengths/weaknesses, as well as the pilot’s aircraft, instrumentation and intended missions. That is, the CFII was allowed to decide what tasks the pilot needed to accomplish in order to show the CFII that the pilot could competently operate an aircraft solely with reference to the instruments.
Although this discretion presented the opportunity for a CFII to conduct an IPC with minimal demonstration of ability by the pilot, most CFII’s required pilots to demonstrate sufficient skills and competence to show that they could safely fly in instrument meteorological conditions (”IMC”). After all, no responsible CFII wanted to be the last IPC sign-off in a pilot’s logbook if the pilot was later in an accident or incident: Too many questions to answer and potential liability for the CFII.
However, the revised PTS no longer give the CFII discretion in how an IPC is to be conducted or the tasks to be performed. The current PTS now require completion of specific tasks including holds, unusual attitudes, intercepting nav-aids and dme-arcs, precision, non-precision and circling approaches, partial- panel and review of instruments and aircraft equipment.
Unfortunately, the removal of the CFII’s discretion seems to convert what used to be a learning experience tailored to a pilot and his or her needs into what is more closely akin to an actual check-ride. Under the prior PTS, a student and instructor could discuss and determine the appropriate and/or necessary tasks to ensure that the pilot could demonstrate the necessary competency to pass an IPC. This allowed a pilot to use the IPC as a learning tool by agreeing with the instructor to review or practice specific tasks on which the pilot may have felt he or she needed additional practice.
Under the revised PTS, all of the designated tasks must now be satisfactorily completed. Although a pilot and instructor can still tailor the IPC to focus on tasks needing additional work, the remainder of the designated tasks will still need to be completed. This will increase the time required for an IPC and may deter pilots from spending the time and money for additional practice of specific tasks.
Another concern is the requirement that an IPC candidate must now perform a circling approach. Unfortunately, this eliminates the opportunity for an IPC candidate to fully complete an IPC using a computer-based trainer such as an Advanced AD. Although an Advanced AD will still qualify for completion of a majority of the IPC requirements, if it does not have a wide, wrap-around display, a circling approach will be impossible and this portion of the IPC will need to either be demonstrated in an aircraft or in a simulator that is equipped for such an approach.
This new requirement also has the potential to increase the cost of an IPC for a pilot. If the pilot does not have access to an appropriate computer based trainer, he or she will need to perform a circling approach in an aircraft.
The revised PTS are here and are the standards for conducting an IPC. Pilots should keep in mind that an IPC sign-off received after October 1, 2004 that does not comply with the revised PTS will not be valid and may leave the pilot operating without instrument currency. Both pilots and their instructors should review the revised PTS to fully understand what tasks are required for an IPC.
As always, fly safe and fly smart.
About the Author
Greg is an aviation attorney, author and holds a commercial pilot certificate with instrument rating. His handles aviation litigation, including insurance matters and creditor’s rights, FAA certificate actions and aviation related transactional matters. He can be reached via e-mail at greigel@aerolegalservices.com or check out his website at www.aerolegalservices.com.
Businesses routinely maintain copies of correspondence and memos. Far to often, however, they do not extend this practice to email correspondence. Email correspondence is no different then your normal paperwork. You must keep copies of all of it to protect your business in any litigation.
Currently, only banks and broker-dealers are obliged to retain e-mail and instant messaging documents for three years under U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission rules. Beginning July 2006, all public companies will also be required to do so under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
Notwithstanding these laws, your custom and practice should be to maintain copies of all email correspondence. Email is considered evidence and courts are hammering businesses that do not maintain email records. Judges are often ruling that the failure to maintain and produce email records means the business in question is hiding key evidence.
In the recent Perelman v. Morgan Stanley litigation, a judge’s ruling on the failure of Morgan Stanley to produce email was key factor in the issuance of a $1.45 billion verdict. Based on the failure to produce email records, Judge Elizabeth Maass issued a pretrial ruling that effectively found Morgan Stanley conspired to defraud Perelman in a 1998 deal. Morgan Stanley is not the only business defendant to have this problem.
In the summer of 2004, UBS bank was found by a judge to have “willfully destroyed” email evidence in a discrimination case. UBS was ordered to pay costs and a jury returned a $29 million verdict.
Email Policy
To protect your business, you must have a procedure in place to maintain email communications generated through the business. Failure to keep these records can lead to rulings in litigation that your business willfully destroyed evidence. If this occurs, the judge may issue significant monetary sanctions, automatically find you liable or take other harsh steps that assure a victory for the Plaintiff. As if such developments are not bad enough, there exists a second risk associated with email communications.
Maintaining email communications, however, can have a downside. The problem arises, of course, when a communication contains statements that are damaging to your business. Yes, the proverbial catch-22 situation.
To avoid such disasters, your business must develop a clear policy on email communications and train all employees to comply with that policy. Employees must understand the business environment is not one in which jokes, flippant remarks and so on should be made in email communications.
Richard A. Chapo is a San Diego business lawyer with www.sandiegobusinesslawfirm.com - a San Diego business law firm in San Diego, California.
Since the days of Upton Sinclaire’s “The Jungle”, workplace injury law has improved to protect workers and repay them for injuries incurred at work. Departments like the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) have been developed to monitor working conditions and maintain a benchmark level of safety for workers. Not only is your employer responsible for providing a safe workplace, they must support you when you suffer injuries on the job site. OSHA penalizes companies for dangerous working conditions. These are some very strict regulations, and it is a good idea to contact a lawyer if you mean to hold your company responsible for injuries you’ve suffered.
Since its inception in 1971, OSHA has helped to cut workplace fatalities by more than 60 percent and occupational injury and illness rates by 40 percent. In the past, workers had to fend for themselves. People working in dangerous industries were not paid when they had to take time off for injuries, even when the injuries happened at work! These employees who took on extra risk by working difficult and dangerous jobs were not necessarily paid more, so it was often the marginalized members of society such as recent immigrants who were forced to risk their lives daily just to get by. Modern standards, such as those established by OSHA, seek to make this abuse a thing of the past.
Workplace injury and abuses still occur, however, especially if you don’t know your rights. If you have been injured at work because your employer has not provided appropriate safety measures or you have suffered a workplace injury and were subsequently laid off or not paid for your recovery time, contact a lawyer right away.
GA
To find out more about workplace injury lawyers and read about workplace injury lawsuits, visit our website at hugesettlements.com.
If you have any questions or concerns about workplace injury laws, please contact a professional workplace injury lawyer right away!
About the Author
None
Unless you’ve been on vacation all summer, the brawl between Google and Microsoft should be old news. New developments, however, have occurred with publication of the non-compete agreement signed by Kai-Fu Lee.
Google v. Microsoft
Earlier this year, Kai-Fu Lee quit Microsoft to go work for Google. In doing so, Lee allegedly violated a non-compete agreement he had signed with Microsoft. Predictably, Microsoft sued Lee to prevent the move and the brawl began. Microsoft landed the first punch by getting a temporary restraining order preventing Lee from working for Google until the case is resolved.
Non-Compete Language
As matters have moved forward, the language in the non-compete agreement has become public knowledge. Generally, Lee agreed not to work for a major competitor of Microsoft if he left the company for a period of one year. The specifics of the language, however, are grossly entertaining
In signing the non-compete agreement, Lee agreed:
1. “…not to accept employment or engage in activities competitive with products, services or projects…of Microsoft…I worked on or …learned confidential or proprietary information or trade secrets while employed.”
2. All litigation arising from the non-compete agreement would occur in the State of Washington.
Mr. Lee and Google have a serious problem. California courts rarely enforce non-compete agreements, while Washington courts do. Since Microsoft sued first and Lee specifically agreed to Washington jurisdiction, this case should remain in Washington. Google is trying to move jurisdiction to California, but Microsoft beat it to the punch. Google’s attorneys simply blew it.
Prediction
Predictions in legal disputes are iffy at best, but Mr. Lee and Google have really fallen on their face in this one. Why they didn’t sue Microsoft in California court before Microsoft could react is mind boggling. The deck is now stacked heavily in favor of Microsoft and you can expect an outright victory for Microsoft or a settlement on terms set by the company.
About the Author: Richard A. Chapo is a San Diego business lawyer with http://www.sandiegobusinesslawfirm.com - providing legal services and legal advice to businesses in San Diego, California.
Source: www.isnare.com
In civil court matters, a process server is someone who serves or delivers legal documents, ie. subpeonas, summonses, court orders, various legal notices and in some cases writs. Process servers normally fall into one of four (4) categories:
1. Registered or licensed process servers: In most states, process servers are registered by their county. In some states, like California a process server, once registered in one county can serve papers in any other county within that state. In some other states a process server can only serve papers in the county in which he or she is registered. Most, but not all counties, when registering a process server require the applicant to be bonded or insured.
2. Private detectives and investigators: In most states private detectives and investigators are licensed by the state and exempt from registering as process servers. They and anyone in their employ can serve legal process and when doing so are considered officers of the court.
3. Sheriffs, Marshals and Constables: Sworn peace officers.
4. Non registered or licensed individuals: Friends, relatives and others.
In many states as in California a non registered individual may serve up to ten (10) legal documents each year provided that individual is not a party to the action at hand. ie: a plaintiff or defendant, etc.. When the service of the paper has been completed the server must sign an affidavit that the paper was served properly. That affidavit must usually be signed under penalty of perjury.
It is not usually a good idea to have a non professional serve process. They do not normally know the laws and rules involved in process serving nor do they usually know how to fill out a proper proof of service. Either of these can cause a service to be declared invalid and possibly cause you to lose the case or at the least force you to start over. Additionally many people attempt to evade service and a professional has a better chance of completing service. Finally, process serving can be very dangerous. Many people get very angry when served and attempt to take it out on the process server. Over the years I have had many servers beat up and attacked with knives or clubs or hit with thrown rocks.
I have had several servers that were non fatal victims of vehicular attacks and three servers that were shot, several more were shot at but not hit.
At one time, Sheriffs, Marshals and Constables were considered good choices for serving papers, however that is not now usually the case. Most Marshals no longer serve papers and many Sheriffs and Constables are so busy doing other things that your papers may sit for weeks or longer before or if they are taken out for service. Additionally, many people, when the see a Marshal’s or Sheriff’s uniform, just do not answer their door. The Sheriff or Marshal walks away and the papers are returned unserved.
Licensed private detectives and investigators can sometimes make the best servers, however not all of them serve papers and many believe that since they are “big shot” investigators they should charge far more than registered process servers. Others serve so few papers that they sometimes “make a mountain out of a molehill” and turn a fairly easy service into a difficult one. Other investigators turn every service into an investigation in order to run up billable hours. Then again, if you find a good detective agency, they will have numerous service assignments and investigators that can serve papers fast and efficiently for a reasonable fee.
Most licensed investigators can be trusted to be honest about the papers they serve. It is not easy to obtain a license and if they get caught commiting perjury by saying they served a paper when they did not or if they get caught billing a client for work that was not done, they can lose their license. If they lose their license they are out of business as they usually can not get a license reinstated. Additionally, in most states, complaints can be filed against a licensee and those complaints are investigated. Prospective clients can contact the state licensing board and obtain a record of adjudicated complaints.
Registered process servers usually know the laws and rules and for the most part are honest and hard workers. In most counties it is, however, easy to register and there is usually no licensing body to keep an eye on them. Therefore, if the registration is revoked the server can usually get a friend or relative to register and then the server can list himself or herself as an independant contractor working for the new registrant. Also there is no experience required in order to register. Finally there is usually no place where a prospective client can check for or file a complaint against a registrant. The only recourse a client usually has against a registered process server is to file a law suit against the party and then if a judgment is obtained to go against the registrants bond. Note, however that not all registering counties or states require a bond and those that do usually require a bond of $2000.00 or less.
When searching for a process server take care. Do not choose just anyone. Never use a friend or relative. If you find a server over the internet do not just go by the looks of the web site. A person can be a poor web site designer and a good server or vice versa. Call the server and ask questions based on the foregoing information in this article. If the server refuses to speak with you do not use his or her services. If the server is a licensed investigator check out the license. Contact the Better Business Bureau and see if they have any information. Try not to use a one person operation as he or she may not be able to keep up with the workload or may be forced to charge high fees in order to make up for a lack of steady business.
When making your choice do not go by price. Expensive servers are not necessarily the best just as inexpensive servers are not necessarily the worst. Hallstrom Detective Agency was considered to have one of the best process serving divisions in the United States, yet we charged less than almost any other service in the country. Ask about addirtional fees. Many companies quote a low initial fee and then tack on a fortune in incidental fees.
For links to directories listing process servers, private investigators, detective agencies, court reporters, people finders and more, offered for attorneys and other legal practitioners visit http://services.resourcesforattorneys.com a directory of directories listing links to services of use to the legal profession.
The foregoing information is not given as legal advice. It is instead given as information and opinion gathered and developed through experience over the last thirty years. David G. Hallstrom, Sr. is the owner of Hallstrom Detective Agency and although the agency no longer offers process serving services, it has, through it’s servers, completed service of several hundred thousand legal documents. Although the author believes the information to be accurate no guarantee is made or implied.
This article may be reprinted, at no charge, provided that credit is given to the author and that any links contained herein are retained and kept active. ©Copyright 2005 Resources For Attorneys. All Rights Reserved Worldwide.</FONT>
About the Author
David G. Hallstrom, Sr. is a retired private investigator and currently publishes several internet directories including http://www.resourcesforattorneys.com a legal and lifestyle resources directory for attorneys, lawyers and the internet public.
Every year, approximately 200 billion dollars is lost because of fraud. Social Security fraud made the stealing of billions of pounds from the public, stealing of money which can be allocated to the primary needs of the people, and striking at the roots of public support for the general welfare, possible.
Examples of benefit fraud are making false wage details; failure to disclose savings, investments and properties; failure to inform the Council that you have income from employment; failure to declare an occupational pension or a partner’s occupational pension; living with an undeclared partner who has income; and not living at the property that has been claimed for. Fraud and deception are everywhere now. It is like a virus that is slowly killing the citizenry and leaving them unprotected against further attacks.
This is the reason why the government made an institution in order to fight scams and frauds. Social Security is the antidote designed to reduce if not to eliminate social security fraud. It is open for some valuable information regarding fighting social security scams and frauds. If you are in any manner interested in knowing, you can visit social security office near you. You can also report a social security fraud by contacting the office. Never worry about your report because it will be taken with confidence and security.
Another antidote is to have social security fraud attorneys to protect government’s funds. Social security fraud attorneys are there to guard the finances of the people. Social security fraud attorneys are very much committed to reduce social security fraud to benefit the general public. Social security members can also help by reporting individuals who are misusing their Social Security number.
Money should be given where it is due and surely it is not due to fill the pockets of the unscrupulous few. The money involved is owned by certain individuals. It was taken from them with the promise of returning it for future use. Moreover, it must not be a subject for outright abuse and deception.
The legislature is already taking steps to circumvent or to put a stop to this fraud. Laws of the land has been there to prevent fugitives, felons, parole violators from taking Social Security dollars form social security members.
Using money owned by another is a morbid crime and the person doing this kind of abuse and fraud must be pay for said crime. Lend a helping hand now to reduce fraud, your help is certainly valuable one!
About the Author
For additional information and comments about the article you may log on to http://www.socialsecuritylawattorney.com