The Best Ten
Attorney Or Lawyer in San Luis Obispo

Home | Main Page | Advertise With Us | Sitemap


Attorney Or Lawyer in
93401, 93402, 93403, 93405, 93406, 93407, 93408, 93409, 93410, 93412
Finding An Experienced Lawyer No matter what your legal needs are you will see that there are countless lawyers in your town that advertise that they can concentrate on your form of case. This can make the procedure of finding one with a great deal of experience somewhat of a challenge. However, should you follow the tips below it will be easy to restrict your pursuit off to the right one out of very little time. The first task is to generate a set of the lawyers that are listed in your neighborhood focusing on your situation. When you are making this list you need to only include those that you have a great vibe about based upon their advertisement. You can then narrow this list down by using a little while evaluating their webpage. There you must be able to find the amount of years they have been practicing and some general details about their success rates. At this time your list ought to have shrunken further to those which you felt had professional websites plus an appropriate level of experience. You need to then make time to lookup independent reviews of every attorney. Be sure to browse the reviews rather than relying upon their overall rating. The information inside the reviews provides you with a solid idea of the way they connect to their clientele and the time they invest into each case that they are focusing on. Finally, you will need to meet up with at least the final three lawyers which may have the credentials you are interested in. This will give you time to genuinely evaluate how interested they are in representing you and the case. It really is vital that you follow many of these steps to ensure that you find a person containing the correct measure of experience to help you the best possible outcome.

ACTIONPages is your local directory publisher. Serving markets in Arizona, California, Washington, and Canada. ACTIONPages the best local choice for cost-effective advertising.
Some of the cites we server are, California Grover Beach | Pismo Beach | Nipomo | Arroyo Grande | San Luis Obispo | SLO | Morro Bay | Los Osos Orcutt Ojai Arizona | Lake Havasu | Kingman | Bullhead | Prescott | Payson | Show Low | Snowflake | Taylor | Flagstaff Sedona | Cottonwood | Camp Verde | Williams | Washington | Skagit | Whatcom | Bellingham | Ferndale Lynden Mount Vernon | Sedro Woolley | Burlington | Oak Harbor | Anacortes | Camano Island | Stanwood | Arlington Langley Clinton | San Juan Islands | BC | Duncan | Port Alberni | Comox | Courtney | Campbell River | Parksville | Langley Maple ridge | Chilliwack | Abbotsford | Mission | Whistler | Squamish | Sunshine Coast | Terrace | Kitimat | Smithers Prince Rupert | Prince George | Williams Lake | Quesnel | Sidney | Victoria | Alberta | Red Deer | Lloydminster | Ontario | Sudbury | Sault Ste Marie | North Bay | Timmins | Muskoka | Gravenhurst | Parry Sound | Huntsville | Kingston | Belleville | Cornwall | Brockville | Dundas | Pembroke | Renfrew | Smith Falls | Cobourg

In Desperate Need Of A Lawyer?
About 2 1/2 Years Ago, I Had A Severe Asthma Attack That Left Me Sligthly Disabled. I Personally Feel That The Hospital Is Responsible For My Current State. I Have A Seizure Disorder, From Lack Of Oxygen, And Psychological Distress. I Recently Went To My Neurologist, And He Informed Me That The Parts Of My Brain That Is Responsible For Memory Are Not Symmetrical And Are Sized Differently. Anyway, Right After I Got Out Of The Hospital 2 Years Ago, My Husband And I Immediately Took Legal Action Against The Hospital For Medical Malpractice And Was Told That I Didn'T Have A Case. So We Gave Up. Now Here It Almost Three Years Later And My Physical And Mental Condition Is Worse Than Ever. But My Dilemma Is That There Is Only A 2 Year Time Period In Which A Person Can Take Legal Action Against Someone. I Live In Nj And I Need To Know If There Any Possibities Of Successfully Pursuing A Lawsuit Against This Hospital Or Is It Too Late?

To answer your question it is too late: why? Statute of limitation is within 2 years. The fact that you state 2.5 years ago is one reason.

The NJS cites: Statute of Limitations
Medical malpractice actions must be commenced within two years from the date of the act or omission giving rise to the complaint, or two years from the date the injury was or reasonably should have been discovered. Under New Jersey law, except in cases of medical malpractice resulting from birth injury, the statute of limitations begins to run on a minor's eighteenth birthday. Any claim for malpractice based on birth injury must be filed by a minor's thirteenth birthday.

New Jersey Statute §§ 2A: 53A-27 to NJSA 2A: 53A-29

In New Jersey, in order to file a lawsuit for medical malpractice, the plaintiff (person filing the lawsuit) must provide each defendant (person being sued) with an Affidavit of Lack of Care.
Failure to provide the affidavit as required may result in the dismissal of the complaint.

The Affidavit of Lack of Care must:

Be a notarized statement by a licensed professional in that field.

For example- if suing a dentist, one needs the affidavit of a dentist.
Say that there is a reasonable possibility that the care, skill or knowledge used by the professional in treating the plaintiff fell outside acceptable medical standards.
The affidavit must be provided within 60 days after the date the defendant filed a written answer to the complaint.

As a suggestion you may wish to go this route:

File a complaint with the NJDOH I have provided the link below

For Those Working (Or Who Have Worked) At A Small Law Firm?
I'M Currently A Law Student And I Was Hoping That Someone Could Tell Me About The Advantages And/Or Disadvantages Of Working At A Small Law Firm (20 Lawyers Or Less) As Opposed To A Big Law Firm. Thanks!

The smaller the law firm, the more "hats" you will be asked to wear. The smaller the law firm, the less pay you usually receive.

If you can, change your major asap.

Choosing a career is one of life's most important decisions.

The legal profession is dramatically changing and is in CRISIS!!! Every year, more and more people graduate from law school, but there are fewer and fewer jobs. Even the largest and most reputable law firms are experiencing unprecedented cutbacks. I don't expect the situation to improve in the coming years.....

Be aware of what you are proposing on getting yourself into. Please do more research first. Reminder: We are in a World-wide Recession. Consider career paths that have available JOBS.<<<<<

Warning> Jobs in the field of Law are drying up fast!! This is just not a good field to invest time and/or money into. This is a SHRINKING, crumbling, and dying vocational field. Many reasons. We now have computers. So, many people today (mistakenly) think they can do their own legal work, thanks to the Internet. Also, there are a lot of companies out there making very efficient legal software for the field of Law. Today's graduating lawyers tend to be very computer savvy, so they just do the work themselves to save themselves the cost of overhead. Also, the "Public" buys this legal software in order to get legal work done without the cost of an Attorney. Also, we simply already have way too many Legal Professionals - we have an absolute glut!! ("Legal Professionals" includes, but is not limited to: Attorneys/Lawyers, Paralegals, Legal Assistants, Legal Secretaries, Bailiffs, Court Reporters, etc, etc)

Sites like have taken away work that many small-time attorneys/lawyers would do.

The field of Law has a mystique that actually exceeds reality. The field of Law is an overrated career - mostly by television. There are many myths regarding the field of Law: working as a Lawyer is mentally challenging (Actually, most work as an attorney involves routine paperwork: research, cite checking, drafting documents, and document review. Attorneys need to write down and track every activity they do, all day long [in 6 to 15 minutes increments, depending on the billing system] - a painstaking but necessary task), being an attorney is thrilling, high-powered, and glamorous (remember: television is fiction - the fictional lawyers on TV are ACTORS - the majority of work that an attorney does, does not happen in a courtroom), law students think that because they are good at arguing they will become great attorneys (actually being a great attorney is more in one's ability to mediate between differing sides and bringing them to agreement), as a lawyer I can correct injustices (actually legal decisions are more about reaching compromises than about right vs. wrong), guaranteed financial success (actually when salaries are compared, you also need to account for cost-of living expenses [most large law firms are in large cities - the bigger the city, the more cost-of-living expenses will be], payment of debts accrued while attending law school, and time needed to build a client base. Many large law firms require lawyers to work 60-80 hours per week.).

Cost of law school to be lawyer, approx $150,000+.
Be prepared to take on a LOT of debt, if becoming an attorney is your true ultimate goal.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

There are no jobs in this vocational field. My family, coworkers, friends, acqaintances, etc. have been laid off left and right in this vocational field.

Employers (usually law firms) in the field of Law today want employees with degrees from traditional colleges/universities. Those "certificates" you see advertised aren't worth the paper they are printed on - they are generally scams. (I found this out the hard way.) Also, the law school's program needs to be accredited by the American Bar Association - if it isn't, you are just wasting your time/money.

Even if you finish law school, you won't be able to find a job when you are done. Since this vocational field is shrinking, many new attorneys/lawyers are, themselves, having to work "down" as Paralegals, Legal Assistants, Legal Secretaries, Bailiffs, Court Reporters, etc, etc, to simply try to keep some of their bills paid <<this would be your competition. And the competition is fierce!!

Now... the law schools know this, but they won't tell you the truth >that the job market/economy is just SATURATED with way too many Legal Professionals. Instead the schools will feed you a fairytale and will LIE to you. The root of the problem is we have too many law schools. We are in a recession, and the schools are fighting for their own survival - they will tell students anything to get to the students' money. (Which is why they won't tell you the truth about the job market for the field of Law.) And these schools continue to recruit and churn out even more graduates.............Remember: law schools are BUSINESSES - their top concern is making money for themselves.

>>>>>THE MOST IMPORTANT THING (and I can't stress this enough): You ESPECIALLY have to beware of the bogus, inflated law school salary/job stats given out by law schools!!!*****

If you don't believe me, then just do a SEARCH here on Yahoo Answers to see what other posters are saying about the current status of the field of Law. Call some local law firms - ask to speak to the Manager of Human Resources - ask them if they are hiring; ask them what they think about job availability in the field of Law..................

In the book "So You Want to be a Lawyer?" by Marianne Calabrese and Susanne Calabrese (ISBN 0-88391-136-1): "The United States has more lawyers than any other country in the world. About 38,000 students graduate >each year< from the 200+ law schools in the United States. The competition is very keen for jobs and clients." - Even Associate Justice Antonin Scalia (who served on the U.S. Supreme Court for more than 20 years) says there are too many lawyers. (9/14/2008)

Check out these websites: http://informeddecisionmaking.blogspot.c...
(A link to a website does not constitute endorsement.)

If you want a job when you are done with your studies, consider and look into the fields of: >>>Healthcare, Information Technology, Law ENFORCEMENT, environmentalism, emergency planning, accounting, education, entertainment, utilities, home-car-commercial-industrial repairs, vice industries, clergy, and/or debt collection. I spoke to a career counselor from Jobs and Family Services, and HE told me that these areas are where the jobs are, and future job opportunities/availability....and scholarships.

Good luck.

(This is based on my current knowledge, information, belief, and life experiences. This was intended as personal opinion, and not intended to be used as legal advice. Please be careful and do your research.)

Do You Think This Could Be A Possible Lawsuit?
I Work At A Mall, I Was Loading Some Merchandise For My Company And Had To Go Throught The Loading Zone Of The Mall. There Is Some Construction Going On, There Are A Bunch Of Old Doors And Metal Parts Laying Around With No Signs Of &Quot;Contruction&Quot;, Or &Quot;Caution&Quot; Signs What So Ever. There Was A Huge Pice Of Metal Right By The Doorway Where It Obviously Should Not Have Been. While Walking By My Arm Was Cut On A Very Rusty Piece Of Metal. About A 10Cm Gash, I Was Bleeding Non Stop For About 2 Hours. I Didnt Want It To Get Infected So I Went To A Near-By Hospital To Get A Tetnanus Shot And Get It Cleaned Up. It Did Not Require Stiches However It Hurts And I Feel It Was Very Inconvieniant For Me To Go Through This. Now I Have A Big Bandage Going Around My Arm. Thoughts Please?


Why? Were you blind when walking through there? Did you not see this stuff? Would a sign saying "construction zone" have alerted you more to the fact that stuff was lying around? Does it take a "caution" sign for you to pay attention to your surroundings?

Wouldn't a little common sense have been more in order?

So you cut your arm and a HUGE piece of metal because there wasn't a "caution" sign posted on it. Like you couldn't see a HUGE piece of metal was there without a caution sign.

And are you not cautious around this type of thing without being told by a sign to be cautious?

So what you should have done was notify your manager/supervisor that you had an injury. They have procedures for such things. Such as seeing you got first aid or medical care.

But no - you continued to bleed for 2 hours and took yourself off to the hospital. So now you have no proof that you were injured at work because you didn't report it.

And by the way - I doubt it was a "gash" if there were no stitches involved.

So, what kind of lawsuit do you have in mind? I've never heard of one being filed for inconvenience.

Yes, I believe a cut on the arm will hurt for a day or two. However, doesn't prevent you from being on the computer - does it?

So, no, I don't think you have a legitimate lawsuit. You didn't report it when it happened. You waited 2 hours and dealt with it on your own. So you can't even prove that it happened at work. You didn't give your employer an opportunity to help you. There weren't even any stitches so you aren't even injured that badly.

Be sure you put "caution" signs around your house so people will not walk blindly into the walls.

How Many People Die From Drunk Driving Every Year?

Drunk driving is no accident.

There were 16,885 alcohol-related fatalities in 2005 – 39 percent of the total traffic fatalities for the year.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), "A motor vehicle crash is considered to be alcohol-related if at least one driver or non-occupant (such as a pedestrian or pedalcyclist) involved in the crash is determined to have had a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .01 gram per deciliter (g/dL) or higher. Thus, any fatality that occurs in an alcohol-related crash is considered an alcohol-related fatality. The term 'alcohol-related' does not indicate that a crash or fatality was caused by the presence of alcohol."

Note the last paragraph, and in particular, the last sentence. This would seem to make the statistics below a little misleading since we tend to think that alcohol-related crashes are caused by drunk drivers. But if a sober driver kills an alcohol-impaired pedestrian, it's still considered an alcohol-related crash. Does this invalidate the drunk driving statistics below? No. The statistics reveal that most fatal alcohol-related crashes do indeed involve drunk drivers and far fewer of these fatalities involve intoxicated pedestrians or "bicyclists and other cyclists".

Nationwide in 2005, alcohol was present in 24 percent of the drivers involved in fatal crashes (BAC .01-.07, 4 percent; BAC .08 or greater, 20 percent).

The 16,885 alcohol-related fatalities in 2005 (39% of total traffic fatalities for the year) represent a 5-percent reduction from the 17,732 alcohol related fatalities reported in 1995 (42% of the total).

The 16,885 fatalities in alcohol-related crashes during 2005 represent an average
of one alcohol-related fatality every 31 minutes.

Of the 16,885 people who died in alcohol-related crashes in 2005, 14,539 (86%) were killed in crashes where at least one driver or nonoccupant had a BAC of .08 or higher.

The drunk driving statistics show that raffic fatalities in alcohol-related crashes fell by 0.2 percent, from 16,919 in 2004 to 16,885 in 2005. [Note that this figure for 2004 is higher than what we've shown for 2004 (16,694 deaths) because our data came from preliminary reports. The final government report counted more drunk driving deaths.]

NHTSA estimates that alcohol was involved in 39 percent of fatal crashes and in
7 percent of all crashes in 2005. The national rate of alcohol-related fatalities in
motor vehicle crashes in 2005 was 0.57 per 100 million vehicle miles traveled.

An estimated 254,000 persons were injured in crashes where police reported that alcohol was present — an average of one person injured approximately every 2 minutes.

In 2004, the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program
estimated that over 1.4 million drivers were arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol or narcotics. This is an arrest rate of 1 for every 139 licensed
drivers in the United States. (2005 data not yet available.)

In 2005, 21 percent of the children age 14 and younger who were killed in motor
vehicle crashes were killed in alcohol-related crashes.

In 2005, a total of 414 (21%) of the fatalities among children age 14 and younger
occurred in crashes involving alcohol. Of those 414 fatalities, more than half (224)
of those killed were passengers in vehicles with drivers with BAC levels of .01 or higher.

Another 48 children age 14 and younger who were killed in traffic crashes in 2005
were pedestrians or pedalcyclists who were struck by drivers with BAC .01 or higher.

The rate of alcohol involvement in fatal crashes is more than 3 times higher
at night as during the day. For all crashes, the alcohol involvement rate is 5 times higher at night.

The highest percentage of drivers in fatal crashes who had BAC levels of .08 or
higher was for drivers ages 21 to 24 followed by the 25 to 34 age group.

click for stats and charts of fatalities since the 90's to 2005:

Can Parents Be Turned In By Financial Aid Office Representatives For Going Against A Legal Document?
If Your Parent Doesn'T Pay In Child Support What They'Re Supposed To By The Separation Document Could A Financial Aid Representative Turn Them In Even If They Parents Are Okay With The Situation Despite The Legal Document?

this is going to depend on your state law

if the Fin Aid office is a mandatory reporter for child support obligations that are unpaid, then yes parent who is not paying (and against the court order) could get turned in

I would suggest it isn't highly likely, but slightly possible

otherwise they are not likely to get involved

Psych Case Study Retarded Family? Sterilization Laws?
Hey So I Need Some Help. I Learned About This Case Study In My Psych Class At The University, But I Cannot Recall Or Find Anything Bout It Online. Unfortunately I Looked Through My Notes And I Didn'T Write It Down. From What I Remember The Case Study Went Something Like This. A Family Somewhere In The Us (Don'T Remember Were) Were On Their 3Rd Or 4Th Generation Of Retarded Kids. So Everyone In The Family Was Retarded. And One Of The Women From The Most Recent Generation Was Also Pregnant. So It Became A Case Where The Government Said That It Was Ridiculous That They Had To Pay In Order To Take Care Of This Family That Continued To Have Mentally Retarded Kids. So In Order To Prevent More Mentally Retarded Children From Being Born A Law Was Passed That Made It Legal For The Government To Castrate Or Sterilize You If You Are Mentally Retarded. Now I'M Not 100% Sure On All The Details And That Is Why I'M Asking. Please Provide Me With A Link Or The Family Name Or The Law So I Can Look It Up. Sorry, It'S A Lil Bit Much To Read, But I'M Really Frustrated I Can'T Figure It Out. Thanks In Advance For All The Help.

Buck v. Bell (1927) was a Supreme Court ruling (a precedent, not a law) that led to the sterilization of some 65,000 people by 1979. The ruling (which pertains especially to people with an intellectual disability) has never been officially overruled, and was cited in a case as recently as 2001, Vaughn v. Ruoff, in which a social worker made sterilization a requirement for the return of children in state custody. (That case made it to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.)

A lot of good info on the subject here: