3 Strategies To Know You've Picked The Correct Lawyer It's pretty intimidating to pass through a legal court system, specifically if you lack confidence with your legal team. Listed below are three important methods to realize that you've hired the proper lawyer: 1. They Focus On Your Sort Of Case Legislation is usually tricky which requires specialists to tackle the tough cases. When you want a legal professional, try to find one that deals with the issue you're facing. Even if a family member or friend recommends you employ a firm they are fully aware, if they don't have a focus that's much like your case, keep looking. Once your attorney is surely an expert, especially in the trouble you're facing, you realize you've hired the right one. 2. The Lawyer Carries A Winning Record Dependant upon the circumstances, it might be tough to win an instance, specifically if the team working for you has little to no experience. Look for practices which may have won numerous cases that relate to yours. Although this is no guarantee that you simply case will probably be won, it will give you a significantly better shot. 3. They Listen And Respond In case the attorney you've chosen takes some time to hear your concerns and reply to your inquiries, you've probably hired the correct one. Irrespective of how busy they can be or how small your concerns seem from their perspective, it's essential that they reply to you in a caring and timely manner. From the aim of look at an ordinary citizen who isn't knowledgeable about the judicial system, court cases can be pretty scary you require updates and also to feel like you're section of the solution. Some attorneys are merely more desirable to you and the case than others. Be sure you've hired the most appropriate team for your personal circumstances, to ensure that you can put the matter behind you as quickly as possible. Faith within your legal representative is the first step to winning any case.
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,
Is It Legal For A Company To Have Two Employees On The Same Management Development Programme (Neither Obviously Better Than The Other) And Give One Obvious Favouritism And Subsequent Promotion? Is This At The Managers Discretion Or Are There Any Rules Governing It?
The company's answer would be that the person who you percieve as being given "obvious favouritism" is actually the better employee, for any one of numerous non-quantifiable reasons (perhaps he or she represents the company better, has better understanding of company culture, has expressed a greater variety of new ideas or insight regarding the company, products, industry, customer base, etc.).
The reality could be that he or she simply makes a better impression on the person making the decision--some would call this sucking up, others, as many books on career success have pointed out, would say that paying attention to your superiors' priorities is simply good business, and makes you stand out to them as a more valuable team member.
If neither person distinctly appears as the better candidate (i.e., numerical data pertaining to job performance are equivalent--this could be sales numbers, turnover rates among direct reports, or anything else that is measured and tracked), then the decision to promote two equally good candidates becomes based on "soft skill" perceptions that the manager has about the people. One candidate might have a better phone voice, respond to emails quicker, have hobbies that could lend themselves to higher-level management (such as golfing), be more outgoing, etc. etc. etc.
The point is, the favouritism does not come out of thin air. Maybe the person wears suits a few times a week when the standard attire in the office is shirt and slacks. Maybe they have earned the trust of management in subtle ways through the course of their employment--respond to managers' emails quickly and thoroughly; work through lunch or stay late regularly; attend more networking events; or it could be an attitude difference--perhaps the person has said or done things to make the manager think he or she would be better "management material."
In most cases, managers really do realize that they are there to do their job to the best benefit of the company they are representing and that is paying their salary. Usually, management even stands to earn bonuses based on the performance of the part of the company which is directly related to the management decisions they make. Therefore they try to hire and promote those whose later actions with the company will make them look like good decision-makers to their own superiors.
The only situation where this "favouritism" could be illegal is if the candidates are equally qualified and the one being passed over for promotion belongs to one of the protected classes for employment purposes. In the USA, you will see most companies have statements on their job applications and other HR materials stating that they are equal opportunity employers. According to the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, http://www.eeoc.gov/ , this means that they don't discriminate based on age, disability, national origin, pregnancy, race, religion, or sex.
Some categories that are NOT protected are body art, hair styles, appropriate attire, grooming, attitude, personability, salesmanship, eye contact, knowledge of current events... Employers can and do make decisions based on these factors all the time, and they are areas in which candidates might want to educate themselves further if they know that they are important to their boss or prospective employer.
If the person passed over for promotion is a woman and the person promoted is a man, the woman could allege that the decision made was discriminatory on the basis of her sex, and an investigation would follow. She would probably need to seek legal council.
Exceptions are known as "bona fide occupational qualifications" that justify otherwise prohibited discrimination. An example would be if the company said that they had to hire a male to be a men's fitting room attendant.
In conclusion, the decision to promote, while it is based somewhat on current job performance, also must include speculation on how the employee will handle the job for which he or she is being considered. Especially in the case of those hoping to be promoted to management, as in your example, the decision will be made with strong consideration given to people skills, listening skills, perceived authority, ability to carry out company policy, and existing rapport with potential direct reports. These are all areas which someone hoping to be promoted should focus their energies. Additionally, those who have recently been passed over for promotion should resist the urge to retaliate against the person who was promoted. Stay close to that person, learn his or her new job priorities, help him or her make a smooth transition by being supportive and helpful. If in fact he or she is a "favourite," he or she may well soon be in a position to advance others' careers, too.
I Was Involved In A Parking Lot Accident About A Month Ago. I Was Backed Into While I Was Trying To Park In The Parking Spot Next To The Car Backing. She Literally Did Not Look Behind Her And Cut Her Wheel Before She Started Backing Instead Of Backing Straight Out Of The Spot And Gunned It. Common Sense Tells Me If You Back Up Into Something Its Your Fault Because You Should Have Seen It, However Her Insurance Has Placed Me At Fault Because She Said I Hit Her (I Was Trying To Back Up But Only Managed To Put My Car Into Neutral Because There Wasn'T Enough Time And I Didn'T Honk Because My Reaction Was To Move Out Of The Way) I Have About $2000 Dollars Worth Of Damage To The Side Fender Of My Car (How Can I Hit Someone With The Side Of My Car?)
So I'Ve Missed A Months Worth Of Income And I Can Now Go Back To Work But Not With My Full Time Status Only Part Time Because My Employer Only Has Part Time To Offer Me Now. I Am Still Going To The Doctor And Paying Out Of Pocket For It, I'M Taking Prescriptions I Have To Pay For, And Also Physical Therapy Three Times A Week.
My Lawyer Told Me Today That It May Not Be Worth Going After. So I'M Left With A Broke Car, Medical Bills, And Lost Wages Because Someone Was Negligent And Backed Into Me? I Am Not Prepared To Let Someones Negligence Cost Me A Vehicle (Which Will Not Run Because The Radiator Is Busted),Who Knows What In Medical Costs, And My Full Time Job Status, Along With My Benefits (Health, Dental, Vision, Prescription, Life Insurances) . Has Anyone Been In This Srt Of Situation Or Can Anyone Offer Some Advice?
I Mean Really, How Can I Hit Another Vehicle With The Side Of My Car While It Is In Neutral?
If you have a good insurance company, they should have handled the situation for you. That really is the difference between good auto insurance and cheap insurance. I've been in the same situation before, and after going through all the bs (and switching to a legit insurance company), I feel a civil lawsuit is the only way to get things done anymore.. Which is sad. Good luck.
Body Injury Claim Against Me.?
So I Was In An Accident About A Year Ago And The Other Party Had Filed For A Boy Injury Claim. It Was A Minor Accident In Which Their Bumper Was Damaged And My Driver'S Side Was Scratched Badly. As Far As I Know And I Saw, The Two People In The Opposite Car Were Pretty Good And It Seemed They Didn'T Have Any Fractures. Alright, So We Met Again In The Court When I Went To Collect My Dl And Even At That Time They Were Pretty Good And Came With Their Lawyer. Now, They Are Still Arguing To Get A Body Injury Claim, Most Probably From My Observation For Soft Tissue Injury As They Seemed Fit At Both The Times I Saw Them.
My Real Problem At This Point Is That Now I Am Switching My Insurance And Terminating My Previous Insurance, With That Body Injury Claim Still On File. The Agent With Whom I Had The Previous Insurance Is Very Reluctant In Cancelling The Policy And Tells Me That Cancelling The Policy Might Have Diverse Effects On The Claim And That The Insurance Company Might Not Fight For Me And Would Easily Pay The Liability Of 25K That I Had. As A Result, The Other Party Might Come After Me Suing Me For More Money. Thus, Cancelling The Insurance And Going To Another Company, The Insurance Company With Whom I Still Have The Claim On File Wouldn'T Try Hard To Help Me. Is It So? What Do You Guys Think About It? Would An Insurance Agency Just Give Up 25K Because I Terminated Their Policy, And So That The Other Party Might Ask For Money And Come After Me Filing A Lawsuit?
And Even If The Amount Crosses The Liability, Does The Insurance Agency Still Defend Me To Come To A Proper Settlement Above The Liability Amount So That The Other Party Might Not Come After My Butt To Grab More Money Once The Liability Has Been Paid To Them.
Please Help Me.....This All Stuff Is Too Confusing.
So many issues. No wonder you are confused.
First, the claim is against your current insurer. The claim goes against the policy in effect at the time of the accident.
So, your agent is right. If your current insurer were to cancel you, that would have a very bad effect on your rates. It is better to change insurers before a cancellation becomes in effect. Even if you receive a NOTICE of cancellation, if you change before the cancellation becomes effective, you can honestly answer application questions that you were NOT cancelled (you voluntarily changed BEFORE cancellation).
Moving on... Your insurer has a duty to defend you. However, if they pay the limits of insurance, they have (as a matter of law) fulfilled all obligations under the policy. Even if a claim is not worth much, it does not take much for defense costs to reach $25k. and often they would rather settle and save defense costs and eliminate the possibility of an adverse verdice
HOWEVER, if they settle the case, they would need to get a release of YOUR liability. The reason for this is that, unless they have resolved YOUR liability, they have breached their fiduciary liability to you. Some states allow them to post the entire $25,000 to retire their obligations, but most would hold that the insurer must either settle/retire your liability (in exchange for payment), or provide a defense.
So, lets say that your state allows the insurer to tender their limits of insurance, can the plaintiff go after you for more? The legal answer is yes. However, unless you are independently wealthy, it is virtually unheard of for plaintiffs lawyers to pursue you in excess of your insurance. They have no interest in garnishing your wages or selling your property. They are after the easy money -- insurance funds. I would not worry about the plaintiffs going after you personally, it is virtually unheard of.
Whether or not you terminate the insurer will make virtually no difference to their defense posture. Some settle easier than others, but with such a small policy, your terminating their insurance will have almost no impact on their litigation strategy.
The reason for this is simple. The insurer's sales and claims departments are completely separate. Even the underwriters do not deal with individual claims. What this means is that the claims people do not know (or care) who you are currently insured by. They follow their own procedures without regard to sales.
This is different when you get into business policies and products liability policies for large companies. But then you are talking about hundreds of thousands of dollars in premiums (if not more), and usually a deductible (or self insured retention) of $25,000 or more. There, the client's views on settlement can (but need not) matter more.
I Need A Labor Law Attorney In The Area?
I Am In The Austin, Tx - San Antonio, Texas Area And I Am Looking For A Pit Bull, No Mercy, Get The Job Done Labor Law Attorney. Please Recommend Someone You May Know And Let Me Know Why You Think S/He Can Get The Job Done.
I'm not going to recommend an attorney in San Antonio - sorry, I don't know any personally. However, the advice above requires response. If you go up against an employer with an attorney and you have none, you're highly likely to lose.
Contact your local bar association and interview several attorneys. Then make your choice.
Any Nonprofit Group Provding Legal Advice For Divorcing Females In Maryland?
I Am Divorcing And Hope To Find A Place For Legal Support, Besides Lawyers.
Try these and good luck:
Legal Aid Bureau, Inc.
Maryland Volunteer Lawyer Service
Maryland Legal Services Corporation
Women's Law Center of Maryland, Inc.
Maryland Crime Victims' Resource Center, Inc
Divorce Vs Legal Separation?
Like To Get A Legal Separation What Are The Ramifications Between The Two I Live In Vt
Talk to a lawyer on this. The main reason for a legal seperation today would be if you cannot file for divorce immediately or if one spouse is having tremendous financial problems.
For instance, your husband abandons you. Some states require that he be gone for a year before you can file for divorce based on abandonment, yet in the meantime, you remain legally liable for any bills he generates as part of a marital couple.
My relative filed for legal separation from her spouse to protect her home and assets when his business was in trouble. Since the home was only in her name, this prevented debtors from attaching a lien to her home even though it was the marital home.
Very complicated, but in most cases, you would just file for divorce rather than legal seperation.