A large number of people do not think about selecting a lawyer until they are in desperate need. The lawful problem may possibly be personal, like family law, for a breakup or if you are looking for a bankrupcy or trust lawyer or attorney. It may be a felony condition you need to be defended on. Businesses need to have attorneys as well, regardless if they are being sued for discrimination, sexual harassment, or maybe not fair business procedures. Tax attorneys are also helpful whenever interacting with government problems. Just like doctors, lawyers have specialties. A huge, full service law firm has many legal professionals with distinct areas of experience, so based upon on your current legal issue, you can instantly hold on to the greatest legal professional to satisfy your existing need without having to commence your search each time you need legal assistance.It is ideal to find a legal representative you can have confidence in. You really want one with a good track record, who istruthful, efficient, and wins cases. You need to have assurance that they will represent you accurately and invoice you fairly for their products and services. Quite often a referral from a friend or business affiliate can be beneficial, however you should keep your options open and review all the firms available, simply because when you require legal help, you need it immediately and you need the best you can pay for. Thank you for searching for a lawyer with us. Your time is valuable, and Action Pages, at Actionyp.com, is happy to give specific search parameters to match your requirements. We continually strive to focus on the most popular phrases so you can instantly find anything you are looking for.
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,
My Daughter Has Erbs Pasley Due To Birth Injury ? But Iwas So Young I Knew Nothing About Sueing Is It To Late?
She Is 14 Yrs Old
I'm afraid so. There's usually a 2 year statute of limitations on that sort of claim. Even if it's longer, it wouldn't be that long. Sorry.
ok, wait... different states say different things about when the statute of limitations begins to run. some states are really strict about it saying that it starts to run when the breach occurs (which is really hard for products liability since the thing might not be packaged shipped and bought before the 2 years expires... SoL would start running when the thing was manufactured). other states say that it starts to run when you have knowledge of the breach (like when the product breaks and injures you). and still other states will say that it starts running when you have notice of a causal connection between the act that was the breach and the injury. But that last is a minority. The rule I was supposed to learn for my torts class (for my exam that I just took in December) was the second one: that the SoL begins to run when the injury occurs. The case in our textbook refused to allow a lawsuit where this man was injured by the chemicals at the plant where he worked and he went to doctors who tested him and they couldn't give any tesitmony that there was a causal connection until a doctor that he went to 20 years later... even though that was the first time that he could bring a lawsuit, the SoL had already run because the SoL is a thing to limit the number of lawsuits... and because the courts don't want liability based on this after-the-fact knowledge because the employer wouldn't have known at the time that he had been using dangerous chemicals.
Even if, as my fellow answerer has stated, the SoL wouldn't start until you learn of the possible wrong doing, the SoL would have already run because you knew of the wrongdoing at the time when your daughter was born... the fact that you didn't realize you could sue doesn't matter to a court.
Even the information he states regarding the extension of the SoL for disabilities and infancy is flawed... I checked the website and it does say that, but there's a separate category for medical malpractice where it says 3 year SoL or 1 year from date of learning of the injury and that children can bring suit until they're 8... and 14 is older than 8
Actually, the information about the extension of the SoL for disability or infancy I did learn, it in regards to property law... disabled people can't make a lawsuit if their property rights are infringed, so they have until the disability has concluded before they have to sue... if that's their whole life, then their successor can sue.
I am very sorry about your daughter's injury and if you want to be sure, you should talk to a lawyer because the law in your state might say differently. but the law as far as I know, would not permit your lawsuit.
How Does Marxism Influence Family Law If Applied?
I'M Making A Research On How Marxism As An Ideology In Totalitarian States (Such As Former Ussr For Instance) Influences Family Law. I Would Be Happy To Know Your Ideas And Thoughts About It.
There is no peaceful co-existence between Communism and bourgeois law, and its social forms like the family.
The family plants the seeds of anti-social feelings and actions, because it attaches interest to a particular circle of accidental relationships at the expense of communitarian living.
The abolishment of private private was not only material, but legal, social, cultural as well. That's what a revolutionary change means: the complete removal of private barriers and locations.
The factory unit was the ideal form of social living, not the isolated, private family.
In fact, the early Reds were great advocates of abortion, abolishing marriage, dissolving families into communal units, moving women into full labor equality, having work place units provide child care.
What Happens After You Confess After Asking For A Lawyer?
I Love Law Shows Like The Practice And Having Seen Many Episodes Of Many Such Shows, I Wonder: If I'M Accused Of, Say, Murder, And I Ask For A Lawyer At The Beginning Of The Interrogation, All Questioning Should Be Stopped Right Away. Right?
However, In Law Shows The Interrogation Quite Often Continues After The Cops Gloss Over The Request For A Lawyer. (I'Ve Seen This Happen In The Practice, Day Break, Dexter, Law And Order Etc.) What If I Subsequently Confess To Everything, Giving Many Details The Cops Didn'T Even Know... Would This Confession Be Thrown Out Because It Is Illegally Obtained? If Yes, Would It Subsequently Not Be Very Hard To Try Me Again (Assuming Double Jeopardy Doesn'T Apply) Because The Cops Would Not Only Have To Find Other Evidence That I Committed The Crime, But Wouldn'T They Also Have To Prove That It Wasn'T In Any Way Derived From The Illegally Obtained Confession? ('Fruit From A Poisoned Tree')
The police will only advise you of your Miranda warnings if you are subject to custodial interrogation. That means you can't leave, and they intend to ask you questions. Once you ask for an lawyer, they have to stop asking you questions. No ifs, ands or buts about it.. We all know that in the real world, at that point, the interrogation is over. Unless you have your own attorney in the next room, no public defender is going to appear to give you advice. So, you ask for a lawyer and the detectives get up and leave and a patrol officer or two walk you back down to the lock up. No more talking.
If the police are stupid, they will continue to ask you questions. If you answer them, after having asked for an attorney, whatever you say will likely be suppressed. Of course, it will only get thrown out if you tell that to your lawyer and a pre-Trial motion to suppress evidence is filed.
Now, if you ask for a lawyer, and the police stop talking to you, you can always change your mind. If you decide to start up the conversation again, and you specifically explain that you changed your mind, whatever you say will be admissible. I have had that happen many times, especially on cases with co-defendents. One guy will ask for a lawyer, and end up back downstairs in the cell. When his pals are still "chatting it up" with detectives, he might get nervous that they are blaming it all on him. So, as happens very often, he will ask the turn-key to get in touch with the detectives and tell them he wants to talk. When the interrogation resumes, it is necessary that the investigator document that the defendant changed his mind, and specifically declined legal counsel.
Now, just as a side comment. Don't pay attention to the crap yous ee on TV. None of the TV cop or lawyer shows are anywhere near close to reality. I have taken hundreds of confessions from everything from Library Theft to Murder. Any good detective knows what he/she can or can't do. Once the dirt ball um,,, defendant...asks for an attorney, the conversation is over.
Double jeopardy only attaches if you have been found "Not Guilty". If the case is withdrawn by the prosecution, or dismissed at a Preliminary hearing, "Jeopardy" has not attached. And you can eventually be brought to Trial for those charges. That's another thing that gets a little confusing to people who watch cop and lawyer shows.
Can Someone Explain Lawsuits To Me?
I Know The Guy Who Was Completely Embarassed On The Plane Got $206K For Being Made To Stand In The Back, Just Ticked Him Off.
I'Ve Been Injured In A Car Accident, I Was Ticked Off, Treated Badly, Embarassed To Hell & Back, Facing Bankrupcy, Etc, How Come I'M Not Going To Get That Kind Of Money?
Why Isn'T There Some Set Of Standards For These Things?
A lawsuit requires several things or conditions.
1. Something has to have happened to you of a negative nature, whether injury, insult, object or monetary loss, or other types of subjective or objective harm.
Just being "ticked off" probably would get laughed out of court. The guy at the back of the plane might well have had a civil rights violation, which is a lot more than being ticked off. Public embarassment might qualify depending on degree and nature of the event. Physical injury as the result of a car accident absolutely qualifies for lawsuits.
2. A person's action must be directly responsible for causing the negative event.
If a person does things that lead to your being injured in the legal sense, and you don't contribute to the event in any way, and there is no hint of it being an act of nature / act of God, then there can be an argument for cause and effect relationship between the person's actions and your injury. This is tricky and hard to explain other than to say that if you are a klutz and get hurt, a defense against a lawsuit would be that you are klutz and therefore are more likely to be hurt without anyone's help.
3. There must be a way to assign monetary value to the event or to its result.
Property action: Some jerk drives his car into yours while it is parked. You can file a suit for property damage.
Personal injury: Same jerk drives his car into yours while you are in it, whether parked or moving. You are physically injured by the accident. You can file a suit for personal injury.
Civil Rights violation: Many constitutional laws make certain actions punishable through the courts as personal rights issues. For instance, the guy on the plane. Being told to not stay in a particular area - when there was no safety hazard and no other reason to stay in that area -might have been a civil rights violation.
4. A lawyer must be willing to take your case on hearing its nature. If you run into a raft of lawyers who do not want to take the case, you might reconsider its worthiness as a legal action.
The lawyer files the suit. You become the plaintiff, the person or persons who caused you to experience the event become the defendants. You request some type of damages or corrective behavior or perhaps both. The defendant might try to settle out of court for less money than you requested. Or, you can roll the dice with a jury and see how much they want to award you - if anything.
What Is The Criminal Law For Harassment Cases ?
A Da Is Appealing A Criminal Law Of Harassment - What Is That, Anybody Know ?
Harassment is a very broad charge. It can include physical contact , unwanted, with another, repeated phone calls or calls at inconvenient hours, following a person around, unwanted, or acting in a lewd or lacivious manner either to or about others or even inappropriate drawings or caricatures of others unwanted. It can be a very subjective crime, open to interpretation by the judge, or even the police officer who may have to initiate the charge. If a case is already found and under appeal, you're getting into the realm of lawyers as the best spoken or articulate actors will probably win the case.
Question On Divorce And Custody?
Why Is It Some Men Threaten Of Custodial Battle When Their Wives Bring Up Divorce? What Are The Odds Of Them Getting The Kids??
Adults can behave like kids at times too. It's sort of like the one thing they can hold over your head. No one likes to lose and the sad part about it is that when couples divorce, they get competitive and stop looking out for the best interest of the kids. The divorce becomes a competition on who can hurt the other the most. I say don't give into the pettiness, and ignore the threats. Don't stoop down to this childish level.