3 Approaches To Know You've Picked The Proper Lawyer It's pretty intimidating to go through a legal court system, specifically if you lack confidence inside your legal team. Listed here are three important strategies to recognize that you've hired the right lawyer: 1. They Focus On Your Sort Of Case Legislation is normally tricky and that requires specialists to tackle the tough cases. When you want an attorney, look for individual who handles the matter you're facing. Even though a family member or friend recommends you utilize a firm they are aware, should they don't possess a focus that's just like your case, keep looking. Whenever your attorney is definitely an expert, especially in the hassle you're facing, you know you've hired the right choice. 2. The Lawyer Carries A Winning Record According to the circumstances, it might be challenging to win a case, particularly if the team working for you has little to no experience. Try to find practices which may have won numerous cases that apply to yours. Although this is no guarantee which you case is going to be won, it will give you a much better shot. 3. They Listen And Respond If the attorney you've chosen takes enough time to listen for your concerns and respond to your inquiries, you've probably hired the correct one. Regardless how busy they can be or how small your concerns seem from the perspective, it's essential that they reply to you in the caring and timely manner. From the purpose of take a look at a typical citizen who isn't knowledgeable about the judicial system, court cases could be pretty scary you want updates as well as feel like you're part of the solution. Some attorneys are merely a lot better to both you and your case than others. Make sure you've hired the most suitable team for your personal circumstances, to actually can placed the matter behind you as fast as possible. Faith with 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,
How Can We Call A Person That Finds Land For Developers & Gets Paid A Finder Fee?
This Person Doesn'T Have A Real Estate License An Does This For A Living.
That person is breaking the law. He must be a principal. He won't be doing this long. He must have a license.
If someone calls the state Real Estate Commission and tells them about this I suspect they will call the Attorney General.
Is There A New Law About Settlements For Medicare Recipients?
I Am On Disability From A Car Accident In 03 Where I Had A Brain Injury And Surgery. Last Yr I Gave Birth To My Son. When He Was 6 Wks Old I Was Sideswipped By A Truck. I Had Whiplash And Was In Alot Of Pain For Months. It Was Hard Caring For My Son, Because The Lifting And Carrying Him Put Strain On My Neck.
I Gat A Lawyer To Help Me With The Accident And A Small Settlement. I Just Called Them, And Was Told That There'S A New Medicare Law That Says If I Get Any Settlement Over 1,000 I Won'T Be Able To Get Medicare Anymore. Is That True? I Called Medicare And The Woman Talked With Her Superviser, And Said They Never Heard Of It. Now I'M Worried. I'D Like A Settlement Over 1000 To Cover Medical Expenses, My Lawyer Fees And Pain And Suffering. But I Don'T Want To Lose My Insurance.
Has Anyone Else Heard Of This Law? Where Can I Find It?
You spoke to the proper authorities and they gave you an answer.
It sounds to me like your lawyer would like to to give them the money in excess of a thousand dollars.
I don't trust your lawyer. Your injury is worth much more than a thousand dollars. If I were you I'd contact the Bar Association and ask them if what your lawyer told you is legal.
This smells to high heaven.
Medicare is for those over sixty five, if you have a young son, you aren't over 65, did you call Medicare, or Medicaid, because Medicaid is the proper office. The rules for Medicaid are income based, they would be different than Medicare, and you may need to make another call.
Can Someone Please Help Me With My Legal Research?
I'M Doing Research Regarding The Michigan Medical Marihuana Act. The Issue Is Whether Or Not A Caregiver Is Allowed To Give His/Her Qualified Patient An Ingestible Form Of Marijuana Due To Complications That Prevent Him From Smoking It.
So Far, I Know That It Is Legal But I Only Found Out Because Of The Q&Amp;A At The Michigan.Gov Website But I Still Can'T Find Any Cases To Back It Up. Can Someone Please Help Me By Giving Me Key Terms To Type In The Westlaw Database? I'Ve Been Searching For Hours :(.
I authored the brief that resulted in what was for a time the leading Michigan Court of Appeals case on medical marihuana in Michigan (People v Redden). The Westlaw search query that you want to use is "medical +2 (marijuana marihuana) +2 act & ingest!" (without the quotes).
This search query brings back 8 cases, including the case People v Carruthers, 301 Mich App 590; 837 NW2d 16 (2013). In Carruthers, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that using marijuana brownies violated the law because they did not contain "usable marijuana" under the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act. The Court reasoned as follows:
“By excluding resin from the definition of ‘usable marihuana,’ as contrasted with the definition of ‘marihuana,’ and defining ‘usable marihuana’ to mean only ‘the dried leaves and flowers of the marihuana plant, and any mixture or preparation thereof,’ MCL 333.26423(k) (emphasis added), the drafters clearly expressed their intent not to include resin, or a mixture or preparation of resin, within the definition of ‘usable marihuana.’ They therefore expressed their intent not to include a mixture or preparation of an extract of resin. Consequently, an edible product made with THC extracted from resin is excluded from the definition of ‘usable marihuana.’ Rather, under the plain language of the MMMA, the only ‘mixture or preparation’ that falls within the definition of ‘usable marihuana’ is a mixture or preparation of ‘the dried leaves and flowers of the marihuana plant . . . .’” Id.
So to answer your question, the manner in which the marijuana is ingested into the body is not the determinative inquiry. Rather, the dispositive question is whether an ingestible contains "usable marijuana" as defined by the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act. My understanding is that ingestibles are generally created using resin, which Carruthers says violates the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act. According to the holding in Carruthers, an ingestible would not violate the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act if but only if it constituted "a mixture or preparation of ‘the dried leaves and flowers of the marihuana plant . . . .’” Id.
I would also offer the following two caveats. First, be careful relying on legal opinions such as the Q&A at the michigan.gov website because it is impossible to determine who wrote the content or when it was last updated, and it will not constitute a defense if the information is incorrect, which appears to be the case in this instance. Second, the Michigan appellate courts have essentially eviscerated the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act and continue to do so with extremely narrow interpretations of that law. So always be sure to err on the side of caution by drawing the most conservative conclusions that you can when interpreting this law or the cases that construe it. While this is not what most medical marihuana clients / users want to hear, it is the reality under the current Michigan judiciary. I hope this of help. Good Luck with your research.
When A School Searches You Can You Refuse To Comply Until You Speak With A Parent Or Lawyer?
I Know That A School Can Search You Or Your Belongings Without Probable Cause. All They Need Is Reasonable Cause. But I Was Wondering If You Told Them That You Refuse To Comply With Them Until You Speak With A Lawyer Or Parent If They Could Do Anything. Isn'T It A Persons Right To A Fair Trial With Legal Representation? Thank You For Answering.
They are under no duty to wait for a lawyer - not even the police have that duty. As for your parents - better check with them before you pull this kind of stunt. If one of your parents gets pulled out of work because you've decided to "stand on your rights" to hide your cell phone, my guess is that you're a dead duck.
Schools have the right to search you and your belongings for contraband. If you will not cooperate, they can call the police and have you subdued.
A school search does not fall under the right to a fair trial - best start reading Supreme Court decisions, little lawyer.
Why Is The Washout Or Look-Back Period For The Ga Dui Law Not Considered Ex Post Facto?
Why Is The Washout Or Look-Back Period (10 Years) For The 2008 Amended Dui Law (O.C.G.A. Section 40-6-391) Not Considered An Ex Post Facto Law For Cases That Occured Before 2008 Under The Five Year Look Back Period?
More Specifically, If You Had A Dui On July 2, 1998 And Get Another On July 1, 2008, Prosecutors Consider This Your Second Offense. Even Though Under The Old Law, The Look Back Expired In 2003. It Seems To Me That Using The Law In This Manner Is In Direct Violation Of Having An Ex Post Factor Law.
However, The 2008 Amended Law States That It Takes Effect For Offenses On Or After July 1, 2008. This Statement Applies To All Sections Within This Law, But Prosecutors Are Using The Look Back Period To Increase Punishments For Convictions Prior To This Date. When One Looks At The Words On Or After, These Words Does Not Mean Or Equate To The Word Prior. I Could Not Find Anything In The State Of Georgia That Addresses This Issue Either As An Official Opinion Or Under The Rule Of Law.
It Would Make Sense To Prosecute Offenders Of This Law In The Following Manner:
1) If One Is Convicted Of Dui Prior To July 1, 2008, The Look Back Period Of 5 Years From The Prior Law Shall Be Used Up To But Not Past July 1, 2008. (If The Look Back Period Has Already Expired Under The Previous Law, It Should Not Be Considered An Offense Under The Amended Law.)
Example: John Doe Was Convicted For Dui On January 2, 2003 (1St Offense Under Old Law). January 2, 2008 His Look Back Period Expires Under The Old Law. John Doe Gets Convicted Of Another Dui On July 2, 2008, In Which He Is Sentenced As A First Offender (Even Though Its Truly His Second).
2)Every Conviction On Or After July 1, 2008 Will The Look Back Period Of 10 Years.
Example: John Doe Gets Convicted Of Another Dui On July 2, 2008, In Which He Is Sentenced As A First Offender. John Doe Gets Convicted Of Another Dui On July 1, 2018, In Which He Is Sentenced As A Second Offender.
I Would Like To Believe That One Would Be Charged/Sentenced As A 1St Offender Under These Circumstances Stated Above But They Are Not. Could Someone Explain Why This Is The Case And Why The Law Is Not Considered An Ex Post Facto Law?
It appears that the law is properly written but the prosecutors are pushing the envelope. One would hope some judges note the ex post facto effect, and force compliance with the Constitution. However, Article I, Section 9 limits Congress, not the Georgia Legislatur, so there may be some wrangling necessary.
The definition of an ex post facto law comes from Calder v. Bull in 1798 in the opinion written by Justice Chase:
"1st. Every law that makes an action done before the passing of the law, and which was innocent when done, criminal; and punishes such action. 2d. Every law that aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when committed. 3d. Every law that changes the punishment, and inflicts a greater punishment, than the law annexed to the crime, when committed. 4th. Every law that alters the legal rules of evidence, and receives less, or different, testimony, than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense, in order to convict the offender."
There can be argument made that this law does not fit that definition. If it modifies the look-back period for crimes committed after its effective date, and those crimes were STILL crimes in that lookback period, and their punishment is not changed, it may not even fit the 2nd case cited. But this is a matter for the courts, and perhaps prosecutors are in fact doing due diligence to make a case that forces the issue. Laws are not declared unconstituytional by review, most of the time, but rather by a court case challenging them.
What Is The Salary For A 25Th Year Securities Lawyer At A Large Law Firm?
Apparently A 1St Year Associate Makes 160 Grand I Was Wondering What A 25Th Year Securities Partner At A Major Law Firm Makes
Not all 1st year associates make $160k p/yr and a 25th year partner gets bonuses and profit sharing based upon how the firm is doing financially in addition to their annual salary. There is no set amount based on senority.