Finding A Skilled Lawyer Whatever your legal needs are you will see that there are countless lawyers in the area that advertise that they focus on your kind of case. This can make the entire process of finding one with quite a lot of experience somewhat of a challenge. However, should you follow the following it will be possible to define your research off to the right one out of very little time. Step one is to create a selection of the lawyers that are listed in your area specializing in your situation. While you are which makes this list you need to only include those that you may have a great vibe about depending on their advertisement. You can then narrow this list down by using a while evaluating their site. There you should certainly find the number of years they are practicing and a few general information regarding their success rates. At this point your list ought to have shrunken further to the people that you just felt had professional websites as well as an appropriate level of experience. You should then take time to lookup independent reviews of every attorney. Be sure to browse the reviews rather than just relying upon their overall rating. The details from the reviews will provide you with a sense of how they communicate with their clientele and the length of time they invest into each case they are working on. Finally, you will want to meet with a minimum of the past three lawyers who have the credentials you are searching for. This provides you with enough time to truly evaluate how interested they may be in representing both you and your case. It is crucial for you to follow many of these steps to actually find a person which has the right measure of experience to get you the perfect 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,
Legal Immigration Advice?
Im In Need Of Some Legal Advice Concerning A Green Card Holder Marrying An Alien. Not, Not The Type From Mars. Anyway, I've Gotten To A Point I'm Really Getting Fed Up With All The Procedures And Paperwork And Forms To Fill Out, Tht Im Considering Just Leaving This Country.
Here Goes, Iv Bn Here For 5 Yrs On A Green Card. I've Also Left My Fiancee Back Home While She Was Studyin Medicine. Shes's Done Now, And Has Graduated. I'v Also Finished My 5 Yrs Here Makin Me Elligible For Us Citizenship. I Sent The Paperwork This Weekend. Now Im Lookin To Bring My Fiancee Over Here. Rmbr, Its Bn 5 Long Yrs, N Im Lookin To Get Her Here Real Fast(Legally Of Course).
Now I Knw The Spouse Visa Is A Possibility, But Im Not Citizen Yet. God Knws Il B Citizen After A Yr Or So.
The Fiancee Visa Is A Possibility, Once Again, Im Stil A Green Card Holder.
Is There Anything Else I Can Try? I Dont Care If The Paperwork Takes Forever, Just As Long As Shes Here With Me Soon. Any Help Is Appreciated. N Please, If U Have Nothin To Say, Please Dont. I Cant Be Stretched Any More. Thank You. Perhaps I Shud Look Into Goin To Uk Or Something. Iv Always Liked Europe.
Only US citizens can file I-129F for an alien fiancee, so that option is out of the window at the moment.
You could file for a spousal visa as a green card holder, and once your citizenship is approved, you can have the I-130 application upgraded to get an immediate visa number. Still, you'd be looking at 8-10 months on top of the time it takes for your N-400 to be approved.
Because you're not a citizen, any route she pursues to enter the US based on you is going to be slow. It would be faster for her to look at her own ways of entering the country if you wanted to get it done fast, such as through a student visa. A work visa is always a hard thing to go after, they are all gone on the same day they are made available. Unless she already has a job offer it's going to be tough.
If you're originally from the UK, it is easier going back to the UK and getting married and being together. However, the time away from the US is always going to hold you back from citizenship and you're still eventually going to face the same time frame problems of not being a citizen when it comes to petitioning for an alien relative.
It's a toss up between waiting for your N-400 to be approved and then filing I-129F for a fiancee visa, or get started on an I-130 now and upgrade it when your N-400 is approved. It's going to be pretty much the same time frame either way.
Can You Help With Business Law?
True Or False...
1. Nella Offers To Sell Her Crop Of Strawberries, Which Have Just Been Picked, To Morgan’S Market. Since She Does Not Specify A Time Limit For Acceptance, Morgan’S Can Accept The Offer The Following Week, As Long As Nella Has Not Revoked It
2. Under The Ucc, The Mirror Image Rule Applies Strictly
3. A Letter Of Intent Summarizes Progress Made During Business Negotiations, But It Does Not Necessarily Create A Binding Contract.
1) -- True.
2) -- The 2-207 Statute is a bit confusing.
However, the Uniform Commercial Code generally governs the law of transaction. --
This is how the Mirror image law works:
The mirror image rule and its application to contract law states that an OFFER and ACCEPTANCE must mirror each other or no contract is formed.
So, in order for a contract to be formed, an ACCEPTANCE of an offer must be absolute, unconditional, and identical with the terms of the offer.
So if a person makes an OFFER and the person to whom the OFFER is made accepts CONDITIONALLY or introduces a new term to the acceptance this allows for rejection of the offer and serves as a counter offer which then said COUNTER OFFER must be ACCEPTED before a contract can result.
So in regards to the offer in the first question about the strawberries this is a mirror image as no conditions were introduced.
A letter of intent is an interim agreement that summarizes the main points of a proposed deal, or confirms that a certain course of action is going to be taken. Thus, Normally, it does NOT constitute a **definitive contract** but merely signifies a genuine interest in reaching the final agreement subject to due diligence, additional information, or fulfillment of certain conditions.
Hope that helps,
What Questions Do I Ask When Looking For A Lawyer To Hire?
My Dad Died In A Veterans Hospital At Age 52. The Cause Of Death On The Death Certificate Was Accidental Mixed Drug Overdose. What Do I Look For When Hiring Wrongful Death Lawyers? What Do I Ask? How Can I Tell If I Have A Good One?
You need to find a lawyer who specializes in medical malpractice cases. Find one who is board certified too b/c they have advanced training in that area. If you know a lawyer, ask them if they know someone who specializes in that. If you have board certification in your state, look for a board certified civil trial lawyer. I am a lawyer and know who is good in our state and who is not but I am not sure how lay people who are not lawyers can find out. If you ask a lawyer, ask them
1) how long they have been practicing and what their areas of specialty are. Avoid anyone out less than 10 years or someone who specializes in lots of things, like wills, divorces, dog bites - that means they do a little of everything and not a lot of medical malpractice work which is what you need.
2) how many trials have they personally tried, alone, to verdict. A lot of lawyers talk a big line but never really tried a case to verdict. You want someone who has tried a lot of malpractice cases to verdict.
3) ask if they ever litigated a case involving prescription overdoses and deaths and/or the VA?
4) what are the limits of recovery against the VA? And can the dr's who treated your dad be sued separately if they are at fault?
If they are good they are going to want a lot of information from you - like your dad's records- before deciding whether to take your case. Medical malpractice cases are very expensive to bring to trial for the plaintiff's attorney and they are going to want to make sure the case is worth their time before they sink $50,000 - $100,000 of their own money into the case.
What state are you in?
Recommended Resource For Learning About Legal Self-Defense?
Hi, Some Questions I Have Are: 1 - Does The Principle Of "Obligation To Retreat" Apply To Self-Defense Only (If Someone Else Was In Danger Of Death At A Gas Station, Could Someone With A Conealed Pistol License Who Has The Gun In A Glove Box In A Car Outside Go Get The Gun And Use Lethal Force To Prevent The Apparent Armed Attack? 2 - If Attacked By Someone Without A Weapon (Punching/Kicking), Could The Defender Use An Aid Without Using Deadly Force (Like A Baseball Bat)? 3 - If Someone Is Walking Down An Ally Or Street, And Is Approached By More People Than Could Be Handled In An Attack (3-4 "Thugs"), Could The Defender Show The Pistol, And Even Use Deadly Force If The Group Does Not Cease To Advance? 4: If Someone Is Robbed At Gunpoint And Wisely Chooses Not To Draw A Concealed Weapon (Since That May Provoke The Attacker To Actually Shoot), Once The Attacker Withdraws And Turns Away, Can The Defender Then Show The Pistol, Insist That The Wallet Be Returned, And If The Attacker Points His Own Weapon, Use Deadly Force? In Addition To Your Answer, Do You Have A Recommended Resource Or Website That Defines "Legal Self-Defense" And The Defense Of Others Using "Justifiable Deadly Force", Preferably With Situation Examples? Thanks!
The doctrines the govern self-defense vary by state in both their content and their implementation.
For example, my state makes no mention of self-defense matters in written law whatsoever. The doctrines of self-defense are defined in caselaw and jury instructions. Why? Self-defense is simply an "excuse" (aka Affirmative Defense) raised when you've been arrested and are being tried. If in the above situations the police are never summoned, nothing happens. If they are summoned, in most the situations you mentioned, you would probably be arrested or at least taken to the police station, though in many of the cases you would be released.
I can address your questions in order though, based on caselaw I have reviewed and the doctrines of a my state as an example.
1. Duty to retreat in the majority of cases does not apply when defending another person.
2. The use of an weapon against an unarmed attacker can be justified but it limited to just enough force needed to stop them. I have two cases where a person with a knife defended themselves against larger unarmed opponents, and killed them (knives are deadly but have no stopping power). Both these people are now serving murder or manslaughter because they used DEADLY force against non-deadly threats when they have obvious avenues of escape (Their petty sense of "honor" made them confront another person needlessly)
3. Same as above, the pretense of multiple attackers makes the need for an equalizer justifiable. A large factor would be an expression of intent by the thugs ("We gon' kill you, @#$!" would be a threat of death, therefore brandishing a deadly weapon would likely be justified provided you could prove it to people who were not there at the time)
4. This is unlikely to be justifiable, as it is deadly force to retrieve simple property. Further, it is not very safe, considering the other person could fast draw and then you have a one-on-one gun battle. Bad news.
Most pistol training courses give excellent training on justifiable deadly force for the specific area one lives in. I would trust those over any website out there. Also, gunshop owners are mines of useful information on a lot of these laws, especially if the managers.
One last thing is the political climate of the courts in the area. The best resources on this are at your local courthouse. The caselaw library provides examples of situations and how the law ruled in them. And often, if you are a pretty smooth, talker, you can even talk to the SA or DA's Office about the subject, as their office is the one that decides whether to prosecute people.
Legal/ Law Enforement Professional Advice?
I Live In Las Vegas, Nevada About Two Years Ago I Pled Guilty To A Misdemeanor Concealed Weapons Charge. Under Really Bad Advice From A Friend, I Thought I Was Obeying The &Quot;Tote Law&Quot; We Have Here In Nevada. I Had My Pistol With Me While Walking My Dog. I Was Stopped And Arrested.Initially I Was Charged With A Felony, But In Court I Was Offered A Misdemeanor With The Stipulation Of A Fine And Inpulse Control Classes. I'M Thirty Years Old, And Besides This Inccident Have Never Been In Any Sort Of Violation Of The Law. The Question I Have Now, Is How This Will Affect Me In The Future. I'M Planning On Moving Out Of State Soon, And Still Own Long Rifles I Purchased Close To A Decade Ago. I Was Originally Charged With A Felony But Pled Guilty To A Misdemeanor, So I Don'T Know If I Can Have My Existing Firearms Repaired If Needed Or Possibly Purchase New Ones I'Ve Seen Advertisements That Offer Expungement Services, But I'M Not Sure About That Either. I Appreciate Any Advice Available On The Matter.
Nevada law does not require the registration of firearms. However, handgun owners in Clark County must register their concealable firearms at a law enforcement agency within an incorporated city of Clark County.
Nevada is a "shall issue" state for concealed carry. The county sheriff shall issue a concealed firearms permit to qualified applicants. A person must take a class to receive the CCW concealed carry permit and must qualify by demonstrating use of the exact handgun that the person will carry if an automatic, and only a representative model for revolvers(all revolvers operate the same way).
Also effective Oct 1, 2007 a CCW permittee can qualify with a revolver and thereafter carry ANY revolver (or derringer) - the permit will simply state "Revolvers Authorized"; however, one must continue to qualify with each make/model/caliber of semi auto pistols.
The CCW permit costs $105, and is valid for 5 years for residents and 3 years for non-residents.
Effects: -It might make it slightly harder to get a job due to your record but since it is only a misdemeanor you shouldn't have excessive difficulty.
- As you mentioned that you have rifles, you need a permit for those and when they see your record that might have an effect.
I'd give you the Firearm Laws for the state your moving to but you did not mention it. However if you have a permit for Nevada these states MIGHT admit the permit too: States that honor Nevada's CCW permit: Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas*, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan*, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah (*Residential Permits Only)
Hope I Helped and Good Luck
I Am Needing Some Legal Advice.?
Back On December 30Th 2006 My Pickup Was Totaled In An Accident. It Was A 98 S-10 And Was Not Paid For. My Payments Were Being Made To Chase Bank Through A Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Trustee. A Few Days Later After I Got The News From My Insurance Company That It Was A Total Loss, I Went To My Lawyer And Had A Chapter 7 Conversion Done. The Purpose Of That Was To Have The Garnishment Of My Wages Stopped. About The Middle Of Jan., My Insurance Co. Sent Me A Letter Telling Me That I Was To Receive A Check. After Waiting Almost 3 Months, I Have Been Told By My Chapter 7 Trustee That Since My Truck Will Have To Be Paid Off First Before I See Any Money, That It Could Be Another 1 To 3 Months Before I Get A Check If Any Thing Is Left Over. I Am Really Counting On That Money To Help Me Get A Vehicle And My Patience Is Wearing Thin. My Question Is This; Do I Have Any Legal Recourse, And If So, Against The Insurance Company,Or The Lienholder, Which Is Chase Bank.
This isn't an insurance matter. This is a bankruptcy matter. Whenever you file for bankruptcy, you are basically putting your finances into the hands of the trustee of the bankruptcy court.
You vehicle had a lien on it. Your insurance has no choice but to pay the value of the vehicle to you and the lienholder, in this case, Chase Bank. They get the money for the remainder of the loan because that is secured property. You exempted it from bankruptcy, which is why you were continuing to make payments on it, in order to keep your vehicle during the bankruptcy. However, when it was totaled, the bank gets paid. Any money that is left over from the payment is now in the hands of the trustee.
What the trustee does with that remaining money will be up to the courts. I don't know whether you'll get any money that is left over or not. Since you are in Chapter 13, meaning you are paying off at least some of your bills, they may use the money to pay your bills.
You need to talk to your attorney. No, I don't think you have any recourse against the insurance company. They did exactly what your policy required. They paid off the lienholder, Chase bank. You'll need to talk to your attorney to find out where the remaining money went but my guess is, it's in the hands of the trustee who may be using it to pay some of your other bills.