Finding A Highly Skilled Lawyer Whatever your legal needs are you will recognize that there are loads of lawyers in your town that advertise that they focus on your kind of case. This may make the entire process of finding one with a lot of experience somewhat of a challenge. However, in the event you follow the following it is possible to define your pursuit to the correct one out of very little time. The initial step is to make a selection of the lawyers which are listed in your area focusing on your needs. When you are causeing this to be list you must only include those that you may have an excellent vibe about based upon their advertisement. Then you can narrow this list down by taking a while evaluating their internet site. There you will be able to find just how many years they are practicing plus some general specifics of their success rates. At this stage your list must have shrunken further to people that you simply felt had professional websites as well as an appropriate amount of experience. You need to then spend some time to search for independent reviews of each and every attorney. Be sure you see the reviews instead of just counting on their overall rating. The information within the reviews will give you a solid idea of how they interact with the clientele and the time they invest into each case they are working on. Finally, you will want to meet up with at the very least the past three lawyers who have the credentials you are searching for. This gives you enough time to really evaluate how interested they may be in representing you and your case. It is vital that you follow most of these steps to actually find someone containing the right level of experience to obtain the very best 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,
Difference Between Dui And Dwi?
Driving Under The Influence Vs Driving While Intoxicated? What'S The Difference? Also, What Are The Differences In The Laws Pertaining To Each In The Us?
It depends on the state, but here are some helpful hints:
1. DWI generally means Driving While Intoxicated from alcohol, and DUI generally means Driving Under the Influence of any mind-altering substance (including prescription drugs, illegal drugs, alcohol, etc).
2. Different states use different definitions, but often in California the District Attorney will charge you with both a DUI and a DWI, especially if there is no blood test showing that you were only under the influence of one particular substance.
3. In California, if you plead "guilty" to the DWI only, then future employers, landlords, etc who do background checks will probably assume that it was just alcohol; if you plead to a DUI, they may wonder if you were under the influence of something else, and worry about whether you have a drug history.
4. In California, if your DUI or DWI involved an accident or injury to anyone, then you should know that entering a plea of "no contest" instead of "guilty" in your criminal case can make a difference in a civil case, although it makes no difference in your criminal case. Generally, a "guilty" plea can be used as evidence of your guilt in a civil case, while a plea of "no contest" usually cannot.
If You Were Involved In An Accident And Wanted To Sue, Would It Be Better To Not Get A Personal Injury Lawyer?
I'M Just Asking Because I Know That Personal Injury Lawyers Have Kind Of Bad Reputations Now....And I See Them Advertising A Lot On T.V., Billboards, Radio, Etc. I Was Just Wondering If Having A Personal Injury Lawyer Would Actually Do A Person More Harm Than Good In A Court? Also, Do Lawyers Specializing In Personal Injury Have To Go Through As Much Schooling And Have As Much Education, As Any Other Type Of Lawyer? If So, What'S So Bad About Wanting To Help People That Have Been Injured Or Hurt In An Accident Rather Than Helping Someone Convicted Of Some Kind Of Crime?
(1) Yes, you want a personal injury lawyer because:
(a) They've done this a lot, so they're very good at it (generally)
(b) They'll take you on a "contingent fee basis" meaning that you don't pay their fees until you win (or settle) your case. Other lawyers will, generally, make you pay up front on a per hour basis.
(c) Other lawyers won't take your case because they represent, generally, big companies, and they don't want to look like attorneys who will (or can) sue them. There might be actual conflicts of interest (which prohibit the attorney from representing the latecoming party) or just the appearance to business that they represent people against their interest.
(2) Yes, they go through as much schooling as any other lawyer. In fact, many take particular classes after they graduate in trial advocacy, anatomy, and particular issues in personal injury law.
(There's a belief that personal injury lawyers are not as smart as "corporate" or other kinds of lawyers because the legal issues they engage every day are generally not "complex." Generally personal injury lawyers did not graduate at the the tops of their classes, but they have many other good skills that make them adept at their jobs)
(3) "rather than helping someone convicted of a crime..."
Criminal defense lawyers have the WORST reputation of all lawyers. PI lawyers are just seen as greedy and intent on bringing "frivolous lawsuits" against businesses, entities, and individuals who didn't really do anything wrong (like products liability lawsuits, suing McDonalds, etc.) Their reputation is further impugned because they HAVE to advertise -- "corporate" lawyers and the like have a book of steady clients who continually come back to them for business. Rarely, however, would a plaintiff in a personal injury lawsuit be a "repeat player." So they have to find these individuals and tell them about their services -- mass media is one of the best ways to do that. But people see the ads, think "eew lawyers," and it makes it worse.
There's nothing wrong with these types of lawyers (John Edwards was one), but there are certainly bad eggs who (a) just try to get as many cases to settle quickly as possible, and (b) do a bad job with communication. So get good referrals, ask PI attorneys for recommendations from previous clients; investigate who's got a good rep in town.
How To Hire A Lawyer On Standby?
I Run A Small Business, And Recently Hired A Litigation Lawyer To Deal With A Certain Matter, Which Is Still Ongoing.
In Another Incident, I Have Been Asked By A Police Detective To Provide A Signed Witness Statement, Including My Address (Or Care Of A Legal Representative).
Can I Put My Existing Lawyers Address Down Even Though Its For A Seperate Incident He Is Not Strictly Dealing With?
I Want To Just Hire A Lawyer Who Is On Standby To Deal With Any Legal Issues I Have, Which Crop Up From Time To Time, But I Dont Really Know How To Arrange This.
It is called a retainer. You place a certain amount of money in an escrow account (say $2,000) and when you need that lawyer, you call and he draws down from the escrow account. When it hits a certain amount (say $500) you replenish the account. Note that the escrow can get drawn down quite quickly at $150 to $200 an hour, so shop around and try to find a lawyer who won't charge for the odd 5 minute opinion phone call.
Help! I Need The Following Things That Starts With A L?!?!?!?
Something You Wear.
Something In The Kitchen.
Reason For Being Late.
Something You Would Shout..
And A Four Letter Word.
Please Help :) Plz And Ty!
Reason for being late: Lost my alarm clock
Body part: Leg
4 letter word: Love
Hope this helped :)
Full Custody Versus Joint Custody?
My Now Ex-Husband Told Me I Couldn'T Have Full Custody Because We Had A Parenting Plan. It Had To Be Listed On The Legal Papers As Joint Custody Subject To The Parenting Plan. Is This True? I Think He May Have Pulled One Over On Me.
Joint custody is the standard now. I was involved in the passage of those laws in the late 80s and early 90s. Currently I promote Bird Nesting.
It’s a form of access or custody where the children stay in the former family residence and it is the parents who rotate in and out separately and on a negotiated schedule.
The children simply live at "home" and the separated or divorced parents take turns living with them there, but never at the same time.
The core element of this arrangement is that each parent maintains a separate residence where they live when it is not their turn at the "bird's nest". When one parent arrives for his/her designated time, the other vacates right away, so as to minimize or eliminate the presence of both at the same time.
At times, bird's nest access can be coupled with specified access with the other parent say, for example, for dinner one night a week.
Sometimes, this form of access or custody will end when the youngest child reaches the age of majority at which time, one parent either buys the other out of their interest, if any, in the former family residence, or it is sold and the proceeds divided pursuant to the matrimonial property regime or separation agreement.
The arrangement can be expensive as it generally requires that three separate residences be maintained, the "nest" and a separate residence for each parent.
The concept is somewhat novel and appears to have as its origin a Virginia case Lamont v Lamont.
In Canada, Greenough v Greenough was a ground-breaker case in that the Court implemented a bird's nest custody order even though it had not been asked for by either party. Justice Quinn, in Greenough stated:
"In Lamont ... the court made a bird’s nest custody arrangement in which the children (aged 3 and 5 years) remained in the home, with the mother staying in the home during the week and the father on the weekend. I think that the benefits of a bird’s nest order are best achieved where the children are able to stay in the matrimonial home, particularly if it has been the only residence that they have known....
"Time and time again I have seen cases (and this is one) where the children are being treated as Frisbees. In general, parents do not seem to appreciate the gross disruption to which children are subjected where one of the parents has frequent access. In this regard, I do not believe there must be evidence that the children are suffering before the court is free to act. To me, it is a matter of common sense. At the risk of falling prey to simplistic generalities, I am of the view that, given a choice, I do not see why anyone would select a living arrangement which involved so much movement from house to house."
I Installed Some Stonework For A Customer On Bank Budget And The Contractor/Owner Overspent The Money And To Make A Long Story Short, I Was Never Paid...
So After Endless Negotiations I Want To Remove All My Material...I Want The Police To Be Present When I Am Removing The Installed Items...
Do I Need To Go To Court Or Do I Need To Call The Police Department In Order To Do This?
Thank You For Your Help
Depends on what state you're in, but regardless, you obviously don't have a license or you would know the procedures for doing work, i.e. filing a mechanics' lien before you even buy your materials.
Now that you have completed the work, if there is any cement or concrete or any manner in which it is attached to the structure OR permanently affixed to the ground, you cannot touch it. In fact, even going onto the property now amounts to a trespass.
It's a civil matter now, the police will tell you so unless they are complete idiots.
you are going to have to sue whoever it is who hired you. since you are not a licensed contractor, you cannot file a lien.
see if you can work out some kind of payment plan and for heaven's sake, in the future make sure that your terms are clearly CIFIA - cash in fist in advance.