3 Ways To Know You've Picked The Right Lawyer It's pretty intimidating to pass through the court system, especially if you lack confidence with your legal team. Listed below are three important approaches to understand that you've hired the proper lawyer: 1. They Are Experts In Your Kind Of Case Legislation is frequently tricky and this requires specialists to tackle the tough cases. If you want a legal representative, look for person who deals with the issue you're facing. Regardless of whether a relative or friend recommends you employ a good they understand, should they don't have got a focus that's similar to your case, keep looking. When your attorney is an expert, especially in the difficulty you're facing, you know you've hired the right one. 2. The Lawyer Carries A Winning Record Depending on the circumstances, it might be hard to win an instance, specifically if the team working for you has hardly any experience. Try to find practices which may have won numerous cases that pertain to yours. Although this is no guarantee that you simply case will be won, it provides you with a much better shot. 3. They Listen And Respond In case the attorney you've chosen takes time to hear your concerns and answer your inquiries, you've probably hired the best one. Regardless of how busy they are or how small your concerns seem off their perspective, it's crucial that they answer you in the caring and timely manner. From the aim of take a look at a typical citizen who isn't informed about the judicial system, court cases could be pretty scary you need updates as well as feel as if you're area of the solution. Some attorneys are simply considerably better to your case than others. Make sure you've hired the best team for your personal circumstances, to actually can placed the matter behind you as fast as possible. Faith with your legal representative is the initial 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,
I Need A Lawyer For A Slip And Fall & Broke 2 Bones In Foot, That Can Handle The Wal Mart Lawyers. Help?
My Fiance And I Need Someone Who Can Deal With These Lawyers From Wal Mart. I Am From Bensalem,Pa Near Philadelphia. I Need Help!!!
Right now I'm sitting on Roosevelt Blvd headed towards Bensalem and I've just passed two billboards advertising personal injury lawyers in Philly. Look up my Philly Lawyer. I just passed a SEPTA bus with a billboard for another on the side. I think it said "Emeka Makes it Happen." Seriously, just open your eyes, these guys are everywhere.
As an aside, suing Walmart isn't going to happen. You'll have to punch your white trash lottery ticket somewhere else.
Slip And Fall In Grocery Store?
My Sister Fell At A Local Supermarket On A Wet Floor (There Were No Wet Floor Signs At All Displayed) She Hurt Her Foot And Went To Er. The Diagnosis Is That She Has A Severe Sprain Foot. Do You Think She Should Persue A Claim With Her Attorney?? The Supermarket Is Cleary At Fault For Not Displaying Any Kind Of Sign And Above That , Noone In The Store Even Offered My Sister A Hand To Help Her Up. They Walked Right Past Her.
The fact that she fell on a wet floor does NOT mean that the store was "clearly at fault".
WHY was the floor wet, and how long had it been wet for? These questions will determine whether the store was at fault.
The store is liable only if they were "negligent". If an employee had swabbed the floor with soapy water, and then left it wet with no signs, then the store was negligent. If a shopper had dropped a bottle of juice a few minutes before, and no-one had yet told store employees, then the store was not negligent.
There is also the question of "contributory negligence". If the store was well lit, and the wet floor clearly visible, then your sister exercised "contributory negligence" by not watching where she was going.
If you can prove that the store was negligent, then your sister could successfully sue them for her actual damages. This would be her medical bills, any lost wages for a period that a medical doctor said she was incapable of working, and possibly a small amount for pain and suffering.
Whether that would make it cost effective to hire a lawyer is a decision only she can make.
Does Any One If The Prepaid Legal Services On Line Are Scams?
Is It Worth Using Them Or Do You Scam You? How Do You Know If They Are For Real?
Lawyers are licensed in specific states, not for the whole world. In most cases, you are being offered only advice, not representation, and the advice can be from anyone. Look at this site and you will see that over half of the answers are dead wrong and most of the rest are incomplete or misleading. That is what you would be getting. You would do better getting advice from your bartender. There are legitimate pre-paid legal services, but they tend to be local or regional. They offer very limited services for the most part and ultimately will save very little money.
About A Year Ago I Was Involved In A Car Accident. It Was My Fault,But The Damage Was Very Minor.The Person I Hit With My Car Was Fine,But Now She Filled An Injury Claim.My Insurance Knew The Whole Thing From The Beginning.I Was Wondering,Who Pays The Money,The Insurance Or Me?Or Do We Split ?
Your company will pay the claim up to the liability limits that you have. They have a duty to try to settle the claim at or below your limits so that you don't have to pay anything out of pocket.
I doubt you have anything to worry about as the average injury settlement is well below most minimum policy limits.
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.