Source: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202586365589&rss=rss_nlj
free lawyers free legal advice free legal aid getting power of attorney government lawyer
Thursday, January 31, 2013
Am Law Firms Eager for IPO Rebound in 2013
With companies such as Bright Horizons Family Solutions and Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings coming to market with initial public offerings this month, might better times be around the bend for corporate lawyers? Maybe so. According to Renaissance Capital, which tracks IPO filings in the U.S., January 2013 is poised to be the second-most active January of the past decade, trailing only the IPO market's peak in January 2006.
Inside Midnight Regulations
Back in June of 2012, the Administrative Conference of the United States approved non-binding "Midnight Rules" guidelines. Midnight rulemaking involves the pushing through of rules by a President, in the last few months of their administration. Host David Yas, a BU Law alum, former publisher of Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly and a V.P. at Bernstein Global Wealth, chats with consultant for the Administrative Conference of the United States, Professor Jack M. Beermann, about Midnight Regulations, the new recommendations and the potential impact on current and future administrations.
personal injury lawyers power attorney power of attorney power of attorny private attorney
Google Just Said No
For a brief, shining moment, Sen. Patrick Leahy told us he was going to make law enforcement get warrants to obtain our information from the internet. And then, poof, it was gone. Law enforcement patiently explained to the good senator that it would make their lives more difficult, and he said, "Oh no, we can't have that."
But there was another way. A way that few of us considered, and fewer still ever believed could happen. While the law required nothing more of the government than the mere asking, it didn't require the recipients of the request to comply. The targets of government subpoenas for our lives weren't obliged to cooperate.
And someone at Google, maybe the Jolly Good Fellow, decided to just say no. In an article in Wired, via Grits for Breakfast:
The government asked. Google delivered. That's the way it worked. Until now.
What Congress is too cowardly to give us, Google will provide.
The significance of Google's new stance, its demand for a search warrant before turning over information to the government, cannot be overstated. Entire lives are online, our most personal information and most private moments, exist on third party servers. The courts, explaining that by handing our information over to the cloud, say we have forfeited any reasonable expectation of privacy, though most ordinary people have no idea what they've given away.
Whenever a court has concluded that the third-party doctrine lives, it regurgitates the words of computer experts, who explain how the tubes of the internet actually work. Most of us don't know, or care, how it actually works, and we're just pretty happy that we can watch funny kitten videos on Youtube from our cellphones. It's a miracle. It's less of a miracle should your life be laid out before you from your search history and emails.
The fact that neither our courts nor our legislators feel particularly concerned at how privacy has been eviscerated by a doctrine that makes no sense whatsoever in the digital age, and how the reasonable expectation of privacy of ordinary people died a quiet, but horribly painful death, left many to believe that there was no hope for the future of privacy. Google's change of policy offers new, unanticipated hope.
That doesn't mean, however, that private corporations will provide a public service by honoring the Constitution where governmental entities will not.
Whether that last sentence is accurate is doubtful. It's hard to imagine the FBI shaking in its boots at the idea of Justice Scalia becoming a champion for internet privacy. Rather, the question is whether Google's refusal to honor "requests" in the form of a disconnected subpoena will subject it to sanctions. The principled stance taken by Google may crumble if fines start piling up, or even incarceration of the Jolly Good Fellow for contempt.
As for others Internet Service Providers, they may wait to see what happens to the 800 pound gorilla of the internet before deciding whether to stare down the government. Or they may be more than happy to be compliant servants of law enforcement, offering up whatever they have and sending a box of donuts along for good measure. It never hurts to have friends in high places. With full stomaches.
For now, at least, Google has decided not to play the game any longer. If the government has a warrant, they will honor it as the law requires. But without a warrant, the government can stick it. That's guts.
For quite a long time now, the argument has raged over whether the Fourth Amendment protects our digital lives from unfettered intrusion by the government. The fight has not gone particularly well for privacy, and the foremost scholar on the subject, Orin Kerr, has not been particularly supportive of what most people reasonably believe to be private.
And so Google has decided not to play the government's game as a matter of principle. Well done, Google. You are a jolly good fellow, which nobody can deny.
© 2012 Simple Justice NY LLC. This feed is for personal, non-commercial & Newstex use only. The use of this feed on any other website is a copyright violation. If this feed is not via RSS reader or Newstex, it infringes the copyright.
But there was another way. A way that few of us considered, and fewer still ever believed could happen. While the law required nothing more of the government than the mere asking, it didn't require the recipients of the request to comply. The targets of government subpoenas for our lives weren't obliged to cooperate.
And someone at Google, maybe the Jolly Good Fellow, decided to just say no. In an article in Wired, via Grits for Breakfast:
The development surfaced as Google publicly announced that more than two-thirds of the user data Google forwards to government agencies across the United States is handed over without a probable-cause warrant.
A Google spokesman told Wired that the media giant demands that government agencies — from the locals to the feds — get a probable-cause warrant for content on its e-mail, Google Drive cloud storage and other platforms — despite the Electronic Communications Privacy Act allowing the government to access such customer data without a warrant if it’s stored on Google’s servers for more than 180 days.
The government asked. Google delivered. That's the way it worked. Until now.
Google demands probable-cause, court-issued warrants to divulge the contents of Gmail and other cloud-stored documents to authorities in the United States — a startling revelation Wednesday that runs counter to federal law that does not always demand warrants.
“Google requires an ECPA search warrant for contents of Gmail and other services based on the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, which prevents unreasonable search and seizure,” Chris Gaither, a Google spokesman, said.
What Congress is too cowardly to give us, Google will provide.
The significance of Google's new stance, its demand for a search warrant before turning over information to the government, cannot be overstated. Entire lives are online, our most personal information and most private moments, exist on third party servers. The courts, explaining that by handing our information over to the cloud, say we have forfeited any reasonable expectation of privacy, though most ordinary people have no idea what they've given away.
Whenever a court has concluded that the third-party doctrine lives, it regurgitates the words of computer experts, who explain how the tubes of the internet actually work. Most of us don't know, or care, how it actually works, and we're just pretty happy that we can watch funny kitten videos on Youtube from our cellphones. It's a miracle. It's less of a miracle should your life be laid out before you from your search history and emails.
The fact that neither our courts nor our legislators feel particularly concerned at how privacy has been eviscerated by a doctrine that makes no sense whatsoever in the digital age, and how the reasonable expectation of privacy of ordinary people died a quiet, but horribly painful death, left many to believe that there was no hope for the future of privacy. Google's change of policy offers new, unanticipated hope.
That doesn't mean, however, that private corporations will provide a public service by honoring the Constitution where governmental entities will not.
It was not immediately known whether other ISPs are traveling Google’s path when it comes to demanding probable-cause warrants for all stored content. But Google can seemingly grant more privacy than the four corners of the law allows because there’s been a string of conflicting court opinions on whether warrants are required for data stored on third-party servers longer than 180 days. The Supreme Court has never weighed in on the topic — and the authorities are seemingly abiding by Google’s rules to avoid a high court showdown.
Whether that last sentence is accurate is doubtful. It's hard to imagine the FBI shaking in its boots at the idea of Justice Scalia becoming a champion for internet privacy. Rather, the question is whether Google's refusal to honor "requests" in the form of a disconnected subpoena will subject it to sanctions. The principled stance taken by Google may crumble if fines start piling up, or even incarceration of the Jolly Good Fellow for contempt.
As for others Internet Service Providers, they may wait to see what happens to the 800 pound gorilla of the internet before deciding whether to stare down the government. Or they may be more than happy to be compliant servants of law enforcement, offering up whatever they have and sending a box of donuts along for good measure. It never hurts to have friends in high places. With full stomaches.
For now, at least, Google has decided not to play the game any longer. If the government has a warrant, they will honor it as the law requires. But without a warrant, the government can stick it. That's guts.
For quite a long time now, the argument has raged over whether the Fourth Amendment protects our digital lives from unfettered intrusion by the government. The fight has not gone particularly well for privacy, and the foremost scholar on the subject, Orin Kerr, has not been particularly supportive of what most people reasonably believe to be private.
And so Google has decided not to play the government's game as a matter of principle. Well done, Google. You are a jolly good fellow, which nobody can deny.
© 2012 Simple Justice NY LLC. This feed is for personal, non-commercial & Newstex use only. The use of this feed on any other website is a copyright violation. If this feed is not via RSS reader or Newstex, it infringes the copyright.
Source: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2013/01/26/google-just-said-no.aspx?ref=rss
Obama Care --Affordable Health Care Reform Act
The new health care law, officially known as the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act, sometimes known as ObamaCare, became the law of the land on March 23, 2010. This law changed the health care conversation as well as the political tone in Washington, D.C., if not the entire country. The Supreme Court in what clearly was a fast track decision sustained the constitutionality of the law. This also altered the dialogue for the presidential election of 2012. Many lawyers received increased revenue in the fight on both sides of the aisle. In the future, lawyers who are familiar with the provisions of this new playing field will, likewise, see increased revenue resulting from advising clients on how to comply with the law's provisions.
More than 10,000 people daily reach the age of 65, the traditional retirement age; these people face increased health care needs. How will we deal with their needs? Our guest, Brian Sullivan, is a seasoned professional in the employee benefits and health care industry for more than 25 years. He has authored numerous articles in the area of employee benefits and health care, and has delivered dozens of talks around the country to people seeking to understand the complexities of his industry.
This discussion is one of the clearest explanations of the law as it currently stands that you will hear.
45 minutes, 34 seconds 6.7MB
Source: http://feeds.lexblog.com/~r/LawBizBlog/~3/9349BqqBu2c/
A Use For An AK-47 You Probably Hadn't Thought Of
In addition to squirrel hunting and self defense ... add to the list of things an AK-47 is handy for ... disciplining your children! As reported by the Star Tribune:
A St. Paul man who recently purchased an assault rifle out of fear of an impending gun ban threatened his teenage daughter with it because she was getting two B's in school rather than straight A's, according to a criminal complaint filed Friday. Kirill Bartashevitch, 51, was charged in Ramsey County District Court with two felony counts of terroristic threats after alleging pointing an AK-47 at his daughter and wife during an argument over high school grades on Jan. 13.
Bartashevitch had recently purchased the rifle because he thought that such guns soon will be banned, the complaint said. He admitted to St. Paul police that he had pointed the gun at his wife and daughter but said it wasn't loaded and that he had checked the chamber beforehand.He was just trying to scare them is all. What's the big deal?
"Any gun owner in America will tell you that's incredibly irresponsible," said Ramsey County Attorney John Choi. "You just don't point guns at people." Threatening someone with a gun is a crime of violence regardless of the type of weapon or whether it's loaded, Choi said.Uh, um, sorry?
The incident took place at the family's house on Englewood Avenue. The girl's concerns came to light four days later at Central High School when a social worker received a report from a parent who was monitoring her son's electronic communications and read a message from the girl."Mom on Facebook saves the day!"
According to the complaint, the argument began when Bartashevitch berated his daughter for not making straight A's at school. The girl swore at her father and stated that she "hated" him. He then pointed his new AK-47 at the girl, the complaint said.
The mother said that when she tried to protect the girl, her husband pushed her to the floor.And what does the dad do for a living? He works for the Minneapolis Public Schools. Maybe he can be reassigned as an armed guard ... Here's the source, including a photo.
Source: http://rss.justia.com/~r/LegalJuiceCom/~3/8OcnmdpA3SU/a_use_for_an_ak47_you_probably_1.html
Mid-year union dues increase: Hudson notice required, opt-in not opt-out
The US Supreme Court this morning held that "when a public-sector union imposes a special assessment or dues increase, the union must provide a fresh Hudson notice and may not exact any funds from nonmembers without their affirmative consent."
Knox v. Service Employees Intl Union (US Supreme Ct 06/21/2012)
This is a remarkable decision for two reasons.
First, the Court has never before held that unions must issue a Hudson notice before changing the amount of dues. Hudson notices have always been based on an after-the-fact look-back based on the previous year's audited accounts.Second, the Court has never before held that unions cannot collect fees from nonmembers unless they affirmatively opt in. The Hudson notice system has always been based on the idea that nonmembers can get an after-the-fact refund.
The union representing California public sector employees has an agency shop agreement which requires nonmembers to pay an annual fee for "chargeable" expenses - nonpolitical costs related to collective bargaining. In June 2005 the union sent out its annual Hudson notice which estimated that chargeable expenses would be 56.35% of its total expenditures. After the 30-day period that nonmembers had to object, the union announced a 25% increase to fund a broad range of political expenses, but nonmembers were given no choice as to whether they would pay into this fund.
The US Supreme Court held (7-2) that
"when a public-sector union imposes a special assessment or dues increase, the union must provide a fresh Hudson notice and may not exact any funds from nonmembers without their affirmative consent."
The Court described this case as one involving compelled funding of the speech of other private speakers or groups, which is akin to compelled speech and compelled association. Therefore, it is subject to "exacting First Amendment scrutiny." In order to prevent the union from extracting a loan from unwilling nonmembers, the union must issue a fresh Hudson notice and must exempt nonmembers unless they opt in.
Two Justices, CONCURRING in the judgment, criticized the majority for adopting an opt-in system of fee collection which was "not contained in the questions presented, briefed, or argued."
Two Justices, DISSENTING, pointed out that unions have always been allowed to calculate each year's fee based on its expenses during the previous year. Although an imperfect system, it is not unconstitutional.
Source: http://www.lawmemo.com/blog/2012/06/midyear_union_d.html
internet lawyer labor attorney lafayette attorney law law enforcement
Delaware Has No Per Se Rule Against "Don't Ask, Don't Waive" Standstill Provisions, But Boards Must be Careful in Using Them
By John Stigi, John Tishler, and Edwin Astudillo
In In re Ancestry.com Inc. Shareholder Litigation, C.A. No. 7988-CS, Chancellor Strine of the Delaware Chancery Court held that Delaware has no per se rule against “don’t ask, don’t waive” standstill provisions, but cautioned that boards using “a powerful tool like that” need to deploy it consistent with their fiduciary duties. This decision comes less than three weeks after another Delaware judge (Vice Chancellor Laster) enjoined a target company from enforcing a “don’t ask, don’t waive” standstill provision in In re Complete Genomics, Inc. Shareholder Litigation, C.A. No. 7888-VCL.
“Don’t ask, don’t waive” standstill provisions prohibit the counterparty potential bidder from making a non-public request that the target company waive the terms of the standstill provision. They have become common in the public company auction process. Chancellor Strine’s ruling provided needed guidance to boards of public company targets, potential bidders and their respective advisors with respect to the use and enforceability of such standstill provisions. As a result, we believe public company targets will continue to negotiate for “don’t ask, don’t waive” standstill provisions as a tool designed to maximize shareholder value in a well-structured auction process.
Background
On November 27, 2012, in Complete Genomics, Vice Chancellor Laster enjoined a target company from enforcing a “don’t ask, don’t waive” standstill provision and analogized it to a "no-talk" provision in a merger agreement, albeit that the standstill provision only applied to the bidder that was bound by it. The court noted that Delaware courts have deemed no-talk provisions impermissible because by agreeing to them a board would be violating its duty to take care to be informed of all material information reasonably available. Vice Chancellor Laster held that by agreeing to the “don’t ask, don’t waive” standstill — which prevented the board from knowing whether a bidder that did not win the auction is willing to offer a higher price despite its contractual agreement not to do so — the Complete Genomics board impermissibly limited its ability to discharge its ongoing statutory and fiduciary obligations to properly evaluate a competing offer, disclose material information and make a meaningful merger recommendation to its stockholders. The court issued an injunction even though there was no indication that the counterparty to the applicable standstill agreement intended to make a topping bid.
Commentators were concerned that Vice Chancellor Laster’s ruling in Complete Genomics, if broadly adopted, could affect the way public company auctions are conducted. Target companies often seek a “don’t ask, don’t waive” standstill to help run an orderly auction process where the bidders that are invited to participate in the process are incentivized to submit their highest bid prior to the seller signing and announcing the deal. If auction bidders read the court’s ruling as assuring themselves a last look, they could be incentivized to not put their full bid on the table or to stand back rather than bid against themselves.
What Happened?
Just three weeks later, on December 17, 2012, in Ancestry.com, Chancellor Strine recognized that “don’t ask, don’t waive” standstills may be properly used by sellers “as a gavel, to impress upon the people that it has brought into the process the fact that the process is meaningful; that if you're creating an auction, there is really an end to the auction for those who participate. And therefore, you should bid your fullest because if you win, you have the confidence of knowing you actually won that auction at least against the other people in the process.” Chancellor Strine cautioned, however, that directors must “be darn careful” when using these types of standstills. His ruling highlighted that neither the CEO nor the board was informed about the potency of the provision, and he noted that it was not clear whether the banker was even aware of it. Chancellor Strine also stated that if “don’t ask, don’t waive” standstills are going to be used, stockholders need to be aware that there are a group of potential bidders who are contractually prohibited from submitting a topping bid. The court enjoined the Ancestry.com stockholder meeting until proper disclosure was made.
Now What?
In Ancestry.com, Chancellor Strine recognized the value-maximizing purpose of effectively employed “don’t ask, don’t waive” standstills in a well-structured auction process, but cautioned that there use will be subject to careful review. His ruling should give public company boards comfort that as long as they are well informed of the effect that “don’t ask, don’t waive” standstills have on potential bidders who are bound by them, and the directors believe that such standstills will help maximize value for stockholders, such standstills can be used.
From a disclosure perspective, if a “don’t ask, don’t waive” standstill provision is used, stockholders should be informed that although a bidder who did not participate in the auction process may submit a topping bid, stockholders should not assume that the potential bidders who did participate in the process and who are subject to the standstill will be able to do so.
What if you have questions?
For any questions or more information on these or any related matters, please contact any attorney in the firm’s corporate practice group. A list of such attorneys can be found by clicking the “ATTORNEYS” tab on the left-hand side of this page.
John P. Stigi III (310.228.3717; jstigi@sheppardmullin.com), John D. Tishler (858.720.8943, jtishler@sheppardmullin.com), and Edwin Astudillo (858.720.7468, eastudillo@sheppardmullin.com) participated in drafting this posting.
Disclaimer
This update has been prepared by Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP for informational purposes only and does not constitute advertising, a solicitation, or legal advice, is not promised or guaranteed to be correct or complete and may or may not reflect the most current legal developments. Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on the contents of this update.
Neither the content on this blog nor any transmissions between you and Sheppard Mullin through this blog are intended to provide legal or other advice or to create an attorney-client relationship.
In communicating with us through this blog, you should not provide any confidential information to us concerning any potential or actual legal matter you may have. Before providing any such information to us, you must obtain approval to do so from one of our lawyers.
By choosing to communicate with us without such prior approval, you understand and agree that Sheppard Mullin will have no duty to keep confidential any information you provide.
Wednesday, January 30, 2013
Supreme Court Review of the Health Care Reform Law
Professor Renee Landers and Brendan Abel JD '12 of Suffolk University Law School discuss their recent article entitled, "Supreme Court Review of the Health Care Reform Law." Read the article at http://bit.ly/AdgRI4.
immigration lawyers injury attorney injury attorneys injury lawers injury lawyer
Obligations to Clients in Settlement Negotiations
After a settlement has been reached in a lawsuit, often claimants have questions about how to handle or manage their settlement money. On this Ringler Radio podcast, host Larry Cohen and co-host, Ann Marie VonBank get some real world perspective from expert guest, Attorney James Heuer, Jr., to discuss the attorney obligations to the client during settlement negotiations and after the settlement has been reached.
Survey Says Outliers Helped Push Large Law Firm Revenue Up 5 Percent in 2012
An early look at how some of the largest law firms in the U.S. fared financially last year finds that on average they enjoyed a 5 percent increase in gross revenues -- the biggest year-over-year jump since 2008, according to a survey by Wells Fargo Private Bank's Legal Specialty Group. Net income rose an average of 6 percent between 2011 and 2012 while profits per equity partner increased by an average of 5 percent.
injury attorney injury attorneys injury lawers injury lawyer injury lawyers
The LinkedIn Lawyer
Are you on LinkedIn? Un-Billable Hour host Attorney Rodney Dowell, Executive Director at Lawyers Concerned for Lawyers and Director of LCL’s Massachusetts Law Office Management Assistance Program chats with Dennis Kennedy, lawyer and co-host of The Kennedy-Mighell Report and Allison Shields, author of Legal Ease Blog, about their recently published book, LinkedIn in One Hour for Lawyers. Dennis and Allison talk about how attorneys are using LinkedIn, and the key features that make LinkedIn a valuable networking and client development tool without consuming all of an attorney’s time.
Source: http://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/un-billable-hour/2012/06/the-linkedin-lawyer/
I’ll Tumblr for Ya
While Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter draw the lion’s share of social media attention, there are many other social media platforms available to lawyers. Tumblr, Pinterest and Foursquare are just a few of the alternatives. How can you evaluate which of these tools might be worthy of your time and effort? On The Kennedy-Mighell Report, Dennis Kennedy and Tom Mighell survey the lesser-traveled landscapes of the social media world, identify some tools that might make sense to some lawyers in some scenarios, and speculate about the future of specialized social media tools.
Source: http://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/kennedy-mighell-report/2012/07/ill-tumblr-for-ya/
power of attorny private attorney private lawyer pro bono lawyers probate attorney
UN rights experts urge Iran not to execute Ahwazi activists
[JURIST] A group of independent UN human rights experts on Friday urged Iran to stop the execution [press release] of five Ahwazi activists. UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran Ahmed Shaheed [official website] stated that the execution of Mohammad Ali Amouri, Sayed Jaber Alboshoka, Sayed Mokhtar Alboshoka, Hashem Shabain Amouri and Hadi Rashidi is unacceptable. They have been sentenced on charges of enmity against God, corruption on earth and causing propaganda...
Source: http://jurist.org/paperchase/2013/01/un-rights-experts-urge-iran-not-to-execute-ahwazi-activists.php
Todd Stabelfeldt: Spinal Cord Injury Advocate, Entrepreneur, Inspiration
On this very special Ringler Radio, host Larry Cohen welcomes colleague, Tony Robinson and their guest, Todd Stabelfeldt, a spinal cord injury victim and an advocate for those who have suffered the same injury, to share his inspirational story. Larry, Tony and Todd discuss everything from spinal cord injuries and caregivers, to technology, to helping and educating others through The Todd Stabelfeldt Foundation.
Egypt confirms death sentences for amateur anti-Muslim film
[JURIST] An Egyptian court on Tuesday upheld the in absentia death sentences of seven Coptic Christians and an American preacher on charges stemming from the amateur anti-Muslim film Innocence of Muslims [BBC backgrounder], which sparked violent protests in the Middle East last year. A criminal court in Cairo sentenced [JURIST report] the convicted defendants in November, pending the final verdict just announced [Bloomberg report]. The death sentences are primarily symbolic, as all of the defendants live outside of Egypt. The...
Source: http://jurist.org/paperchase/2013/01/egypt-confirms-death-sentences-for-amateur-anti-muslim-film.php
Tuesday, January 29, 2013
Inside & Outside Counsel Roundtable
Greg Mitchell of The Recorder moderates a roundtable discussion with Joan Tucker Fife of Winson & Strawn, Michael Rhodes of Cooley, Tim O'Leary of NetApp, and Larry Denny of Tivo that addresses building relationships between in-house and outside counsel, including alternative fee agreements and how corporations assess the quality of a law firm's services
getting power of attorney government lawyer green card lawyer immigration attorney immigration law
Judge lets creditors of company linked to meningitis attach insiders' assets
A bankruptcy judge has granted creditors' motions to attach $21.1 million in assets of four insiders of New England Compounding Center, which has been linked to a deadly fungal meningitis outbreak. One temporary restraining order bars the four from depleting their assets, except for "ordinary living or legal-representation expenses," and another order forbids related companies from making payments to them.
Making Selling Easier for Lawyers
Why is selling so hard for lawyers and what can you do about it? On this September edition Jared Correia, the host of The Legal Toolkit and Senior Law Practice Advisor with Mass. LOMAP, joins Stephen Seckler, principal of Seckler Legal Consulting and Coaching, to talk about selling vs. marketing, how important referrals are for attorneys and some of the key things that get in the way of attorneys successfully generating work.
Source: http://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/legal-toolkit/2012/09/making-selling-easier-for-lawyers/
statute law statutory law stupid laws traffic attorney traffic lawyer
Senate panel kills appellate defender bill
A bill that would have reinstated the office of appellate defender for Virginia went down to defeat in the Senate Courts Committee Monday.
The 8-to-5 vote to “pass by” Senate Bill 738 closely followed party lines. Republicans generally were opposed to the measure while Democrats favored restoring the position.
The appellate defender handled appeals of criminal defendants represented by public defenders. The position was created in 1996 and survived until it fell victim to the budget ax in 2009. Legislation to revive the post this year called for $275,000 for two attorneys and one support person.
The first state appellate defender, Sandy Sanders of Richmond, had urged support for restoration of the office, arguing a dedicated appellate legal team was needed to counter the appellate unit at the attorney general’s office.
“I feel bad I didn’t do more to get lawyers and attorney groups behind it,” he said.
Source: http://valawyersweekly.com/vlwblog/2013/01/22/senate-panel-kills-appellate-defender-bill/
Tony Coelho: Fighting for the Disabled
On Ringler Radio, host Larry Cohen welcomes colleague Cindy Chanley, and returning guest, Tony Coelho, the past chair and member of the board of the American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD) and the interim President and CEO of the Epilepsy Foundation, to share his personal journey and his ongoing fight for people living with disabilities. Tony shares his thoughts on health care, how structured settlements have benefited a person with disabilities, in addition to the AAPD’s mission for 2012 and his work with the Epilepsy Foundation.
Source: http://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/ringler-radio/2012/04/tony-coelho-fighting-for-the-disabled/
statutory law stupid laws traffic attorney traffic lawyer traffic ticket lawyer
Victims Accuse L.A. Catholic Church Leaders Of Covering Up Sex Abuse
Prosecutors in California say they are reviewing newly-released personnel files that document efforts by the Los Angeles Archdiocese to cover up clergy sexual abuse. They haven't said whether they might pursue criminal charges against retired Cardinal Roger Mahony. Statutes of limitations make prosecution difficult, but victims are calling on authorities to be more creative and find a way to punish church higher-ups for protecting abusive priests, rather then children.
The DRI - ‘The Voice of the Defense Bar'
DRI is considered a ‘think tank’ for defense attorneys and in-house counsel. On Ringler Radio, host Larry Cohen and Ringler colleague, Jim Early, join Attorney Matthew Cairns from the firm, Gallagher, Callahan & Gartrell, to focus on the DRI - ‘The Voice of the Defense Bar’ and talk about what defense attorneys should know about the settlement process.
Source: http://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/ringler-radio/2012/10/the-dri-the-voice-of-the-defense-bar/
criminal defense lawyer criminal injury lawyers criminal justice lawyer criminal law criminal law cases
The Constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act
There is a great debate before the U.S. Supreme Court on whether the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act minimum coverage provision is in fact constitutional. For insight into the case, host David Yas, a BU Law alum, former publisher of Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly and a V.P. at Bernstein Global Wealth, turns to Wendy Mariner, professor of law at BU School of Law and the lead author of an amicus brief submitted to the court by more than 100 health law professors. Together, they discuss Department of Health and Human Services v. Florida and the amicus brief, and examine some of the interesting points that arose during the court's oral arguments.
Monday, January 28, 2013
U.S. Attorney Jones tapped by Obama for ATF
The Associated Press has
Jones
reported President Barack Obama intends to nominate B. Todd Jones as his choice to be the next leader of the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
Jones is the U.S. Attorney for Minnesota. He has served as the acting director of the ATF since late 2011 — taking over as the agency was embroiled in controversy surrounding an operation against gun smuggling.
Jones has continued to serve in both roles, spending about half of his time in Washington and half in Minnesota.
In his first weeks as acting ATF director, Jones “hit the reset button” and assembled a team of law enforcement executives, to get the ATF back to its core mission of fighting violent crime.
His nomination must still be confirmed by the U.S. Senate.
Source: http://minnlawyer.com/minnlawyerblog/2013/01/16/u-s-attorney-jones-tapped-by-obama-for-atf/
employment lawyers estate attorney family law family lawyer federal attorney
The Latest in Court Technology for Paralegals
Find out what’s new in court technology on The Paralegal Voice. Co-hosts Lynne DeVenny and Vicki Voisin join Ted Brooks, the Founder & CEO of Litigation-Tech LLC for his insight on the latest in court technology for paralegals. Ted provides tips for paralegals getting ready for a big trial using extensive technology in the courtroom and explains how paralegals can learn the basics of commonly used trial software. Ted also gives his picks for blogs and online resources for paralegals interested in learning more about courtroom technology.
Structured Settlements and NSSTA’s 2012 Mission
NSSTA stands for National Structured Settlements Trade Association - the largest gathering of top professionals in the country taking the a lead in the structured settlement industry. On Ringler Radio, host Larry Cohen welcomes Eric Vaughn, Executive Director of National Structured Settlements Trade Association, to discuss what’s ahead for NSSTA 2012. Eric addresses everything from NSSTA’s Annual Meeting to its Take the Hill initiative with Congress, and the steps individuals of retirement age should take to ensure a better financial future.
Click the link to see a video snippet of the podcast.
Click the link to see a video snippet of the podcast.
traffic attorney traffic lawyer traffic ticket lawyer absolute power of attorney attorney
International Law Opportunities at Suffolk University Law School
Professor Christopher Gibson, Associate Dean, & Ian Menchini, Director of Electronic Marketing and Enrollment Management discuss the many opportunities available through Suffolk Law's International Law program. Learn more at http://bit.ly/I95LF3.
divorce lawyers download power of attorney dui attorney dui lawyer dumb laws
Attorney's Remarks in Court Proceeding Found Privileged
An attorney's allegations that his client's previous counsel botched the case and "stole" money were privileged statements immune from a defamation action, a New York appeal court has ruled. The court determined that even if the statements were "actionable assertions of fact," they were "protected by the absolute privilege for statements made in a judicial proceeding."
Same Sex Marriage Before the Supreme Court
Senior staff reporter Gina Passarella takes a look at the same-sex marriage issues that are headed toward the U.S. Supreme Court.
criminal defense attorneys criminal defense lawyer criminal injury lawyers criminal justice lawyer criminal law
Focus on Privacy: The Facebook Internet Tracking Case
Back in May of 2012, Facebook was sued for $15 billion for improperly tracking users even after they logged off the social network. Digital Detectives co-hosts, Sharon D. Nelson, Esq., President of Sensei Enterprises, Inc.,and John W. Simek, Vice President of Sensei Enterprises, join Attorney David Straite, partner at Stewarts Law U.S. LLP, Head of Investor Protection Litigation and co-lead counsel in the Facebook Internet Tracking Case, to discuss the main issues of this case including: digital privacy litigation, the current statutory and common law involved in this case, calculation of damages and the future of digital privacy rights.
Sunday, January 27, 2013
Gambling on Sports and the Law
What are the odds that your office NCAA basketball pool for March Madness is illegal? Are you willing to bet that gambling outside of a casino on any sporting event breaks both state and federal laws? So then, why is it a crapshoot that you will be prosecuted under these laws? Lawyer2Lawyer co-hosts and attorneys, Craig Williams and Bob Ambrogi, take a look at America’s gambling legislation with Professor Marc Edelman of Barry University's Dwayne O. Andreas School of Law and Author and Attorney Clay Travis from Counsel On Call.
Source: http://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/lawyer-2-lawyer/2012/03/gambling-on-sports-and-the-law/
real estate attorney real estate lawyer solicitor solicitors statute law
Court Upholds Airline Passenger?s Claim of First Amendment Retaliation
In a lengthy, divided opinion that explored the scope of protected speech in the sometimes tense environment of an airport security checkpoint, the Fourth Circuit has allowed to move forward a man's claim that authorities retaliated against him for exercising First Amendment rights by arresting him after he went through a security checkpoint with the text of the Fourth Amendment written on his chest.
DOMA down, but why?
The 1st Circuit today held that the Defense of Marriage Act's denial of federal benefits to married same-sex couples is unconstitutional. Massachusetts v. US Department of Health and Human Services (1st Cir 05/31/2012).
The federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) Section 3 prevents same-sex married couples from filing joint tax returns, prevent a surviving spouse from collecting Social Security survivor benefits, and prevents federal employees from sharing medical benefits with same-sex spouses.
The trial court held that DOMA Section 3 is unconstitutional; the 1st Circuit affirmed.
The court's decision surveys equal protection and federalism issues and concludes that "governing precedents under both heads combine - not to create some new category of 'heightened scrutiny,' ..., but rather to require a closer than usual review based in part on discrepant impact among married couples and in part on the importance of state interests in regulating marriage."
Thus the court gave less deference to, and "closer scrutiny of government action touching upon minority group interests and of federal action in areas of traditional state concern."
The court concluded that denial of federal benefits to same-sex married couples "has not been adequately supported by any permissible federal interest."
The court stayed its mandate, thus extending the trial court's stay, in anticipation of the losing parties seeking certiorari in the US Supreme Court.
My view:
This is a decision, purportedly based on the US Constitution, that essentially avoids making an explicit connection to the text of the Constitution.
The idea is that states regulate marriage, the federal government may have something to say in this regard, but the reasons behind the federal government's actions didn't have enough oomph. No, there's no 10th amendment violation, and no violation of the Spending Clause. And no, there's no "strict scrutiny" going on. And no "new category of 'heightened scrutiny.'" But wait, let's give the legislation "closer scrutiny."
I'm no fan of DOMA, but it's not really clear to me what this court is doing.
[By the way, similar DOMA issues are pending in the 9th Circuit.]
Source: http://www.lawmemo.com/blog/2012/05/doma_down_but_w.html
business law business lawyer civil attorney colleges for lawyers colorado disability lawyer
Second Circuit Ruling in Goldman Case Used to Expand MBS Suit Against Credit Suisse
A federal judge in Manhattan has enlarged a class action brought by investors who claim that Credit Suisse misled them about the risks of mortgage-backed securities that the bank arranged. It's the third time in two months that a MBS suit has been revived because of a recent Second Circuit ruling on standing.
Student Loan Management for Lawyers
Stressed about your student loans from law school? On The Legal ToolKit, host Jared Correia, Law Practice Management Advisor with Mass. LOMAP, joins Heather Jarvis, student loan expert and former capital defense attorney, to discuss student loan management. Heather offers her insight on consolidation, Public Service Loan Forgiveness, Income Based Repayment and how lawyers can reduce, or better manage their payments.
Source: http://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/legal-toolkit/2012/01/student-loan-management-for-lawyers/
bankruptcy lawyer bankruptcy lawyers best attorney business law business lawyer
EEOC can use Teamsters-style pattern-or-practice theory under Title VII § 706
Serrano sued in a class action claiming sex discrimination and the EEOC intervened. The trial court ruled for the employer on a number of issues; the 6th Circuit reversed. Serrano and EEOC v. Cintas Corp (6th Cir 11/09/2012).
The main issue was whether EEOC could pursue a pattern-or-practice style claim pursuant to § 706 of Title VII.
The employer argued that under § 706 the EEOC is limited to proving its allegations of discrimination pursuant to the McDonnell Douglas Corp v. Green, 411 US 792 (1973), burden-shifting framework, and cannot use the pattern-or-practice framework announced by the Supreme Court in Teamsters v. United States, 431 US 324 (1977). The court rejected that argument. Even though the Teamsters case arose under § 707, the theory of that case can be used under § 706.
The trial court erred in holding that the employer was entitled to judgment on the pleadings in light of the EEOC's failure to plead its intent to rely on the Teamsters framework. Although the EEOC's complaint "is not a model of good lawyering," a plaintiff need not indicate at the pleading stage which circumstantial evidentiary framework it plans to use.
Source: http://www.lawmemo.com/blog/2012/11/eeoc_can_use_te.html
US appeals court vacates conviction of al Qaeda media director
[JURIST] The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit [official website] on Friday vacated the conspiracy conviction of Ali Hamza Ahmad Suliman Al Bahlul [HRW profile; JURIST news archive], the media secretary of Osama bin Laden [JURIST news archive]. The DC Circuit ruled [Miami Herald report] that the military tribunal that convicted Al Bahlul of conspiracy in 2007 erred because a Guantanamo prisoner could not be convicted of conspiracy unless his crime took place after 2006. The...
divorce atterney divorce attorney divorce lawers divorce lawyer divorce lawyers
Philippines congress approves bill granting compensation to human rights victims
[JURIST] The Congress of the Philippines on Thursday approved a bill on its second reading allocating 10 billion pesos (USD $246 million) for the victims of human rights abuses committed by the regime of former president Ferdinand Marcos [JURIST news archive]. Approximately 10,000 people can claim compensation [Reuters report] based on abuses that took place between when Marcos instated martial law in 1972 until he was overthrown in 1986. Should the bill be passed by a plenary session of Congress...
Saturday, January 26, 2013
NLRB's recent significant decisions
The NLRB this week made public a number of significant decisions, most reached in the final days of the term of Member Brian Hayes, which ended on December 16. The Board continues with three members, Chairman Mark Gaston Pearce and Members Richard F. Griffin, Jr. and Sharon Block.
The decisions touch on a variety of issues including social media postings, charter school jurisdiction, backpay awards, the chargeability of certain union lobbying expenses, and an employer’s responsibility to continue dues collection after the expiration of a contract.
Hispanics United of Buffalo
The Board found that the employer unlawfully fired five employees because of their Facebook posts and comments about a coworker who intended to complain to management about their work performance. In its analysis, the Board majority applied settled Board law to the new world of social media, finding that the Facebook conversation was concerted activity and was protected by the National Labor Relations Act. Member Hayes dissented.
Alan Ritchey, Inc.
In a unanimous decision that resolved the last of the two-member cases returned following the 2010 Supreme Court decision in New Process Steel, the Board found that where there is no collectively-bargained grievance-arbitration system in place, employers generally must give the union notice and an opportunity to bargain before imposing discipline such as a discharge or suspension on employees. Member Hayes was recused.
Latino Express
In a decision that will affect most cases in which backpay is awarded, the Board decided to require respondents to compensate employees for any extra taxes they have to pay as a result of receiving the backpay in a lump sum. The Board will also require an employer ordered to pay back wages to file with the Social Security Administration a report allocating the back wages to the years in which they were or would have been earned. The Board requested briefs in this case in July 2012. Member Hayes did not participate in the case.
Chicago Mathematics & Science Academy
Rejecting the position of a teachers’ union, the Board found that it had jurisdiction over an Illinois non-profit corporation that operates a public charter school in Chicago. The non-profit was not the sort of government entity exempt from the National Labor Relations Act, the Board majority concluded, and there was no reason for the Board to decline jurisdiction. Member Hayes dissented in part.
United Nurses & Allied Professionals (Kent Hospital)
The Board, with Member Hayes dissenting, addressed several issues involving the rights of nonmember dues objectors under the Supreme Court’s Beck decision. On the main issue, the majority held that, like all other union expenses, lobbying expenses are chargeable to objectors, to the extent that they are germane to collective bargaining, contract administration, or grievance adjustment. The Board invited further briefing from interested parties on the how it should define and apply the germaneness standard in the context of lobbying activities.
WKYC-TV, Gannet Co.
Applying the general rule against unilateral employer changes in terms and conditions of employment, the Board found that an employer’s obligation to collect union dues under a check-off agreement will continue after the contract expires and before a bargaining impasse occurs or a new contract is reached. Member Hayes dissented.
Source: http://www.lawmemo.com/blog/2012/12/nlrbs_recent_si.html
attorney law attorney lawyer attorneys bankruptcy attorney bankruptcy lawyer
Court finds appointments unconstitutional
A federal appeals court in Washington has declared unconstitutional President Barack Obama's recess appointments to a labor board in a sweeping decision that curtailed executive power and undermined the legitimacy of a high-profile, controversial appointment to the administration's consumer financial protection agency.
Source: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202585836438&rss=rss_nlj
OPINION: Prosecutors and book deals
In a blockbuster case, the question 'Who is going to play me in the movie?' could be one of life or death.
Source: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202585689193&rss=rss_nlj
criminal attorney criminal defence lawyer criminal defense criminal defense attorney criminal defense attorneys
International Law Opportunities at Suffolk University Law School
Professor Christopher Gibson, Associate Dean, & Ian Menchini, Director of Electronic Marketing and Enrollment Management discuss the many opportunities available through Suffolk Law's International Law program. Learn more at http://bit.ly/I95LF3.
Wisconsin public employee collective bargaining statute amendments declared unconstitutional
A teachers' union sought declarative and injunctive relief against the governor, claiming that statutory amendments dealing with municipal employees' collective bargaining rights and payroll deductions of dues and pension contributions were unconstitutional.
The trial court declared the statute unconstitutional. Madison Teachers v. Walker (Wisconsin Circuit Ct 09/14/2012)
(1) Certain portions of the statute violated the free speech clauses of the Wisconsin and US constitutions. Although there is no constitutional right to collective bargaining, the statute imposes burdens on the speech and associational rights of employees represented by unions which burdens are not imposed on other employees. They cannot negotiate wage increases greater than the cost of living, they cannot pay dues by payroll deductions solely because the dues go to labor organizations. A ban on fair share agreements means that union members bear the cost of bargaining for non-members who receive the befits of bargaining. Requiring unions to be recertified annually burdens members with the full costs of the election.
(2) The trial court applied strict scrutiny to the equal protection claims because of the infringement on speech rights. The statute creates two classes of employees (represented and non-represented), and the defendants "offer no defense of the statute that would survive strict scrutiny."
(3) Certain portions of the statute violated the Wisconsin constitution's home rule amendment, violated the constitutional bar on impairment of contracts, and deprived employees of property without due process.
Source: http://www.lawmemo.com/blog/2012/09/wisconsin_publi.html
private attorney private lawyer pro bono lawyers probate attorney real estate attorney
Dayton includes across the board funding increases for the courts in budget
He is asking for an increase in overall spending and funding increases for much of the justice system.
Under Dayton’s budget:
- Civil Legal Services would get a 4.5 percent increase
- The Board of Public Defense would get a 6.5 percent increase
- The Supreme Court would get a 4.3 percent increase
- The Court of Appeals would get a 5.9 percent increase
- The District Courts would get a 6.2 percent increase
- The Guardian Ad Litem Boar would get a 4.3 percent increase
- The Tax Court would get a 19.5 percent increase
- The Judicial Standards Board would get a 33 percent increase
Much of the new money would go to paying for new employees, raises, investments in technology and to up the contribution to the employee retirement fund for branch employees.
The legislature and the Governor will meet in the coming weeks to finalize a budget for the coming biennium.
Chief Justice Lorie Gildea released a brief statement after the recommendations were released.
“We appreciate Governor Dayton’s support for our budget request and look forward to working with the Legislature in the months ahead.”
Inside the Trayvon Martin Tragedy
The shooting death of 17 year old Trayvon Martin in Florida has sparked outrage across the country. On February 26, 2012, Trayvon died from a single gunshot to the chest. Police say neighborhood watch captain, George Zimmerman, fired that shot. Zimmerman is using Florida’s "Stand Your Ground" Law to justify the killing. Lawyer2Lawyer co-hosts and attorneys, Craig Williams and Bob Ambrogi, welcome Professor Michelle Jacobs, from the University of Florida's Levin College of Law and Professor Kenneth Novak, Ph.D., Chair of the Department of Criminal Justice at the University of Missouri - Kansas City, to explore the legal issues surrounding the "Stand Your Ground" law, neighborhood watches, and the possibility of racial profiling.
Source: http://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/lawyer-2-lawyer/2012/03/inside-the-trayvon-martin-tragedy/
personal injury attorney personal injury attorneys personal injury lawyer personal injury lawyers power attorney
E-DISCOVERY: A SPECIAL REPORT: Five cases made for a momentous year in predictive coding
They reflected widely differing approaches by judges and parties involved.
Source: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202585797862&rss=rss_nlj
Friday, January 25, 2013
Remote Working Options for Lawyers
The convergence of technology has created a “tipping point” for remote work options for attorneys. Law Technology Now, host and editor-in-chief of ALM’s Law Technology News, Monica Bay analyzes the key advantages of remote work options, which is also June’s Law Technology News’ cover story, Unleashed, with Albert Barsocchini, senior director, strategic consulting at NightOwl Document Management Services and Marc Osborn, senior director, communications for LexisNexis Legal & Professional.
Source: http://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/law-technology-now/2012/06/remote-working-options-for-lawyers/
local attorney local lawyer local solicitors mold attorney need a lawyer
The BP Oil Spill Case and Large Volume E-Discovery
How do you efficiently handle large volume e-discovery in a high-profile case? Digital Detectives co-hosts, Sharon D. Nelson, Esq., President of Sensei Enterprises, Inc., and John W. Simek, Vice President of Sensei Enterprises, get expert advice from Joe Mulenex, the Regional Technical Director for Avansic, who assisted the discovery team for the Plaintiffs Steering Committee in the BP Oil Spill case. Joe discusses the biggest challenges of handling documents and the importance of project management. He also shares his biggest e-discovery take away from this case.
Inside the Trayvon Martin Tragedy
The shooting death of 17 year old Trayvon Martin in Florida has sparked outrage across the country. On February 26, 2012, Trayvon died from a single gunshot to the chest. Police say neighborhood watch captain, George Zimmerman, fired that shot. Zimmerman is using Florida’s "Stand Your Ground" Law to justify the killing. Lawyer2Lawyer co-hosts and attorneys, Craig Williams and Bob Ambrogi, welcome Professor Michelle Jacobs, from the University of Florida's Levin College of Law and Professor Kenneth Novak, Ph.D., Chair of the Department of Criminal Justice at the University of Missouri - Kansas City, to explore the legal issues surrounding the "Stand Your Ground" law, neighborhood watches, and the possibility of racial profiling.
Source: http://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/lawyer-2-lawyer/2012/03/inside-the-trayvon-martin-tragedy/
civil attorney colleges for lawyers colorado disability lawyer commercial law common law
Student Loan Management for Lawyers
Stressed about your student loans from law school? On The Legal ToolKit, host Jared Correia, Law Practice Management Advisor with Mass. LOMAP, joins Heather Jarvis, student loan expert and former capital defense attorney, to discuss student loan management. Heather offers her insight on consolidation, Public Service Loan Forgiveness, Income Based Repayment and how lawyers can reduce, or better manage their payments.
Source: http://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/legal-toolkit/2012/01/student-loan-management-for-lawyers/
How Law Firms Can Track Time
How does your firm track time? On The Un-Billable Hour, host Attorney Rodney Dowell, Executive Director at Lawyers Concerned for Lawyers and Director of LCL’s Massachusetts Law Office Management Assistance Program joins Danny Wen, Co-founder of Harvest Software and Sri Vemuri, Marketing Manager at Harvest Software, to discuss how law firms can track time and invoice clients in a way that captures more time and allows attorneys to receive payment more quickly.
Source: http://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/un-billable-hour/2012/02/how-law-firms-can-track-time/
lawyer office lawyers legal legal advice legal advice online
Student Loan Management for Lawyers
Stressed about your student loans from law school? On The Legal ToolKit, host Jared Correia, Law Practice Management Advisor with Mass. LOMAP, joins Heather Jarvis, student loan expert and former capital defense attorney, to discuss student loan management. Heather offers her insight on consolidation, Public Service Loan Forgiveness, Income Based Repayment and how lawyers can reduce, or better manage their payments.
Source: http://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/legal-toolkit/2012/01/student-loan-management-for-lawyers/
The Lost Art of the Online Discussion
For many years, we used email and listservs for private and public discussions. Today, the last thing we want to do is add a high-volume email list to our overloaded email inboxes. Yet, we still have the need for discussions of all kinds. What are good ways to have discussions using technology today? In this episode of The Kennedy-Mighell Report, Dennis Kennedy and Tom Mighell discuss today’s options for discussions, how to select the right forum for discussions, and whether we can improve the quality of the discussions we have with others.
bankruptcy lawyers best attorney business law business lawyer civil attorney
Thursday, January 24, 2013
Why Is Sexually Abusing a Puppy Funny?
Some see this is a particularly bizarre crime story. Other see this as an opportunity to make jokes. From Doug Berman at Sentencing Law and Policy:
It is often reported that child rapists are often treated as pariahs even among the most hardened criminal is prison. Consequently, this stunning local sentencing story prompted the (serious?) question in the title of this post. The article — which has an ending that led me to double-check it wasn't from The Onion — is headlined "N.Y. super who had sex with dog gets prison." Here are the details:
An apartment building superintendent who was caught on tape entering a unit and having sex with the tenant's puppy was sentenced to prison Tuesday.
Alan Kachalsky thought something in his apartment was amiss for months — blinds drawn that had not been, a window left open that he had left shut. But nothing ever went missing, and, fearing he may come off as paranoid, Kachalsky never went to the police. Instead, he set up three cameras and waited. Kachalsky shared his apartment at the Rye Colony Cooperative Apartments with a male Labrador puppy, Gunner, who, unbeknownst to Kachalsky, was the real target of the burglar.
The burglar, it turned out, wasn't there to steal anything, Kachalsky said Tuesday, but for something far more unimaginable. Kachalsky, an attorney, said it never occurred to him that someone was returning to have sex with his dog. Kachalsky turned over the video to police, who questioned and arrested Nicaj on Feb. 9, 2012, for sex acts against the 1-year-old dog committed the day before.
From there, it goes to a place I would never have imagined.
Given the apparent happy ending for the victims of this crime, I am not sure whether to encourage off-color jokes about this case or to engage in serious analysis of the prosecution of this peculiar puppy rapist. Thus, I pose this dilemma to readers:
-
should we ponder, rigorously or comically, whether and how the victim dog's tender age impacted the seemingly severe sentencing outcome?
-
should we worry, genuinely or jokingly, whether there are other puppy victims of this defendant who lacked the courage (and ability) to speak up about their abuse?
-
should we question, meaningfully or mirthfully, what the human victim here has now done with the contraband puppy porn than he inadvertently produced?
-
should we wonder, seriously or facetiously, whether upon release from prison the offender will be barred from going within 1000 feet of a pet store without prior approval of his probation officer?
Obviously, this is bizarre conduct, sufficiently off-the-charts nuts that it seem almost Onion-like. But it isn't a joke, and bestiality (like necrophilia) happens. Is this funny? Are we so jaded that we can indulge in dark humor to the extent reflected by this post?
There is nothing about what was done to a puppy that strikes me as humorous, even indirectly. This is just sick stuff. Am I missing something here?
© 2012 Simple Justice NY LLC. This feed is for personal, non-commercial & Newstex use only. The use of this feed on any other website is a copyright violation. If this feed is not via RSS reader or Newstex, it infringes the copyright.
Source: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2013/01/20/why-is-sexually-abusing-a-puppy-funny.aspx?ref=rss
personal injury personal injury attorney personal injury attorneys personal injury lawyer personal injury lawyers
Morocco to change rape law allowing marriage
[JURIST] The Moroccan government plans to change Article 475 of the Moroccan Penal Code [text, French], which allows rapists to avoid charges if they marry their victims, Justice Minister Mustapha Ramid announced Tuesday. This practice is encouraged in countries such as Morocco and India, where the loss of a woman's virginity out of wedlock brings shame upon the family. Article 475, translated from French, reads, "When a minor removed or diverted married her captor, the latter can not be prosecuted...
Source: http://jurist.org/paperchase/2013/01/morocco-to-change-rape-law-allowing-marriage.php
Supreme Court declines to rule on state-funded cross restoration
[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website] denied certiorari [order list, PDF] Tuesday in a case in which an Illinois tax-payer was found to lack standing to sue the state legislature for a $20,000 grant provided to the Bald Knob Cross of Peace Organization to restore a landmark Latin cross. The petition challenged a June ruling [opinion, PDF] by the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit [official website] which found the petitioner, Robert Sherman, lacked standing to sue...
employment attorney employment law employment law courses employment lawyer employment lawyer san diego
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)