Source: http://news.feedzilla.com/en_us/stories/law/video/392636052?client_source=feed&format=rss
personal injury attorneys personal injury lawyer personal injury lawyers power attorney power of attorney
Ed offers 5 ways to increase your law firm’s revenue.
1. Emphasize collections.
2. Hire lateral lawyers to meet specific demands, a new practice area, a new need.
3. Leverage technology.
4. Create a cooperative compensation model that emphasizes the law firm as an institution.
5. Outsource functions that are better done by others. Delegate.
Source: http://feeds.lexblog.com/~r/LawBizBlog/~3/2cO-Ajtv738/
real estate lawyer solicitor solicitors statute law statutory law
The Department of Homeland Security is settling a lawsuit with the ACLU, which deals with immigrants who were improperly pushed to leave the country.
lawyer fees lawyer firm lawyer malpractice attorneys lawyer office lawyers
The trustee in the Tom Petters bankruptcy case has asked the judge for permission to extend his claw back efforts outside the borders of the United States.
Doug Kelley said Petters’ $3.65 billion Ponzi scheme extends to a total of 26 jurisdictions. A hearing on his request in scheduled in U.S. Bankruptcy Court later this month. Kelley said that residents of Australia, Ireland, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Malta will be targeted and there are hundreds of millions of dollars at play. The list of countries could expand, he said.
The money ended up outside the U.S. because foreign investors invested in feeder funds that in turn invested in larger hedge funds that invested with Petters, Kelley said in an interview with the Star Tribune.
“We’ll get records of the master fund and then records of the feeder funds and then we’ll know where to go,” Kelley said. “We basically reverse the process.”
The bankruptcy team has hired lawyers outside the U.S. to identify potential targets.
The bankruptcy has been underway for five years. Kelley has retrieved more than $400 million to be returned to creditors and investors who lost money. Petters is serving a 50-year prison sentence.
Source: http://minnlawyer.com/minnlawyerblog/2014/04/04/petters-claw-back-could-go-worldwide/
The trustee in the Tom Petters bankruptcy case has asked the judge for permission to extend his claw back efforts outside the borders of the United States.
Doug Kelley said Petters’ $3.65 billion Ponzi scheme extends to a total of 26 jurisdictions. A hearing on his request in scheduled in U.S. Bankruptcy Court later this month. Kelley said that residents of Australia, Ireland, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Malta will be targeted and there are hundreds of millions of dollars at play. The list of countries could expand, he said.
The money ended up outside the U.S. because foreign investors invested in feeder funds that in turn invested in larger hedge funds that invested with Petters, Kelley said in an interview with the Star Tribune.
“We’ll get records of the master fund and then records of the feeder funds and then we’ll know where to go,” Kelley said. “We basically reverse the process.”
The bankruptcy team has hired lawyers outside the U.S. to identify potential targets.
The bankruptcy has been underway for five years. Kelley has retrieved more than $400 million to be returned to creditors and investors who lost money. Petters is serving a 50-year prison sentence.
Source: http://minnlawyer.com/minnlawyerblog/2014/04/04/petters-claw-back-could-go-worldwide/
divorce atterney divorce attorney divorce lawers divorce lawyer divorce lawyers
internet lawyer labor attorney lafayette attorney law law enforcement
Remember the finale of The Sopranos way back in 2007?
How everyone was so confused? Did Tony die? Was he in heaven? Hell? Purgatory?
Just sitting at a diner with his family musing on his life and what not?
Well the show's creator David Chase has always stayed incredibly tight-lipped on the finale, refused to answer questions about it, EVER.
But he's finally, FINALLY answered the question that every single Sopranos fan has even wondered -- was Tony dead at the diner at the end?
David reluctantly answered:
'No. No he isn't.'
So what does it all mean now?!?!
Well, that's obviously still up to your own interpretation as a fan!
Though David did go on to reveal that the finale was also based on the poem by Edgar Allen Poe titled Dream Within A Dream!
So maybe, if you REALLY want to figure out the true meaning of the finale, then go study Poe's poem!
Source: http://perezhilton.com/2014-08-27-did-tony-soprano-die-in-finale-david-chase-answers-question
Donna Feldman Drea de Matteo Drew Barrymore Ehrinn Cummings Elena Lyons
The bank has reached a record settlement of nearly $17 billion to resolve a probe into its role in the sale of mortgage-backed securities before the 2008 financial crisis, according to AP sources.
power of attorney power of attorny private attorney private lawyer pro bono lawyers
Source: http://traffic.libsyn.com/sr/This_Week.mp4
attorney directory attorney fees attorney finder attorney law attorney lawyer
Source: http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2014/08/25/can-treasury-make-inversions-rule-stand-up-in-court/?mod=WSJBlog
colorado disability lawyer commercial law common law company law conservator
Ashley Greene Ashley Olsen Ashley Scott Ashley Tappin Ashley Tisdale
Source: http://jurist.org/paperchase/2014/08/hrw-mexico-government-should-investigate-military-shootout.php
bankruptcy attorney bankruptcy lawyer bankruptcy lawyers best attorney business law
Source: http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2014/08/25/uber-to-launch-in-israel-tuesday/?mod=WSJBlog
criminal defense criminal defense attorney criminal defense attorneys criminal defense lawyer criminal injury lawyers
Source: http://www.pinkisthenewblog.com/2014-08-25/les-news-082514
In European Community v. RJR Nabisco, Inc., Case No. 11-CV-2475 (2d Cir. Apr. 23, 2014), the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (“RICO”) statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1961, et seq., could apply to conduct outside the territory of the United States. In doing so, the Second Circuit addressed the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd., 130 S. Ct. 2869 (2010) [blog article here], which held that United States statutes are presumed not apply to extraterritorial conduct, unless Congress has clearly indicated its intent that the statute have extraterritorial application. Applying Morrison, the Second Circuit determined that RICO could apply to extraterritorial conduct, because a number of the statutes listed as predicate acts for RICO liability clearly apply extraterritorially. The Second Circuit ultimately concluded “that RICO applies extraterritorially if, and only if, liability or guilt could attach to extraterritorial conduct under the relevant RICO predicate.” Thus, even after the Supreme Court’s ruling in Morrison, RICO liability can still attach to foreign conduct where the underlying predicate statute applies to extraterritorial conduct.
In this case, the European Community and 26 of its member states (collectively the “European Community”) brought an action against RJR Nabisco, Inc. and a number of its corporate affiliates (collectively, “RJR”) alleging that “RJR directed, managed, and controlled a global money-laundering scheme with organized crime groups in violation of the RICO statute, laundered money through New York-based financial institutions and repatriated the profits of the scheme to the United States, and committed various common law torts in violation of New York state law. The complaint alleged a number of predicate racketeering acts, as required by the RICO statue, including violations of the Travel Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1952, and violations of the statutes criminalizing mail fraud, wire fraud, money laundering and providing material support to foreign terrorist organizations. The complaint also alleged claims under New York state law for fraud, public nuisance, unjust enrichment, negligence, negligent misrepresentation, conversion and money had and received. RJR filed a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), arguing primarily that RICO could not apply to extraterritorial conduct in the wake of Morrison.
In considering RJR’s motion to dismiss, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York determined that the racketeering enterprise alleged in the complaint was a foreign enterprise “which consisted largely of a loose association of Colombian and Russian drug-dealing organizations and European money brokers whose activity was directed outside the United States.” The district court held that the complaint failed to state a viable RICO cause of action, because the “focus” of the RICO statute is the racketeering enterprise, and, absent a domestic enterprise, Morrison’s presumption that United States statutes do not apply extraterritorially would preclude such extraterritorial application.
The Second Circuit disagreed, holding that “Congress manifested an unmistakable intent that certain of the federal statutes adopted as predicates for RICO liability apply to extraterritorial conduct.” The Second Circuit held further that when a predicate act underlying a RICO claim applies extraterritorially, then any claim based upon that act would also. In support of this holding, the Second Circuit cited RICO predicate statutes that only apply to extraterritorial conduct, such as 18 U.S.C. § 2332, which criminalizes killing and attempting to kill United States nationals outside of the United States. The Second Circuit found that these predicate statutes exhibited Congress’s intent that, in certain circumstances, RICO should apply extraterritorially. The Second Circuit then determined that the European Community’s claims that alleged predicate acts of money laundering and providing material support for terrorism could apply extraterritorially in light of the clear indications from Congress that those statutes were designed to criminalize foreign conduct.
The Second Circuit reached a different conclusion with respect to the RICO claims based upon predicate acts of mail fraud, wire fraud and violations of the Travel Act. The Court held that these claims did not apply extraterritorially because Congress did not exhibit the intent to make those statutes apply extraterritorially. The Second Circuit, however, allowed those claims to proceed, because it held that the complaint alleged “that RJR essentially orchestrated a global money laundering scheme from the United States by sending employees and communications abroad.” The Court held that this allegation, and other similar allegations, established a domestic enterprise and that the alleged scheme was directed at the United States in a way that had significant domestic ramifications. Ultimately, those allegations provided a sufficient domestic nexus for the claims to proceed past the pleading stage. The Second Circuit, however, made clear that, at trial and on summary judgment, the European Community would be required to provide proof of the domestic nature of those predicate statutory violations.
Whereas the Supreme Court’s decision in Morrison dealt specifically with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Second Circuit’s application of Morrison to RICO claims in this case suggests that Morrison may have significant implications beyond the securities laws. Future decisions likely will rely upon the Court’s approach here of carefully heeding the underlying principals articulated in Morrison, and requiring a showing of clear Congressional intent before any federal statute will be applied to extraterritorial conduct.
litigation attorney local attorney local lawyer local solicitors mold attorney
Jaime King Jaime Pressly Jamie Chung Jamie Gunns Jamie Lynn Sigler
Ana Hickmann Ana Ivanovi Ana Paula Lemes Ananda Lewis Angela Marcello
Oh true love. The lengths people will go to. This is a new one on The Juice, and that’s saying something after doing this every day for so many years. As reported by ktvu.com:
A woman in Texas told police she stole a bottle of cheap wine from a gas station so she could get arrested and see her boyfriend in the Williamson County Jail, according to a warrant.
Brilliant!
Alicia Walicke, 22, was charged with theft. Police found her Wednesday next to a Shell gas station drinking a $3.99 bottle of Mad Dog 20/20 she had just stolen from the station, the warrant said.
“Walicke advised her boyfriend was arrested earlier that evening by Cedar Park Officers and it was her fault so she wanted to make things right and go to jail,” according to the warrant.
Two things: That’s the best thing you could come up with? And Mad Dog? (If you’ve never had it, keep it that way!)
Walicke was released from the Williamson County Jail Friday after posting bond on bail set at $5,000, according to court records.
You’ll find the source, and a mug shot, here.
Source: http://rss.justia.com/~r/LegalJuiceCom/~3/TUAyUFldagw/afd-8.html
power of attorney power of attorny private attorney private lawyer pro bono lawyers
Grace Park Gretha Cavazzoni Gwen Stefani Halle Berry Hayden Panettiere
find lawyer free attorney consultation free lawyer free lawyer advice free lawyer consultation
Source: http://jurist.org/paperchase/2014/08/bank-of-america-reaches-1665-billion-settlement-with-doj.php
statute law statutory law stupid laws traffic attorney traffic lawyer
The actress attends the FOX All-Star Party in L.A.! Plus, check out more pics of your favorite stars on the scene!
Jennifer Gimenez Jennifer Love Hewitt Jennifer Morrison Jennifer ODell Jennifer Scholle
Source: http://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/kennedy-mighell-report/2014/06/evernote-organized-lawyer
employment attorney employment law employment law courses employment lawyer employment lawyer san diego
Izabella Scorupco Jaime King Jaime Pressly Jamie Chung Jamie Gunns
Source: http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2014/08/25/uber-to-launch-in-israel-tuesday/?mod=WSJBlog
conservator copyright lawyer corporate law corporate lawyer criminal attorney
Source: http://stupidcelebrities.net/2014/08/hayden-panettiere-lets-slip-shes-girl-video/
Ed talks about lawyers who provide solutions and who communicate effectively and often with their clients.
Source: http://feeds.lexblog.com/~r/LawBizBlog/~3/phF8NiBJ0pc/
attorneys bankruptcy attorney bankruptcy lawyer bankruptcy lawyers best attorney
Michelle Tanner was an iconic character of ’90s television. Her role on “Full House” taught us many life lessons, and of course gave us the adorable catchphrase, “You got it dude.” But what would the show have been like without the precocious Olsen twins?
personal injury attorneys personal injury lawyer personal injury lawyers power attorney power of attorney
The What's Your Number? premiere is tonight in Los Angeles! I have my dress and I'm super excited!
I'm gong to be tweeting live from the red carpet at 6:30 PM PST for US Weekly magazine, so make sure to follow them and me on Twitter:
Source: http://www.prettyinthecity.com/blog/2011/9/19/whats-your-number-premiere.html
Ehrinn Cummings Elena Lyons Elisabeth Röhm Elisha Cuthbert Eliza Dushku
A young man named Trayvon died. He didn’t need to die. That is both tragic and sad.And there is another truth that twitter cannot change. For all the vast information that has become available to us by virtue of the internet, there is no wisdom of the crowds.
injury attorneys injury lawers injury lawyer injury lawyers international law
international law schools internet lawyer labor attorney lafayette attorney law
Funny girl Mindy Kaling looked adorable when she showed up at the 2014 Primetime Emmy Awards earlier tonight (August 25).
The “Mindy Project” star showed off her red carpet prowess in designer duds as she strolled inside Los Angeles’ Nokia Theatre to catch all the action.
Hosted by Seth Meyers, this year’s Emmy Awards promises to be full of laughs and excitement, as well as plenty of beautiful people.
As for the Outstanding Lead Actor in a Drama Series hopefuls, Bryan Cranston, Kevin Spacey, Jon Hamm, Jeff Daniels, Woody Harrelson and Matthew McConaughey are all up for consideration.
Source: http://www.celebrity-gossip.net/emmy-awards-2014/mindy-kaling-ready-action-2014-emmys-1190954
Jessica Biel Jessica Cauffiel Jessica Paré Jessica Simpson Zooey Deschanel
Source: http://jurist.org/paperchase/2014/08/un-rights-chief-cites-potential-war-crimes-in-iraq.php
copyright lawyer corporate law corporate lawyer criminal attorney criminal defence lawyer
It’s so easy, in the comfort of your own home, or sitting there in your ergonomic office chair, to say that you wouldn’t have reacted as this Houston woman did. But can you really know with certainty? Exactly. As reported by khou.com:
According to officers with the Houston Police Department, the woman got upset over her drink at a McDonald’s restaurant, caused a disturbance, and then sped off [and allegedly led police on high-speed chase.] Police said they spotted her older Mercedes with an expired sticker, and they tried to pull her over.
Okay, so perhaps she overreacted a little.
They eventually used spike strips to flatten her tires. She came to a stop on Hillcroft near Richmond.
Yikes. So what happened to her?
Police said the woman would be charged with resisting arrest. [She was taken to jail.]
Here’s the source, including a photo of the unhappy customer.
Source: http://rss.justia.com/~r/LegalJuiceCom/~3/jI6cZj4tl1Y/adfsas.html
find attorney find lawyer free attorney consultation free lawyer free lawyer advice
Following his DUI arrest yesterday in Miami, the Internet exploded with responses to Justin Bieber's latest headline grabbing antics.
Carla Gugino Carmen Electra Carol Grow Carrie Underwood Cat Power
Oh, the ‘90s. It was a time when all the hardest-rocking ladies in music were totally angst ridden -- and fierce about it. (And we’d like to categorize our adolescent selves during that period the same way, if we may.)
AnnaLynne McCord Anne Marie Kortright April Scott Arielle Kebbel Ashanti
Or does the 4th Amendment REALLY vanish with those magic words?
I've been stopped and the cop claimed he smelled pot, when, at the time, I hadn't touched the stuff in years. I told him I'd consent to a search if he apologized for wasting both of our time when he didn't find anything. He searched, didn't find anything, and I was on my way without an apology and a "verbal warning" to fix my tail light
Do you ask for another officer's opinion?
Do you tell the officer "bullshit"?
I'm just trying to help some people know what to do in this situation.
Initially, it helps for have a basic understanding of the law as it currently exists. When a cop says he "smells pot," he is invoking the automobile exception to the warrant requirement, which is based on exigent circumstances. Since a person can drive away, and thereby evade arrest and seizure of evidence of a crime in a car, the Supreme Court crafted the exception fin Carroll v. United States, a 1925 opinion about bootleggers getting away from the revenuers, which has done more harm to the 4th Amendment than perhaps any other case.
Since smell can't be captured and bottled for later presentation to a judge, the only "proof" of what an officer smelled is the officer's testimony. If he says so, it becomes real, and that's why they are magic words. Other than proving impossibility or incredibility, there is essentially nothing that can be done to challenge what the cop says he smelled. More importantly, even if a subsequent search turns up no pot, that doesn't mean he didn't smell what he smelled. The officer will testify about his training and experience in smelling pot, and yet he can be mistaken. The law doesn't require the cop to be right.
But the discussion thread about the magic words is where a grave misunderstanding about the system becomes clear. The problem derives from the absence of any marijuana in the car. The cop says he smelled it. This gives rise to probable cause to search and the automobile exception allows the cop to do so without a warrant. A search follows, and it can be as intrusive as the cop chooses to make it. By intrusive, it can include dismantling your brand new Maserati into a million pieces on the side of the road and, when it's over, leaving it there.
So the cop smells pot, searches and comes up empty. No apology. No help putting your Maserati back together. He drives away without so much as a tip o' the hat. This is where people don't seem to understand how constitutional rights work.
There are no elves in the backroom enforcing your constitutional rights. Had the police officer found something in the car to justify an arrest, the question of the constitutionality of the search could be hashed out in court in a suppression motion and hearing. Bear in mind that the cop may have claimed to smell marijuana, but that doesn't mean pot is what was found. Maybe other drugs. Maybe an illegal gun. Maybe a dead body. The smell of pot claim serves to except the search from the warrant requirement, and whatever comes of the search is the basis for the subsequent arrest.
But the cop finds nothing. Nada. Zip. You are clean and, surrounded by the pieces of your brand new Maserati, free to go. What then?
This is where people get confused. That's it? Don't the cops have to, you know, do something?
No red light goes off in the backroom of the constitutional elves. Actually, there is no such backroom. There's nothing. As the cop drives away, that's the end of the encounter, unless the person chooses to take action to contest the violation of his constitutional rights, such as a §1983 claim.
The problem there, of course, is that the cop, invoking the magic words that he "smelled pot," will very likely prevail despite the fact that he found nothing. You won't make it past summary judgment. More significantly, no lawyer will take the case on contingency, meaning that you will have to pay to play, and it will prove to be an expensive longshot to even make the effort to enforce your constitutional rights.
Consider the plight of people stopped in the street in New York City under the stop & frisk program, where the most generous view is that the police take action against 12% of the people stopped. They've performed millions of stops, and a tiny fraction have resulted in people going before a judge, where they can contest what happened. The others, the millions of people stopped and searched where nothing was found, just walk away, having been violated, humiliated and treated like pond scum.
The Constitution is not a self-effectuating document. It requires someone to act upon it to challenge police conduct. Otherwise, they are words without meaning, easily thwarted by police invoking the myriad exceptions the courts have provided. And here's an even worse secret: they don't even have to use magic words unless they ultimately find something, arrest a person and want to use it as evidence in court.
They get this. Most people don't. Most people harbor a naïve belief that, despite everything they know about how the police function, there is still some thread of honesty woven through their conduct that somehow makes them behave in accordance with the Constitution.
There are some excellent videos and writings about how to best conduct oneself to properly invoke constitutional rights and to create countervailing evidence to support one's invocation. The pervasiveness of video is a huge factor in showing that police have manufactured claims and false allegations, and these go a long way in keeping police clean where in the past they could make up anything they want to and there would be no way to challenge them.
But these rights we love so dearly don't happen on their own. Someone has to make them happen. We make them happen. And if we don't, then we're left on the side of the road with our Maserati in pieces cursing. The cops have magic words, but constitutional rights aren't magic. They only happen if we make them.
Source: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2013/07/08/magic-words-magic-rights.aspx?ref=rss
employment law employment law courses employment lawyer employment lawyer san diego employment lawyers
The Supreme Court has stayed a Virginia court's ruling which ended the state's ban on same-sex marriages.
personal injury attorneys personal injury lawyer personal injury lawyers power attorney power of attorney
Source: http://jurist.org/paperchase/2014/08/texas-governor-pleads-not-guilty-to-abuse-of-power-charges.php
conservator copyright lawyer corporate law corporate lawyer criminal attorney
Jennifer Lopez dazzled on the red carpet with a perfectly form-fitting outfit.
But one of the best-looking things she brought to the VMAs wasn't an accessory-- though she did wear him on her arm!
JLo was spotted with her supposed ex Casper Smart in the audience, and that can only mean one thing; they're back together!
We mean, come on, we know WE can't get our exes to bring us Skittles in the middle of an award show!
Mm, a man that serves you candy while you relax? No wonder she keeps him around! They don't call him her eye candy for nothing!
[Image via MTV.]
In the wake of violent clashes between protesters and police in Ferguson, Mo., President Obama is ordering a review of the federal programs that help local police departments purchase military gear.
personal injury attorneys personal injury lawyer personal injury lawyers power attorney power of attorney