Law Legal Services » Society

Labor Law

admin — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 08:02:51 +0000

I went to law school to be a labor lawyer. Before I got to law school, I did not really even know what lawyers did, but up to that time the my jobs were on farms, in a warehouse and on construction sites. Northeastern Pennsylvania was at that time still very Pro-Union. The trade unions were, in my mind, very proud organizations tracing back to the United Mine Workers.

So I took some classes in labor and employment law but could never really get interested. What was taught in law school did not seem to have much to do with the worksites I had been on. In fact most of it seemed so academic that I gradually lost interest.

I started in practice with no real direction until I started to do bankruptcy and financial cases. Money seemed like a pretty good thing to learn about, so I kept at it, handling hundreds of bankruptcies for debtors, and participating in many more on behalf of creditors. I was very active in this until Congress changed the law in 2005.

Bankruptcy is a hard job for a lawyer and Congress really added some homework to the process with the Amendments to the Code. What is worse is that the reforms were premised on the assumption lawyers and their bankruptcy clients were abusing the system. As I thought of all those hundreds of individuals and all the businesses I had counseled, represented and litigated for, I became more and more chagrined. In all those years, there had only been one or two people who, I felt, were trying to commit bankruptcy fraud and I had refused to represent them.

All the rest were ordinary people – teachers, office workers, cab drivers, students, and contractors, who simply had made poor borrowing decisions and obtained credit on terrible terms.

What Congress had done was so offensive to me that I greatly reduced the scale of my involvement with bankruptcies. I thought about a way to help people get out of financial trouble without having to file bankruptcy under these new laws over the last few years, and finally decided to start making a special effort to reach out to these people. At times, the irony of my earlier career decision strikes me. My representation of people who feel they cannot afford a lawyer and have nowhere else to go is designed to work for working people and for small businesses.

Labor Law and the Salaried Employee

admin — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 08:02:09 +0000

Salaried employees are, for the most part, at the mercy of their employer. These employees are under contract to their employer for a set amount of money on a set pay day. The labor laws, in this case, are somewhat ambiguous, so many of these cases go to court or are decided by arbitrators and no one may be found at fault or “guilty” unless the excesses are blatant and obviously knowingly carried out.

Salaried employees are not usually required to keep track of their hours, though for reporting instances, your employer may require that. Some employers do this as a means to measure productivity and will require complex descriptions of the work done as well as the number of hours or even minutes spent on each task. This is legal, though on the side you may want to make notes of how much time it took you to complete this requirement, along with your regular work. It will subtract from your productivity level if you must spend minutes recounting your work every time that you perform a task. It is also wise, if you are entering into a salaried position, that it is clearly stated how many hours you are expected to work during a regular work week. Since you are not punching a time clock or filling out a time sheet, you must keep meticulous records if you regularly work over the number of hours originally agreed upon. For example, if your contract states or you know that you are required to work 50 hours a week, but you regularly put in 60 or 70 hours a week with no additional compensation, then you have the right to approach your employer about it and in the case that you and he or she disagree, you also can take them to court for reimbursement for those additional hours. But, in most cases, it is imperative that your contract spells out the expectations and if you are looking at one or two weeks over the course of a year, do not expect a ruling in your favor. You also cannot expect to be compensated at the overtime rate, though in some cases of blatant abuse of a salaried employee, that has been a decision handed down by the court.

When it comes to sick and vacation days, a salaried employee is compensated when he or she has the sick or vacation days available. By the same token that your employer is required to pay you the set amount for a week in which you worked the set hours, if you do not have sick days or vacation days available, your employer is not required to compensate you for hours you did not work. In this case, your salary is usually computed to a daily or hourly rate, and that amount of money can be withheld from your salary. This normally only happens with cases where the employer feels that the employee is abusing their salaried position. On the other hand, if you are regularly a very reliable employee who puts in more than their agreed upon salaried hours in the majority of weeks, but then has to take a sick day once or twice during a pay period and your employer decides to dock your pay, regardless of the number of additional hours that you have voluntarily worked, you may have a case. These cases are much more difficult to bring, but if a pattern of this type of abuse can be tracked and attested to, your employer may be required to compensate you and will also be required to mend his or her ways.

Yes, it’s true that salaried employees do not necessarily receive the same protection as an hourly employee, but it is also true that blatant disregard of the labor laws can land your employer in hot water. For the most part, salaried employees enter into contracts for which they feel adequately paid for the work they perform. It is really up to you, as an employee, and up to your employer to honestly carry out your contract in the way that it was intended when it was entered into.

Your Legal Rights in a Living-Together Relationship – Common Law Marriage

admin — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 04:36:36 +0000

This article is intended for anyone involved in a long-term, committed relationship, who has never been formally married, and wants to know his or her rights. Whether your relationship recently ended, it’s in crisis, or you just want to know whether being formally married makes a difference in this day and age, you’ll probably be surprised by what the law provides.

One common misconception is a belief that there is little legal difference between marriage and living together. This sometimes arises out of the mis belief that after a period of cohabitation (frequently believed to be seven years), a living-together relationship is instantly metamorphosed into a common law marriage. This myth, though it has the persistence of urban legend, is pure fiction. In truth, you cannot enter into a common law marriage within the boundaries of New York State. And, common law marriage has become less and less favored across the nation over the past hundred or so years.

According to my most recent research, there are only ten jurisdictions that continue to recognize common law marriage (Alabama, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Utah and the District of Columbia), and five others that do so, but only if the relationship was established prior to a certain date (Pennsylvania, Georgia, Idaho, Ohio and Oklahoma). There are a few countries that also recognize common law marriage, or a status similar to common law marriage.

Here in New York, common law marriage has not been legally sanctioned since 1933. But the inquiry doesn’t quite end there. There are several states, New York being among them, that recognize common law marriage relationships that were established while the parties resided or sojourned elsewhere, namely in one of the aforementioned common law marriage jurisdictions. So, despite the abolition of common law marriage in 1933, our courts continue to recognize common law marriages that were established in other jurisdictions. And, this may be the case even where the couple only temporarily sojourned in such jurisdiction, all the while maintaining their domicile in New York.

In such instances, the court’s determination of whether a common law marriage was established will hinge on the legal standards of the particular state where the parties sojourned. These standards and precedent vary from state to state. And, contrary to common law marriage folklore, common law marriage states look to more than just whether the couple attained their seventh year of living together.

Some legal factors that are considered significant in common law marriage states are: (i) the amount of time spent in the state; (ii) whether the parties “held themselves out” as husband and wife; (iii) whether they functioned as an economic entity; (iv) whether they ever entered into an agreement stating their intent to be considered married (even though they never formally wed); (v) whether either of the parties was married to someone else at the time; and (vi) whether the parties actually physically resided together. Lastly, in each of these states, historically you’ve needed to be of opposite sexes.

Contrastingly, factors that typically won’t be considered significant (factors I might contend bear more directly on notions of fairness) include (i) sacrifices made by either party in entering into the relationship (what lawyers call “detrimental reliance”), (ii) the standard of living enjoyed by the parties, (iii) whether one partner might not be able to sustain that lifestyle after separation (or even support himself or herself period), and (iv) whether there were children of the relationship.

This issue most recently garnered public attention in New York when the prominent film actor, William Hurt, was brought into court by his then ex-girlfriend, an actress and dancer by the name of Sandra Jennings. The decision in that case underscored, among other things, how crucial issues of credibility can be.

The common law marriage jurisdiction involved was South Carolina, where the parties had sojourned during the filming of “The Big Chill”. The crux of Ms. Jennings’ claim was that during an argument, Mr. Hurt told her that, “as far as he was concerned, we were married in the eyes of God”, that they had “a spiritual marriage”, and “were more married than married people.” Mr. Hurt, for his part, denied ever making these statements. There was also uncontradicted evidence that the parties never held themselves out as a married couple, even while cohabiting on location in South Carolina. On the other hand, the parties did have a child together.

In the appellate court decision, which dismissed all of Ms. Jennings’ causes of action (Jennings v. Hurt, 554 N.Y.S.2d 220), the Court made particular note of the following facts: (i) that Ms. Jennings had never mentioned any conversation regarding an alleged “spiritual marriage” during her pre-trial deposition; and (ii) that a document, which Ms. Jennings had allegedly signed her name to as “Hurt”, was in fact an altered copy on which the name “Hurt” had been inserted.

As to the legal showing that was required under South Carolina law, the Court held that a common law marriage proponent must establish “an intention on the part of both parties to enter into a marriage contract…with such clarity on the part of the parties that marriage does not creep up on either of them and catch them unawares.” The evidence on this point, i.e., factors suggesting that neither of the parties considered themselves to be married, or held themselves out as such, also seemed to favor Mr. Hurt.

Another illustration of how difficult it can be to establish a common law marriage in a non-common law marriage state such as New York, involves one of my cases, which I’ll call A vs. A (I represented the claimant putative common law wife). In A vs. A, believing strongly in the case, we chose to first proceed solely under a common law marriage cause of action, forsaking in the first instance pleading non-marital causes of action, so as not to weaken the common law marriage claim. Subsequently, with permission of the Court, we added several non-marital causes of action to Mrs. A’s complaint. It was these claims, rather than the common law marriage cause of action, that ultimately served as her basis for recovery.

I am sure you will understand, from even a brief recitation of the facts, why we initially believed that Mrs. A’s case for common law marriage was a strong one. Most strikingly, Mr. and Mrs. A held themselves out as a married couple for more than thirty years. They also raised a child together (by then a grown woman), who was always led to believe that her parents were duly married. Each party wore wedding-style rings on the appropriate finger. In fact, no more than a handful of close friends and family ever knew the parties were not formally married. They were referred to in every writing, every joint account, every tax filing, etc., as Mr. and Mrs. A. And, Mrs. A had even legally changed her last name to A fifteen years earlier, upon becoming a naturalized citizen.

Further, Mr. A always told Mrs. A that they had no need to formalize their marital status, allegedly because they were in all respects a married couple. According to Mr. A, what was “his was hers”, and when they “got old”, they would get formally married. Needless to say, that day never came. Indeed, on the precipice of retirement age, Mr. A initiated their separation. By then, they’d established a more than comfortable lifestyle (including residence in a $1.5 Million penthouse apartment), a lifestyle that Mrs. A certainly couldn’t maintain on her own. And, all that Mr. A was initially offering to Mrs. A was a $50,000 per year stipend, for which in return he asked Mrs. A to quietly walk away from their thirty-plus year relationship.

The parties had also traveled widely, though they lived within the same borough of New York City for the entirety of their relationship. Yet, fatally to Mrs. A’s claim, the only common law marriage jurisdiction that they had traveled to was Washington, D.C. On this point, the Court’s decision, granting Mr. A’s motion for dismissal of the common law marriage cause of action, focused on the District of Columbia’s requirement that the parties to an alleged common law marriage must have done more than just cohabited as husband and wife; they must have cohabited after expressly agreeing, “in words of the present tense”, to become “man and wife”.

Rejecting our arguments, the Judge held that this agreement must have been actually and explicitly stated while the parties were physically present within the confines of Washington, D.C. It was inconsequential that the parties had explicitly made this kind of an avowal elsewhere. Because Mrs. A could not assert that she and Mr. A explicitly made this kind of an avowal, or even reiterated it, while physically present in D.C., her cause of action was deemed inadequate. Notwithstanding, Mrs. A prevailed in that portion of the Court’s decision that refused to dismiss several of her non-marital causes of action.

Conclusion
If you’ve concluded that your relationship might meet the legal criteria for common law marriage, I strongly recommend that you speak to a lawyer (preferably a family law specialist). And, for advice that you can rely on, you should plan to set aside at least a few hundred dollars for the cost of a consultation and additional legal research. The good news: if your relationship is found to be a common law marriage, you will generally have the same rights and obligations as every other divorcing spouse in this State.

On the other hand, if you’ve determined that your relationship is unlikely to qualify for common law marriage treatment (even though it may be one of significant financial interdependence), then I suggest that you read Part II of this article, which discusses a variety of other legal concepts that may be applicable to your living-together relationship.

Jonathan K. Pollack is an attorney admitted to practice in New York State (1992), and a partner of the firm of Beldock Levine & Hoffman LLP, located in NY, NY (since 2002). His area of practice is matrimonial, family law, the rights of unmarried cohabitants, and alternative dispute resolution in these practice areas. He is a graduate of Columbia College, NY (1987), and Tulane Law School, LA (1992). He has served on the Association of the Bar of the City of New York Committee on Family Court and Family Law and on the Inter-Disciplinary Forum on Mental Health and Family Law. He is also a member of the Association for Conflict Resolution, and completed divorce mediation training sponsored by the Academy of Family Mediators in 1996. He has experience handling cases in Supreme and Family Courts in all five boroughs of New York City, as well Westchester and Nassau counties.

Medical Negligence Solicitor : Walker Smith Way Solicitors, is a firm of specialist medical negligence solicitors, with offices in Chester,Wrexham, Ashton under Lyne, Birmingham and London.

Cheap car insurance products have absolutely taken over the insurance market. Like drive through fast food, processed and packaged snack foods, and delivery pizza, the “cheap eats” of the car insurance world is absolutely littered. You really don’t have to go very far on TV, where, especially late at night, insurance products of all sorts are advertised.

Social Organisation : Wetogethernow is a social Organisation that works for the welfare of people. Our range of service include Child Abuse and Care, Social Consultation, Online Help, Financial Aid, Old Age Homes, Divorce Laws etc. We possess a competent team of lawyers and social workers who offer their help and guidance to our clients. One of our basic services is fighting against child abuse.

Houston Personal Injury Lawyer : Get a free initial consultation with the lawyers of Reich & Binstock.

Daily News : Daily News from Germany. Get the latest updates and track business, technology and health care news.

Employment Law Solicitor London : Our dedicated team of employment law solicitors in London has extensive experience in all areas of employment Law.

Clinical Negligence Solicitors : Barlow Robbins Solicitors in Surrey are specialist clinical negligence solicitors to solve brain injury and spinal injury cases in Surrey and Guildford.

matchmaker services | family law coral springs | cigars | thermal labels

The Rule of Law

admin — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 09:00:42 +0000

One of the most fundamental requirements of a civil society is the rule of law which means that the people must follow the law of the land irrespective of his or her status or position in the society. In the modern world, the developed countries feel proud that their society is governed by the rule of law while most developing countries like India feel ashamed that their society does not have the rule of law. The developed countries are the role model for the underdeveloped countries, where the rule of law is still a distant dream.

Societies that follow rule of law are often considered more civilized as there is much more order in the society. Every thing in such societies appears to be in order. The roads are clean, lawns and parks are well-maintained, government officials work in office, trains and public transports run on time. Further, there is virtually no corruption in public offices. People are well paid, deliver better efficiencies and keep everything neat and clean. These societies appear perfect to the people of other parts of the world, who often wonder why they can’t be like them.

All societies need laws for their existence. Even though the laws may be different in each society, yet there are some basic principles that are common to all laws of the world. These fundamental principles are equality, fraternity, justice and liberty. The Indian constitution, for example, incorporates these goals in the preamble to the constitution which seeks to secure for all its citizens justice, liberty, equality and to promote among them the spirit of fraternity.

These principles are so universal in nature that they find place in every civilized society of the world. It is matter of great surprise that in reality the outcome of the rule of law is just the opposite. The more civilized a society is, the more is the inequality among its population – more injustice to the have-nots, less liberty due to strict enforcement of law and more hatred among the citizens based on race, caste and religion. What goes wrong in the implementation in the so-called rule of law?

Law of Nature

Indian thinkers in the Vedic period, i.e. around 3000 years before the birth of Christ, discovered that the universe does not perform its functions at random but follows certain laws. These were called “Rita” or the universal laws or principles that guided the universe. The progress of man can be largely attributed in understanding these basic principles of nature and exploiting them for the benefit of the human race at the cost of the rest of the creations. The laws of man, therefore, run contrary to the laws of nature as they are human-centric and not designed for all the creations of God or Nature.

One of the basic differences between man-made-laws and the laws of Nature is that the laws of nature are spontaneous as they require no effort in implementation. For example, in a natural piece of earth like a forest, the earth produces trees, plants, fruits and vegetables spontaneously without any need of watering or breeding. The nature itself provides timely rain and fertilizer to the new plants. The forests and the mountains are covered with greenery and beauty, which is purely natural since it comes without any effort.

On the contrary, the man-made creations like parks, trees, plants are artificially made. They too may look as beautiful as the natural ones, yet they cannot survive without regular effort on the part of man. Imagine a park, which is not maintained for a few months, or a house not cleaned for months. It will lose all its beauty and soon be filled with dust and weeds. No building or modern gadget can survive without external effort from man. However, all natural creations are able to survive on their own and maintain their existence; and enjoy their life without any external support.

The laws of nature are just as they treat every specie (and not only man) with equality. In a jungle, every specie gets its due share of food, air and water which enable them to live a dignified life without being dependent on any other creation. Nature makes no distinction between one specie, and the other as all species are the children of the same God.

However, in the man’s world, every other creature is killed if it is not useful for man. They can survive only if they can be useful for man. Thus man’s world does not treat any other creature of the nature with respect and does not provide them any right of equality, liberty, justice or fraternity. He cleverly usurps this universal law and makes it applicable only for human beings. For all other lesser species, he has created a man-made-law, calling it ‘the law of jungle’ or ‘the survival of the fittest’ which justifies his domination over the weak creations. The fact, on the contrary, is that the laws of jungle are far more just and equal for all species than the man-made-law.

Most men are not concerned about the way they treat the lesser animals as they feel that ‘the survival of the fittest’ theory is more logical than the laws of nature. However, they forget that every principle created in the universe has to be applied on them also and that they may not always be a beneficiary. Man-made-laws do not stop with animals but they soon spread their wings to encompass human beings, too. This is where conflicts between man and man starts that gives rise to hatred and wars. Man feels the pinch when the law of jungle is applied against them and the law of nature is denied to him. He is hurt when he is treated like weeds by the society.

Weeds: The Undesirable Plants of Nature?

One of the most interesting creations of the natural world is weed. Weeds are undesirable vegetation in the kingdom of plants. Weeds are defined as any plant that is not valued by the human society and usually tends to overgrow or compete with valued flora. Weeds are the plants which are considered by human beings as unattractive, undesirable, or troublesome.

In the natural world, man has to continuously fight against weeds to make their artificial plants survive. Weeds grow automatically and if the artificial gardens do not have the support of man, it is soon overpowered by weeds and the whole field or garden becomes full of weeds. Weeds are created by Nature (God) as no human effort is required to grow them. They are, however, so powerful that man has to continuously guard his creation from these weeds, lest all creation of the civilized society is destroyed. Weeds are as undesirable to man in the world of plants as criminals in the human society.

Criminals: The Necessary Evil for the Civil Society

Similar to weeds in the natural world, there is a growth of criminals in civilized societies. Who these criminals are? Why do they grow? Whether the criminals are healthy people or are they mentally ill as often thought by the civilized world?

Criminals are defined as the people who commit crime. Crime is defined as an act that is a violation of the criminal law that is punishable by law. Crime is usually considered an evil act and criminals are often seen as evil created by Devil, out there to destroy the civilized citizens, the children of God.

There are many similarities between criminals and weeds. Criminals grow automatically in every society and the society has to work hard to weed out these criminals. Criminals like weeds are so powerful and competitive that they have the power to defeat the civilized people. They are, therefore, fought jointly by the society. Yet in every society, there is crime and there are criminals. We are used to look criminals as evil that is unnecessary just like weeds. Yet if God (Nature) is the creator of all, then everything in this world must have been created with a purpose. “What could be the purpose of creation of criminals?” We wonder.

Criminals are, as a matter of fact, creation of the civilized world. In an uncivilized world, there would be no law, so there can be no violation of law and hence, no criminal. If we wish to understand the utility of criminals in the civilized world, we must imagine the world of nature without weeds. In such a world, all plants will have to be grown by man with artificial watering – canals, tube-wells, and other irrigation systems used for agriculture. In all certainty, man will grow only such crops and plants that are useful to man and the rest of the species would surely not survive in the man’s world. Further, man’s energy is limited and with all his effort, he can hardly take care of a minuscule part of the world by artificial plantation, so the rest of the physical world would be without plants and so without oxygen and other animal life and eco-system. This will soon lead to the end of the world including the human being.

The role of criminals is similar to the role of the weeds. Imagine a world without crime i.e. everyone follows the law of the land without questioning. It will only provide status quo in the world. Kings will always be kings and only their children or loved ones can become kings. Poor will always be poor. Kings will frame more inhuman laws that would give them more powers. The less fortunate people would die out of hunger and poverty as they won’t break the law and the state will have no obligation to feed them. Thus the world without criminals would be a place where people will die due to inaction, boredom and cruelty. Such an ideal world, indeed, would be the most inhuman and most undesirable to mankind.

Thankfully, people called criminals automatically grow in every civil society as soon as man creates laws to govern it. The laws of man are always challenged by them since they are mostly against the laws of nature i.e. equality, justice, liberty and fraternity. States always have to face opposition from such people who break the law and are known as criminals. They may have an ugly appearance as weeds but they only provide oxygen to the society for its life. Thus in posterity, people recognize them not as criminals but as heroes.

The Path of Heroism

While man hates criminals, he worships the heroes. He can lay his most valuable possession i.e. his life on a single call from his hero. Who are these heroes? Are they law-abiding civilized people or the law-defying criminals? Take the example of Mahatma Gandhi in the modern world. He was perhaps the biggest criminal in the time of the British rule in India and he was jailed many times on charges of being waging war against the state. He spent more than 15 years in jail for his various crimes. Yet the people of India call him ‘Father of the Nation’ and love him more than any civilized person on the earth. Nelson Mandela spent 27 years in jail, yet he is a national hero not only for South Africa but for the entire world.

In history, we can find numerous examples of great people who have broken the law and having been punished for their criminal acts. The list includes people like Christ, Prophet Mohammad, Socrates and Galileo. Yet it is these people who changed the history of the world and they are rightly worshiped as heroes by the masses even after their death.

How many people you have ever known who have become heroes without breaking the law and committing crimes in their time? Perhaps none. Heroes are created not by following the law but by breaking the law.

Rule of Divine Law

It is not always good to follow the law blindly as it provides order and rule of law in the society but kills the humanity as the implementation of most of the man-made laws are against the natural laws. Man-made laws are often disguised under the cover of natural laws like equality, justice, liberty and fraternity yet they serve just the opposite purpose. Most people see the letter of the law but fail to grasp its spirit. One must understand that breaking man-made laws is one of the fundamental requirements of all civil societies, if it contradicts the natural or divine laws. Thus every person who breaks the law need not be a criminal. One must go deeper into the facts before declaring a law-breaker to be a criminal. The key distinction perhaps would be to see if he is breaking the law for the interest of the humanity or for his own selfish end. Is it need-based or greed-based? There lies the distinction between good and evil, between a true criminal and a hero. One who is breaking a law for others or to fight injustice is a hero and not a criminal. A poet said “Jo lade din ke khet, Sura toi” (One who fights for the weak is the real hero).

Mr. Awdhesh K Singh holds his B. Tech. from Institute of Technology, Bananas Hindu University Varanasi and M. Tech. from Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi. He was granted study leave for the PhD course in 2002, for doing PhD from ABV- Indian Institute of Information Technology and Management (IIITM) Gwalior, India. His PhD thesis on the topic “Expert System based Decision Support System for E-Governance: An Application to Indian Customs” is undergoing evaluation.

He has published several papers in International Journals and Conferences on the subject of E-governance and the application of Artificial Intelligence tools like Fuzzy Logic (FL) and Expert Systems (ES) for Indian Customs. He also has keen interest in the study and application of Indian Philosophies for solving the real-life problems of the modern world.

All About White Collar Crimes

admin — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 13:53:30 +0000

In this article we’ll introduce you to a few basics of what white collar crimes has to offer up to anyone who wants to learn more about crime and investigation and much more. When most people think about crime, white collar crimes are not the first thing that come to mind. White collar criminals do not fit the standard Hollywood depiction of lawbreakers in this country. Most of us might picture something like a bank robbery, or a lone gunman knocking over a liquor store. Maybe images of murder come to mind, or extortion schemes by the mob. White collar crimes, however, are way down the list for most of us. Nonetheless, white collar crimes are a real fact of living in this modern world. According to white collar crime statistics, they are way up in the last couple of years. Although rates for murders, assaults, and other violent offenses seem to be down nationwide, white collar crimes are still perpetrated as much or more in most areas. If you are accused of a white collar crime, it is important that you get the best representation that you can. Criminal representation is always important, of course, but the representation for white collar crimes is especially crucial. You see, white collar criminal lawyers need to have a more subtle understanding of the law than people representing other kinds of crimes. If you are representing someone suspected of murder, all you need to be able to do is cast reasonable doubt that they killed someone in a certain time or place. With white collar crimes, however, the issues are much more complicated. I have represented several people accused of white collar crimes in my time as a lawyer, so I know what I am talking about. The difference between white collar crimes cases and other kinds of criminal law is that the facts of the case are often not disputed in white collar cases. You are not trying to prove, for example, that your clients did not kill someone. You are trying to prove that your clients financial transaction was not illegal, or something like that. It is not a matter of life and death, but of shades of meaning in the law. We hope that the first part of this article as brought you a lot of much needed information on the subject at hand. There is another big difference in street crime vs white collar crime. In street crime, you are much more likely to have charges actually brought against you. People accused of white collar crimes are very infrequently tried. It is so expensive, and they are so likely to have good representation, that the government does not go after them. The public doesn’t care as much about white collar criminals, you see. If you are brought to trial, however, God help you. The government obviously thinks that it has a very solid case and has decided to make an example of you. When you thoroughly analyze each paragraph that we have discussed about white collar crimes, you will see a familiar thread of which to explore.

Criminal Background Check – Do a Background Check on a Person Online

admin — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 13:50:37 +0000

The safety of your family will never be guaranteed unless you do a criminal background check on people that you are wary of. This goes especially true if you are hiring someone to work for your household. If you are employing a gardener or a housekeeper, it is important to know whether they have previously been charged with a crime. However, you are refrained to use the information that you have gained against the person that you have done a background check on. For some states in the U.S., this is considered answerable to the law and you may be filed with a lawsuit for it. What is more, there are some states laws that hinder you from basing your hiring decision on the previous criminal records of the applicant. It is considered a criminal background check mainly because you only have to review the history of the person and not use it against him or her.

Everyone Can Access Criminal Records

In the past, a criminal background check can only be done by a member of the law or someone from the law enforcement department. Ordinary individuals or the public were not granted access to criminal or court records. However, this has changed for the past years, with more and more types of court records open for the perusal of the public. Almost anyone is allowed to request for public records such as court records or criminal records. If you want to perform a criminal background check on an individual, you can go online. Some sites on the Internet let you lookup names and info on a former prison inmate. On the other hand, there are also some websites that offer records or certificates to individuals who request for it.

Online Database of Criminal Records

The databases that are found online are updated constantly and compiled with the latest criminal records. This is to assure you that you will be able to do a complete and thorough criminal background check on a person. Online databases of public records consist of the most current records and information. This is available for each person that wants to do his or her own investigation. In order for you to access online databases, you have to provide certain information regarding the person. Among these are the name, sex, and age of the individual. This way you will be able to come up with a fruitful search. When you do your criminal background check, you will come up with information like the arrest and conviction, felony charges, registry search for sex offenders, and warrant search.

When you have the records or information that you need through a criminal background check, you can have these printed or downloaded. With the report that you have obtained, it will be easier for you to identify whether it is proper to trust the person you are dealing with or not. Knowing this is very important, especially when it comes to the safety of your family and your investment.

Chicago Personal Injury Lawyers : Find out how can a personal injury lawyer help you! If you are located in Chicago and need to speak to a personal injury lawyer please contact us now!

ski chalet : In spite of the effects of the credit crisis, Bulgarian gross domestic product had a 7% growth in 2008. The Bulgaria real estate market and business has seen rapid development recently. Bulgaria has many historical cities, mountain ski resorts where you can find a beautiful ski chalet. New types of tourism are expanding the range of visitor experiences and practices.

Houston Criminal Lawyer : Scheiner Law Group provides Houston Criminal Lawyer services in Texas.

Austin Divorce Attorneys : Austin divorce attorneys of the Milner Law Firm help clients with family law matters in Texas.

Solicitors Central London