How Long Will My New York Auto Accident Case Take?

Posted on November 15, 2010 by Jim Reed

If I only had a nickel for every time I’ve been asked that question….

The honest answer is: “It depends.”

Sorry, but that is the best answer any injury lawyer can give you. I am NOT trying to evade the question or be flip, but I have learned over my 25 years of representing injury victims that there is no easy answer to this question. The answer ALWAYS depends on the unique facts of each case.

I have settled some cases within a month of the accident; I’ve had other accident cases that have taken many years to finally reach the courtroom.

How long your case may take depends on a wide range of factors.

It depends on…

… how long you are actively treating for your injuries because most often it is NOT a good idea to try to settle your claim until you are done treating. Responsible lawyers are quick to remind their clients that they only get one chance—one bite at the apple—to settle their case so they need to be very sure of the permanent consequences of any injury before even discussing the settlement value of your case.

… the nature of your injuries. Some injuries heal quickly so very early on you are able to tell what might be the lasting consequences of your injury. Other injuries take a long time to heal or in some cases, never heal. Those cases usually take longer.

… how the accident occurred. Is the fault of the other driver clear and convincing or is there some significant argument about who was responsible for causing the accident? The more complicated the liability question, the longer the case is likely to take.

… the insurance carrier who insures the other driver. Some carriers have a reputation for quickly evaluating claims and making reasonable settlement offers. Other carriers are known for taking forever and never settling a case before trial.

… the amount of the insurance coverage. Often, the more money that may is at stake, the longer the case might take.

The key thing about how long your case should take is that you want it to take as long as it needs to take to get maximum value for your case.

You do NOT want to rush your case, thereby settling for less than it is worth. Likewise, you do NOT want your case to drag on any longer than it needs to take.

I like to say to my clients, “I don’t get paid until you get paid – so rest assured that I am NOT going to let your case drag on any longer than it needs to take!”

Thanks,

Jim

_____________________________________
James B. Reed, Esq.
NY & PA Personal Injury Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
William St., Elmira, NY 14902
Tel. (607) 733-8866 Fax. (607) 732-6062
Toll Free 1-800-943-3529
mailto:jreed@zifflaw.com http://www.zifflaw.com
E-mail me at FreeReports@zifflaw.com for two free books:
NY Car Accidents and NY Car Insurance Secrets YOU Need to Know

Upstate NY Personal Injury Faker Caught by Store’s Cameras

Posted on November 13, 2010 by Jim Reed

The crooks out there who claim fake personal injuries do REAL damage to the cases of legitimately injured people. As a personal injury attorney, I also detest such “fakers” for the harm their fraud does to the reputation of my profession.

Reporting on false claims sticks strongly in the minds of the public. When juries are put together, they frequently start with the perception that our cases can be faked.

Personal injury fakers may think it’s just between them and whatever defendant they decide to try and extract money from. Their actions are criminal – and call into into question the integrity of our personal injury clients, and of attorneys like myself who represent them. These bad apples cause the whole barrel to be suspect.

I recently came across a great post by a respected colleague, personal injury attorney Michael Bersani, of the firm Michaels & Smolak. The firm is based in Auburn, and the post reported on the case of a personal injury hoax perpetrator and how he was caught. I want to spread the word about this post, “Auburn NY Personal Injury Claim Faker Is Caught!” and the true story of this stupid would-be crook.

The case, as reported in the Syracuse Post-Standard, was of an Auburn man charged with insurance fraud for faking a slip-and-fall injury in convenience store. According to the Associated Press story, “Officials say Auburn man’s faked fall in store was caught on camera,” the guy poured a soda on the store floor, then sprawled on the floor until other customers and the store employees found and helped him.

Charles E. Barnes Sr., 48, later filed a claim with the store’s insurance carrier, claiming he suffered a back injury in the “accident.”

His real “slip”? Forgetting that the convenience store had surveillance cameras that caught his whole act!

State Insurance Department officials said in the story that Barnes is charged with insurance fraud and falsifying business records. He’s withdrawn his claim and pleaded not guilty to the charges.

I completely agree with Micheal in his hope that the authorities will “throw the book” at this crook. I also wanted to quote Michael’s feelings about this case and personal injury fraud in general, because they mirror my own.

“Honest New York personal injury lawyers like myself abhor dishonest personal injury claimants. They give our honest clients, and us, a bad name. Many people already assume, wrongly, that personal injury claimants exaggerate or completely fake their injuries. One true story about a fraudulent personal injury claim gives the whole profession a black eye.

I have represented hundreds of Central New York and Syracuse personal injury claimants over the years, and I can count on one hand those who were faking (and with my long experience representing personal injury victims, I can tell!). When I discover the deceit, I quickly severe the relationship. Even if I did not discover the deceit, the personal injury claim process would eventually, in almost all cases, reveal it. An insurance carrier’s thorough investigation, or the harsh light of a deposition, usually brings the lie into focus.

In my experience, most personal injury fakers are also stupid. And dishonesty mixed with stupidity can easily backfire.”

My sentiments exactly. Thanks, Michael, for the great post!

Jim
______________________________________
James B. Reed, Esq.
NY & PA Personal Injury Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
William St., Elmira, NY 14902
Tel. (607) 733-8866 Fax. (607) 732-6062
Toll Free 1-800-943-3529
mailto:jreed@zifflaw.com http://www.zifflaw.com
E-mail me at FreeReports@zifflaw.com for two free books:
NY Car Accidents and NY Car Insurance Secrets YOU Need to Know.

New York Accident Lawyer Explains Why Pursuing a Big Judgment May NOT Be a Good Idea

Posted on April 15, 2010 by Jim Reed

You would think if you are badly hurt in a car accident, it would make sense for you to pursue a BIG judgment against the driver who hit you, right? Not necessarily…

A recent dialogue with a client got me thinking about how backwards it may seem to folks when I tell them that I cannot recommend taking their case to trial because they may be better off taking the insurance money – even if that insurance money clearly is not sufficient to fully compensate them for their injuries.

Heck, if the insurance money isn’t enough, why wouldn’t you want to get a judgment against the bad guy and then collect the money directly from the bad guy?

The short answer is that sometimes judgments aren’t worth the paper they are written on. You have heard the expression “You can’t get blood from a stone?” Likewise, you can’t collect on a judgment unless the person against whom you have the judgment has some money or other assets subject to collection. The plain hard truth is that most often when a person does not have good insurance coverage, they also don’t have any real $ to collect against.

First, collection may be difficult/impossible because of the lack of assets. You may think, why not get a judgment anyways? What if the person who didn’t have the assets to settle a judgment suddenly hit the lottery or came in to a lot of money? Well, first we would have to know about his windfall – and he’s not going to make that easy. Then he’d have to be dumb enough to put it in a bank where we could reach the money – THEN we might be able to collect on the judgment.

However, collecting on a judgment is very tough and there are plenty of ways for a debtor to hide or shelter money from collection. In fact, I have a judgment for $400,000 I obtained 8 years ago and I have spent close to $30,000 on collection lawyers and we have yet to receive a single penny. For all of these reasons, pursuing a judgment doesn’t turn out to be the solution one would think…

Second – and this is related to the first point – we don’t get a penny of the money from the car insurance carrier unless we sign a Release releasing the driver from any personal liability. In other words, we are over a barrel – if we want the insurance $, we have to let the driver go. I know the insurance payment is only $25,000, but $25,000 is better than a possible zero.

Now, don’t get me wrong – the insurance will pay $25,000 toward the judgment, but that is all they would be required to pay. So that leads us to the third point…

Third, it costs money to pursue a judgment because to do so we have to go to trial and the average cost of a trial like this would be approximately $8,000-$10,000. This is just for costs (i.e. doctor’s testimony, court costs, transcription fees, etc.) and doesn’t include a penny of my fee. I hate the idea of eating up that much in costs when the maximum insurance coverage is only $25,000.

For all these reasons, I think pursuing a judgment is not always a good idea. Ultimately, however, it is the client’s decision and I will pursue whatever course he prefers. I just help him make an informed decision.

I hope this clarifies this issue for my blog readers. Please, if you have questions about this topic, don’t hesitate to call or e-mail me for more information.

Thanks,

Jim
_________________________________

James B. Reed
NY & PA Injury & Malpractice Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
Mailto: jreed@zifflaw.com
Office: (607)733-8866
Toll-Free: 800-ZIFFLAW (943-3529)
Web: www.zifflaw.com
Blogs: NYInjuryLawBlog.com and
NYBikeAccidentBlog.com

Record Upstate NY Settlement in Albany Medical Malpractice Case

Posted on April 9, 2010 by Jim Reed

Albany Medical Center Hospital

I wanted to offer my congratulations to attorney John Powers for a record settlement in a tragic medical malpractice case. John is an excellent Albany attorney with whom I have had the pleasure of working on several cases.

The Albany Times-Union carried the story, “$5.2 M benefit can’t heal loss.” John handled the case for the family of Diane Rizk McCabe. Diane died in 2007, at age 32. The Caesarean delivery of her second child was not handled correctly. Diane slowly bled to death over 15 hours. Albany Medical Center Hospital will pay the cash settlement for malpractice and mandated changes in procedure.

The McCabe family took a settlement, but John was able to bring this case to an unusual conclusion. The monetary settlement is substantial, but what this family truly wanted two things: To make Diane a remembered presence to her two children and to force the hospital to make changes that would prevent this kind of loss from happening to any other families.

John represented Joseph McCabe, Diane’s widowed husband and a Schenectady police officer. In the Times-Union story, John says he was ready to take the case to trial in August.

“It was never about the money with the family,” John was quoted as saying. “It came down to the non-monetary aspects involved with the settlement. They wanted to do something to make certain this doesn’t happen to someone else and to create a memorial to Diane for the children as they grow up that they’ll know that their mother is being remembered in this way.”

If the McCabe family had pursued the trail, they couldn’t have won those very important non-monetary stipulations. The Albany Medical Center Hospital must fund for the next 20 years a Diane McCabe Memorial Quality Lecture series focusing on topics related to enhancing patient safety.

The hospital must also buy a maternal and neonatal simulator for staff training and to change monitoring procedures for women during childbirth.

I just want to congratulate John for being able to bring such a tragic case to a resolution that really means something to the McCabe family. He’s also a past president of the New York State Academy of Trial Lawyers. The organization sent an e-mail to members with an announcement of this extraordinary settlement.

Thanks for reading,
Jim
_________________________________________
James B. Reed, Esq.
Personal Injury & Malpractice Attorney
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William St., Elmira, NY 14902
Tel. (607) 733-8866 Fax. (607) 732-6062
Toll Free 1-800-943-3529
mailto:jreed@zifflaw.com http://www.zifflaw.com

E-mail me at FreeReports@zifflaw.com for two free books:
NY Car Accidents and NY Car Insurance Secrets YOU Need to Know.

NY Malpractice Lawyer Explains Difficulty of Determining the Time Limits to Bring a Claim

Posted on February 25, 2010 by Jim Reed

I recently had an e-mail from a concerned personal injury victim about his case. The writer is not a client of mine, but he was hoping I could give him some advice about the statute of limitations on legal malpractice claims.

I told him that the time limit to bring a legal malpractice claim in NY is “generally” 3 years from the date of the alleged malpractice by the attorney (ie the first date you feel the lawyer screwed up).

The reason I qualified this statement by saying “generally” is that there are a few, very limited exceptions to this 3 year time limit requirement (more on this below).

In this man’s situation, his case may be dismissed – and that could have been caused by legal malpractice by his own attorney. Through no fault of his own, this victim is looking at his case being dismissed before he even really gets started because the time limit to bring a NY legal malpractice case (3 years) has already expired.

The sad part is that he might not have any recourse because he was so caught up in his medical situation that he didn’t even know the applicable time limit for bringing a lawsuit against his lawyer. Now he has discovered that he may have to hurry up and file a legal malpractice case – if he can – before the 3-year window to bring a legal malpractice case closes.

He wanted to know if this was all the time his case had left – and if there were anything else he could do.

Statute of limitations in legal malpractice cases can be very tricky to determine and often are very fact-dependent.

My usual rule of thumb is to use 3 years from the date of the alleged malpractice. Any date other than that can become very risky because you are relying on exceptions to the general rule.

With that said, there is an exception generally referred to as the “continuous treatment doctrine” that is occasionally applied in medical malpractice cases. It says the clock doesn’t start to tick on the time limit to file a malpractice claim until the last date the defendant doctor continued to provide active treatment to the patient.

The corollary to this exception in the legal malpractice world is the “continuous representation doctrine” and it would suggest that the clock doesn’t start to tick on the attorney’s malpractice until the last date the attorney represented you on the particular matter that you allege he screwed up.

As I said before, these are general exceptions and the courts can be very strict in applying these exceptions to the facts of any particular case. Accordingly, competent malpractice lawyers prefer not to ever rely on these exceptions and try to bring the action within 3 years of the date of the alleged malpractice. I refer to this as the KISS principle: Keep It Simple, Stupid!

Because determining the proper time limit is so important (and fatal to your case if you do it incorrectly!), I urge anyone with a this issue to consult with an experienced malpractice lawyer ASAP!

I hope this helps.

E-mail me at FreeReports@zifflaw.com for two free books:
NY Car Accidents and NY Car Insurance Secrets YOU Need to Know.

When The Going Gets Tough Does Your NY Motorcycle Lawyer Roll Up His Sleeves Or Run For The Hills?

Posted on February 8, 2010 by Adam Gee

I had the pleasure of handing over a sizable settlement check to the victim of a Pennsylvania Motorcycle Collision the other day. It’s a pretty common occurrence, but the circumstances of this particular case made it particularly satisfying. My hope is that by sharing the information on this blog, I can keep a future motorcycle client from making the same mistake.

This client didn’t come to us when he was first hurt. He made the mistake of calling one of those firms who advertise on TV about every 15 seconds. So they sent an “investigator” to him to have him sign a retainer agreement, and made him travel to their BIG CITY office several hours away to meet with some paralegal. Everything seemed to be going fine until the time came to discuss settlement with the insurance company. It turned out that who was at fault for the collision was a little bit of an open question, so the insurance company decided they wouldn’t pay a penny and basically dared the attorney to sue them.

This is where things get really interesting. You see, the client had a really significant injury. If this “BIG CITY” lawyer with the multi-million dollar advertising budget could convince the insurance company that their driver was at fault, the insurance company would surely offer up the entire policy due to the nature of the biker’s injury. For whatever reason, this “BIG CITY” attorney couldn’t convince the insurance adjuster to do this. That kind of thing happens. Insurance companies don’t stay in business long if they hand over money every time an attorney comes knocking with an arguable claim. If the insurance company refuses to pay anything willingly, the next step is clear: you sue them and start heading for trial. It doesn’t mean there will necessarily be a trial, as after the discovery part of the law suit is concluded there will be another round of negotiations where the case may settle, but you have to keep the case moving.

What happened next astounded me. This “BIG CITY” lawyer with the tough guy commercials tucked his tail and ran for the hills. He told the client he would no longer represent him. Now that the case might actually take a little work, this “BIG CITY” lawyer wanted nothing to do with it.

So the client came to me. I couldn’t figure out why the “BIG CITY” lawyer dropped the case, as it seemed like a good case to me. I sued the case and proceeded with the litigation. I was eventually able to convince the insurance company that their driver was at fault for the accident, and they agreed to pay my client the fully policy limits.

There are a couple lessons to be learned from this case. First, spending millions of dollars a year on tough sounding TV commercials doesn’t make a lawyer tough. Second, you don’t have to drive to a big city to get quality representation.

If you need a personal injury attorney, ask your family, friends and neighbors who they may have used. Do some research, and make an informed decision. As the above situation reveals, which attorney you choose can make a huge difference in how your case comes out. Ask any attorney you meet with if they are willing to take your case to trial if necessary, and how many similar cases they have tried. Insist that you actually meet with the attorney that will be handling your case and not some “investigator”. After all, do you really want to hire an attorney who is “too busy” to meet with you himself? If you are too far away for the attorney to drive to meet you, aren’t you too far away to drive to meet the attorney?

Everything for this client ended up working out for the best. I just worry about that firm’s other clients. Heaven help them if the going get tough in their case.

Thanks for reading,

_______________________________
Adam M. Gee, Esq.
NY and PA Personal Injury and Malpractice Attorney
The Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William Street
Elmira, NY 14901
Phone: (607)733-8866
Fax: (607)732-6062
Email: agee@zifflaw.com
www.zifflaw.com

“Hot Coffee” Movie Will Reveal the Reality Behind Famous McDonald’s Case

Posted on November 24, 2009 by Jim Reed

At long, long, last. A new documentary may reveal the TRUTH about a tragic case. One personal injury case in the early ’90s has been held up as the epitome of a “frivolous” lawsuit. In 1992, 79-year-old Stella Liebeck was severely burned by spilling a cup of McDonald’s coffee onto her lap.

After a long struggle with the McDonald’s legal forces, Stella was awarded $2.9 million in damages by a New Mexico jury. The story became a national lightning rod for controversy over personal responsibility and bogus litigation. Poor injured Stella was lampooned for stupidity, clumsiness and greed. The term “Stella Award” was even coined to refer to any lawsuit or victim award viewed as preposterous.

New documentary presents radically different view of coffee case

“Hot Coffee,” slated to be released in 2011 according to IMDB.com, returns to the principals in the case to find out the REAL details. In many of the most important, basic details, Stella’s hot coffee case was very different from what was reported in the media.

One thing that is mentioned in the trailer (check it out above) that is not usually emphasized is the fact that the courts drastically reduced the jury’s verdict. Despite that reduction, the tort reformers NEVER mention that fact and ALWAYS refer to this as the multi-million dollar McDonald’s case! Very dishonest.

Also in the brief trailer you can see participants reflecting on the case and the amount of disinformation that was spread. The reason, suggested by some experts: McDonald’s objective to embarrass Stella Liebeck, ridicule her legitimate claim and foster a public climate in which injured claimants were reluctant to press for justice.

Thanks to the filmmakers for all their hard work on this important story. Hopefully it will change the reigning public opinion about Stella Liebeck’s intentions and claims.

Thanks for reading,

Jim
________________________________________
James B. Reed, Esq.
Personal Injury & Malpractice Attorney
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William St., Elmira, NY 14902
Tel. (607) 733-8866 Fax. (607) 732-6062
Toll Free 1-800-943-3529
mailto:jreed@zifflaw.com http://www.zifflaw.com

Experienced Personal Injury Lawyers Make Costs Clear to Clients

Posted on March 18, 2009 by Jim Reed

Getting the axe Can a client get “fired” by his lawyer? Aren’t lawyers always looking for new clients – and wouldn’t they want to keep clients they were already working for – not give them the axe?

The short answer is YES, attorneys want and need clients. The long answer is that it is a two-way street. Clients can commit actions or have habits that make it difficult for an attorney to continue to work with them. These traits include lying to your lawyer, ignoring your lawyer’s advice, and being generally discourteous.

I recently came across a great post for clients, “The Top 10 Ways to Get Fired by Your Lawyer,” at BlawgIT.com

In the blog post, patent lawyer Brett Trout explains the 10 most common client actions he believes will cause an attorney to call it quits on a case. I wanted to focus on two of Trout’s tips and use them to illustrate how I work with my personal injury and medical malpractice clients at the Ziff Law Firm.

Communication is key – right from the start

Two issues that can cause friction between client and attorney are when the client fails to pay promptly and/or nitpicks the bill.

As Trout explains: “Failing to pay your bill within 30 days of the invoice is no guarantee your lawyer will fire you, but it certainly does not help. If you have a concern about the bill, contact your lawyer immediately to discuss it.” As for nitpicking, Trout explains that he is not referring to genuine fee disputes, but cases in which a client consistently has issues with his or her lawyer’s bills.

Most of my clients do not pay by the hour. I work on a contingency fee, receiving one-third of the amount recovered after expenses are deducted off the top. Because of this arrangement, I don’t have issues with people paying me late or nitpicking my bills. (To see how clients with representation still come out ahead financially, check out the ZiffLaw Accidents and Car Crashes FAQ.)

I also believe, however, that one of the reasons that I have never had a fee dispute with a client in more than 22 years of practice is because I spend time going through the details of my retainer agreement right at the very beginning of our representation.

Any good lawyer is willing to spend the time to make sure that a client understands exactly how fees and disbursements are calculated and paid. It’s one of the ways we make sure we don’t get “fired” by our clients – but rather work together to achieve the resolution they are looking for.

Thanks,

Jim

______________________________

James B. Reed, Esq.
Personal Injury & Malpractice Attorney
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William St., Elmira, NY 14901
Tel: (607) 733-8866
Fax: (607) 732-6062
Toll Free: 1-800-943-3529
Email: jreed@zifflaw.com
Web: http://www.zifflaw.com

Please visit the New York Injury Law Blog at: http://www.NYInjuryLawBlog.com

Email me at FreeReports@zifflaw.com for two free books:
NY Car Accidents and NY Car Insurance Secrets YOU Need to Know.

Eight Powerful Reasons to Hire a Local Attorney (zifflaw.com)
Get Paid Fast! Accident Victims’ Right to Prompt Payment of Insurance Claims (zifflaw.com)

Legal Malpractice: When Lawyers Sue Lawyers

Posted on February 18, 2009 by Jim Reed

j0305893 Suppose, for a moment, that you hire a lawyer to represent you in a personal injury case. You received multiple fractures when a tractor trailer came across the center line into your lane of travel. The lawyer tells you he is confident he can generate a large settlement, but that it may take some time because the truck driver claims you came into his lane of travel. He intends to hire an accident reconstructionist to prove that your version is the correct one.

And so you wait. And wait. And wait. Your calls are returned, but nothing seems to be going on. You are frustrated, but confident your lawyer knows what he is doing. You trust that it all will end well. But it doesn’t. Three years pass and one day your lawyer calls to inform you that he is mortified, but he failed to put your case in suit within three years and now your claim is barred by the Statute of Limitations. You may no longer sue the trucking company or its driver. You have lost your claim.

Outrageous? To be sure, but unfortunately it happens more than members of the profession wish to admit. And, indeed, you have lost your claim against the trucking company and its driver. But you are not without a remedy, because the reason your claim is barred is a direct consequence of the negligence of your lawyer. You now possess what is called a Legal Malpractice claim.

Legal Malpractice claims are different than other negligence cases because they are really two cases rather than one. To prevail, you must prove that your lawyer deviated from good and accepted legal practice. On our facts, that proof is not difficult. Your lawyer let the three year statute of limitation run without suing your case. That part of your Legal Malpractice case is a slam dunk.

But the lawyer handling your Legal Malpractice claim must prove more than the prior lawyer’s negligence. He or she must also prove the original case. There are two cases, then, that your new lawyer must prove: one against your former lawyer and one against the trucking company and its driver. And on the facts I have offered, the second part of your case may be problematic because there will likely need to be a trial to determine whose account of how the accident occurred is truthful.

The trucking company, if there is any basis for believing the version claimed by its driver, will likely hire its own accident reconstructionist to come testify that the physical evidence (photographs, debris, vehicle damage, etc.) point to the impact as having occurred in the trucker’s lane of travel. They will seek to discredit your version of how the accident occurred. What will be different, however, is that the defense lawyer will be a person hired by your first lawyer’s malpractice insurer, not by the insurance company for the trucking company.

This case can still settle. Most do, particularly if the physical evidence does not strongly support the trucker’s version. But in the hypothetical case I have created, it is likely that the physical evidence was at least equivocal if not supportive of the trucker. That would help to explain why three years passed without the trucking company’s insurance carrier having made a significant settlement offer.

Legal Malpractice litigation is more complex than garden variety negligence litigation. Not many lawyers have experience prosecuting these cases. The Ziff Law Firm has been handling Legal Malpractice claims and obtaining good results for years. We would be happy to have a look, without charge, at yours.

Thank you for reading,
Carl
_________________________________________
Carl T. Hayden, Attorney
Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William St., Elmira, NY 14902
Phone (607) 733-8866
Fax (607) 732-6062
Toll-free 1-800-943-3529

mailto:chayden@zifflaw.com
www.zifflaw.com

District of Columbia, et. al. v. Heller: One for the Ages

Posted on June 27, 2008 by Christina Sonsire

Calling all Constitutional Law Junkies: June 26, 2008 was a monumental day.

It is not often (yet more frequent these days than is perhaps appropriate) that the U.S. Supreme Court authors a decision in which it offers — in nearly 150 pages of disparate, arguably subjective detail — overtly telepathic insight into the minds and hearts of the framers cast under a thin, unimpressive veil of stare decisis. A day to celebrate? Perhaps, as it was for the N.R.A. supporters and the libertarian crowd who view the District of Columbia, et. al. v. Heller through a narrow pragmatic lense as a promotion of individual liberties (and security that they can keep their guns.) A day for outrage? Apparently for a “frightened” Mayor Daley, as he trumpeted the call to fight for the right to ban guns in his hometown and plans were made to challenge similar laws in megapolises across the country.

I felt something in between. I feel scholastic excitement, to be sure. Heller , like Bush v. Gore, will certainly endure as a landmark case in Constitutional Law 101 for centuries to come. The majority opinion, authored by Justice Antonin Scalia and joined by Justices Roberts, Thomas, Alito and Kennedy, is bursting with interesting (if somewhat trivial given Scalia’s general predisposition against extra-four corners constitutional analysis) historical references — James Madison’s inclusion of a conscientious-objector clause in his original draft of the Second Amendment; E. de Vattel’s 1792 “The Law of Nations, or, Principals of the Law of Nature”; England’s 1671 “Game Act”; and, of course, the mighty and ever-persuasive Federalist Papers. (As a reverent admirer of the Papers, Continue reading →

How long your case may take depends on a wide range of factors.

It depends on…

Statute of limitations in legal malpractice cases can be very tricky to determine and often are very fact-dependent.

New documentary presents radically different view of coffee case

Communication is key – right from the start

Related articles by Zemanta