Who Is An Expert?

Some weeks ago a man had a consultation with me concerning his issue which involved dealings with a federal government agency which investigates discrimination in housing. However, the person decided he wanted to have another consultation with someone who was an "expert" on his issue, and he had been provided that person's number by a friend.

This experience got me thinking about what constitutes "expert" status. The media (print, television, radio, the Internet and various social media like Linked In) provide us with self-serving testimony by persons who want us to do business with them, and state they are experts in certain fields. If one is a bus passenger or finds oneself alongside or behind a bus, one can view large photos of lawyers who proclaim that they are experts in certain fields of law. If one listens to the major local radio news station, one can hear about doctors who work at medical facilities who are experts in joint replacement surgery. If one views television station news and morning broadcasts one will see many self-proclaimed experts in all sorts of fields like beauty, fashion, food, gardening, decorating, politics, etc. Some of these self-proclaimed experts appear to be barely out of college.

So, I have come to the opinion that anyone can declare him/herself an "expert" these days, as there really isn't a guideline or a requirement for that designation. Some of my recent experiences with legal experts are as follows:

• A fellow lawyer who practices worker's compensation law, and is a sole practitioner, told me that he inherited a case from another law firm, one of the largest in the area, who had settled part of the case for the client, and forgot to include language which ultimately cost the client over $30,000 in benefits. Yet the larger firm is considered to have "expert" status.
• Some lawyers I know have been called as guest commentators on television news shows because they have declared themselves experts on real estate or other areas of the law, when their practical experience regarding these areas is quite minimal.
• Some of the most prominent personal injury firms in the area readily declare themselves experts because they have tried and won or settled 1 or 2 cases on a particular issue.
• A lawyer who knew nothing about a certain area of the law, and I know this because he called me to pick my brain about the matter, accepted a high profile case and got his name and his client's name splashed all over the media. The end result did not turn out well for the client.

It is highly unlikely in the legal field that lawyers will sue the same defendant over the same fact circumstances, unless it is a highly specialized area of the law. Although lawyers may encounter some similarities in their cases, there are many variables which enter into each case. So, take the designation of someone who is a self-proclaimed expert with a grain of salt, because these days self-promotion is the rule. Also, bear in mind that an expert may not have experience in other areas of the law which may impact on the particular fact situation.

Faye Riva Cohen, Esquire
Law Office of Faye Riva Cohen, P.C.
2047 Locust Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103
P: 215-563-7776
F: 215-563-9996
E: frc@fayerivacohen.com
U: http://www.fayerivacohen.com/

View the original article here

The Truck Accident Attorney and Mistakes to Avoid

A case against a negligent driver doesn't start when you walk into the office of a truck accident attorney. It starts the moment the crash happens and everything from that moment forward may very well be imperative to your chances of success in court. If the crash was severe, you probably have very little memory of the immediate minutes following the incident. You were likely more concerned about getting medical attention than building a lawsuit. But, this is something you should begin thinking about before you hire a lawyer. If you make enough mistakes, there may not be much of a case to build.

Agree to Nothing

It's very common for the opposing insurance company to try and get you to agree to provide a statement of some kind to the adjuster. They will phrase this in terms of, "The quicker we get this done, the faster you can get paid," which sounds good to someone who is wondering where the money for bills is going to come from. This is taking a short-term reward for a long-term loss, however. It may very well be that the money they are offering you is as much as you're ever going to get. You won't know that until you have a nice long chat with a truck accident attorney, though. Until then, mum's the word.

Admitting Fault

This is a scenario that any truck accident attorney who has been around for more than a year has seen multiple times. A client comes in and lays out his case. It's a good one, but the other party was not the only participant at fault in the crash. This doesn't really matter as much as the client thinks it does, of course. Car crashes often share blame. The question is who is mostly at fault in the scenario. The lawyer won't be concerned with some shared fault, but they will be concerned if the client has already admitted some degree of fault to the police or insurance company. This could easily be a case-sinker, especially if the client took on more blame than was really his to take.

Waiting Too Long

You don't have the rest of your life to decide whether or not you want to file suit. Every state has statute of limitation laws that apply to cases like this. In your state, that may be five years or it may be six months. The point is that you shouldn't wait around too long if you think you might want to file a lawsuit. Contact a truck accident attorney as soon as possible and discuss your options.

View the original article here

Reforms Can Still Preserve Social Security

With a dose of determination and innovation, we can reform Social Security.

The recent Post and Courier editorial "Social Security insecurity" makes some important points-that Congress must reform Social Security (SS) soon to ensure its long-term solvency, and yet the current Congress is so polarized it is unlikely to make the compromises necessary to achieve such reform.

But the dire description of the solvency problem-that the retirement fund will be empty by 2037 and the disability fund kaput by 2017-may suggest to some that the system is beyond repair. It's right to raise the alarm for urgent action by Congress, but we should be careful not to suggest that we are incapable of solving the problem.

Many are under the impression that if the SS trust funds were exhausted all benefits would suddenly stop, but this is a misconception. SS is a pay-as-you-go system whereby today's benefits are paid with today's SS taxes.

For many years, Social Security built up a large trust fund by taking in more in taxes than it paid out in benefits in order to have enough to pay for the baby boomers to retire. As a result, the SS taxes collected today are no longer enough to pay all of the benefits, requiring SS to draw on the retirement trust fund.

If Congress did nothing to reform the system, SS taxes would still be enough to pay 77 percent of scheduled benefits in 2037 when the trust fund is expected to be exhausted.

If Congress decided to fund the SS deficit through tax increases on current workers and employers with no reduction of benefits, it would have to increase the SS tax by 2.22 percent under the current contribution formula. For the average worker who in 2011 earned $43,518, that would mean an annual tax increase of $483 for the wage earner and the same amount for the employer.

This is not to say that hitting American workers and their employers with a 2.22 percent tax increase is OK-because it's not.

The point is that bringing SS back into long-term actuarial balance is not an impossible task, particularly if action is taken soon and if both tax increases and benefit cuts are part of the equation. Even if tax increases are required, there are numerous options for increasing revenue without imposing higher payroll taxes on middle class and low income workers who are already struggling to make ends meet.

The biggest obstacle to achieving long-term solvency of the SS system may be our inability to look beyond tax-rate increases or benefit cuts as the only possible solutions. We should recognize that the recovery of both our economy and the wages of the middle class could drastically change the calculus of SS reform.

Social Security is funded by taxes on wages earned by ordinary American workers -- not on stock dividends and capital gains, which are the primary sources of income for our wealthiest citizens. Our highest wage earners pay no SS taxes on earnings over $110,100.

As currently designed, the burden of SS taxes falls squarely on the shoulders of the middle class whose real wages have declined over recent decades and who are now suffering from high unemployment.

If our economy recovers, the unemployed return to work, and middle class wages begin to rise as they did after World War II, Social Security could generate enough revenue to significantly reduce the projected deficits.

Growing our economy and restoring the prosperity of the middle class may have a bigger impact on SS solvency than enacting benefit cuts and tax rate increases-neither of which Americans want or should endure unless absolutely necessary.

We should continue to sound the alarm for Social Security reform. But we should also make it clear that reform is neither an impossible nor an improbable task.

Rather than give in to resignation, we instead should rely on those quintessential American traits-determination and innovation-to meet the challenges ahead.

Robertson Wendt from The Law Offices of Robertson Wendt. Visit us today at http://robertsonwendt.com/.

View the original article here

Understanding Your Post Conviction Appeal

In many situations, there is hope through a post conviction appeal. For many men and women, going through a trial is a long and tiring process. If the outcome is not a good one, many people just give up believing they have no other option for improving their lives and getting their voice heard. Yet, this is not necessarily the case. Many individuals to win appeals and when they do, they can get better results. The key to success is finding a professional you can trust to work with you through this process.

What Is It?

A post conviction appeal most often takes place after a person's case has gone through the criminal trial process. If the individual is found guilty in the case, that individual has the right to file a motion with the higher court. This process provides an opportunity for individuals to get their case in front of a judge and potentially a new trial court depending on the outcome of the process. However, it is not just up to a judge to determine you are not guilty.

It's Not About Guilt

The appellate court, which hears these requests, will make a decision about whether a new trial is warranted based on if there were errors in the previous trial. In other words, this is not based on whether or not the judge thought you were innocent or not. Rather, it is about showing that your attorney, the other attorney, the judge, or someone else in the case made significant mistakes during the case that affected the outcome of your trial. It may be possible to get a retrial if mistakes were made.

How It Works

If you believe that your case deserves such a hearing, you should work with an attorney to get your case in front of the appellate court. This may be done on numerous grounds. If an error is made, that could be one option. If there is new evidence in the case, this can also trigger an opportunity for a new trial. The process begins once you file a notice of appeal and a brief that outlines the reasoning behind it. Then, a hearing is set and your attorney and the prosecution make arguments in front of a judge.

In many cases, this does lead to a new trial. That will happen if the appellate court finds there is reason to overturn the case and remand it to a lower court for a new trial. This does not always happen. To ensure you get a post conviction appeal, work with an attorney who has extensive experience in this area of the law. Doing so could help you to prove your case.

Confidence in your post conviction appeal albuquerque can be a difficult task. Finding out your options is easy after visiting http://www.justappeals.net/.

View the original article here

Bankruptcy And The Frozen Bank Account: Keep Your Money On Deposit Safe

When deposit account holders write a check or make a withdrawal, they may believe that they are accessing their own money, but that is not precisely true, for important reasons. What is actually happening is that the account holder is making demand upon the bank to pay over sums up to the amount on deposit. Viewed in this light, the bank balance really represents a debt owed by the bank to the account holder. Banks hold plenty of cash, but if every deposit holder were to withdraw all their funds at the same time the banks may not have enough to satisfy all these demands. Recognizing that banks can't maintain such 100% liquidity, the law has developed this debtor/creditor approach to deposit accounts.

This approach becomes vitally important when viewed under the doctrine of setoff (also called offset). Setoff happens when two people or entities owe each other debts. Instead of requiring one side to pay the other and then collect the money back, either of the debtor/creditors can simply say "you don't have to pay me all you owe; I'm setting off what I owe against your debt to me." The other party usually can't protest when the right of setoff is being exercised if the right is built into the transaction or under the law.

The classic setoff relationship is when a depositor owes money to their bank, under a mortgage, credit card or line of credit. When that happens, if the depositor is in default under the debt, under the right of setoff the bank can seize any money in the bank account and apply the funds taken to reduce the debt. This right of setoff will usually happen without any warning or notice to the account holder.

It doesn't take much imagination to see that when the bank exercises its setoff rights the result is usually great inconvenience or hardship to the account holder. If there's a default the depositor is usually insolvent or facing other financial distress. Losing access to cash on deposit may mean that other bills or necessary expenses can't be paid. Even though these results may seem severe, the bank is completely within its rights to exercise this setoff. This is why clients seeking financial advice must be mindful to inform their advisors that they are holding money in banks who are their creditors. It is also why banks will exercise their setoff rights promptly if they believe their customers may be getting ready to prefer other creditors with the cash on deposit.

Debtors cannot seek protection from their banks by filing for bankruptcy. The Bankruptcy Code specifically preserves setoff rights and the US Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that applying an administrative freeze to prepare for setoff does not violate the automatic stay in bankruptcy. As a result, immediately upon learning of the bankruptcy filing by an account holder, a bank may administratively freeze a bank account. Under the debtor/creditor approach to bank accounts, this means that the bank will refuse to honor an account holder's demand for payment of a check or withdrawal of funds. This refusal to pay on a debt is not by itself considered a setoff. That won't happen until the bank files a motion for relief from the automatic stay and the bankruptcy court grants that motion. Once that happens, the bank will make a book entry by (1) reducing the amount considered on deposit and (2) applying that amount to reduce the debt owed to the bank. At that time, the funds are forever removed from the reach of the account holder.

Insolvent debtors need to understand the perils of leaving money on deposit with their creditor banks. They should expect that a bank can and will exercise their setoff rights and deprive them access to their cash, usually at a time they can least afford it.

On the other hand, banks and credit unions should anticipate that their debtor customers will seek legal advice that will result in depletion of their bank accounts to defeat their setoff rights. The best way to protect these rights is to closely monitor customers' payment patterns to better understand whether a pattern of late payments is developing. If so, an early exercise of setoff rights may preserve a collection opportunity that may soon be lost forever.

Ronald J. Drescher is an attorney practicing bankruptcy and creditor's rights in Maryland, Delaware, Virginia, Pennsylvania and California.

Please visit our website:

http://www.drescherlaw.com/

View the original article here

The Foreclosure Law Help You Need

Foreclosure law is complex, to say the least. All you know is that you do not want to lose your home. You have put a lot of money and heart into this place and you want to keep it. Is it possible? What can be done? Those who are facing the potential of losing their property may find that there is legal help available to them that they did not know about. There are options in many cases. Consider what may be possible.

Legally Stop the Process

One reason to turn to an attorney when it comes to foreclosure law is because the attorneys can help you to find loopholes and limits that can allow you to stop the process altogether. If the lender did not take the right steps or there was a missing notification sent to you, then it may be possible to simply stop the process. Let the attorneys help you to find a way to stop this proceeding, but to do so you need to give them time.

Consider Modifications and Amendments

What do you need to get caught up on your loan payments? If you have no way to make payments, it is unlikely you can save your home. If you do, but you need help being caught up, allow an attorney to help you to get the loan modification or amendments you need. Sometimes, lenders will agree to add the missed payments to the end of the loan, lengthening it but helping you to get caught up.

Selling It

Sometimes, the best thing you can do to protect your credit is to sell your home. If you can sell it fast enough at a price that is worthwhile, you may even be able to use those funds to purchase a new home. You may also be able to refinance your loan with a new lender if you can afford to pay the closing costs. If this does not work, a short sale may be an option. Here, the lender agrees to accept less than what is owed on the home to sell it to buyers. The process may be long, but it can help you to get out from under the debt.

Want to Get Your Home Back?

In some states and in some cases, it is possible to use the laws of that area to get your home back even after foreclosing actions are taken. Work with a legal team that specializes in foreclosure law to find out if you can get your home back.

If you're looking for a Stuart FL foreclosure law specialist to help you keep your home, consider the skilled and experienced attorneys at http://www.treasurecoastforeclosurelawyers.com/.

View the original article here

How to Prevent Foreclosures

No homeowners enjoy being threatened with foreclosures. When some people think of this subject, they begin to get disheartened and discouraged. This is especially true for those who are in the process of having their home taken away from them. Because of the unfortunate nature of these situations, some people shy away from buying homes altogether. They would rather rent a home or an apartment instead. Although there is nothing wrong with renting space, people shouldn't allow their fears of having their property taken away force them to rent if they really don't want to. All they have to do is face their fears and do everything in their power to prevent this type of thing from happening.

The first thing someone could do to avoid foreclosures is to make sure they choose a home that is safely within their price range. Many times people become overly excited about the prospect of owning a new home. Therefore, they try to find something that fits every single one of their desires. Unfortunately, for some people the "perfect" home ends up being at the top of their budget.

For instance, imagine a couple approved for a $250,000 home loan. After finding out about their loan approval, they go out and search for a home that is basically the same price of the loan that they have been approved for. This isn't a wise decision. They haven't given themselves any financial breathing room. What happens if one of them ends up losing their job? What happens when another unexpected expense arises? The best bet would have been to purchase a home that cost $200,000 or even $175,000. Depending on the area they are looking in, they can find a great home within these price ranges.

Another way to prevent foreclosures is for homeowners to be financially stable before purchasing a home. Being financially stable doesn't necessarily have anything to do with how much money they pull in every month. It has more to do with how much money they have stashed away in places like savings accounts. Having just $10,000 put away could be a great help. This would come in handy if they were to ever run into financial woes that caused them to be short on their home payments.

There's more to purchasing a home than being approved for a loan and going out on a thorough search. Making wise and responsible decisions before the home is purchased will go a long way in preventing foreclosures.

View the original article here