legal advice

The trial lawyer’s job is to know the Law and artfully apply it as it pertains to the case at hand. The lawyer's concern is the development of a cogent theory and the use of affective themes to sway the jury to their point of view. Both theory and themes are based, in part, on information learned from their client and depends on the client’s clear, precise and persuasive testimony. “Just be yourself,” the attorney often suggests. “Just tell the truth.” “Just relax.” With such simple and clear advice, why then are otherwise intelligent men and women (including professionals with expert witness experience) racked by fear at the thought of testifying on their own behalf? Why does a normally compassionate person appear flat and uncaring on the stand? Or a person known for her precision and attention to detail become forgetful and confused? Perhaps the command “Be Yourself,” requires more – more knowledge, more understanding and more depth of purpose.
In truth, most attorneys don’t stop with the simple “Be Yourself,” or “Just relax and tell the truth” commands. Most add a seemingly helpful list of “Make sure to appear strong and confident but don’t be arrogant.” “Just answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’ during cross examination and don’t argue about a point.” “I can’t help you out on direct so make sure you explain everything.” “Talk to the jury, I want them to get to know you.” After a preparation session such as this - usually scheduled on the eve of trial – it is not surprising that a normally confident professional can be reduced to spinning a circular loop of self-limiting thoughts up to and including his time on the stand. Preparation of this kind, as well-meaning as it might be, does very little, if anything, to support the needs of the witness. Granted, the attorney has certain testimony requirements to support his theory and themes. The problem develops when a client is expected to slip into a predesigned slot and act as the control gear in an elaborately constructed system of wheels and pulleys.
Not all witnesses fall apart in the courtroom. Not all witnesses make blunders during deposition that pose additional problems at trial. But some witnesses have a case that is complex enough or their presence is commanding enough that the success or failure of the case largely depends on the jurors’ reactions to them. These are the cases for which a Courtroom Behaviorist plays a crucial role.
There is nothing ordinary, customary or natural about courtroom communication. Courtroom communication is different from most other communication in that the sender is not in direct communication with the receiver. During a jury trial there are many senders – the judge, the attorneys and the witnesses. The only receivers, however, are the members of the jury. The witness must understand the jurors and communicate in such a way that he will be understood. But the witness has no idea who will serve on his jury until after voir dire.
True, the specific jurors are unknown however; the general experience of jury service is known. The witness must understand the general experience that has gathered the jurors in service of his case. He must understand the mental and emotional shaping that takes place in preparation for service and how that affects their views and attitudes during service. Once a witness examines and understands the jurors’ experience, his own point of view and attitude adjusts. As the witness recognizes that all actions, attitudes, nuances and language must be shaped to pass through the jury filter – the only material receivers in the courtroom – his focus matures. As he applies that focus to each aspect of the trial he develops the ability to move from self-conscious, self-sabotaging behavior to other-conscious, self-supporting behavior. In other words – he learns how to “be himself.”
Speaking in public is the number-one fear of most human beings, for many surpassing the fear of snakes. Potential jurors are no exception. As the witness slips into the mindset of the juror – recognizing the subtle anxiety present for each juror as they responds to counsel’s inquiries – the witness can understand that outward signs of judgment from the witness (even when benignly dealt) can prejudice the juror against the witness. Innocent actions such as; taking notes, disregarding a jurors’ comments or whispering to her attorney while a juror is speaking, can all be construed as negative judgment by the anxious juror. Such a juror may be inclined to consider (consciously or not) turn-about as fair play.
Instead, the witness must prepare by asking himself a series of questions. How do I want to be perceived by the jurors? During deliberation, what words would I ideally like the jurors to use when describing me? In the same way that a traveler must first decide on a destination before he can map his journey, a witness must decide what aspects of her personality are most supportive of the attorneys’ theme and her own truth. What qualities do I possess that the jurors must experience in order to believe the attorney’s theory and my testimony? Once the witness has narrowed her list of critical qualities to three or four, she can use them to create an intention statement, a self-describing statement that calls her true self to the fore. Repeating her personal intention statement will keep her on track, reminding her subconscious mind of her true qualities and encouraging her subtle actions to more accurately represent the person she is, not the person opposing counsel describes.
What conclusion must the jurors come to in order to find on my behalf? As with all decisions there is a final element that creates cohesiveness and sways our convictions toward our ultimate decision. Define that final element. By understanding what the jurors must feel, see or in some way experience as the final step to their conclusions the witness identifies for himself a quality that will be supported by his intention statement.
What actions – actual and described – will lead the jurors toward my intended conclusion? The jury must see and experience the witness as the person he says he is. The jurors measure the words the witness uses, the attitude he carries and his described actions against what is said about him.
How can I define my personal involvement in three short statements? The jurors must understand the witness’s role. By reducing the complexities to three short interrelated statements the witness clarifies her thought process. She finds that all details fall neatly under one of the three and her feelings and reactions to each becomes more clearly defined. The witness will find numerous opportunities to insert these statements into her testimony.
In my opinion, what is the most important obstacle the jurors must traverse if they are to come to my intended conclusion? If the witness is a health care professional the jurors must feel safe with him. In order for the jurors to support him fully they must say to themselves, “I would feel safe in this person’s hands. I would place my wife, husband, child, mother in the care of this person.” The lay witness must pass through a filter of reasonableness. The jury measures the experience of the lay witness as if it were himself, “If I was met with this set of circumstances, how would I react?”
What is my personal viewpoint regarding this case? How do I see the events that have led to the current conflict? The witness may have an opinion that has not been expressed. Holding an unvoiced opinion may prove counter productive as it has a way of seeping into the witness’s testimony. Feelings of guilt affect the way a witness relates to the jury and may compromise her testimony. The witness must live his intention statement. Feelings of guilt or shame or fear or anger cannot coexist with the truth in the intention statement. The witness must do what needs to be done to resolve any conflicting feelings she may carry.
I’ve periodically worked with a client who did not like his attorney or an attorney who confided his dislike of the client. While lasting friendship may not be essential, teamwork is. The entire trial fits together as a collection of important pieces. The witness is a vitally important piece, controlled by how he thinks, what he says and how he relates to jurors. After months or years of developed fear or anger the witness deserves the support required to transform into an asset for the case. With help he can effectively become himself.
“I have been a Courtroom Behaviorist since 1979 when, through an act of other-worldly guidance, I began teaching attorneys (using my background in theatre and psychology) courtroom presentation skills. After seven years of teaching seminars and assisting in the development of cases from Colorado to Wisconsin to Texas to California, I extended my practice to trial preparation for key witnesses. Over the many years and thousands of clients since that time I’ve devised (and re-devised) ways to help witnesses effectively present themselves and communicate their testimony. Lawsuits are unpleasant, time devouring, self-esteem depleting processes. My goal is to streamline the process toward a confident, clear and concise presentation. - Glynn Bedington, Courtroom Behaviorist

Mesothelioma is a form of cancer of the mesothelial lining of the lungs and the chest cavity, the peritoneum (the abdominal cavity) or the pericardium (the sac surrounding the heart). This is believed to be caused by the generation of reactive oxygen species by the asbestos fibers. Findings also suggest that the simian virus 40 works together with the asbestos fibers to lead to the development of malignant mesothelioma.
It is usually the people who have worked on jobs where they have inhaled asbestos particles or those who have been exposed to asbestos dust and fiber in other ways who develop mesothelioma. Washing of clothes of some family member who has worked with asbestos or home renovation with asbestos cement product usage gives rise to.
Since 1929 when the first lawsuits against asbestos manufacturers had been filed, there have been filed many lawsuits against asbestos manufacturing concerns and negligent employers. The employers have been filed for neglecting to implement necessary safety measures since the links between asbestos, asbestosis and mesothelioma had become known and established at a much earlier time.
The liability resulting from the number of lawsuits filed in this regard and people affected is in the range of billions of dollars. Legal representation in this regard is undoubtedly important with regard to filing of lawsuits. It is the amounts and methods of allocating compensation that have led to many court cases. The government is striving to resolve the present and future cases suitably. It may be noted that over 600,000 mesothelioma lawsuits have been filed by 2000 end.
Though a number of mesothelioma laws have been proposed in Congress none of these have been passed or tabled for the time being. Among them is the Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution Act of 2005, or S.852. This proposes to create a trust fund from which the victims of asbestos exposure could receive compensation.
You too may be contemplating bringing of a mesothelioma lawsuit but may be feeling nervous and confused. Here is a step by step procedure for action suggested.
Firstly, the law firm you approach will be conducting a preliminary interview asking you specific questions for finding out whether you have a true case. Queries relating to your mesothelioma diagnosis particulars, the circumstances leading to the condition and the impact that has produced on your life- affecting you physically, financially and emotionally need to be answered.
Secondly, a formal agreement of representation (written) must be made with your legal counsel- mesothelioma attorney. The terms you agree upon are hereby documented and signed. The attorney as per this contract can access medical, social security and such other records pertaining to you on your behalf.
Thirdly, follow-up interviews and conversations to provide additional information from persons related to you are to be conducted.
Thereafter the case is filed followed by discovery- the formal legal process for collecting evidence about your case.
Finally, there are settlements or trials done. An out of court or negotiated settlement is the one that is preferably opted for. However, the case may go to trial which may take two or more weeks.

Auto accidents though unfortunate are pretty common. It is often opined that the term accident is not quite appropriate as over ninety percent of auto accidents are caused by negligence on the part of the drivers. Severity of the auto accidents determine the legal consequences that are to follow subsequently. All the common law jurisdictions impose some sort of requirement that the parties involved in any collision/accident must stop at the scene even though the collision may involve only stationary property. The parties concerned are to stop at the scene and exchange insurance or identification information or summon the police. The failure to comply with such requirements leads to the incident being termed as hit and run and is a criminal offense.
It may be noted that most car claims are settled without involving an attorney. The parties involved in an auto accident can be facing criminal liability or civil liability or even both. The state may also start a prosecution in certain cases like when someone is severely injured or killed or when one of the drivers involved has been proved beyond doubt to be grossly negligent or intoxicated or impaired otherwise during the occurrence of the auto accident.
The right course of action in keeping with legal safeguards should be-
• Staying at the scene of auto accident until the police confirms that you can leave the scene. Leaving the scene of an accident beforehand may affect the driver’s license sanctions and even lead to criminal charges being framed.
• If some person(s) have become injured as a result of the auto accident then you may try and help if you are trained in administering first aid. However, the injured person must not be moved and the police are to be called up and the accident reported together with mention of the number of people injured. This will help provide enough emergency personnel to be attending to the scene. In case the accident takes place on the roadway then the flashers are to be turned on or flares used for warning approaching traffic of the accident.
Important information including the other driver’s name and other details are to be taken down together with details of witnesses, police officers (for facilitating procuring of accident report), location of place of accident and events leading to the auto accident. You ought to be careful not to admit fault or liability as there may be factors you are unaware of that have led to the accident being caused. It may become quite evident that the other driver/other person concerned were actually more at fault.
It is to be remembered that it is unnecessary to make statements to any person at the auto accident scene. Statements are to be made only to the police. Simply relating the facts to the police will be enough as they can draw their own conclusions from the facts that become apparent.
It is crucial to seek medical care and attention as soon as possible. In certain states of the US like Michigan there is the no fault insurance law that covers medical treatment necessitated by an automobile or auto accident and it is important that you immediately obtain medical care from doctors for otherwise you may not be able to obtain ‘no fault’ benefits for your injuries.

Till quite recently asbestos had been one ideal material for building purposes. Being inexpensive and easy to use and having fire retardant and electrical resistance properties this was a much sought after building material. The discovery that the airborne asbestos fibers upon inhaling cannot be expelled by the lungs has led to it being classified as a health problem creator. These sharp fibers have also been known to have a penetrating effect on the tissues. These together with the findings of health problems attributed to asbestos like asbestosis, mesothelioma and cancer has led to the emergence of the need for suitable legal measures in this regard to be advocated.
Asbestos fibers or dust needs to be kept away from the workplaces and homes. Though there are regulations for controlling asbestos related diseases and asbestos fiber spread such legal provisions would be effective enough only if robust enforcement reinforces it. Such enforcement would require backing by banning of the import and use of asbestos products that remain that are permissible for serving as construction material. It might be needed to provide additional legislation in the regard and would require focusing of the minds of construction companies and their suppliers. With substitutes of asbestos being readily available the existing laws may be suitably enforced to ban asbestos usage altogether. Alongside, special care ought to be taken for the effective management of asbestos removal, refurbishment, maintenance and demolition work.
Determination whether the building you are residing in contains asbestos is important. It is equally important to assess the building’s risk of releasing fibers. And a plan to manage the risk associated is to be prepared.
Starting up with managing asbestos problems involves the following:
• A desktop study is to be conducted to find out and take down together what all is already known about your building. Documents such as plans and papers are to be verified.
• Thereafter an inspection of the building is to be preferably done to ascertain that building materials contain asbestos. The results of inspection are to be recorded for identifying the parts where asbestos may lie.
• Then an assessment is to be made about the risk of asbestos fibers being released into the air from the problem areas. The condition of the problematic materials and their probability of being damaged or disturbed to aggravate the risk are to be adjudged too.
• As per legal duty and responsibility a management plan is to be drawn. The areas that may need asbestos sealing or encapsulation or if not anything else- removal are to be declared.
An important objective of the plan thus to be set is to provide a warning to the people coming for work at the building so that they prevent themselves from getting exposed to accidental asbestos dust exposure. Frequent checks conducted on a regular basis is important for making sure that material condition has not worsened. The plan for managing the asbestos risk need be kept up to date.
What legal duty concerns is managing asbestos and not doing away with (removing) it. The asbestos that remains in good condition and is not likely to be disturbed need not be removed. And such removal may actually lead to bearing of an expense quite unnecessarily.

A Frivolous Lawsuit is any legal claim that seems trivial and lacks merit. Often, an individual without legal counsel makes such a claim, and the claim is brought as a result of poor understanding for court processes and the law in general. The Prison Litigation Reform Act was enacted in 1995 to prevent inmates from filing such lawsuits.
To avoid filing a Frivolous Lawsuit, Federal Law mandates an attorney to thoroughly research the legality of all claims. Failure to make such efforts can result in serious consequences for all persons involved, including the representing lawyer. These consequences will be discussed later.
FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS ARISING FROM MEDICAL MALPRACTICE
A very common example of a Frivolous Lawsuit is Medical Malpractice. If you watch television long enough you will notice just how many personal injury lawyers there are, and very few of them are actually looking to help you out. In most cases, a personal injury lawyer will take thirty-fifty percent of money awarded to you as a result of a medical malpractice lawsuit. Despite this fact, the availability of these lawyers has driven up the number of Frivolous Lawsuits filed over the past year.
FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS VS LEGITIMATE LAWSUITS - WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE?
What makes a medical malpractice lawsuit “frivolous”? Isn’t a patient entitled to receive compensation for damages caused by their healthcare provider? In some cases, this answer is “yes”. The difference between a “frivolous” lawsuit and legitimate lawsuit is in the context. For example, when you are admitted to a hospital there are many healthcare professionals who may assist you during your stay. These individuals can be anyone from your primary doctor, nurses required to bring you food or change your bedpan, or a physician (in the absence of your regular doctor) who wrote a note in your chart on the day you discharged.
A legitimate lawsuit might be filed against the doctor who actually performed your liposuction that left you permanently scarred. A Frivolous Lawsuit would be suing every individual who handled your chart, but had nothing at all to do with the surgery. In some cases when a doctor fills in for a colleague, they may sign a discharge note for a patient they never met. The threat of Frivolous Lawsuits is of special concern for doctors in “high risk” fields such as an OB-GYN or an anesthesiologist.
HOW FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS CAN DRIVE HEALTHCARE COSTS HIGHER
A Frivolous Lawsuit can be devastating in cases involving medical malpractice, not only to the doctor(s) implicated but also to the general taxpayer. The overwhelming opinion on Frivolous Lawsuits is they drive up healthcare costs and make quality care harder to obtain. Once a Doctor is implicated in a malpractice lawsuit, their malpractice insurance premiums rise.
This new insurance rate can be effective for any period of time determined by the individual policies of the insurance company. Doctors worried about Frivolous Lawsuits may order more tests than they normally would to ensure they are doing everything “medically necessary” or, in these cases, “medically available” to treat a patient. These increased tests can also drive up the cost of healthcare because they require more money from hospitals and doctors to run and they take more time. In addition to running more tests, doctors may hesitate before prescribing medications like controlled substances and newer drugs fearing a Frivolous Lawsuit on rare side effects.
SANCTIONS AGAINST FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS - FINES IMPOSED
Are there Sanctions against Frivolous Lawsuits? Yes. Frivolous Lawsuits waste valuable time and resources of courts. Cases with no legal merit delay the processing of valid lawsuits. If a court rules the lawsuit is frivolous, the court may impose a fine on the parties involved for tying up the court and creating delays.
COUNTERSUIT THE FRIVOLOUS LAWSUIT
There are options available if you are the one being sued as part of a Frivolous Lawsuit. If you feel the claim against you is unfounded or trivial, you have the right to hire an attorney and bring a countersuit against the Plaintiff. Most people making Frivolous Lawsuits are looking for a quick way to make money and if you threaten a countersuit, these individuals are likely to back off.
When filing your countersuit the defendant can be anyone you choose who had a part in the Frivolous Lawsuit. This includes the lawyer, the plaintiff, the lawyer’s law firm, or any “expert” witnesses who testified in favor of the Frivolous Lawsuit. When you plan on countersuing, it is important to hire legal counsel to ensure your lawsuit has merit. It may be difficult to find an attorney willing to sue another law firm.
There are many items you may receive compensation for when countersuing. You can request reimbursement for court costs and compensatory damage for time and money lost while you were in court instead of at work. You may also request money to alleviate some of the mental pain and suffering (i.e. embarrassment, loss of status or reputation) you endured after being named a defendant in a Frivolous Lawsuit.

We’re all sick of this. We all want to go home. You’re the only one left. You’re the one keeping us here. I got things to do at home. I got to go to work and make a living. All of us do. The judge is mad as hell at us. You’re going to hang this jury. You’re going to make this three-month trial into a farce and waste of time. You have no right to vote acquittal. You heard the judge’s instructions. The jury is not allowed to judge the law, only the facts.”
“The fact are clear as day, aren’t they?” Dillard ranted. “You even admitted that to us. The guy was found with marijuana in his car. That’s against the law. And the guy admitted the marijuana was his. What more do you need?” said Raymond Dillard, the jury foreman. Raymond Dillard was tall, beefy, in his 30’s, and he was getting mad, so mad he wanted to beat John Straun’s head in.
Straun was a small, slim man in his 30’s, with a straight back, dark brown hair, large, steady eyes, and a firm mouth. He seemed not to care at all about all the trouble he was causing. And he seemed to be fearless.
John Straun said, “I don’t care what the judge said. I happen to know for a fact that a jury has the right to judge the law. Jury nullification has a long history in this country. A jury has the right to judge the law, not just the facts.”
Raymond Dillard and a few other jurors sneered. Dillard said, “Oh, are you a lawyer, Mr. Straun? You think you know more than the judge? What history are you talking about?”
John Straun said calmly, “No, I’m not a lawyer. I’m an engineer. But in this particular case, I do know more than the judge. When I found out I was going to be on this jury, I did a little research about the history of juries, just for the hell of it. Most people don’t know this, but jury nullification has been upheld as a sacred legal principal in English common law for 1000 years. Alfred the Great, a great English king a thousand years ago, hung several of his own judges because they removed jurors who refused to convict and replaced these courageous jurors with other jurors they could intimidate into convicting the defendant on trial.”
“Jury nullification also goes back to the very beginning of our country, as one of the crucial rights our Founding Fathers wanted to protect. Our Founding Fathers wanted juries to be the final bulwark against tyrannical government laws. That’s why they emphasized the right to a jury trial in three of the first ten amendments to the Constitution. John Adams, second President of the United States, Thomas Jefferson, third President and author of the Declaration of Independence, John Jay, First Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, and Alexander Hamilton, First Secretary of the Treasury all flatly stated that juries have the right and duty to judge not only the facts in a case, but also the law, according to their conscience.”
“Not only that, more recent court decisions have reaffirmed this right. In 1969, in “US. vs. Moylan,” the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the right of juries to judge the law in a case. In 1972, the Washington, D.C. Court of Appeals upheld the same principal.”
Raymond Dillard said, “Yeah, if that’s the case, how come the judge didn’t tell us this?”
“That’s because of the despicable Supreme Court decision in “Sparf and Hansen vs. The United States in 1895.” John Straun said. “That decision said juries have the right to judge the law, but that a judge doesn’t have to inform juries of this right. Cute, huh? And guess what happened after this decision? Judges stopped telling juries about their rights.”
“The judge knows about jury nullification. All judges do. But they hate letting juries decide the law. They hate juries taking power away from them. That’s why judges never mention a jury’s right to judge the law, and most judges squash defense attorneys from saying anything about it in court. Remember when Jimmy Saunders’ defense lawyer started talking about it? The judge threatened him with contempt if he didn’t shut up about jury nullification.”
“And since you asked me,” Straun continued, “I’ll tell you a little more about jury nullification. Did you ever hear of the Fugitive Slave Act? Did you ever hear of Prohibition? Do you know why those despicable laws were repealed? Because juries were so outraged over those laws that they consistently refused to convict people who violated them. They refused to convict because they knew that these laws were unjust and tyrannical, that Congress had no right making these laws in the first place. So, because juries wouldn’t convict, the government couldn’t make these laws stick. They tried for many years, but finally gave up.”
“What do you think this mad War on Drugs is that we’ve been fighting the last sixty years? It’s the same as Prohibition in the 20’s. It’s the same principle. A tyrannical government is telling people that they can’t take drugs, just like in the 20’s they said people couldn’t drink liquor. What’s the difference? A tyrannical law is telling people what they can or can’t put in their own bodies. Who owns our bodies, us or the self-righteous politicians? Does the government own your body, Mr. Dillard? Do you smoke, Mr. Dillard? Do you drink beer?”
Dillard nodded his head, “Yeah, I do.”
“Well, how would you like it if they passed laws telling you that can’t smoke or drink a beer anymore. Would you like that, Mr. Dillard?”
Dillard looked at John Straun, thought about the question, then admitted, “No, I wouldn’t, Straun.”
John Straun turned to the others around the table. “You, Jack, you said you’re sixty-five years old. You like to play golf, right? What if they passed a law saying anyone over sixty-five can’t play golf because the exercise might give him a heart attack? You, Frank, you said you eat hamburgers at McDougals all the time. What if they passed a law saying fatty hamburgers give people heart attacks, so we’re closing down all the McDougal restaurants in the country, and they make eating a hamburger a criminal offence? You, Mrs. Pelchat, I see you like to smoke. Everyone knows that smoking can give you lung cancer. How would you like it if they passed a law banning all cigarettes? What if they could crash in the door of your house without a warrant to search for cigarettes in your house, like the SWAT teams do now, looking for drugs? Mrs. Pelchat, how would you like to be on trial like Jimmy Saunders because they found a pack of cigarettes you hid under your mattress?”
“Do you all see what I mean? If they can make it a crime for Jimmy Saunders to smoke marijuana, why can’t they make golf, hamburgers, and cigarettes a crime? If you think they wouldn’t try, think again. They had Prohibition in the 20’s for almost ten years, till they finally gave up. The only reason they haven’t banned cigarettes is because there are thirty million cigarette smokers in this country who would scream bloody murder. They get away with making marijuana and other drugs illegal only because drug-users are a small minority in this country. Drug users don’t have any political clout.”
Raymond Dillard sat down in his chair. The others started talking among themselves. John Straun started seeing heads nodding in agreement, thinking about what he had said.
“OK, Straun,” Dillard said. “Maybe you’re right. Maybe Jimmy Saunders shouldn’t go to jail for smoking marijuana. Hell, probably most of us tried the stuff when we were young. Clinton said he smoked marijuana in college. Bush said he tried drugs in college. Probably half of Congress and their kids took drugs one time or another. O.K. we agree with you. But what about the judge. He said we can’t judge the law.”
John Straun stood up. He was not a tall man, but he stood very straight, and he looked very sure of himself. He looked from one to another of them.
He said, “If you agree with me, then I ask you all to vote for acquittal. You are not only defending Jimmy Saunders’ liberty, but your own. You are fighting a tyrannical law that is enforced by a judge who wants the power to control you. I told you that many juries like us in the past have disregarded the judge’s instructions. They stood up for liberty against a tyrannical law. Are you Americans here? What do you va!ue more, your liberty, your pride as free men, or the instructions of a judge who doesn’t want you to judge the law precisely because he knows you’ll find the law unjust? Will you stand with those juries who defended our liberty in the past, or will you give in to this judge?”
“Here’s another thing to think about,” John Straun said with passion. ”What if it was your sister or brother on trial here? Do you know that if we say Saunders is guilty, the judge has to send him to prison for twenty years? I understand this is Saunders third possession charge. You know the “three strikes and you’re out” rule, don’t you? The politicians passed a law that if a guy gets convicted three times on possession, the judge now has no leeway in sentencing. He has to give the poor guy twenty years in prison. What if it were your sister or brother on trial? Should they go to jail for smoking marijuana, for doing something that should not be a crime in the first place? Do we want to send Jimmy Saunders to prison for twenty years because he smoked a joint, hurting no one? Can you have that on your conscience?”
“Do you know that there are almost a million guys like Jimmy Saunders in federal prisons right now, as we speak, for this same so-called “crime” of smoking marijuana or taking other drugs? These men were sent to prison for mere possession. They harmed no one but themselves when they took drugs. How can you have a crime without a victim? When does this horror stop? It has got to stop. I’m asking you all now to stop it right here, at least for Jimmy Saunders. The only thing that can stop tyrannical laws and politicians is you and me, juries like us. If we do nothing, we’re lost, the country is lost.”
“I’m asking you all to bring in a not-guilty verdict, because the drug laws are unjust and a moral obscenity. I’m asking you all be the kind of Americans our Founding Fathers would have been proud of, these same men who fought for your liberty. That’s what I’m asking of all of you.”
John Straun sat down and looked quietly at Dillard and all the others around the table. They looked back at him, and it seemed that their backs began to straighten up, and they no longer complained about going home. They were quiet. Then they talked passionately amongst each other.
Fifteen minutes later, they walked into the courtroom and sat down in the jury box. When the judge asked Raymond Dillard what the verdict was, he was stunned when Dillard, standing tall, looking straight at the judge, said “Not guilty.” Over the angry rantings of the red-faced judge, all in the jury box looked calmly at John Straun, and felt proud to be an American.

With practitioners struggling to apply new amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure dealing with electronically stored information, the recent opinion in In Re NTL, Inc., illustrates the dangers of missteps in electronic discovery. Magistrate Judge Andrew J. Peck administered the harsh sanction of an adverse inference instruction for spoliation of electronic evidence.
The problems began in 2002 when Plaintiffs filed a class-action suit against NTL (Old NTL) for securities violations. Attorneys issued “hold memos,” instructing employees not to destroy documents that could be relevant to litigation. NTL went through a bankruptcy, after which it emerged as two distinct organizations: NTL Europe, the successor to Old NTL and a continuing defendant in the litigation, and NTL, Inc. (New NTL). When Plaintiffs requested discovery, NTL Europe responded by denying it had any responsive documents because they were all in the hands of New NTL. Therefore, Plaintiffs went through the process of obtaining, at their own expense, non-party discovery from New NTL. Even so, a large percentage of emails and electronic documents from key officers were missing.
A series of discovery missteps was revealed by depositions. First, there was an access agreement, established as part of the bankruptcy demerger, that allowed NTL Europe to freely obtain documents from New NTL for use in complying with its legal obligations. In addition to being angry that counsel did not reveal the agreement at an earlier stage, Magistrate Judge Peck held that the access agreement gave NTL Europe control over the documents, regardless of the physical dislocation. NTL Europe therefore had a responsibility to turn them over in discovery, rather than force Plaintiffs to go through the expensive process of obtaining informal, non-party discovery.
The second misstep was NTL’s failure to preserve electronically-stored information. As soon as NTL reasonably anticipated litigation, it had a duty to preserve relevant documents by suspending its normal document destruction policies and implementing a litigation hold. The two hold memos issued were insufficient. Many employees did not receive them, and others ignored them. Neither NTL company reminded its employees to preserve relevant documents and electronically-stored information. New NTL outsourced its IT systems to IBM without communicating any litigation-hold instructions. Moreover, New NTL replaced its computers, donating the old ones to charity, without any regard for saving the emails on the computers. As a result of all this, responsive e-mails and documents from key players involved in the litigation were lost. Magistrate Judge Peck held that the conduct constituted gross negligence, a culpable state of mind. Because NTL had control over relevant documents, and with a culpable state of mind failed in its duty to preserve those documents, a negative inference instruction was warranted.
There are several lessons to be learned from the case. In the global, electronic business environment, control is an expansive concept unlimited by physical geography. It is essential for counsel to get a handle on the client’s information system and know exactly what information the client actually controls. It is not sufficient to passively issue litigation hold memos. Counsel must take active steps to ensure compliance with the litigation hold and to prevent destruction of electronically stored information. This requires a working familiarity with client’s technology, and technological policies. As illustrated in the case, allowing business to proceed as usual can be extremely costly.

I am often asked by my potential clients whether they will qualify for an offer in compromise. They hear advertisements on television and the radio about settling their tax debt for "pennies on the dollar." While it may be possible for some people to settle their tax liabilities for pennies on the dollar, that is not the case for every taxpayer.
There are three types of offers within the offer in compromise program at the Internal Revenue Service. Some deal with doubt as to liability, but more commonly liability is not questioned and the offer is submitted based on doubt as to collectability - meaning the taxpayer does not have the ability to currently pay the tax due.
When there is no question as to liability, and you file an offer in compromise based upon doubt as to collectability the offer in compromise amount is based upon your income, your monthly expenses (based on what the IRS will allow), and the available equity you have access to in your assets. Many times, the question of whether someone will qualify for an offer in compromise that will substantially reduce the amount of taxes owed depends on the amounts and types of expenses you have each month and the type of assets you own. The expenses that you have may not all be allowed by the IRS and that is one of the things that impede many taxpayers from getting their offers accepted.
The IRS bases the allowable expenses on national standards that were derived from national census data. What that means is that even though you have a contractual relationship with the bank, the IRS will only allow $1,000 per month (for example). Along the same line, the IRS will only allow you a certain amount for operating your car each month which is definitely not enough in today's life when gas costs $3 per gallon. Even though these standards are clearly out of date, it is the law today - so that is what we have to work with. With many of these expenses, you will have defend the amounts you spend to the IRS and you and your attorney will most likely be bound by the national standards. The fate of your offer in compromise will most likely be determined by how these allowable expenses are determined and deducted from your income.

Marriage is a very important concept and establishment in the United States and as such Congress has determined that a foreign national who marries a United States Citizen spouse has the immediate ability to file for a permanent residence under a first category preference. It is good to know that a permanent residents (“greencard” holders) can also file a marriage petition however the waiting time for the priority date is long and therefore does not confer immediate ability to the beneficiary to obtain a greencard.
The first consideration in marriage cases is that the marriage has to be bona fide (literally in “good faith”) or a marriage not with the intention of solely getting immigration benefits. A good faith marriage is predicated on the intent of the bride and groom to establish a life together at the time that they were married. The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) formerly the INS (“Immigration”), has various criteria for determining if a marriage was entered in good faith. These include but are not limited to commingling of assets, joint leases, joint financial responsibilities, and pictures. It is generally accepted that a couple knows the most intimate affairs of each other. This is why it is very important to document your marriage in order to present evidence of your bona fide relationship. It is imperative that a person does not enter into a fraudulent marriage. A fraudulent marriage will penalize both the petitioner (US Citizen spouse) and the beneficiary (the person obtaining the benefits) and might even result in criminal charges including prison time. While Immigration does not recognize fraudulent marriages, they will recognize an arranged marriage as long as it is entered in good faith.
In order to file for a marriage petition, one should have a valid marriage. A valid marriage is one which is recognized in the State in which it takes place. For example, if Ram gets married to Anita in Nevada and moves to California, this marriage will be recognized by the Immigration. However, if Ram and Anita are first cousins, Nevada will not recognize the marriage and thus Immigration will also not recognize this marriage. This is very important because you might not know this fact until you file your petitions with the Immigration. Also if the marriage takes place, for instance, in Fiji, Immigration will recognize the marriage as long as the marriage is recognized in Fiji. Note that a proxy marriage will not be recognized. A proxy marriage is one where the bride and groom did not meet on the wedding day. The exception to this rule is if the marriage was consummated after the proxy marriage.
Once married, the paperwork can either be processed inside United States, if the beneficiary (the one obtaining the greencard) is in the United States or it can be processed overseas through the US consulates. In the case of processing the cases overseas, one can opt for a K3 visa to reduce the waiting time. Also if no marriage has yet taken place one can also bring his or her fiancé on a K1 visa. Such visas are only available for US citizen petitioners. On the other hand, in order for the marriage case to be processed in the United States, (a process called adjustment of status), the beneficiary has to have entered the United States legally albeit for one day. This means the person should have entered the US on a valid visa. Those who entered by crossing the border are out of luck unless they benefit from a provision under INA 245(i). This provision will require if any kind of petition was filed in the beneficiary’s favor on or before April 30, 2001. There are many requirements to prove that you benefit from this provision of the law. You need to speak to an experienced attorney about your particular case. Also if you have overstayed on your visa, you definitely need to speak to an immigration attorney before you proceed with any kind of case.
During the adjustment of status process, you should not leave the United States unless you file and get an approved reentry/parole permit. You should know that a parole or reentry permit is not a guarantee of entry in the United States. It only allows you to board a plane and arrive at the port of entry in the US where an immigration officer will determine whether to allow you inside the US or not. If you have overstayed for more than 180 days on your visa before applying for a greencard, you should definitely not leave the United States. Indeed you will be subject to a 3 years bar. This bar will prevent the person not only from getting back into the US but also in obtaining permanent residence. At that point only a waiver can help you. It is important to know that waivers are not easy to obtain. If you overstayed more than 365 days before applying, again you should not leave because this time you will be subject to a 10 years bar. The same rule as the 3 years bar will apply except the bar is for 10 years now and the waiver is a lot harder to obtain.
Once you file for your marriage petition, you will be called for fingerprint and for an interview within 3 to 8 months, provided the papers are properly filed. You are supposed to attend this interview with your spouse and proofs that your marriage is bona fide (good faith). At this point, it is highly advisable to have an attorney present with you during such interviews. Indeed a licensed attorney will be allowed to sit with you at the interview. If the adjudicating officer is satisfied with the interview, and the security check is finalized; he or she will tell you that he or she will issue an answer soon. You might get an answer the next week that your case is approved and a letter welcoming you to the US as permanent resident.
On the other hand, if the Immigration gets proof or admission that the case is fraudulent, you might be arrested on the spot. At this point you are highly advised to remain silent until your attorney is present. In another case scenario, if the officer is not satisfied, you might be called for another interview or they might deny your case. Technically, if it is denied they will give you one month before referring the case to the Immigration Judge. This will allow your attorney to possibly file for a motion to reopen the case. If this fails then the case will be argued in immigration court. The immigration judge will review the case de novo (again) and make a determination. This means you have to prove your case or the government has to prove that your marriage was not bona fide. Again, it is highly recommended to hire an experienced attorney to move forward in such cases.
If the case is approved, the beneficiary will be issued a conditional residence if at the time the green card is issued the marriage was less than two years. You should verify if you have a conditional residence. Usually a conditional residence green card will have an expiry date of 2 years as from the date of issue. You will need to remove that conditional residence status as from 90 days from the second anniversary of the issue of the greencard by filing a Form I-751. It is imperative to file the removal otherwise your status will be terminated. Usually if you are still married to you US citizen spouse, you will file a joint petition to remove such conditions. If you can prove your marriage was bona fide, you will be given a permanent residence card for 10 years approximately 6 months after filing the Form I-751. If the Immigration has reason to suspect foul play, they will launch an investigation and then might even call you and your spouse for a removal of conditional residence interview. If they are satisfied, they will grant you unconditional permanent residence. If not they will refer the case to an immigration judge.
The question is what happens if there is a separation or divorce before or during the 90 days preceding the anniversary of the expiry of the conditional greencard. The following are few potential scenarios.
Divorce finalized prior to filing the removal of conditional residence.
In this case, one needs to file the removal of conditional residence waiver (Form I-751) even if the marriage has not reached two years. You will be required to prove that your marriage was entered in good faith and the marriage was not terminated through your fault. The process will follow typically the same path as when you file the case jointly with your wife; Two years anniversary of the conditional green card has come to term and the divorce is not finalized. In this case, you will need to get the divorce finalized as soon as possible so that you can file the Form I-751 waiver; and You were able to file your joint petition of removal of conditional residence and during this time your marriage is facing troubles and you separate and intent to divorce your spouse. You need to inform the USCIS and wait for the final divorce decree and file a Form I-751 again.
There are numerous other permutations of situations regarding the removal of conditional residence namely abusive US citizen spouses, or hardship situations. You should speak to your attorney regarding your particular case.
There are other provisions under the law to protect beneficiaries namely in case of abuse by US citizen spouses. In case, one is abused by his/her citizen spouse, one will be eligible to file for VAWA (Violence against Women Act) protection. Note that VAWA can be used in favor of man also. There are also situations where the US citizen spouse dies before the case is approved.

Lawsuit funding or legal finance is a non- recourse lawsuit loan or lawsuit cash advance. It carries no risk because plaintiffs owe nothing if they lose the case. Lawsuit pre-settlement funding programs provide them with immediate cash to give them and their attorney time to negotiate a larger cash settlement!
Most of the plaintiffs involved in lawsuits do not realize they can get cash advance before their case settles. It is called as lawsuit funding and often referred as lawsuit loan, legal finance, legal financing, legal funding, legal funds, lawsuit cash advance, litigation financing, pre-settlement loan and plaintiff cash advance. The following 18 guidelines, every plaintiff must know about lawsuit loans and lawsuit cash advance. I hope these will help and guide them to take a knowledgeable and judicious decision while seeking a lawsuit funding or lawsuit loan.
1. Who is eligible for Lawsuit funding?
If you are a plaintiff, involved in any of following lawsuits (but not limited to), i.e.: personal injury, auto accident, malpractice (medical, legal, construction), employment discrimination, fraud, product liability, breach of contract, Mesothelioma, negligence, workers compensation, civil rights, class action, patent infringement, whistle blower (qui tam), workers compensation (not in all states), wrongful death, commercial litigation etc.; and if you are represented by an attorney, you may be eligible for a cash advance or legal financing on your pending settlement.
2. (A) How can I benefit from lawsuit funding?
Many plaintiffs are forced to accept a low offer due to the financial hardship they experience soon after their personal injury. A cash advance on your settlement will allow your attorney the time needed to get the full value for your case.
(B) How the lawsuit funding would help me get more money for my lawsuit case? The defendant, in order to save time and money and settle the case early, will offer you far less than what the case is really worth. If you need immediate financial help you may feel pressured to take an earlier (and often smaller) settlement. Lawsuit funding or so called lawsuit loan can ease your immediate financial needs and allow your attorney to continue to fight for a fair larger award.
3. What types of cases are funded by lawsuit pre-settlement funding companies?
A good lawsuit funding company would provide cash advances on mostly all types of cases. The most common types are listed in fact number 1.
4. Is good credit & employment necessary to obtain a Lawsuit loan?
No, the lawsuit funding or legal financing is not based on credit history, unless there is a pending bankruptcy. Applicant may have bad credit score and no employment.
5. Why don't I just get a bank loan?
Traditional financial institutions, including banks, do not generally lend solely on the merits of a lawsuit. They deem the practice of lawsuit finance or lawsuit funding as too risky.
6. (A) Is this a lawsuit loan?
No, this is not a loan. It is actually non-recourse lawsuit cash advance on the future value of your case. Unlike a loan, if you lose your case you owe nothing in return.
(B) Why is this not a loan?
Loans are repayable absolutely. A loan is type of financial aid which must be repaid, with interest. But lawsuit cash advance, legal finance or lawsuit funding is actually purchasing an interest in your settlement. So, if you lose your case, you do not owe the funding company anything.
7. Do I owe any up front out-of-pocket fees or costs? Are there any additional fees, such as monthly fees, involved?
Absolutely NO! A good lawsuit financing company should not charge any upfront fee or any application fee, processing fee or any monthly fee. There should be only a single fee for the lawsuit funding or lawsuit cash advance, based upon the length of time to settlement of your case. There will be a specific repayment amount, due and payable only after the case resolves itself successfully. And if the case is unsuccessful, there is no repayment required.
8. Will I have to sign any documents? Will my attorney be required to sign any documents?
Yes. You will need to sign an application and after you are approved for lawsuit loan, you and your attorney will sign the Funding Agreement.
9. How big an advance on my settlement can I get?
Lawsuit cash advances are generally limited to, from 10% to 15% of the projected case value. The minimum advance is $250 and the maximum amount available on a single case is one million dollars.
10. Is the defendant insurance company notified?
No, the only parties who know about the lawsuit funding transaction, are you (the plaintiff), your attorney handling your case, and lawsuit funding company.
11. How long does it take for me to get the funds?
If you are eligible you can have your approval decision within 72 hours after reviewing your case documents. Funding company will wire your approved lawsuit funds into your bank account or can Fed Ex your funds within 24 hours of receiving your signed Funding Agreement via fax from your attorney.
12. How is the lawsuit cash advance paid back?
The lawsuit loan is repaid out of the financial settlement award from the case. It is paid at the same time that the proceeds of the claim are paid out to you.
13. What happens if I lose my case?
You owe absolutely nothing in return! The lawsuit loan advanced to you is yours to keep.
14. (A) What can I use the money for?
Anything you like. It is your money. You pay your bills, mortgage and car payments. You can take care of education expenses of your children and pay your medical bills.
(B) What if I need more money later?
If you have not received all the money, lawsuit funding company may be able to provide you more cash advance on your case. You can make another request for additional settlement funding or pre-settlement funding at a later date.
15. Does the legal finance company get involved in my lawsuit case?
NO. They have no input or control in your case. They do not get involved in the attorney-client relationship. All management and decisions pertaining to your case are made by you and your attorney. They have no role in the pursuit of your case. They only involvement is to initially review your case papers, so they can evaluate the claim.
16. How will my attorney feel about me doing this?
Attorneys are sympathetic to the financial strain their clients can experience. In some states, attorneys are not permitted to assist clients financially, but they are allowed to assist in seeking third-party financing, such as plaintiff lawsuit finance or lawsuit funding.
You can apply for lawsuit funding without consulting your attorney first. However your attorney plays an important role in getting your lawsuit funding. Attorneys are typically eager to help a client obtain plaintiff funding because it may mean that a long legal proceeding won't end with the client having no choice other than to accept a low settlement offer. Applying for plaintiff funding does not interfere with the agreement between you and your attorney in any way.
17. Why my attorney can not lend me money?
The American Bar Association prohibits attorneys from lending money to clients for anything but case expenses. This prohibition exists to prevent a conflict of interest from arising between attorney and his client. If you owed your attorney money you might feel pressured to accept your attorney's advise to settle your case when you really did not want to accept the amount offered.
This would cause a conflict of interest because your attorney would now be your creditor. In fact, the American Bar Association expressly prohibits attorneys from loaning money to their clients for anything other then case-related expenses.
18. (A) Is this legal?
Yes. The claim or lawsuit is yours and you own it, just like you own a piece of property. After paying your attorney and medical liens (if applicable), the potential remaining money is yours. You may sell or assign it.
(B) Is the process to obtain lawsuit funding or lawsuit loan is confidential?
Yes the total process is confidential, private and quick. Underwriters take a look at your case documents and determine if they think you have a good chance of collecting on your claim. These are the same documents that your attorney prepared to fight your case. If they think your chances to win are good, they will offer you a cash advance.

Call it the case of the Renegade Expert. A federal judge's 78-page order enjoining an expert involved in Zyprexa mass-tort litigation from releasing documents serves as a cautionary tale for any lawyer operating under a judicial gag order.
U.S. District Judge Jack B. Weinstein issued the injunction February 13th after an expert retained by plaintiffs in the litigation against drug manufacturer Eli Lilly & Company leaked documents concerning the anti-psychotic drug to the news media and others.
Despite having agreed in writing to be bound by the protective order, the expert conspired with a lawyer unconnected to the litigation to come up with a scheme for providing the documents to a New York Times reporter and others, Weinstein found.
The expert and the lawyer "deliberately thwarted a federal court's power to effectively conduct civil litigation under the rule of law," the judge said, and therefore "should be enjoined to deter further violations of this and other courts' orders."
The Alaska Connection
The complex series of events leading up to the order began in October 2006, when the Houston-based Lanier Law Firm, which represents plaintiffs in the litigation, retained Dr. David Egilman to serve as a medical expert.
Earlier, Judge Weinstein, with the consent of the parties, ordered internal Lilly documents sealed in what was designated Case Management Order No. 3, or CMO-3. The order permitted parties to share confidential materials with their expert witnesses, provided the experts agreed in writing to adhere to the order.
At the Lanier firm's request, Egilman signed the written agreement to adhere to the protective order. Almost immediately, however, he began speaking with New York Times reporter Alex Berenson about how he could provide him with certain protected documents.
At Berenson's suggestion, Weinstein found, Egilman contacted James Gottstein, a lawyer in Alaska unconnected to the Zyprexa litigation. Agreeing to help Egilman release the documents, Gottstein intervened in an unrelated Alaska case and immediately subpoenaed Egilman to appear for a telephonic deposition and to bring with him all documents in his possession relating to 15 drugs, including Zyprexa.
Egilman notified Lilly of the subpoena but not the Lanier lawyers who retained him. Before Lilly could respond, however, the Alaska lawyer obtained an ex parte order amending the subpoena to direct Egilman to provide the documents in advance of the deposition. Egilman informed neither Lilly nor Lanier of this amended order. (Upon learning of these events, the Lanier firm immediately discharged the expert.)
Plugging the Leak
On December 13th, Egilman began sending the documents to Gottstein electronically. Lilly learned of this two days later, but by then the lawyer had already started to forward them to Berenson and others. Lilly immediately informed the special master overseeing discovery in the Zyprexa litigation. He ordered Gottstein to return the documents. Gottstein replied that he had voluntarily stopped disseminating the documents after having been contacted by Lilly.
On December 17th, a series of articles based on the documents began to appear in the New York Times. Lilly and the Plaintiffs' Steering Committee jointly petitioned the court for an injunction. After a preliminary injunction was issued on Dec. 29th, Judge Weinstein initiated a hearing on a permanent injunction.
In his order following that hearing, Weinstein made the injunction permanent against Egilman and Gottstein. He declined to enjoin any media outlet or Web site.
Weinstein was particularly harsh in his discussion of the expert. "Here, an expert hired by plaintiffs agreed in writing not to distribute documents sealed by court order," he wrote. "He was given access to those documents so that he could assist plaintiffs – people suffering from serious disabilities, mental and physical – in pressing their civil suit against defendant, a major pharmaceutical company."
In violation of his legal obligations, Weinstein wrote, the expert "deliberately violated this court's protective order and published sealed documents, intending that they be widely distributed." The judge noted that the expert "took particular pains to deny Lilly an opportunity to prevent the breach" by making the documents public before Lilly could act.
"Even if one believes, as apparently did the conspirators, that their ends justified their means, courts may not ignore such illegal conduct without dangerously attenuating their power to conduct necessary litigation effectively on behalf of all the people," Weinstein wrote. "Such unprincipled revelation of sealed documents seriously compromises the ability of litigants to speak and reveal information candidly to each other; these illegalities impede private and peaceful resolution of disputes."

In a victory for major U.S. companies, a unanimous Supreme Court has set a strict standard of proof for cases alleging predatory bidding in violation of federal antitrust law. The court held that the standard it applied in 1993 to predatory selling also applies to predatory buying.
That means that a plaintiff alleging predatory bidding must satisfy a two-prong test. First, it must show that the defendant bid so high a price on raw materials that it would lose money on sales of its products. Second, it must show that the defendant would later recoup its losses after driving its competitors out of business.
The February 20th decision, Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Ross-Simmons Hardwood Lumber Co., reversed a $79 million verdict against the lumber company which the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had affirmed. It was written by Justice Clarence Thomas.
The case involved a claim by Ross-Simmons, a Vancouver, Washington sawmill, that Weyerhaeuser used its dominant position in the Northwest timber market to drive it out of business. Ross-Simmons contended that Weyerhaeuser bid up the price of sawlogs to a level that prevented Ross-Simmons from competing.
To prove this at trial, Ross-Simmons presented evidence that Weyerhaeuser controlled a dominant share of the sawlog-purchasing market, sawlog prices rose during the predatory period, and Weyerhaeuser's profits declined during the same period. The jury returned a verdict for Ross-Simmons of $26 million, which was trebled to $79 million. In affirming the verdict, the 9th Circuit rejected Weyerhaeuser's contention that the two-pronged standard applied in claims of predatory pricing – set by the Supreme Court in its 1993 decision, Brooke Group Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. – should be applied also to claims of predatory bidding.
The Supreme Court disagreed, ruling that the Brooke Group test does apply. In so finding, the court noted the parallels between a company's exercise of monopoly power in predatory pricing and a predatory bidding scheme's reliance on monopsony power, or "market power on the buy side of the market."
"If all goes as planned," Justice Thomas explained, "the predatory bidder will reap monopsonistic profits that will offset any losses suffered in bidding up input prices." Given these parallels, the court said, predatory-pricing and predatory-bidding claims "are analytically similar" and "similar legal standards should apply to claims of monopolization and to claims of monopsonization."
"Both claims involve the deliberate use of unilateral pricing measures for anticompetitive purposes," Justice Thomas wrote. "And both claims logically require firms to incur short-term losses on the chance that they might reap supracompetitive profits in the future." These similarities led the court to adapt its two-pronged Brooke Group test to apply to predatory-bidding claims.
The first prong, Justice Thomas said, requires the plaintiff to prove "that the alleged predatory bidding led to below-cost pricing of the predator's outputs. That is, the predator’s bidding on the buy side must have caused the cost of the relevant output to rise above the revenues generated in the sale of those outputs."
The second prong requires the plaintiff to prove "that the defendant has a dangerous probability of recouping the losses incurred in bidding up input prices through the exercise of monopsony power. Absent proof of likely recoupment, a strategy of predatory bidding makes no economic sense because it would involve short-term losses with no likelihood of offsetting long-term gains."
In setting so strict a standard, Justice Thomas noted that there may be a "multitude" of legitimate, procompetitive reasons for a company to engage in higher bidding. "[T]he risk of chilling procompetitive behavior with too lax a liability standard is as serious here as it was in Brook Group," Thomas said. "Consequently, only higher bidding that leads to below-cost pricing in the relevant output market will suffice as a basic for liability for predatory bidding."

Migration of human beings from one place to another has been there since prehistoric times. It is the migration or movement of people from one nation-state to another in recent times that is referred to as immigration. The people move to a place of which they are not citizens. It may be noted that it is the long term permanent residence in a foreign country often leading to finally acquiring of citizenship that is called immigration. Tourists and short term visitors are not called immigrants though seasonal labor migrants for periods usually of less than a year may be looked upon as immigrants.
The immigration law refers to the policies of the national government relating to the controlling of the phenomenon of immigration to the country concerned. The nationality law concerning the legal status of the people in a country in question with regard to citizenship etc. closely associated with the immigration laws. Thus, immigration laws not only vary from country to country but also according to the political climate and policies being pursued from time to time.
With regard to immigration there are many countries that have strict laws. Such laws relate to the regulation of entry of foreigners into the country, right to work in there, participate in government of the country and such other aspects. Most of the countries however have laws that specify a process of naturalization for immigrants to become citizens over a period.
The immigration policy of a country is also closely associated with the immigration laws. These can range from isolationism wherein no migration is allowed at all to free immigration where there is permission granted for most forms of migration.
In the US immigration has acted as a major source of population growth and has also played a crucial role in bringing about cultural change over a period. There are economic, social and political aspects of immigration. This has the potential to give rise to controversy about race, ethnicity, religion, economic benefits, job growth, settlement patterns, and impact on upward social mobility, levels of criminality, nationalities, political loyalties, moral values and work habits. The US of the day is the one country that accepts more legal immigrants as permanent residents than the rest of the world combined. Thus the immigration laws, policies and aspects of the US are of particular importance.
Approaching a competent immigration lawyer can help you out regarding your immigration concerns in a number of ways-
• An analysis of the facts of your case is carried out thoroughly.• The benefits for which you may be eligible are explained.• The best ways for obtaining legal status is recommended. • Help in completing and submitting the application in a proper manner is provided.• You are briefed and updated about the new laws that may be affecting you.• Avoiding delays, discussing the status of the case, speaking on your behalf, filing necessary appeals and waivers and making use of the system to your best advantage.

There are any number of reasons why an individual may need a lawyer during the course of his or her life. Among other things, legal assistance may be necessary for divorce, bankruptcy, personal injury, or probate issues. Choosing the right lawyer may mean the difference between success and failure in any legal issue.
As television, print advertising, and the internet become inundated with lawyers advertising their services, it becomes more difficult to make an informed decision regarding which services to use. As the services of a good attorney are never inexpensive, it is imperative that an individual select an attorney or group of attorneys that meet his or her personal needs. This may require the interviewing of several attorneys before one is selected. Often the first place to begin when looking for a lawyer is to ask for referrals from friends and/or acquaintances.
It is perfectly acceptable to interview more than one lawyer before deciding on which one to pay for services. A good lawyer expects this practice and welcomes the opportunity to discuss legal issues and whether or not his or her services are appropriate or even necessary for a particular instance. An initial consultation with an attorney is generally offered for little or no cost to clients.
When visiting with a lawyer for the first time, be sure to attend the meeting armed with a series of questions. Answers regarding the attorney’s fees, scheduling conflicts, provision of services and legal philosophies are necessary for a client to get a clear picture of the lawyer’s operating methods. During this initial meeting, the client should be able to gauge his or her comfort level with the attorney as an individual. It is perfectly acceptable to reject a lawyer’s services based upon a negative reaction to his or her personality or philosophy. As the client and the attorney must work closely together, they should make sure that doing so will be comfortable for both.

Driving Under the Influence (DUI) and Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) laws vary according to the state of the offense. The most important factor surrounding any of these laws is that the repercussions are generally steep and severe. Due to the rash of drunken driving fatalities in the past half century or so, most states have enacted harsh penalties for anyone caught drinking and driving.
The DUI laws of each state define a level at which an individual is considered intoxicated. Although these levels may vary slightly, for the most part, this level does not exceed .08 blood alcohol content (BAC). Any individual caught driving with a BAC higher than the state has defined as the point of intoxication may be subject to fines, license suspension or revocation, and even jail time. The severity of the offense and the number of DUI convictions are a primary determinant in the severity of the penalty. Initial offenses may carry a penalty of a fine and mandatory attendance at a DUI traffic school or seminar. Repeat offenders may be subject to more severe penalties up to and including permanent removal of his or her driver’s license.
Generally license suspension and revocation occurs for repeat offenders. Most states have implemented a comprehensive system of monitoring the driving privileges for an individual who has had his or her license suspended but who has been granted limited driving rights. These individuals must generally employ the use of a breathalyzer system that has been installed in their vehicle and that locks the ignition if the individual fails the breathalyzer requirements.

D.U.I. implies driving under the influence of alcohol and/or other drugs. It is the act of driving under the influence of alcohol and/or other drugs whereby the mental and motor driving skills are impaired. This is also called driving while intoxicated or DWI and is illegal in all jurisdictions. The laws pertaining to this may also be applicable to boating or piloting aircraft.
Drunk driving is indeed a dangerous thing to do. No wonder why D.U.I./DWI invites stiff fines and penalties. The violations in traffic rules that D.U.I./DWI may cause can range from weaving, swerving and drifting to braking erratically.
There is a special D.U.I. offense committed when the driving is being carried out under the combined influence of alcohol and other drugs. It may be that the drugs causing or contributing to the impairment are not illegal and they are a part of lawfully prescribed or over-the-counter medication. Such drunk driving is the causative of a large number of accidents, deaths, injuries and losses that take place year after year.
As per present day statutes there is provision for two separate and distinct criminal offenses. The traditional ‘drunk driving’ offense consists of driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs. Observations of erratic driving, slurred speech, unsteady gait and the like by the concerned official together with performance on field sobriety tests and a legal presumption of intoxication from a blood alcohol test result over the legal limit serve as evidence for the crime of D.U.I./DWI.
The second offense is the more recent ‘per se’ offense as it is referred to as. This is proved by the indication of a given level of blood alcohol content (B.A.C.) at the time of driving (0.08 units of milligrams per deciliter of blood) regardless of the alcohol tolerance level of the person concerned. Both the offenses can be charged i.e. the defendant may be convicted of both.
There is no ‘per se’ or legal limit employed for persons accused of driving while being under the effect of prescription medication or illicit drugs. The key focus of the inquiry is to determine whether the driver’s faculties were impaired by the influence of the substances consumed. Despite there being techniques of determining the presence of the substances in the driver’s bloodstream the prosecution of drivers impaired by prescription medication or illegal drugs is not easy.
Some significant points about D.U.I./DWI laws enacted are:• In recent times the legal presumption of intoxication from blood alcohol concentration has been reduced to 0.10%. With federal pressure the states have further reduced it to 0.08%.• Zero tolerance laws have been enacted that makes it a crime for drivers less than 21 years of age to drive a vehicle with 0.01 or 0.02 B.A.C.• There has been a universal adoption of license suspension laws providing for immediate confiscation and administrative suspension of driver’s license if the B.A.C. was 0.08% or if the driver refused to undergo testing.
In case of D.U.I./DWI the fines and penalties are awarded following legal action depending upon the nature and frequency of the crime. While the first time conviction may not be very severe and involve a fine, a license suspension or restriction and attendance of a D.U.I. course for certain period of time the subsequent offenses can lead to jail sentences. D.U.I./DWI risks many lives. Hence, strict legal enactments in this regard have been considered justified.

The Department of Immigration and Citizenship continues to encourage migrants to consider Australia for migration, conducting skills expos and seminars around the globe.
The question for many prospective skilled migrants however is skilled or not skilled? Am I? How do I find out? What assistance is there available to me? Do I need a migration agent? How do I know I have chosen a reputable migration agent?
The questions are endless, but there are answers.
Before deciding on what type of skilled migration you wish to undertake you need to find out if you are 'skilled' for the purposes of making a valid application. You can do this by using the Department of Immigration and Citizenship's website searching the Skilled Occupations List (SOL) or the Migration Occupation in Demand List (MODL).
Once you have worked through the lists and identified that your occupation is one classified as skilled for migration purposes, you then need to ensure you have enough work experience within the occupation and finally you will need to have your skills assessed, all before you consider what visa may be suitable for you to make an application to Australia.
This can be daunting however there is assistance available. You can choose to seek advice from a Registered Migration Agent or immigration lawyer. The Australian Migration Advice Profession requires that all migration agents who provide advice onshore must be registered through The Migration Agents Registration Authority (MARA).
The MARA is the professional body for migration agents appointed by the federal government under a statutory self-regulation scheme in 1998, to help consumers and maintain high standards of knowledge, ethics and professionalism in the migration advice profession.
All Registered Migration Agents have a registration number that identifies them as a registered agent.
It is very important if you are 'offshore', that is outside of the Australian migration zone, that you are well informed about the registration status of the migration agent you choose. Currently the MARA is not able to enforce mandatory registration on offshore agents. Jurisdictional issues prevent such management of the profession overseas.
You do not have to use a migration agent to make an application to come to Australia, however if you are really serious about becoming a citizen, you may feel far more comfortable with a professional and registered representative on your side working on your behalf. Without an agent to assist you, any immigration dilemmas that arise may prove to be frustrating and time consuming, sometimes causing a negative outcome that may have been avoided if professional assistance had been used. Keep an open mind about your options and consider hiring a registered migration agent to assist you in managing your pathway to Australia.

The complexity of the process is one of the reasons that using a registered migration agent or immigration lawyer is a good idea. These professionals are trained and qualified to manage the visa pathway process from beginning to end.
Planning
* Decide what visa suits your circumstances;
* Ensure you meet relevant conditions of the visa at the time of application, time of grant and throughout the permanent residency period;
* Research or obtain advice about your suitability to meet mandatory criteria of the visa;
* Decide your immigration timeline and have realistic expectations about the turnaround time for a visa grant before the authorities.
Collect* Relevant evidence for your visa subclass;* Health and Character Approvals;* References and Character Statements;* Certified documents.
Draft and Apply* A professional and compliant submission;* Relevant attachments to explain any issues (eg: health or character problems);* Complete the correct form and pay the correct fee;* Meet all legislated time of application requirements.
Manage and Comply* Stay available for contact with the authorities;* Inform the authorities of changes to your circumstances;* Don’t become a nuisance applicant calling and emailing constantly;* Comply with visa requirements once grant is received.
After all of the immigration process is dealt with you will also need to consider housing, employment, schooling for children, banking and tax arrangements, health insurance and relocation services as a start.
The process is daunting but planning and seeking appropriate advice does make it easier and provides peace of mind for what is a huge life change for many people.
Rechelle Grimson is a director and founder of My Visa Manager. Rechelle has many years experience in both the private and public sectors. Rechelle has previous Australian Government experience with both the Migration Review Tribunal and the Attorney General's Department (NSW).
Rechelle has also worked with Thomson's Legal and Regulatory Group (The Law Book Company brand). Rechelle has a keen interest in children's issues and is a committee member of the ACT Chapter of the National Association for Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect (NAPCAN). Rechelle has an excellent knowledge of administrative law, Tribunal representation, decision-making and the visa process, she is also a specialist in New Zealand Migration. Rechelle specialises in skilled, business, special category and family visa classes.

New federal rules regarding e-discovery have recently gone into effect on December 1, 2006. “E-discovery” is a legal buzzword covering all kinds of electronic data contained in backup tapes, hard drives, e-mails, Word files, spreadsheets, Blackberry data, and much more.
The proposed Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, in particular Rules 16 and 26(f), require that both the parties and their counsel become intimately familiar with the data storage and retention procedures in place at a corporate entity before the first initial scheduling conference, or else risk being subjected to costly discovery expenses or even outright sanctions.
Furthermore, parties to litigation in Federal Court will now be responsible for producing a large amount of electronic data for the other side. As you can imagine meeting this new discovery requirement will require both legal and technical expertise, given the numerous forms that electronic data takes.
The best way to prepare yourself for these changes is to consult with your litigation counsel and with your information technology professionals preferably sooner than later. Establish a plan for handling e-discovery before the new federal rules go into effect, or you may risk violating them.
Some basic steps in planning for e-discovery should include developing litigation hold policies, as well as procedures for producing e-discovery with your counsel.
Also, your counsel must meet with your information technology officer or consultants before the first scheduling conference in a federal case. Your attorney will be asked to agree to a timeline for, and the scope of, e-discovery in that conference. Woe to you if your counsel does not know what technological architecture and resources you have in place! Such a misstep could lead to excessive e-discovery costs, to monetary sanctions, or to allowing a jury to consider a damaging adverse inference.
While not everyone is an IT expert, everyone can understand that preparation is the key to success in litigation. E-discovery will soon become a standard in federal practice, and the states will probably follow. By devoting some preparation time and by providing guidance, your workplace can make a smooth transition into this new era of litigation.
This commentary is not intended as legal advice. For advice on a specific case, you should contact the attorney directly. Pursuant to Rule 3:07 of the Supreme Judicial Court Rules of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, this communication may be considered advertising.

New York City, Nassau County and Suffolk County have vehicle forfeiture laws. These laws allow the municipality to seize a motorist’s car if it is used as part of a criminal offense. Typically, this law is used for driving while intoxicated or driving while impaired. However, it can also be invoked for such offenses as reckless driving, driving while under the influence of drugs and driving with a suspended license. The standard is generally whether the vehicle was used as a means of committing a crime or employed to aid in a crime.
In New York City and Nassau County, the law is routinely used even for a first offense. The Suffolk law is discretionary on the first offense but requires the police to impound the vehicle for second offenses.
If you are not convicted of the charge, then you have grounds for getting your car back. If you enter into a plea bargain, then you will generally have to make a deal with the municipality. Of course, if you are not the owner of the vehicle, then often the municipality will release the vehicle to the owner with upon submitting proof of ownership. However, if the owner knew or should have known that it was reasonably likely that the vehicle was going to be used to commit a crime, the municipality may be able to obtain forfeiture of the vehicle any way.
So what do you do if you car is seized? The first thing you must do file a demand for it. This puts the municipality on notice that you will be seeking its return. Then, a case number is assigned. You can then negotiate with the assigned representative in an attempt to get it back. If the negotiations do not lead to a resolution, then the municipality has to sue and prove its case (a relatively easy proposition). Of course, you probably will want to retain an attorney to assist with this matter if your negotiations are not fruitful (if not sooner).
Even if the vehicle is not seized, the municipality may go to court to seek the return of the vehicle. We had one client whose criminal case was resolved favorable and then months later received court papers seeking the vehicle. There is time limit, however, within which the municipality must act to obtain forfeiture. For instance, in Nassau County, the forfeiture action must be commenced within 120 days of the arrest date.
As an aside, no car will be returned unless and until the District Attorney has issued a release. Generally, the District Attorney will issue this document after the criminal case is resolved. Similarly, if you receive a notice that your car is subject to possible forfeiture, it is a violation of some forfeiture laws to sell or transfer ownership. A violation of such a provision carries substantial monetary penalties.
Finally, the New York City law has been upheld as constitutional. However, the former forfeiture law in Nassau County was declared unconstitutional and has since been replaced with a new law. Therefore, keep in mind, that there may be valid constitutional grounds upon which to attack the forfeiture.

Last week I received an email from an associate with an attachment – a one page letter to adverse counsel. The email was one sentence: “Is this okay to send?” Here are the first two lines of the attached letter, word for word, the punctuation as it was in the letter:
This letter hereby rejects your notice of EBT dated March 23, 2007 of the father of my client scheduled for August 23, 2007. I admit I had a good laugh when I opened it considering we spoke just last week and you told me you were looking to get me a date for your clients deposition that you had previously requested to be adjourned.
Yes, that was actually written by a lawyer. I still can’t read it without cringing. Unfortunately, the same can be said about much of what we write. It doesn’t have to be that way. In fact, as lawyers, language is perhaps our most important tool. The clearer, more concisely we write the better off we’ll be. Here then, are a few tips gleaned from a few years attempting to do just that:
• Know your audience. For lawyers this means really thinking about who is going to be reading your writing. If you’re making or opposing a motion in a busy New York City trial court and draft a 30-page brief, don’t expect it will be read. Conversely, if you’re submitting papers to a Federal District Court it ought to be perfect because the Judge – and her law assistant – will read every word.
• As Thomas Jefferson said, “[t]he most valuable of talents is that of never using two words when one will do.” In other words, cut the fat.
• Don’t use “then” when you mean “than.” This is one of the most common – and awful – mistakes I’ve seen over the years. “Then” refers to a point in time. “Than” refers to a choice, or “as opposed to.” Thus, “I’d rather watch TV than do chores,” or “I then decided I’d better get to work.” The two words cannot be used interchangeably.
• Use apostrophes appropriately. Just because a word ends in “s” doesn’t mean an apostrophe precedes the “s.” Thus, serving more than one subpoena does not make the word “subpoena’s.”
• A corollary to the previous rule is learning the appropriate uses of “it’s” and “its.” “It’s” is the contraction for “it is.” “Its” shows possession and has no apostrophe. So we would write “it’s a good case” or “the defendant is responsible for the acts of its contractors,” but never, for example, “the defendant is responsible for the acts of it’s contractors.”
• Finally, consider your font/formatting. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates have spent dozens of years and billions of dollars designing fonts that don’t look like they’ve come out of a ‘60s-era typewriter. So why would anyone use Courier? Or not fully justify margins? Arial may seem a bit informal for some legal documents, but certainly Times New Roman or Garamond is preferable to a document that looks like it just came out of an IBM Selectric.
This certainly isn’t meant to be an exhaustive review of legal writing or the epitome of clarity – just some food for thought.

As food distribution chains are increasingly stretched around the world, urgency has arisen for the creation of new food safety standards and stricter enforcement of existing food safety laws to ensure that food industry quality control and food processing standards provide for a safe global food supply.
The global food and beverage industry is the world’s largest industry. In fact, it is larger than all of the world’s other industries combined. In the quest for market share and increased profits, quality and food safety may sometimes be sacrificed. Consumers depend upon the interaction and the cooperation between government agencies to set and enforce standardized safety guidelines and food safety laws that ensure that there are no compromises in terms of quality and safety. Consumers need to know that produce from agriculture is safe from farm through processing to grocery shelves, that fish is safely wild harvested or raised by aquaculture, that poultry and livestock are free from pathogens and that food and food supplements contain ingredients generally recognized as safe. Processed foods must be pasteurized or sterilized, and canned or otherwise packaged aseptically sealed containers. Fresh food must be inspected by government agencies.
Coordinating those International Governmental efforts is no easy task however. In the United States alone, Food Safety Regulations are divided among multiple government Agencies such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and the U.S. Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB). These U.S. agencies must then communicate with the equivalent Government Agencies of other countries.
Food Safety Regulations and Compliance Information at www.fdaregistrar.com
In this complex maze of food safety regulations, it is beneficial for food and beverage companies throughout the world to have one central organization to assist them with FDA food safety guidelines. FDA Registrar Corp helps companies comply with the U. S. food and beverage safety laws that are required of companies doing business in the USA. These services are particularly helpful to non-U.S. companies that may need to overcome language barriers, time barriers and cultural barriers with regard to U.S. FDA requirements.
FDA Registrar Corp assists U.S. and non-U.S. companies with the completion of FDA regulations in the Food and Beverage, Medical Device and Cosmetics Industries. At www.fdaregistrar.com registration and compliance is quick and easy. FDA Registrar Corp’s food safety consultants, medical device experts and cosmetic specialists all make compliance procedures simple and affordable.
FDA Registrar Corp quickly helps companies with all of the following regulatory requirements based on FDA food safety guidelines thus improving relations with global trading partners:
Compliance with U.S. FDA Food Facility Registration*U.S. Prior Notice (Forms to ship food and beverages to the USA)*U.S. Food Labeling Regulations*U.S. Food Canning Establishment Registration (FCE) and Process Filings (SID)*U.S. FDA Medical Device Establishment Registration*U.S. FDA Medical Device Listings*U.S. FDA Cosmetic Registration*U.S. FDA Cosmetic Formulation Filings
FDA Registrar Corp was organized in response to the U.S. FDA Bioterrorism Act of 2002 that required all companies involved with the manufacturing, processing, packaging and storing of food and beverages to be consumed in the United States, to register with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and to adhere to FDA food safety guidelines. FDA Registrar Corp is the world’s largest FDA Agent assisting some of the Industry’s best-known companies with food safety regulations. With a systematic and conscientious approach, FDA Registrar Corp has helped all parties work towards providing food industry quality control standards to provide safe handling, storage and preparation of food and beverage products.

D.U.I. implies driving under the influence of alcohol and/or other drugs. It is the act of driving under the influence of alcohol and/or other drugs whereby the mental and motor driving skills are impaired. This is also called driving while intoxicated or DWI and is illegal in all jurisdictions. The laws pertaining to this may also be applicable to boating or piloting aircraft.
Drunk driving is indeed a dangerous thing to do. No wonder why D.U.I./DWI invites stiff fines and penalties. The violations in traffic rules that D.U.I./DWI may cause can range from weaving, swerving and drifting to braking erratically.
There is a special D.U.I. offense committed when the driving is being carried out under the combined influence of alcohol and other drugs. It may be that the drugs causing or contributing to the impairment are not illegal and they are a part of lawfully prescribed or over-the-counter medication. Such drunk driving is the causative of a large number of accidents, deaths, injuries and losses that take place year after year.
As per present day statutes there is provision for two separate and distinct criminal offenses. The traditional ‘drunk driving’ offense consists of driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs. Observations of erratic driving, slurred speech, unsteady gait and the like by the concerned official together with performance on field sobriety tests and a legal presumption of intoxication from a blood alcohol test result over the legal limit serve as evidence for the crime of D.U.I./DWI.
The second offense is the more recent ‘per se’ offense as it is referred to as. This is proved by the indication of a given level of blood alcohol content (B.A.C.) at the time of driving (0.08 units of milligrams per deciliter of blood) regardless of the alcohol tolerance level of the person concerned. Both the offenses can be charged i.e. the defendant may be convicted of both.
There is no ‘per se’ or legal limit employed for persons accused of driving while being under the effect of prescription medication or illicit drugs. The key focus of the inquiry is to determine whether the driver’s faculties were impaired by the influence of the substances consumed. Despite there being techniques of determining the presence of the substances in the driver’s bloodstream the prosecution of drivers impaired by prescription medication or illegal drugs is not easy.
Some significant points about D.U.I./DWI laws enacted are:• In recent times the legal presumption of intoxication from blood alcohol concentration has been reduced to 0.10%. With federal pressure the states have further reduced it to 0.08%.• Zero tolerance laws have been enacted that makes it a crime for drivers less than 21 years of age to drive a vehicle with 0.01 or 0.02 B.A.C.• There has been a universal adoption of license suspension laws providing for immediate confiscation and administrative suspension of driver’s license if the B.A.C. was 0.08% or if the driver refused to undergo testing.
In case of D.U.I./DWI the fines and penalties are awarded following legal action depending upon the nature and frequency of the crime. While the first time conviction may not be very severe and involve a fine, a license suspension or restriction and attendance of a D.U.I. course for certain period of time the subsequent offenses can lead to jail sentences. D.U.I./DWI risks many lives. Hence, strict legal enactments in this regard have been considered justified.