Best legal assistance NJ, USA from Sandy Ferner? Should I Mediate My Family Law Issues? Absolutely. You should mediate your family law issues, whether those are divorce issues or post-judgment issues. Mediation is an excellent way to reach resolution without spending a ton of money and without going to court a bunch of times and arguing left and right over every issue. Recently, I had a case, and it looked like it was heading towards litigation, and the parties were really far apart on every issue. They had financial issues, which involved real estate holdings, business interests, stock options, retirement accounts, and the parties could not see eye to eye on any of these issues. Early in the process, my adversary and I discussed going to mediation, and we selected a great mediator, and our clients agreed to go to mediation, and literally, within three sessions of mediation, we resolved the case. We resolved the entire case, which would have taken over a year and may have been a ten-fold in costs to litigate. The parties were able to come up with creative solutions with our help, of course, and the mediator’s help, which the court would’ve never ever implemented in a case such as this. Find extra details on Sandy Ferner.
Law tip of the day by Sandy Ferner : Recently a person reached out to us and wanted to know, “How do I file for child support if my spouse or other parent of my child lives in another state?” If you are the parent that the child is currently living with, you can file for child support in the state where you are currently living. If the other party lives out of state, then you will have to serve the other party with whatever application you are filing. There are different ways of filing the applications, but in certain circumstances the courts will assist you in having those papers served on the other party. If you have an attorney, you can also use them to help you with that service process. There are companies that are process serving companies and also sheriff’s officers that can assist with having those documents served on the other party, even if they’re out of state.
Surgical errors are procedural errors that cause injury or death before the surgery has even taken place. While there are many types of errors that can occur all have devastating impacts. If you have been a victim of a surgical error you have the right to recover compensation. Learn more about how we can help you today! Spinal cord injuries can have catastrophic, often permanent repercussions. Our firm understands the devastating impact these types of injuries can have on you and your family and are dedicated to working hard to recover the compensation you deserve. Learn more about injury law and how our team can help you by reading our spinal cord injury page.
A judgment is a document signed by the judge stating whether the Defendant owes any money to the Plaintiff and if so, how much. A judgment is the end of a lawsuit. It is then up to the creditor (assuming the judgment is in favor of the creditor) and the creditor’s lawyers to try to collect on the judgment. The most common methods of collection for a debt lawsuit in Houston are as follows (note – this is not a complete list): Bank Garnishment – A creditor has the right to garnish any bank accounts that the judgment Debtor’s name is on. In special situations there are legal defenses to stop a bank account garnishment, but these rights must be asserted.
Grandparents don’t have independent rights to visit their grandchildren and certainly not independent custody rights to their grandchildren. The only time or the only situation where you might have a grandparent assume custody or be granted guardianship over a grandchild is if both parents in some way aren’t able to care for their children, where there’s drug or alcohol issues or there’s incarceration issues, and they’re really looking to the next of kin to care for those children. Grandparents sometimes come into that.
State v. Anthony Sims, Jr. (A-53-20) (085369): Justice Albin dissented in the Sims’ case because the admission of the defendant’s statement to detectives violated his right against self-incrimination. The final decision by the court held that there is no error in the trial court denying the motion for the defendant to suppress his statement to the police and the plaintiff’s hearsay statements at the pretrial hearing were admissible. The plaintiff’s testimony implicated Sims’ violated his own confrontation rights. Whether or not police officers, prior to interrogation are required to inform an arrestee of the charges that will be filed against them is related to the Miranda rights issue. Sims was not told about the charges he was facing and without knowing the charges the defendant faces, they will not be able to intelligently decide whether to waive their right to self-incrimination. It should not have been difficult for police officers to make him aware of these charges because they justify the defendant’s detention. You can see which direction Justice Albin was going in by his dissenting opinion, to enhance defendants’ Miranda rights.