When Heath Ledger died in January of a drug overdose, he left behind not only the unfinished film The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus, but family and a young daughter, Matilda. Ledger had never married Matilda’s mother, Brokeback Mountain co-star Michelle Williams, but the two lived together for the first year of Matilda’s life. Shortly after Ledger’s death, there was speculation that he’d disniherited Matilda, since she wasn’t included in his Will.

Ledger had willed his estate to his parents and three siblings, via a trust, though it seems that the family has decided to agree with the direction New York State law would have taken the issue, and given the entire sixteen-million-dollar estate to Matilda. While his Will hadn’t included Matilda, it was made before she was born and not altered afterwards, making her “afterborn” and thus entitled to whatever share of the inheritance she reasonably had a right to expect. As Ledger’s only child, and as there’s no wife involved, Matilda receives the entire estate. It seems the family may have done this voluntarily or through their own decision, preventing an appeal of the will in the courts, since Heath Ledger’s father, Kim Ledger, told OK! Magazine that “There is no claim,” and, “Our family has gifted everything to Matilda.”

Now, the trust set up to keep the rather large estate safe for Matilda, since, as a toddler, it’s unlikely she’s going to be able to navigate the financial markets during these perilous times and invest that money well, has begun to sue the company which held her father’s life insurance policy for the $10,000,000 death benefit she’s due. (Hopefully she’s too young to remember this part very clearly).

The company holding Ledger’s insurance, ING, a Dutch company, is investigating the death, as it seems a suicide or some other unfortunate occurance would let them avoid actually paying out the $10 Million they insured Ledger for. So, they’re poking around and checking medical and psychological records, and all sorts of other things that a prudent company issuing a $10 Million life insurance policy would normally do before insuring their client. Plus, it’s Illegal in California to investigate and deny life insurance coverage after the fact, and Ledger might have lived in Californa (it’s so hard to figure out where you live when you have so many homes!). But, in any case, they’re launching an investigation and delaying paying out the settlement until after they’ve finished questioning Mary Kate Olsen. While Olsen, a close friend of Ledger’s whose body guards discovered Ledger’s corpse, hasn’t talked to the police or the press about the incident, it remains to be seen who will budge first in this standoff. Hopefully Matilda’s trust will be able to win this one, so the poor girl has something to console her as she remembers her painful, letigious toddler years.

A young boy from Montreal is facing criminal charges that claim he used his Kirpan to threaten two other boys near their Montreal high school. Well, that’s what’s being alleged. The boy, a thirteen year old Sikh whose name has not been released, has been accused of threatening two other boys with his Kirpan- a traditional knife carried by Sikhs, which, according to a 2006 Supreme Court ruling, Sikhs are allowed to carry to school with them, so long as the weapon is sewn into clothing or otherwise made inaccessible and removing potential safety concerns. The ruling, which is a landmark anti-discrimination ruling, is still in effect, though it seems like recent events will reopen this particular debate.

While many of the facts seem unclear, it’s being reported that the Sikh boy was being harassed by the two boys currently pressing charges when he either pulled out a hairpin, or one fell out. It’s apparently at this point that the boy may have threatened the other two with his Kirpan. However, there are apparently also eyewitnesses who are stating that the boy never threatened the other two.

The boy cannot attend school currently, since his bail conditions stipulate that he cannot go within 200 feet of the alleged victims. He’s been receiving his schoolwork at home. He’s also pled not guilty to the three assault charges he’s now facing. He’s being represented by Julius Grey, a prominent constitutional lawyer.

Now, all of this considered, I think the question to ask might be why a boy who, it seems, has so much evidence backing up his innocence, can’t go to school because he’s being accused (by two boys who allegedly harassed) of assault. I mean, isn’t this a clear case of discrimination? There are eyewitnesses who say it never happened, the boy what being harassed by his alleged ‘victims’… It seems like the charges and the bail conditions are coming out of something other than a sense of the law. Actually, it seems like another flare-up of anti-Sikh sentiment. This type of discrimination and racism really need to end, soon. We’re a multi-ethnic nation, just like our neighbors to the south. Though, in all fairness, neither of us is a “post-racial” nation yet.

It’s been a bad week for Scott Robert Erwin.

The lawyer from DeKalb, Illinois in our lovely neighbor to the south has been suspended for fifteen months from the Illinois State Bar, for agreeing to decrease a client’s legal fees in exchange for nude dances.

Apparently the lawyer was out to a strip club called Heartbreakers with his friends, when he met a dancer whose voice he recognized. The woman had called his firm earlier that week to talk about some legal questions. The two talked, and struck upon an agreement in which Erwin would decrease the dancer’s legal fees in exchange for nude dances performed in his office.

Erwin, who specializes in divorce law and family law, worked with the client from February to June of 2002. The dancer (whose name hasn’t been released) claims she met Erwin at his office several times during that period, and would go in, take off her clothes, and dance for him. She also says that he touched her inappropriately during several of her sessions.

Her complaints against Erwin came after he credited her $534 from her legal bills for the dancing, but, unfortunately, her legal bills were around $7,000. She sought criminal sexual assault charges against him in 2003, before a grand jury in DeKalb County. Erwin denied the charges, and no indictment followed the proceedings.

In all fairness, if you’re a family and divorce lawyer, shouldn’t you know that this isn’t really a good idea? In any case, the Illinois State Bar knew it wasn’t, and have suspended him for 15 months. He’s also, through all of this, managed to get his name all over the blogosphere, and so he’s probably not going to have a good time practicing law, even after all fifteen months are over.

Then again, he could always change his first name to ‘Steve’ and live as a Zombie. That could work, too.

(via here, WSJ, ABA)

Remember all those Collateralized Debt Obligations, the packaged mortgages that were sold to investors to fund more mortgages?

So normally, all those C.D.O.’s (or packaged mortgages) work because they package tons of mortgages, from all over- so if one person defaults, or goes into foreclosure, the whole fund isn’t bad, people from the rest of the country are paying their mortgages. Besides, property values had been skyrocketing- so you weren’t gonna loose money even if people did default.

But, interest rates went up again in 2005, after an unusually long period of low rates- and they kept going up. And slowly, the rates on people’s mortgages went up- as did their payments. And slowly at first, but eventually with growing speed, people stopped being able to make payments on all those nice cheap mortgages they’d gotten- because they weren’t really cheap anymore. And those C.D.O.’s… stop returning on people’s investments. So, Bear Stearns, a Wall Street banking institituion, fell. And Fannie and Freddy Mac, the two vaguely-government-created American mortgage companies, were taken over by the government, in a bid to keep the economy stable.

So, okay, mortgages are going kabloey everywhere, people are getting foreclosed on… but why did Lehman fail? Wellllll, this one’s got a lot to do with those C.D.O.’s. Banks like Lehman found all sorts of ways to package and repackage them to investors, and insuring them. AIG’s losses mostly stem from having “insured” tons of mortgage-backed securities. And in the low-interest rate borrowing binge of the early 2000’s, some banks took on a lot of debt- including C.D.O.’s. So now, as interest rates are higher and the value of those investments is going down, banks and other investors are trying to sell their C.D.O.s, and since everyone’s selling, prices keep plummeting.

So, that takes us to the buyout, and the most recent news. The U.S. government is pledging to take as much as $700 billion to buy bad debt (mainly C.D.O.’s) from banks and mortgage firms, and they’re hoping all of this will calm down the market and bring stability. (via NYT, WSJ).

But, of course, it’s time to ask those pesky questions about this buyout- like, will this really help? I mean, how did the banks create such ridiculous systems for repackaging and selling C.D.O.’s that got everyone in trouble? And why were they allowed to take on so much debt? Plus… is it really the government’s responsibility to step in and save people from their stupid decisions? I’m all for the government helping people- but this seems more like it’s only going to help half the problem. Asking why both people and firms have been able to take on so much debt in the past ten years, leading themselves into bankruptcy, seems like it’ll find us a more effective policy than just buying some of that debt from them. But nooo, regulating companies is too much government interference in the economy! Because this buyout isn’t even bigger interference.

After a series of investigations that have revealed enough information about Montreal Mafia to make an episode of Sopranos look tame, the six men charged with leading the gang after their original leader, Vito Rizzuto, was imprisoned in the U.S, have plead guilty to various charges.

The government engaged in an extensive surveillance program against the group, secretly videoing meetings in their headquarters, and wiretapping their phones. The six leaders of the group plead guilty in a plea deal, the full details of which are still not public. The men, who included Nicolo Rizzuto, the father of Vito Rizzuto, have variously plead guilty to conspiracy to import drugs, bookmaking, possession of stolen property, living on the proceeds of crime, extortion, gangsterism, and various gun charges. Other members of the gang are still awaiting hearings, and legal proceedings are continuing against them.

The group apparently had their hands in half the pots in Montreal- threatening coffee shops that didn’t purchase their beans from their approved wholesalers, threatening non-Montreal contractors who did work in the city, and driving shops that didn’t comply with their demands out of business.

They also trafficked drugs through the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Airport, involving employees in several levels and divisions of the airport. They brought hundreds of kilos of cocaine through the airport into Canada- enough to keep the Navy supplied for a few years, at least.

They also beat, severely, people who owed them money- gamblers and other people who owed them money. Notably, they beat up John Xanthoudakis, the CEO of a Norshield Financial Group, in a law office on Place Ville Marie, where apparently his face “opened like a pancake” and that he “was pissing blood”. Xanthoudakis, they claimed, owed them five million dollars. They also drove insurance broker and financial advisor Magdi Samaan to suicide, and forced his widow to remortgage her home to pay off the mobsters, who claimed that her husband had defrauded. funds from members of the Montreal Italian community. (via)

While all of this is sordidly interesting so far, we have to wait until mid-October for the full charges and details, sadly. However, while these six have gone in through plea bargains, many other lower gang members will be working their way through the courts- so hopefully some of this information, and more, can be a part of the legal record.

A behemoth of an issue. But, let’s begin!

Well, last week was a bit of a doozy for our lovely neighbors to the south. Economy spiraling southward, the US government has now proposed a $700 Billion bailout plan for AIG and other firms on Wall Street. As the “CEO President” managed not to do anything useful this week (besides help announce an already-announced rescue package), we all remembered why people aren’t supposed to borrow money without collateral, and also that maybe John McCain should stop taking advice from CEO’s who’ve presided over some of the more amazing losses of past few years.

So, your intrepid blogger’s done some work, and tried to figure out what exactly’s been going on. I mean, we all remember the sub-prime mortgage crisis that brought down Bear Stearns, and we got some grasp on that, but this? Who knew? (Well, besides the folks that shorted it). Lehman Brothers, Merrell Lynch, and AIG, all in one week! What’s next? Well, I don’t know. But here’s what’s been happening.

So, with the sub-prime mortgages, there are two key events to know about. The first is the mortgage crisis of the 1980’s, when runaway inflation was destroying banks’ investments in traditional fixed-rate 30+ year mortgages. So, a series of new regulations at this point led to what are known as adjustable-rate mortgages, and the new practice of banks packaging and re-selling the mortgages they sell to people buying homes. So, now, the interest on American mortgages can change as national interest rates set by the fed vary. Also, the bank you bought your mortgage from doesn’t hold it anymore: they packaged it into something called a collateralized debt obligation (or C.D.O.), and sold it to investors, who now own your mortgage and receive the payments.

Fast Forward to the 2000’s- the Tech Bubble bursts, and Allan Greenspan, former Federal Reserve chairman, lowers interest rates to 1%… where they sit. For years. Now, borrowing money is cheap, and when we couple it with government policies encouraging home ownership (and thus sub-prime lending, or lending to more risky borrowers), you’ve got lots of people now able to take out mortgages. But banks, who traditionally vet borrowers thoroughly to make sure they can actually pay back the loan, don’t bother doing this anymore- because they don’t hold the loans, so they make profit not on your ability to repay the loan, but simply on how many they sell. And because mortgages are adjustable-rate, the mortgage you get isn’t the mortgage you keep- your monthly payments can go up after a set amount of time.

Part 2: How these bad mortgages have ruined everything, ever.

So everyone in America’s terrifying new obsession, John McCain’s VP candidate Sarah Palin, is having a bad week. After this roller coaster of a ride in the media spotlight (where she’s been stealing Barack Obama’s magazine covers), the New York Times reported that Palin had been specifically conducting state business through her personal email account, to avoid Freedom of Information Act requests. Seriously, Sarah, it was only a matter of time before this happened.

Sarah Palin’s personal email account, gov.palin@yahoo.com, was hacked into last night, though whichever inept idiot did this threw the password out to the public before finding anything juicy. What was found, however, was screencapped, and is now up at Gawker. There’s not much there- but now Bristol Palin’s cell phone number is public, as is Palin’s entire contact list.

Now, I mean, if Sarah Palin were a more sympathetic figure, I might feel really bad that this had happened to her. I mean, it sucks to have your privacy invaded like that. But, honestly, I think this is an important lesson in why you should never conduct important business from an unencrypted email account. Also, if you’re a state official, using your private email address may protect you from a FOIA request, but it will not protect you from intrepid internet sleuths whose keen (aka psychotic) sense of personal liberty will compel them to track you down like a caribou.

Well, what can you do to avoid an invasion of privacy like this? Besides working from an encrypted email account, you can also make sure that your passwords are airtight. You can check to see how strong your passwords are here.

If you’re of a more paranoid bent, and are concerned about your right to privacy, then I’d suggest looking up your email host’s disclosure policies. Check if your host has a history of just handing over user’s emails, or if they’ve required official legal documentation of state need. Yes, you have some rights to privacy in this situation, but you’ve also got to remember that your email is, like anything else, subject to potential breaches, and people can find out what you’re doing.

And remember, most of the bad things that’ll happen to your accounts will come from not having a secure password, or from having your password picked up by a keylogger. If you’re using someone else’s computer, try not to enter your password anywhere if you don’t have to, and if you do, type gibberish in another window between each letter of your password. And if someone you know has placed the keylogger- consider getting an lawyer.

Back in October of 2007, Tammy Kobylka was found dead of alcohol poisoning in her home in Calmar, Alberta. Kobylka came back from a night of binge drinking and passed out, after which her two companions left her house. Another friend found her the next afternoon, and called emergency services after he couldn’t revive her.

Now, the owner of Skip’s Bar, where Kobylka was drinking, and the bartender from that night have been charged with criminal negligence causing death. They could potentially face life imprisonment if they’re found guilty of these charges. Derek Tithecott, the bartender, is also facing manslaughter charges.

Apparently Tammy drank shooters with her two companions, whom she has arrived at the bar with. She then went home and passed out, and her two friends left her (some friends). She was found the next afternoon by a third friend. She wasn’t breathing, so the friend called the hospital.

Now, as tragic as all of this is, it seems like the criminal charges pressed aren’t really addressing the issues at hand. Apparently Tammy had a history of binge drinking- something that her mother had apparently been concerned enough with to talk to her about before she died. She was also a regular at the bar whose owner, Brian Bromley, is being charged with criminal negligence. Another bartender commented that she was sensible and usually knew her limit- though clearly not on that particular night.

So, with all of these things in mind, it seems like the questions that should be asked- why did she drink so heavily when she normally knew her limit, and what her two companions were doing that they didn’t notice she was too drunk to continue- just aren’t going to be. Yes, binge drinking is a very big part of youth culture now- and while it’s always pretty unhealthy, most of us don’t die from it. Also, what questions would we be asking if she’d gotten in her car to go home- and then driven drunk, and hurt someone besides herself? Would we still blame the bar if she committed a DWI?

So, while Tammy’s death is tragic, and inevitably upsetting, I think there is some question of personal responsibility here (Indulge me in some mild social libertarianism). Most people know their own limits, and know when to stop. So, either she chose to go beyond that, or she was pressured into it. If she was pressured into drinking beyond her limits, who was doing the pressuring? If the bartender did, indeed, pressure her into drinking too much, then yes, he should face all the charges. But if these nameless companions who were with her may also be to blame, why haven’t they been charged? It’s senseless to just press charges for the sake of doing so, to “feel better” about someone’s self-inflicted or accidental death.

A coalition in Ontario has called for an inquiry into the representation of First Nations on Juries in the province, particularly in districts where First Nations make up the majority the population but are underrepresented in the Jury lists. Actually, in the district in question, there are about 44 members of First Nations on a jury role of about 700- in an area where First Nations make up about 20% of the population. Which makes for a roughly 6% representation in the jury role- something that’s going to have a severe impact on developing juries for crimes committed by and against members of the First Nations.

Julian Falconer is helping lead the coalition, for Nishnawbe Aski Nation and Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto. Falconer’s call for the inquiry comes from experience in an ongoing coroner’s inquest, though the issue is certainly not new. The deputy Grand Chief of the Nishnawbe Aski Nation, Alvin Fiddler, says that he and other First Nations have seen and been complaining about unfair juries for years. Though they’re not alone in saying this- Mark Israel published an article in the January 2003 issue of Law and Policy, titled “The Underrepresentation of Indigenous Peoples on Canadian Jury Panels.” The article outlines, quite thoroughly, the issue of Native representation on Juries and elsewhere in the legal system- even though they appear before this system in disproportionately high numbers.

All of this is important, but it simply builds on a much larger issue- the lack of representation of First Nations members in the courts system in general. While Canada’s certainly doing a bit better of a job by its Native population than the U.S., since Canada actively recruits First Nations members for local policing whereas the US doesn’t, it’s still, clearly, not enough. The lack of representation at higher levels- lawyers, judges, paralegals, and other members of the courts system- is also a problem.

This isn’t exactly the sort of topic that’s going to be solved by some banal comment about needing more acceptance- these are issues that require outreach and education, and lots of time and political effort to solve. Whether or not the political willingness exists, to put more time, effort, and resources into incorporating the First Nations into our judicial system. Whether or not the inquest that Falconer and others are calling for will help bring the awareness and will together to do this remains to be seen- though if they confine their work to simply jury representation, it’s unlikely we’ll find the types of programs we need to better integrate the First Nations, and make them feel comfortable in our judicial system.

Remember back in August, when we found out that all that meat from Maple Leaf Foods and several other companies contained Listeria, a potentially fatal bacteria? And then that stuff killed 15 people across Canada, and we all had to read the bar codes on our sandwiches for the next month?

Well, several people who got sick with Listeriosis over in Alberta have decided to do something- file a class-action lawsuit against Maple Leaf Foods, mainly. They’re looking for $150,000 in damages for each of the plaintiffs, who all claim to have eaten infected food before the recall and become severely ill.

Indeed, according to initial statements by Brian Witwicki, lawyer and plaintiff, “The plaintiff had symptoms including fever, muscle aches, gastrointestinal nausea, headache, stiff neck and projectile vomiting.” Yuck.

Though apparently the folks over in Calgary aren’t the only ones filing suits against Maple Leaf foods- several firms across Canada have filed suits, and are pursuing cases against Maple Leaf. However, according to The Globe and Mail, Maple Leaf Foods is somehow attached to all that McCain family money, and will be able to pay off all this legal action. (Yes, that McCain family- of the “I don’t know how many houses I have” American presidential candidate. Or rather, his wife’s family, as she’s the heiress).

In any case, the suits against Maple Leaf are just beginning- and the company has made several statements taking responsibility for the outbreak, and placing blame on themselves, not the regulation agencies. While this may be a cynical ploy to avoid more regulation, it’s likely an indication that they’re interested in settling outside of court.

While those looking to hold Maple Leaf accountable in their class-action suits will hopefully find something to assuage their projectile vomiting selves, the rest of us may want to take a look at how, when cases started popping up early in June, they didn’t bother finding out where the source of the outbreak was, or recalling products, until August.

All this said, if you or someone you know became sick because of tainted foods, finding a lawyer and joining a class-action suit against Maple Leaf may be your best bet- since it seems unlikely that the Government Inquiry into all of this will really lead to much change in the regulation systems.

*Recent Accidents and Injury Cases, Defective Products cases, Commercial Accidents Cases, Commercial Drug Cases, Medical Malpractice Cases, Motor Vehicle Accidents Cases, Slip and Fall Accidents cases at Lawyerahead.ca

*Top Personal Injury Lawyers in Canada, Personal Injury Lawyers in British Columbia, Personal Injury Lawyers in Ontario, Personal Injury Lawyers in Toronto