Adult child support invokes the response that most oxymorons entail- say what now? Although adults are not children, some adult children or adult dependants cannot survive on their own and require the assistance of their parents. Some cases that fall under this category are when a son or daughter is mentally disabled or otherwise impeded by afflictions, depending on parents while attending university, or any other case that disallows these ‘children’ to support themselves.

The Divorce Act slips in a nifty little catchall allowing ‘other causes’ to be reason for adult child support. The act defines a ‘Child of Marriage’ as, “[someone] the age of majority or over and under their charge but unable, by reason of illness, disability or other cause, to withdraw from their charge or to obtain the necessities of life.” As blurry as the guidelines are for who exactly deserves support, judges have done a good job of restraining the age limit.

Some of the other causes affirming support payments according to case law include pregnancy, unemployment, and post-secondary education. According to the British Columbia Justice presiding in Wesemann v. Wesemann, he refers to his “four-step approach” to determine support:

1. Decide whether the child is a “child of the marriage” as defined in the Divorce Act. If s/he is not, that ends the matter.
2. Determine whether the approach of applying the Guidelines as if the child were under the age of majority (“the usual Guidelines approach”) is challenged. If that approach is not challenged, determine the amount payable based on the usual Guidelines approach.
3. If the usual Guidelines approach is challenged, decide whether the challenger has proven that the usual Guidelines approach is inappropriate. If not, the usual Guidelines amount applies.
4. If the usual Guidelines approach is inappropriate, decide what amount is appropriate, having regard to the condition, means, needs and other circumstances of the child and the financial.

At minimum, this and other such meticulous lists depict how considerate judges are on the subject.

In the abstract for Child Support for Adult Children: When Does Economic Childhood End? Nicholas Bala notes, “Reflecting the changes in intact families where young adults are living with their parents longer as well as looking to parents for more financial support, compared to a couple of decades ago, the courts in Ontario and other Canadian provinces are now more likely to recognize the obligation to provide support for adult children.” Apparently, now more than ever, offspring are living at home and depending upon their parents far beyond the 18-year benchmark.

Although there is opportunity for exploitation because of its murkiness, adult child case law has done a good job so far of reining in the longevity of support and monitoring who and who doesn’t require continued support. Support tends to hinge on certain requirements (if for unemployment, that they are actively searching for work, or in the case of pregnancy that the young lady return to work once the baby is eight months old) that makes it less like welfare and more like welfare-to-work.

It is always recommended to consult a lawyer relating to such matters.

For more information on Find Lawyer, Lawyers, Toronto Lawyers, Vancouver Lawyers, Canadian Lawyers, Adult Child Support and Family Law visit http://www.lawyerahead.ca/

BMG Music Entertainment v. Tenenbaum

Not only is the RIAA fighting file sharing online, they are now appealing Massachusetts Judge Nancy Gertner’s ruling to allow a live webcast of a federal court proceeding.

In their filing, RIAA claims that this “undermines basic principles of fairness.” Judge Gertner granted Courtroom View Network permission to stream video coverage of Sony BMG Music Entertainment v. Tenenbaum live over the internet. Cameras and other recording devices are largely banned from federal hearings because of the belief that it would impair a defendant’s right to a fair trial. In this case, it is the defendant and the lawyer asking for the coverage.

Harvard law professor and council for the defendant, Charles Nesson stated,”[This case would be] an opportunity for the world to see what the recording industry is doing to him.” In filed documents he went on to argue, “Public access to judicial proceedings, including specifically access by the press, advances the public interest ‘publicity’ is the most powerful check on misconduct or abuse.”

It would be interesting to see what will happen if the appellate court affirms Gertner’s ruling. If anything, to see what exactly the RIAA is ‘doing to him’. For full coverage of the case, go here. To listen to the oral arguments go here. Distributing this mp3 on a P2P network is solely up to your own discretion.  To find a lawyer for yourself look for Toronto Lawyers and Vancouver Lawyers or a lawyer in your own city.   The best way to do this is through lawyerahead.ca

Famed dictator and American prisoner for nearly the last two decades, Noriega is set to be extradited to France against his wishes. Now 75, Noriega has been fighting the extradition for the last two years while being held in U.S. custody.

Noriega’s lawyer plans to appeal to the State Department if things keep going the way they are. The goal being to get Noriega back to Panama, where he was convicted in absentia of charges ranging from embezzlement to murder.

Although they say Noriega is a prisoner of war, the court ruled that nothing in the Geneva Conventions “implies that a contracting party cannot abide by a valid extradition treaty and extradite a prisoner of war to another contracting party simply because the person is a prisoner of war.” Both the United States and France are ‘contracting parties’.

So why France? Well, Noriega allegedly laundered drug money through French banks. The French government convicted Noriega in his absence for this in 1999, but say they plan on holding a new trial once he gets there.

Manuel Noriega was the Panamanian general who collaborated with the CIA. Medellin advocate, Noriega was known for brutal tactics and the usual gamut of underworld activities. The CIA and DEA both at times praised Manuel for his anti-drug efforts, which (strangely enough) seemed to be only geared towards rival drug traffickers. In 1989, the U.S. decided they didn’t like Noriega anymore so they invaded Panama, kidnapped him and brought him back stateside for a trial. He was sentenced to 30 years and was ‘released’ after 17 for good behavior.

Similarly we have had many drug crimes and other corruption crime coming out of Vancouver and Toronto.   Bizzare stories about Vancouver lawyers are headlining this week, namely Dongdong Huang, who has detained by the Customs for  human trafficking enroute to Beijing.

Unfortunately, there may come a time where a person needs to get a restraining order. Even though Canada has restraining orders, restraining orders in the U.S. resemble the Canadian Peace Bond. Here is a brief synopsis of what restraining orders and peace bonds are and how you obtain them.

A restraining order is a court document signed by a judge requiring a person to not do certain things and abide by certain conditions. The purpose of a restraining order is to legally protect individuals who feel they have been abused, harassed, stalked or otherwise mistreated by another. In many situations, this may be the only recourse a person has to prevent the other party from interfering with his or her life.

There are three main types of restraining orders: Emergency protective, Temporary and Permanent. Emergency protective orders go into effect immediately. These usually last a week or so and are issued to give people who feel they are in immediate danger peace of mind before they file for a restraining order.

Temporary restraining orders are usually given after filing for a permanent order. These last a bit longer than emergency protective orders and are a means of protection before and during the hearing for a permanent order.

Restraining orders, (permanent restraining orders) are orders given after a hearing. These orders can be in effect for years and renewed or cancelled if necessary.

To obtain a restraining order, you must first file the required paperwork. This paperwork can vary on locality, but in essence, it requires your name, address, and contact information, the nature of the abuse or reason why this order is needed and information about the person you need ‘restrained’.

Once the paperwork is filed, the judge decides if a temporary order is needed and sets a hearing date. At this point, the victimized party needs to ‘serve’ the appropriate documents to the alleged abuser. This can be accomplished with the help of a friend or a courier service.

At the hearing with lawyer present, the victim has to prove that the person they need a restraining order against committed abusive or harassing acts and that they actually do need protection. If all goes well, the judge will grant an order and the victim will receive a copy. They should make other copies of this order and make sure one is with them at all times. This ensures that if the offending party ever breaks the restraining order, the victimized party has something to show the police to prove that there is in actual order and that legal recourse is needed. In any event, if the offending party encounters the victimized party, the police should be called posthaste.

The steps to procure a peace bond are similar. One must first testify before a judge or justice of the peace about what has happened to make you fearful. Afterwards, another hearing will be scheduled where the alleged abuser attends.

At this second hearing, you and the other party are both given a chance to state your case as to why or why not a peace bond is needed. Bonds tend to be granted by default if the defendant fails to attend. Otherwise, the judge will decide whether a peace bond is necessary.

The main difference between restraining orders and peace bonds is the length of time they last. Peace bonds are good up to a year whereas restraining orders are more open-ended. After a year, if the bond is still needed, the Applicant must file an application for a new peace bond.

Toronto Lawyers, Vancouver Lawyers, and Lawyers in your area can help you with getting a restraining order at lawyerahead.ca.

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania may overturn hundreds of sentences doled out by Judge Mark Ciavarella and Michael T. Conahan, who both plead guilty to fraud charges earlier this month. The judges were charged with receiving kickbacks from private detention centers to, in essence, fill the bunks. The saddest part is it was kids filling those bunks.

The bizarre story begins back in 2002 with Ciavarella overseeing juvenile courts and Conahan in charge of the Luzerne County budget. They argued to privatize juvenile detention centers, stating the county-run centers were in poor condition. Conahan used part of the county’s budget to fund the leasing of the private facilities, PA Child Care and Western PA Child Care. Then they started sentencing.

Some 1200 cases are expected to be overturned. The state’s high court intends to expunge the records of first-time offenders convicted by the judges, many of whom were not allowed a lawyer nor legal representation. Such convictions include Hillary Transue’s who was sentenced to three months for making fun of an assistant principal on MySpace and Kurt Kruger’s five months for shoplifting.

For their efforts, Ciavarella and Conahan received $2.6 million in kickbacks. To date, the two detention centers doing the kicking have not been charged with anything, which proves the old adage, “It’s better to give than to receive.”

Toronto Lawyers and Vancouver Lawyers who specialize in criminal law and represent clients related to criminal charges can be found at www.lawyerahead.ca

The leasing process begins by signing an “offer to lease”. These contain the fundamental terminology featured in the full lease. Negotiating the conditions included in the lease is usually done at this stage. Whatever conditions and penalties for breaking the lease should be included.

Unlike residential leases, commercial leases are less regulated. Here are some of the basic concepts included in most commercial leases.

The contract contains the length, location, and cost of the lease. These are pretty basic and should be expected. It is more of a formality to define what exactly the tenant is renting, for how long they are renting it, and how much they will pay the property owner for usage. Payments may be in lump sum form or differentiate between utilities, taxes and other costs.

Leasing contracts specify insurance and physical obligations of the tenant. Some proprietors may require the tenant to insure the space for the duration of the lease. They may opt to specify what can and cannot be done by the tenant to maintain solidarity for their policy as well. As far as physical obligation, this section goes further to limit what tenants can and cannot do to the property. It could be written, for instance that a tenant agrees to complete the space’s transformation from a massage parlor into an art gallery. Or, it may specify that at no time during the lease the tenant install a horse stable. These clauses tend to be rather open-ended to that effect.

Contracts spell out the attornment, non-disturbance and subordination rights of the tenant. This is about when the tenants rights are ‘subordinate’ or subject to the rights of a landlord’s creditors and when the tenant’s rights are senior. These offer assurance to a lender that the tenant will continue being the tenant under the new landlord or will ‘attorn to the lender’ if, in fact, they foreclose on the property. The non-disturbance portion preserves the tenant’s rights to the building even if the property owner defaults on their mortgage and the creditor forecloses.

Lastly, the lease contains provisions for default and special rights. Default clauses lay out what recompense the landlord is due if the tenant defaults. The special rights clause detail what rights the tenant has in regards to expanding, lease renewal & termination, and any incentives the property owner offers for entering into the lease.

After negotiating, the final lease is drawn up and signed.

This whole process is intricate and being cautious is wise. To avoid future regrets, it is best to get help from a lawyer. An experienced real-estate attorney, well versed in local and provincial laws can lead you through the process, circumnavigating the many pitfalls and risks.  To find Toronto Lawyers, Vancouver Lawyers and Lawyers, use Lawyerahead.ca.

Structured settlements are a useful means of award distribution in many cases. They can ensure years of financial security for a claimant and their family and lessen many income-related stresses (like mortgages). With this in mind, structured settlements are not always the best option and do have a downside.

Large purchases are made more difficult under structured settlements. One may decide it is necessary to purchase a new car or a home, requiring large, upfront deposits. Acquiring the means to progress with such a purchase beneath a structured settlement would involve consistent monthly budgeting to accumulate the down payment and for the purchase to not be an immediate need. Although most investments of this nature tend to fall into that category, life sometimes throws a curve ball that requires immediate action and ready funds.

null

On the other hand, structured settlements are good at regulating a plaintiff’s consumerist behaviors. Like an allowance, these reduce the damage one can inadvertently do to themselves financially by controlling the flow of the award. With a lump-sum settlement, there is often the temptation to go on a spending spree, which inevitably leads to penury. Statistics show that most lump-sum award recipients spend the entire settlement within five years of receiving it. Although many people are responsible enough to invest wisely and self-regulate their lump-sum award, the controls imposed by a structured settlement avoids this issue completely.

“Cash for structured settlement” opportunities may be feasible when situations arise where a person needs to escape the choke hold of their structured settlement. The settlement recipient will most likely take a financial loss by selling their structured award to one of the many companies willing to buy, and sometimes, it may be reasonable to do so. Reasons may include mortgage resets, needs of a child, unforeseen hardships or anything requiring large amounts of money in a short amount of time. Consulting an attorney is always recommended before one chooses to sell a structured settlement. Selling may seem like the surest way to address a current crisis, but one’s lawyer or lawyers may have a subtler solution that is more in the client’s best interest.

Structured settlements are not for everyone. While they offer tax benefits and security, structured settlements lessen a recipient’s control over their own money. Taking into account all of the variables in one’s own life helps them decide the better path to take. Are there children involved? If so, a structured settlement may be a better choice. Is the recipient a savvy investor? In which case, a lump-sum award may benefit them more. Hashing over these and other specifics with a financial advisor will help decide if a structured settlement is best.

Injuries resulting from negligence are troublesome because of the emotional reactions of the injured party to the stresses presented by their current situation. This may cause them to act irrationally and could potentially cripple their chances of getting the settlement they deserve. Here are some Dos and Don’ts for any personal injury case.

Do get a lawyer. The first step in a negligence case should always be to consult with an attorney. Lawyers experienced in tort law and the specific type of negligence a client was affected by will be able to evaluate the merits of the case, how they should proceed, what damages were actually caused, and what the injured party is eligible to receive as compensation.

Don’t threaten whoever the tort suit is against. This may seem obvious, but many are tempted to forgo legal remedies and seek direct revenge. This is never a good idea. Making threats, especially toward a business, may end up irreparably hurting one’s case. Emotions run high in personal injury cases and it’s important to follow a lawyer’s guidance throughout the life of the case.

Do get checked out by a medical professional. A doctor can quantify the actual damage a patient has suffered. This may be something obvious that the injured party already knew they had, but it could be something more subtle and insidious. This benefits the case by putting realistic numbers in the place of mere speculation.

Having a medical professional explain what the recovery process clarifies the situation to a jury if the case goes to trial. Discovering that treatment for the injuries would require four years of physical therapy and an extended absence from work paints a more detailed picture of the hardships the plaintiff will endure - as opposed to simply, her ‘back hurts’. Fleshing out the nitty-gritty details by seeing a doctor will give the lawyer a point of reference for the severity of the injuries and what the claimant is entitled to.

Don’t preemptively take a settlement. In some cases, the offending party may contact the injured party with a settlement before the injured party has a chance to find out the true extent they have been damaged. It is difficult to turn down money right when the initial shock of hospital bills begins, but this is why the offending party offered a settlement in the first place. By taking a settlement at this stage, one is almost guaranteed to be selling themselves short. These arrangements usually entail a signed contract, promising that no future actions can be taken against the offending party. This eliminates any chance of compensation for future, unforeseen expenses. All offers made in these circumstances should be immediately disclosed to one’s attorney. An attorney will know if the client should disregard the offer or, in the rare circumstance of a good deal, if they should accept it.

These are only a few basic rules regarding personal injury cases. A personal injury lawyer will know what particular actions a client should take and which ones they should avoid in every unique case. An injured party is already, in fact injured, so it’s vital one does not compound damage by ignoring these fundamental principles.

Vancouver Lawyer Sheldon Geldberg is crying foul in the arrest of his now clients Gordon Taylor. and Udham Sanghera.  They are both facing weapon charges of 8 for Udham and 12 for Mr. Taylor as a result of a undercover operation ran by the Vancouver Police.  They were both arrested on February 23 by police as part of the city’s push to clean out the ever increasing gang related violence in Vancouver.  Just this morning 2 were killed in an apartment shooting that is now being blamed on the gang related violence in Vancouver.

It is now becoming very important for the city of Vancouver to clean out the violence especially since it is now labeled as Canada’s Olympic City.  All eyes are on Vancouver, and the city and rest of Canada are watch the Vancouver city officials to see what they do, it at all possible, to stop the recent gang related violence.

It is interesting to note however that the Vancouver Police is now starting to employ interesting strategies to show that they are in fact in control of the situation and that they are doing a whole a lot of clean up these days.  Are they though ?  Every time a crime happens, the usual statement from the police officers in Vancouver seem to me “Its a very rare occasion” as Constable Lindsey Houghton was observed saying on this homicide.

This is exactly the point Lawyer Goldberg is trying to make.  He claims his clients are just scapegoats and that they are being used as a media stunt to show to the public that in fact Vancouver Police is making arrests.  He says that his clients are arrested in an attempt by Vancouver Police to “look for easy preys” and to make “public feel safe”.  He believes crack down on easy prey is in no way an indication that they have found the people responsible for many gang related violence in Vancouver.  According to Vancouver Lawyers headed up by Goldberg, Mr. Taylor is recently on unemployment insurance  and penniless; he is not driving around in “Hummers” with “Body Guards”.  He questions “Is it an offence when the police, through an agent or themselves, are handing you the offence?” making reference to the fact that his clients were arrested by undercover police officers disguised as brokers of gun deals.

Robert Rotenberg, a lawyer who opened his criminal law practice 18 years ago has now published a crime thriller based in Toronto itself.

Here is a snippet of this story Line as published by Toronto Star’s Geoff Pevere

“… As police, reporters and various representatives of the local legal community scramble around the periphery of the murder of a popular radio host’s young wife, Toronto flashes by with captivating vividness: streetcars rumble along College St., traffic chokes the terminally congested DVP, sinister confabs unfold at the Vespa Lunch and late-night hockey games crack and slap in the chilly air at Nathan Phillips Square. …”

Toronto Criminal lawyer Robert Rotenberg’s book is titled “Old City Hall” and can be found at a book store near you.