Add To Favorites
Aggressive Advocacy Focused on Your Recovery
Lawyer Blogs | 2012/03/07 09:32
The motorcycle accident attorney services by King Law Firm, P.C., are designed to help you get your life back together and get you the maximum settlement possible.

An experienced motorcycle attorney Ray King will:

- Investigate the motorcycle accident promptly and thoroughly
- Preserve evidence of the motorcycle crash
- Secure photographs of the motorcycle crash scene
- Establish the defendants' liability for the motorcycle accident
- Inspect the motorcycle and safety gear for potential defects
- Recover your medical expenses and lost wages

The Austin, Texas motorcycle accident attorney Ray King is familiar with the battles you face as a motorcyclist, and we can help you stand up for your rights and overcome them. Ray King is "The Motorcycle Attorney" and has offices across Texas.  Ray employs an office of professionals who use the latest technology to enhance each motorcycle accident victim. Ray and his staff regularly make house calls and visit hospitalized clients to accommodate their families. Ray employs an Accident Reconstructionist to investigate each motorcycle accident and immediately interview any witness and collect the necessary evidence sometimes missed by local police departments.

If you need help with your motorcycle accident case, call us at (512) 262-9018.



Monster iPhone location lawsuit filed against Apple
Lawyer Blogs | 2011/08/16 09:31
More than 20,000 South Korean iPhone users have filed a class action lawsuit against US technology giant Apple for alleged privacy violations over the collection of location data, a law firm said.

The suit came after lawyer Kim Hyung-Suk was awarded one million won (US $950) in compensation in June, the first such payout by Apple's Korean unit, following an interim order by a court in the southeastern city of Changwon.

Kim has since led online preparations for a class action suit against Apple and its South Korean unit.

"The suit accuses Apple of breaching articles 10 and 17 of the constitution that ensure pursuit of happiness and protection of privacy, and the South Korean law on protection of location data," a spokesman for Kim's firm Miraelaw said. The suit involves 26,691 people demanding one million won each.




Indiana Court of Appeals Disagrees Over Effect of Admissions
Lawyer Blogs | 2011/07/26 09:02
Today, the Indiana Court of Appeals issued a memorandum decision, uncitable as authority under App. R. 65(D), in which the Court disagreed over the extent to which admissions could be used against a party in a motion for summary judgment in Clark v. Clark, Cause No. 01A02-1007-CT-759. While the decision itself cannot be used as precedent, the disagreement is informative.

In this case, a father and son traveled in a car together to the home of another person. When they arrived, the son got out of the car to help the father parallel park. The son positioned himself in front of his father's vehicle, between it and another vehicle parked in the alley. When the father's vehicle was in the appropriate position, the son signaled for the father to stop by putting his hand up. The father hit the gas pedal instead of the brake, and the son was pinned between his father's vehicle and the parked vehicle. The son sustained serious injuries to his leg. He brought suit against his father for his injuries and the father asserted the Indiana Guest Statute as an affirmative defense.

The Indiana Guest Statute provides that people with certain types of relationships, such as father-son, cannot sue each other for injuries arising out of the operation of a motor vehicle if the person is "in or upon" the vehicle at the time of the injuries. During the course of the litigation, the son sent requests for admissions to the father. Two of those requests and responses are reproduced below.


19. On September 5, 2007, at the time of the collision, Robert L. Clark, Jr. was not in the Chevrolet.

RESPONSE: At the moment of impact the plaintiff was not in the Chevrolet, whether he was a pedestrian is genuine issue for trial and therefore denied.

20. On September 5, 2007, at the time of the collision, Robert L. Clark, Jr. was not upon the Chevrolet.

RESPONSE: At the moment of impact the plaintiff was not upon the Chevrolet, whether he was a pedestrian is genuine issue for trial and therefore denied.

Based on those responses, the son moved for summary judgment. The father filed a cross-motion and the trial court granted the father's motion.

On appeal, the father argued that the admissions were not dispositive of whether the son was in or upon the vehicle at the time of his injuries because that is a legal conclusion that the Court would have to make after applying the law to the facts. The Court disagreed, holding that admissions can be directed to legal conclusions, not merely facts.

The dissent found the admissions ambiguous, because of the qualification about whether the son was a pedestrian and because there were questions concerning whether "in" and "upon" have the same generic meaning as they do as a legal term of art.

The lesson here is that requests for admissions can be powerful litigation tools and we lawyers must be careful when responding to them. You may find out that you have admitted something inadvertently.

Lesson:

1.Even a qualified response to a request for admission can count as an admission.

Brad A. Catlin
Price Waicukauski & Riley, LLC

http://www.indianalawupdate.com/entry/Indiana-Court-of-Appeals-Disagrees-Over-Effect-of-Admissions





When is a Person an Employee of Another?
Lawyer Blogs | 2011/07/19 09:20
On July 19, 2011, the Indiana Court of Appeals issued a decision which I found surprising in McCann v. City of Anderson, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App. 2011), Cause No. 48A02-1009-PL-1060. At issue was whether a trial court had properly granted summary judgment on the question of whether a warrant officer was an employee of the Anderson City Court. Despite the procedural posture of the case and factors that weighed in favor of finding an employer-employee relationship, the Court affirmed a decision granting summary judgment to the defendants.

In this case, McCann was a police officer, who eventually became warrant officer for the Anderson City Court in 1998. He held that post until 2005, when the judge asked that McCann be reassigned. As a result of this dismissal, McCann filed suit based on the Indiana Wage Statute, arguing that he had been an employee of the Court and was entitled to funds that had been allocated to the position of warrant officer by that court. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment and the trial court granted the defendants' motion.

On appeal, the Court quoted GKN Co. v. Magness, 744 N.E.2d 397, 402 (Ind. 2001), for the seven factors that a court should consider when determining whether an employer-employee relationship exists. The Court then analyzed each of these factors and determined that three weighed in favor of the existence an employer-employee relationship and four against, with the "most important" factor weighing against.

Thus, over all, four of the seven factors, including the most important, "Control over the Means Used," indicate McCann was not an employee of the City Court. Because the City Court was not McCann's employer, he cannot be due any "unpaid wages" from the City Court. Therefore, he cannot assert a claim against the City Court under the Indiana Wage Statute.

The aspect of this decision that is most surprising is that the Court reached this conclusion despite the procedural posture of the case. It could have easily held that, viewing the facts in the light most favorable to McCann, the seven factors weighed both for and against a finding of an employer-employee relationship between McCann and the City Court created a genuine issue of material fact. This indicates that the factor the Court identified as being "most important", whether the purported employer exercised control over the means used by the purported employee to perform work, is very important indeed.

Lesson:

1.It will be exceedingly difficult to prove the existence of an employer-employee relationship if the purported employer did not exercise control over the means that the purported employee used to perform his work.

Brad A. Catlin
Price Waicukauski & Riley, LLC

http://www.indianalawupdate.com/entry/When-is-a-Person-an-Employee-of-Another





[PREV] [1][2][3][4][5][6] [NEXT]
All
Legal Business
Legal Marketing News
Headline Legal News
Court News
Court Watch
Legal Interview
Topics in Legal News
Attorney News
Press Release
Opinions
Lawyer Blogs
Legal Marketing
Politics
Law Firm News
Wisconsin Supreme Court prim..
Court: Ex-West Virginia judg..
Kushner firm seeks court cha..
Court: Idaho nuclear waste d..
Supreme Court blocks some re..
Suspect in U Penn student's ..
UN court: Nicaragua must pay..
Cambodian court again reject..
Kenya's High Court orders go..
Texas executes Dallas man fo..
Officials ask court to send ..
Top Pakistani court orders a..
Analysis: Outside groups may..
Malaysia's top court annuls ..
Warrant dropped for professo..


  Law Promo can construct your law firm a brand new responsive website, or help you redesign your existing site to secure your place in the mobile world. Large Law Firm Web Design by Law Promo - How Important is Web Design for Law Firms
   Lawyer & Law Firm Links
Bankruptcy Attorney Eugene
Eugene Bankruptcy Attorney
www.willamettevalleybankruptcy.com
New York Adoption Lawyers
New York Foster Care Lawyers
Adoption Pre-Certification
www.lawrsm.com
Oregon Criminal Defense
Eugene Criminal Defense Lawyer
Coit & Associates, P.C.
www.criminaldefenseoregon.com
Oregon Family Law Attorney
Divorce Lawyer Eugene. Family Law
www.mjmlawoffice.com
   Legal Resource Links
 
 
Disclaimer: The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Legal News Media as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. Legal News Sites & Blogs Design by Attorney Web Design That Works