ESQChat.com - Blogs http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php en Wed, 07 Jan 2009 04:17:05 GMT vBulletin 60 http://www.esqchat.com/forum/images/misc/rss.jpg ESQChat.com - Blogs http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php Los Angeles Criminal Defense Attorney http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=13 Tue, 16 Dec 2008 17:03:48 GMT If you are under investigation for a crime or have been charged with an offense in Los Angeles, you need an experienced California criminal defense... If you are under investigation for a crime or have been charged with an offense in Los Angeles, you need an experienced California criminal defense attorney who can provide you with professional help to defend you against your Los Angeles criminal case. Arthur Khachatourians is a Los Angeles criminal defense attorney who has extensive knowledge and experience with the California criminal justice system and the Los Angeles Superior courts.

If the facts of your case warrant a dismissal, Mr. Khachatourians will attempt to have
the prosecuting agency reject your criminal case. Our criminal defense team will piece
together the missing facts and advocate to the detective or the prosecuting agency to have the case rejected, reduced, or filed as a misdemeanor instead of a felony. Often in cases that warrant a dismissal, the person making the false accusation has a "hidden
agenda." The accuser could be your spouse, former spouse, ex-girlfriend, ex-boyfriend, or a business partner who is attempting to use the criminal case as leverage for their financial gain, pecuniary interest, or child custody purposes. In these situations, time is of the essence!!! You need to call Arthur Khachatourians at 818-590-8294 for a free criminal defense consultation before it is too late.

If a criminal case has already been filed against you or your loved one, Mr. Khachatourians will help you reduce your bail or obtain your release without bail on your promise to appear in court. On misdemeanor cases, your appearance will not be necessary, unless the appearance is for trial. Arthur Khachatourians will personally
handle your criminal case and defend you at all stages of the criminal proceedings.

Visit our website at: http://www.calicriminaldefense.com
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version Name: 1.gif.png Views: 2 Size: 232.0 KB ID: 5  
]]> Arthurfpfmk2000 http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=13 The Michigan Bar Examination Results and What to Do if You Fail http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=12 Sun, 02 Nov 2008 18:54:06 GMT The Michigan Bar Examination is as much a tradition and institution in our state's practice as is the native practice of using your right hand to show others where you live.

For one, we have our own grading service for the essay portion of the exam though the Board of Law Examiners. Two, we require a lot legal knowledge and Michigan specific law from our candidates. Finally, we have an appeal process that actually gives you a second bite at the apple.

At this time of the year, my phone rings off the hook asking for help on the appeal portion. Here's what I tell everyone:

1. Be proactive. When you do fail, don't allow yourself to wallow in self pity. Immediately order your results and register for the next test.

2. When you receive your results, carefully review the questions and the Model Answers. See how closely the law cited in the Model Answer relate to the facts in the question. Break it down into points and compare them to your answer.

3. Be honest with yourself. After doing the comparison, did you see gaps in your answer? Did you notice a lack of detail? Did you get the right law but wrong conclusion? Did you simply not discuss an issue? These are usually the reasons you did not get a good grade.

However, if you do not see these gaps or shortcomings, you might have a question to appeal. Repeat this process enough and you may have a chance at ringing the bell on your appeal.

Don't despair if you fail. Many fine lawyers win on appeal or on their next Michigan Bar Examination. It's a test, not a measure of who you are. ]]> tadatlaw http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=12 The Michigan Bar Examination Results and What to Do if You Fail http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=11 Sun, 02 Nov 2008 18:51:56 GMT The Michigan Bar Examination is as much a tradition and institution in our state's practice as is the native practice of using your right hand to show others where you live.

For one, we have our own grading service for the essay portion of the exam though the Board of Law Examiners. Two, we require a lot legal knowledge and Michigan specific law from our candidates. Finally, we have an appeal process that actually gives you a second bite at the apple.

At this time of the year, my phone rings off the hook asking for help on the appeal portion. Here's what I tell everyone:

1. Be proactive. When you do fail, don't allow yourself to wallow in self pity. Immediately order your results and register for the next test.

2. When you receive your results, carefully review the questions and the Model Answers. See how closely the law cited in the Model Answer relate to the facts in the question. Break it down into points and compare them to your answer.

3. Be honest with yourself. After doing the comparison, did you see gaps in your answer? Did you notice a lack of detail? Did you get the right law but wrong conclusion? Did you simply not discuss an issue? These are usually the reasons you did not get a good grade.

However, if you do not see these gaps or shortcomings, you might have a question to appeal. Repeat this process enough and you may have a chance at ringing the bell on your appeal.

Don't despair if you fail. Many fine lawyers win on appeal or on their next Michigan Bar Examination. It's a test, not a measure of who you are. ]]> tadatlaw http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=11 The Michigan Bar Examination Results and What to Do if You Fail http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=10 Sun, 02 Nov 2008 18:50:47 GMT The Michigan Bar Examination is as much a tradition and institution in our state's practice as is the native practice of using your right hand to show others where you live.

For one, we have our own grading service for the essay portion of the exam though the Board of Law Examiners. Two, we require a lot legal knowledge and Michigan specific law from our candidates. Finally, we have an appeal process that actually gives you a second bite at the apple.

At this time of the year, my phone rings off the hook asking for help on the appeal portion. Here's what I tell everyone:

1. Be proactive. When you do fail, don't allow yourself to wallow in self pity. Immediately order your results and register for the next test.

2. When you receive your results, carefully review the questions and the Model Answers. See how closely the law cited in the Model Answer relate to the facts in the question. Break it down into points and compare them to your answer.

3. Be honest with yourself. After doing the comparison, did you see gaps in your answer? Did you notice a lack of detail? Did you get the right law but wrong conclusion? Did you simply not discuss an issue? These are usually the reasons you dod not get a good grade.

However, if you do not see these gaps or shortcomings, you might have a question to appeal. Repeat this process enough and you may have a chance at ringing the bell on your appeal.

Don't despair if you fail. Many fine lawyers win on appeal or on their next Michigan Bar Examination. It's a test, not a measure of who you are. ]]> tadatlaw http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=10 The Michigan Bar Examination Results and What to Do if You Fail http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=9 Sun, 02 Nov 2008 18:46:50 GMT The Michigan Bar Examination is as much a tradition and institution in our state's practice as is the native practice of using your right hand to show others where you live.

For one, we have our own grading service for the essay portion of the exam though the Board of Law Examiners. Two, we require a lot legal knowledge and Michigan specific law from our candidates. Finally, we have an appeal process that actually gives you a second bite at the apple.

At this time of the year, my phone rings off the hook asking for help on the appeal portion. Here's what I tell everyone:

1. Be proactive. When you do fail, don't allow yourself to wallow in self pity. Immediately order your results and register for the next test.

2. When you receive your results, carefully review the questions and the Model Answers. See how closely the law cited in the Model Answer relate to the facts in the question. Break it down into points and compare them to your answer.

3. Be honest with yourself. After doing the comparison, did you see gaps in your answer? Did you notice a lack of detail? Did you get the right law but wrong conclusion? Did you simply not discuss an issue? These are usually the reasons you dod not get a good grade. ]]> tadatlaw http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=9 TX Sup. Ct. Found Action Of Bodily Injury From Radiation By Cell Phones Triggered Def http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=8 Thu, 25 Sep 2008 17:15:11 GMT By David A. Gauntlett, Gauntlett & Associates

In Zurich Am. Ins. Co. v. Nokia, Inc., ___ S.W.3d ___, 2008 WL 3991183 (Tex. 2008), the underlying suit asserted bodily injury claims from putative class action claimants alleging that radiation emitted by their phones caused biological injury. Zurich agreed to defend under a reservation of rights as did National Union and Federal.

The trial court found that the three insurers had no duty to defend. The court of appeals reversed, finding that “bodily injury” had been factually asserted as the suit sought damages because of “bodily injury” and the “business risk” exclusions were inapplicable. The Supreme Court affirmed noting that the same result was reached by a different panel from the Texas Court of Appeals in Samsung Electronics America, Inc. v. Federal Ins. Co., 202 S.W.3d 372, 383-84 (Tex. App. – Dallas 2006 pet. granted).

Joining opinions from the Fourth Circuit and Ninth Circuit, found that biological injuries alleged by claimants potentially stated a claim for bodily injuries under the policy, the Court analogized the claims to subclinical injuries alleged by plaintiffs who have been exposed to asbestos.

The fact that the proposed class included only those purchasers who have not been diagnosed “with a brain-related tumor or cancer of the eye” is of no moment since excluding certain classes of injured purchasers does not mean that the putative class had abandoned all claims for damages because of bodily injuries. The Court noted that every court to analyze the issue of whether similar claims were covered reached affirmative results. Id. at *7.

The insurers sought to introduce evidence that the plaintiffs introduced in their briefing in the MDL action indicating that their claims were not for bodily injury but solely for economic damages. The court reiterated that Texas has not and would not recognize exceptions to the eight-corners rule. GuideOne Elite Ins. Co. v. Fielder Rd. Baptist Church, 197 S.W.3d 305, 308-09 (Tex. 2006). Id. at *8.

http://www.gauntlettoninsurance.com

Category: Bodily Injury

Keywords: Headset Injuries; Economic Injury; Damages; Complaint Allegations Rule

Upload Date:

Publish Date: ]]> dgauntlett http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=8 <![CDATA["open and obvious" under Michigan law]]> http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=7 Wed, 24 Sep 2008 10:21:48 GMT Does anyone have a brief which addresses "open and obvious ?" I am trying to use dictionary definitions of "casual" and "inspection" to convince judges that one can not "casually" inspect anything. I get interest but they usually say "the Court of Appeals has told me what to do." I need to get around this brainless comment without being insulting.

Ronald A. Steinberg ]]> Ronald A. Steinberg http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=7 Use of Different Copyrighted or Trademarked Materials on Separate http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=6 Tue, 16 Sep 2008 00:30:55 GMT Guaranty Bank v. Chubb Corp., ___ F.3d ___, 2008 WL 2764631 (7th Cir. (Wis.) 2008) (Posner) Applying Wisconsin law, the Seventh Circuit found no... Guaranty Bank v. Chubb Corp., ___ F.3d ___, 2008 WL 2764631
(7th Cir. (Wis.) 2008) (Posner)

Applying Wisconsin law, the Seventh Circuit found no potential coverage under “advertising injury” provisions for fact allegations of trademark infringement and unfair competition in a suit pending in Michigan federal court.

The suit arose out of Guaranty Bank’s public announcement of its intent to enter the same geographic market as Midwest Guaranty Bank. Six days after a preliminary injunction was issued, Guaranty Bank advised Great Northern Insurance Co. of the suit and asked it to defend. Two and a half months later, it settled the suit for $200,000. The court found that the Wisconsin prejudice standard put the burden on the insured, not insurer, because notice was delayed until 90% of the defense fees were incurred and the preliminary injunction motion was lost.

Guaranty Bank argued in effect that there was no harm, no foul, because the insurer would have denied on grounds other than late notice. The court found this argument beside the point because there was no arguable coverage evident on the face of the complaint where an express exclusion for advertising injury to “any intellectual property law or right” “other than one described in the definition of advertising injury” – applied the only exception for infringement of a registered trademark was not factually implicated as the suit was for infringement of an unregistered trademark under Michigan common law.

In the Court’s words, “There is no such animal as a registered common law trademark.” Id. at *5.

The court also noted there was no trademark number referenced on the Civil Cover Sheet, which is a contemporaneous publicly filed document even though it is not part of the complaint. Id. at *5.

http://www.gauntlettoninsurance.com

Category:
General Coverage or Exclusion
Trademark Infringement
Late Notice – Notice-Prejudice Rule

Keywords: Wisconsin; “advertising injury”; trademark; “unfair competition”; “late notice”; prejudice; “unregistered trademark”; infringement

Upload Date:

Publish Date: ]]> dgauntlett http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=6 High Court Hears Important Punitive Damage Appeal http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=5 Wed, 18 Jun 2008 05:23:08 GMT The United States Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments in the Exxon Valdez appeal and explored whether the $2.5 billion punitive award may be... The United States Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments in the Exxon Valdez appeal and explored whether the $2.5 billion punitive award may be excessive. The opinion could be used as a vehicle to further reduce the amount of punitive damages a jury can award a plaintiff.

In 1989, an Exxon Valdez oil tanker ran aground on a reef and dumped 11 million gallons of oil into Alaska waters. The jury found Exxon Mobil Corp. liable for the resulting damages and assessed $5 billion in punitive damages against the company. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the punitive damages award but reduced it to $2.5 billion, which still represented the largest punitive damages award ever affirmed by a federal court. Exxon then filed a petition with the United States Supreme Court arguing that the high court should overturn the $2.5 billion punitive award.

The Justices have several avenues in which to dispose of Exxon's request ranging from the very narrow to wholesale review of prior case law addressing when punitive damages are excessive, and thus violate a defendant's constitutional rights. However, given the line of questioning by the 8 Justices (Justice Alito holds stock in Exxon Mobile and thus, did not participate in the appeal), the most likely outcome is that the award will be affirmed under federal common law, but possibly reduced.

The interesting question will be the basis for reducing the punitive award if it is indeed reduced. Under current case law, one looks to three constitutional guideposts to determine the appropriate ratio between punitive and compensatory damages. During Exxon's oral argument, one Justice suggested that the ratio of punitive damages to compensatory damages in the Exxon case should be as low as two-to-one to comport with due process limits (further reducing the ratio set forth in BMW v. Gore and bringing the ratio closer in line with what was suggested in State Farm v. Campbell). An opinion reaching this conclusion would have a sweeping effect on state law punitive damage awards as defendants across the country would no doubt use this opinion to attack what they consider to be excessive punitive damage awards.


California is trending toward a lower ratio punitive damage award analysis as well. In Jet Source v. Doherty and Walker v. Farmers Insurance, California appellate courts have looked to the State Farm opinion to reach holdings affirming lower punitive damage ratios. If the Supreme Court in Exxon Valdez finds that a lower punitive damage award is mandatory under the facts of that case, defendants will no doubt utilize the ruling to slowly chip away at punitive damage awards in the future. Stay tuned!


Matthew Digesti is partner in the San Diego Law Firm, Heintz Robyn & Digesti LLP. (www.hrdlaw.com)
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version Name: HRD.jpg Views: 14 Size: 13.8 KB ID: 4  
]]> mdigesti http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=5 Verizon Shares Network Secrets to Enhance Download Speed and Reduce Costs http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=4 Wed, 18 Jun 2008 05:21:53 GMT Verizon announced that it, along with others, have created a more efficient peer-to-peer ("P2P") file sharing program. In a bold move, Verizon shared details regarding its network structure with researchers and Pando to create a system that increased download speed by an average of 60 percent.


In a traditional P2P network, if a Verizon user in Los Angeles downloads a movie, only 6.3 percent of that data came from a Los Angeles Verizon customer. Therefore, 93.7 percent of the data had to come from a user outside Los Angeles, and sometimes, half way across the world. The new technology identifies the closest Verizon customers with the particular data required, and thereby reduces download time by an average of 60 percent.


Verizon's move to share its internal network structure to create a solution is important for several reasons. First, the Internet is steadily moving toward video-based downloads wherein high-definition television, which contains large amounts of data to transfer, will soon be common on computers and mobile phones. This creates heavy traffic on Internet providers while simultaneously increasing costs on providers for carrying the information to the ultimate user. By reducing the time the provider's network is carry's the data, the cost to the provider is also reduced--at times by 90 percent. For example, distribution of a 60 minute TV show in HD using traditional P2P delivery systems typically costs Verizon $1 to deliver. With the new technology, this cost can be reduced by up to 90 percent.


Second, many Internet service providers consider their internal network structure a company asset and as such, go to great legal lengths to keep such structures secret. Verizon has effectively broken this mold through an informal strategic partnership and realized a goal that otherwise was unavailable. While other Internet service providers have attempted to slow or even block P2P sharing, and found themselves embroiled in potential costly lawsuits (see Comcast Corp.), Verizon changed strategies and fostered an atmosphere of cooperation.


Just as Heintz Robyn & Digesti LLP counsels its business clients, strategic cooperation can thrive in most business situations if the proper legal foundation is in place. In this instance, strategic planning and the appropriate legal foundation has provided Verizon with a competitive advantage against its competition in the form of a superior product and greatly reduced operating costs.

One can keep updated by visiting www.verizon.com, www.pando.com and www.dcia.info (P2P Industry Group).
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version Name: HRD.jpg Views: 19 Size: 13.8 KB ID: 3  
]]> mdigesti http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=4 Landlord and Tenant Law http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=3 Wed, 18 Jun 2008 05:18:28 GMT The law of landlord and tenant is changing, but in many respects, all to slowly. Chicago, since 1986, has an Ordinance on tenants' and landlords' rights that has done much to "level the playing field" between the rights of landlords and tenants, but we still, in Illinois and Chicago, have a long way to go.

I am very active in litigating tenants' rights in the eviction courts, in cases where the tenant is Plaintiff and asking for damages and in class actions asserting tenants' rights. I have networked to a degree with lawyers in California and New York, but we who are interested in this area of law need a forum for LAWYERS to put our heads together and talk about tenants' rights, which now include to rights of owners of homes and condominiums who find themselves in or about to be in foreclosure.

I am happy to share whatever expertise I may have and hope others will join here to work on our common concerns

Paul Bernstein, Esq.
Chicago, Illinois

What is the state of tenants' rights in your state?
Perhaps a good place to start is with talking a bit about the state of tenants' rights in your state. Happy to start this blog by exploring same and tying in Blog entries with a threaded-discussion group on a series of related topics as we get going here. ]]> paulbernstein http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=3 e-Discovery Guide for Judges Provides Good Advice for All http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=2 Wed, 18 Jun 2008 05:11:27 GMT Ever wonder what's in the pocket of those judicial robes? For many judges in the federal system today, especially magistrates who hear electronic discovery disputes, it is probably Managing Discovery of Electronic Information: A Pocket Guide for Judges. It was written for federal judges by federal judges, namely Judge Barbara J. Rothstein and Judge Ronald J. Hedges, with the help of Elizabeth C. Wiggins, an educator of federal judges. The Pocket Guide was published by the Federal Judicial Center, the education and research arm of the federal court system. The Chairman of the Board of the Federal Judicial Center is none other than the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, currently Justice John Roberts (seated in the center of the picture of the Supreme Court Justices above).


The lead author is Judge Barbara Rothstein. She has been the Director of the Federal Judicial Center since 2003, and has a strong interest in electronic discovery. Her co-author, Judge Hedges, is a former Magistrate Judge in New Jersey who is well known in e-discovery circles. Judges Hedges retired from the bench in 2007 to go into private practice as an e-discovery lawyer for Nixon Peabody. The third co-author, Elizabeth Wiggins, J.D., PhD., is a Project Director and Senior Research Associate at the Federal Judicial Center.

The Pocket Guide tries to persuade federal judges to be much more proactive in the management of e-discovery. As Judge Rothstein explains in her Preface, the Pocket Guide encourages judges to take the initiative in e-discovery issues:

It [the Pocket Guide] encourages judges to actively manage those cases involving ESI, raising points for consideration by the parties rather than awaiting the parties' identification and argument of the matters.

With a few notable exceptions, this is currently not the practice in most District Courts. In fact, very few federal judges have even modified their standard form Case Management Order to implement the new rules. Further, unless the parties raise ESI issues, they are rarely mentioned in Rule 16(b) conferences. Typically, judges wait until e-discovery disputes are raised by the parties. All too often, this still happens near the end of the discovery process, and not the beginning as the new rules contemplate. The Bar has been slow to embrace the requirement that e-discovery issues be fully discussed at Rule 26(f) attorney conferences. This is primarily because most attorneys do not understand e-discovery, are not sure what to say, and may not even know for sure whether their case involves electronically stored information. (Hint - it almost certainly does.) They need "encouragement" from the bench, which is exactly what the authors of the Pocket Guide recommend at page 4:

All too often, attorneys view their obligation to "meet and confer" under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) as a perfunctory exercise. When ESI is involved, judges should insist that a meaningful Rule 26(f) conference take place and that a meaningful discovery plan be submitted.

The Pocket Guide includes a chart summarizing the topics that attorneys should discuss (remember this is a 26-page pocket guide intended for quick reference, not a detailed text):

Discussion topics for a Rule 26(f) conference:
What ESI is available and where it resides.
Ease/difficulty and cost of producing information.
Schedule and format of production.
Preservation of information.
Agreements about privilege or work-product protection.

The guide also identifies the reoccurring problems inherent in e-discovery so that judges will know what questions to ask and have a better appreciation of the issues. Here is the chart included in the Introduction at page 4 as a reminder to judges of how ESI differs from paper information:

How ESI differs from paper information:
Volume.
Variety of sources.
Dynamic quality.
Hidden information: metadata and embedded data.
Dependent on system that created it.
Deleting doesn't delete it.

The Pocket Guide explains how these differences make litigation holds imperative, often lead to disputes concerning the scope of discovery, make document reviews difficult, and make inadvertent production of privileged information much more likely. The important problem of proportionality is also discussed at page 5:

In addition, because deleted or backup information may be available, parties may request its production, even though restoring, retrieving, and producing it may require expensive and burdensome computer forensic work that is out of proportion to the reasonable discovery needs of the requesting party.

Rule 26(b)(2)(B)&(C) apply the proportionality principle for hard-to-access ESI and require a balancing test. The guide at page 8 properly suggests that judges first require the parties to search the available easy-to-access ESI before even considering an expensive search of relatively inaccessible data:

When hard-to-access information is of potential interest, the court should encourage lawyers to negotiate a two-tiered approach in which they first sort through the information that can be provided from easily accessed sources and then determine whether it is necessary to search the less-accessible sources.

The Pocket Guide points out the 7 factors judges should consider in a balancing test as to whether the benefits of production outweigh the burdens, as delineated in the Commentary to Rule 26(b)(2)(C). It goes on to suggest a variety of available tools to assist in weighing these factors, including: prior full review of the reasonably accessible sources; specific and tailored discovery requests; use of sampling techniques; discovery on these discovery issues; and cost shifting.


The federal guide reviews all of the new rules on e-discovery in a similar manner. If you have not already studied the rules in depth, this would be a good place to start. To those already well versed in the rules, the Pocket Guide contains no surprises, just good common sense advice on the meaning and application of the rules.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version Name: j2.jpg Views: 27 Size: 3.5 KB ID: 2  
Attached Images
File Type: bmp j1.bmp (255.9 KB, 32 views)
]]> ralphlosey http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=2 What to advise clients who are thinking of divorce http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=1 Wed, 18 Jun 2008 05:06:16 GMT Every now and then you will get a call from a client asking for a referral to a divorce attorney. Like all referral situations, a recommendation can... Every now and then you will get a call from a client asking for a referral to a divorce attorney. Like all referral situations, a recommendation can have serious repercussions if the work isn't done properly or the parties don't like each other. You can win or lose big depending on the outcome. You want to steer your client in the right direction but just don't know who to trust with your most precious resources, your reputation and your clients.

The words that you are about to read will shock you. I am a divorce attorney yet I advise people to stay away from divorce attorneys if at all possible, and in 85% of the cases it is not only possible, but necessary if the couple is to get out in one piece. Everything you can imagine about how awful divorce court is, is true. I have never seen such a racket in my life. I have been a family law attorney since 1996 and after being a litigator for 8 years I just couldn't stand seeing emotionally vulnerable people manipulated so that the attorneys could make more money. I walked away from a successful law practice and have done nothing but mediation for the past 4 years. I am not saying that all divorce attorneys are sharks who will eat the young of their clients, but the adversarial system creates this win/lose battle where attorneys end up throwing gasoline on a fire by acting as "zealous advocates" instead of trying to find a fast, fair and economic solution.

With half of all marriages ending in divorce, many of us were children of divorce. What was that like for you? I hated being caught in the middle of my parents fighting. It doesn't serve parents to be encouraged to fight and let's face it, if you refer a client to a divorce attorney a couple of things are going to happen. In California, where the average price of a divorce, when both sides have attorneys, is $20,000 EACH, your client is going to lose a lot of money. If they are parents of minor children, there is going to be damage to their co-parenting relationship that comes from a court fight. By the time the case is done, most people hate their own lawyers and how do you think that is going to reflect on you since you are the one who referred them in the first place.

If you want to help yourself and your client, you will find the best mediator within driving distance and establish a relationship with that person so that your clients get first priority. The best person to do divorce mediation is an experienced divorce lawyer. Too many therapists or paralegals are doing divorce mediation but they don't know the law so how good of a resource could they be? The best mediators will be mediation (not litigation) focused, so at least half their practice should be mediation. After all, you don't want a wolf in sheep's clothing. You want someone who thinks "win/win" and that is NOT someone who is primarily a litigator. When interviwing potential referral partners, ask how many mediations they have done with what success rate. You want to know their price and the average length of time it takes to complete a mediation. Once you have those answers, you will have enough information to make an informed decision.

It is just human nature to prefer actively forming your own deal rather than having one imposed on you by judges and lawyers. People who engage in divorce mediation have a much higher rate of following the terms of their agreement than those who are ordered what to do. The comparison between mediation and litigation when tracking how much continuing contact the non custodial parent has with the children is just stunning. The BEST way to protect children from being caught in the middle of a nasty divorce is to avoid the nastiness in the first place. That can only be done by avoiding our adversarial system. Would you go to a surgeon if you had a cold? They will find something to cut out of you if they look hard enough. It's the same when a couple wants a divorce. They could do it the hard, painful and expensive way, but why would you want to be a party to that by sending them down that road. You actually have an opportunity to transform people's lives by encouraging them to work together instead of fighting. It will make all the difference if you do. They only get one chance to have a peaceful divorce. Make sure you advise them correctly when you get that call. ]]> Belinda Rachman, Esq. http://www.esqchat.com/forum/blog.php?b=1