Self-Defense v Manslaughter: What Is the Difference?

Murder and manslaughter charges are often accompanied by claims of self-defense. Self-defense is legal in most places in the world and can alter a criminal case significantly. In some cases, the successful proof of self-defense can ensure the accused is not criminally responsible for a murder.

Murder

Because manslaughter and self-defense in some cases end in murder, what is its legal definition? Well, murder is an unlawful killing of another human being. Murder is often proven if there was premeditation and intention. A person can also be charged with murder if they gave consideration to the killing and their actions resulted in death even if at the time of the crime there was no intention or ill will. Lastly, murder charges can be levied if the perpetrator intended to cause bodily harm, and their actions resulted in death.

Manslaughter

In most jurisdictions, manslaughter is a lesser crime than murder. The difference between manslaughter and murder is that there is no intention or thoughts of killing in manslaughter. Because of this, the punishment for manslaughter is much more lenient than that of murder.

However, charges of manslaughter can be elevated to murder or murder considered manslaughter. In these cases, there are extenuating circumstances that lead to death.

Manslaughter is often classified as either voluntary or involuntary. Voluntary manslaughter is often considered if a person is killed impulsively. Involuntary manslaughter, on the other hand, occurs due to the negligence or recklessness of another. A common example is involuntary manslaughter caused by a drunk driver.

Self Defense

If someone is killed in self-defense, this is not considered a crime. Most legal systems have provisions that allow someone to protect themselves if they are attacked. To claim self-defense successfully, the defendant has to prove that they believed they were in imminent danger. They also have to prove that the force they used was necessary to protect themselves.

Because these arguments are hard to make, you should call a lawyer before you start making them. If you talk to Lauren Campoli Criminal Defense lawyer, they will help you put your explanation in a way that helps you avoid manslaughter or murder charges if indeed your actions stemmed from the fear of harm.

The lawyer will also explain to you if self-defense applies in your case because some states expect you to try to get away before you harm someone. In some states, you are allowed to stand your ground if you are in your own home. Other factors may strengthen or weaken your case including who the instigator was, who escalated the issue, or if any of the people involved were involved in criminal activity at the time of the death.

Accidental Killing

The law also makes provisions for accidental killings. This is often applied if the actions of the defendant did not rise to a criminal level. In these cases, the person who committed the action will be negligent but not criminally negligent or responsible. A civil case can, however, still be brought to a court because the person can be sued for the wrongful death of another.

It can be difficult to know what charges will be brought forward when someone dies. Depending on the circumstances, you can be charged with murder, manslaughter, or be let go if it is proven you were just defending yourself.

What are deposition summaries used for?

In recent years, the legal profession has been relying more on deposition summaries than in the past. There are several reasons these are being used more often than in past years.

 Below are the main reasons lawyers use deposition summaries:

 They Save Time

 Time is important in all legal cases. That is what makes deposition summaries so great. They are used to recap the most important aspects of a deposition. This allows for fast reference in the courtroom and pretrial settings. With the summary in hand, the attorney can focus on more important legal work and allow her to spend more time focused on winning the case.

You can have a deposition summary done in house, but outsourcing this task can give more time to duties that are more vital to winning the legal case.

They Help in Pre-Trial Prep

A few hours of testimony in a deposition can lead to a big pile of paperwork. Some of it is relevant but not all of it is essential to the outcome of the case. To break out the most important parts, a deposition summary makes getting ready for a trial easier.

They are especially helpful in preparing the witness for the trial. Having a summary of their statement that highlights the key elements can prove extremely valuable in refreshing the witness’s memory before he testifies. It also can be used as a point of reference as you conduct legal research.

Delivers Value to the Client

Most law firms bill per hour. Summarizing witness statements takes time, but in the end, it can save the client money because the legal team does not have to sort through hundreds of pages of legal documents to find the most important parts.

Critical to the Court Process

The deposition summary offers a frame of reference for the other counsel’s witness testimony. There is a lot of value in identifying the vital points of the other side’s statement. For instance, this makes it easier to discredit the witness who changes major parts of their statement.

The summary also is helpful to the judge. A well-written witness statement summary that deals with the guidelines of the court are admissible by the judge, who can use that summary to make a summing up statement or even make use of it during the trial.

Deposition summaries are an essential part of most legal cases, so make sure you take advantage of them!

The Wild West

R v West, 2020 ONCA 473

The Issue

What is the standard for issuance of a Production Order pursuant to s487.014; and where that standard is not properly articulated and met what are the consequences.

The Answer

Section 487.014 requires reasonable grounds to believe (not a reasonable suspicion). Where the Informant asserts only a reasonable suspicion in the ITO and the issuing justice authorizes the Production Order, there will be a violation of section 8 and likely exclusion of evidence under section 24(2), as there was here.

The Fine Print

Section 487.014(2) explicitly requires that the issuing justice or judge be “satisfied by information on oath in Form 5.004 that there are reasonable grounds to believe…”. In the ITO in this case the officer asserted only “grounds to suspect”. This lower standard did not support issuance. The issuing judge erred, as did the trial judge who found the ITO to be valid. The proper interpretation of s487.014 was recently set out in R v Vice Media Canada Inc, 2017 ONCA 231 at para 28 (aff’d 2018 SCC 53):

A production order under s. 487.014 of the Criminal Code is a means by which the police can obtain documents, including electronic documents, from individuals who are not under investigation. The section empowers the justice or judge to make a production order if satisfied, by the information placed before her, that there are reasonable grounds to believe that: (i) an offence has been or will be committed; (ii) the document or data is in the person’s possession or control; and (iii) it will afford evidence of the commission of the named offence. If those three conditions exist, the justice or judge can exercise her discretion in favour of granting the production order. [Emphasis added.]

In this case, the result of this error, which had no valid explanation, was the exclusion of evidence under section 24(2): see paras 30-42.

Guest Post: Understanding OUI and the Penalties that come with it

Getting stopped or arrested for OUI or DUI is never fun. What may have started as a couple of drinks with friends can become a misdemeanor charge for you if you are apprehended for either of these two. When this happens, it’s important to let your lawyer know whether or not you’ve had prior arrests or convictions for the same thing, even if it’s outside of Rhode Island.

DUI and OUI are two similar offenses. DUI is short for Driving Under the Influence and is when you are found behind the wheel of a vehicle that is in motion. OUI (Operating Under the Influence) is an offense where you can be apprehended even if the vehicle isn’t in motion. As long as you are behind the wheel, the keys are in the ignition, and you are intoxicated, you can get arrested. This means that if you are asleep along the side of the road or in a parking lot and are behind your steering wheel if you are intoxicated and the key is in the ignition, you can get arrested for OUI.

The penalties that come with OUI in Rhode Island are the same with DUI. You can get fined, jailed, asked to do community service, and even be asked to attend alcohol and drug-related programs. The laws regarding OUI and DUI in Rhode Island are typically the same as those in Massachusetts. If you’ve been arrested for DUI or OUI more than once, the penalties become stiffer, and the third offense becomes a felony instead of a misdemeanor.

You should be aware that whether you are charged with a misdemeanor or a felony, both are considered criminal offenses. This means that if you are found guilty of either DUI or OUI, you have been found guilty of a criminal offense. The only difference between the two is the amount of time you need to serve behind bars and the amount in fines you have to pay.

Things to Remember When Arrested for OUI or DUI in Rhode Island

Whether you are arrested for OUI or DUI, you should know that these two come with relatively the same penalties in Rhode Island. These penalties are dependent on your BAC (blood alcohol content) on the day you are apprehended and how many times you’ve been arrested for the same offense. If your blood alcohol content is higher than .08, you are considered intoxicated. The higher your BAC, the higher the penalties, and longer possible jail time.

You should also be aware that even if your BAC is below .08, if you exhibit signs of intoxication, you can still be arrested and tested by law enforcement. Some things you need to remember:

  • You can refuse field sobriety tests, but it’s advisable that you don’t.

  • You cannot refuse chemical testing. This can include breathalyzer testing, urine testing, and blood testing. If you refuse to do any of these, you will be fined, and your license will be suspended. You may also be jailed and asked to do community service.

  • Refusal to submit to chemical testing can also result in the installation of an IID – An ignition interlock device (IID) may also be installed in your car if you refuse any of these tests.

  • Prior OUI/DUI offenses and convictions out of state can be counted towards your number of offenses – If you’ve been arrested and/or convicted of OUI or DUI outside of Rhode Island in the past five years, these can count towards the number of offenses you’ve had. This means that if you’ve been stopped for DUI in Rhode Island and have a record of a similar offense in another state within the past five years, your Rhode Island arrest will be your second offense and not your first one.

MCL Nugget: Shaikh ONCA

R v Shaikh, 2019 ONCA 895

This case deals with the complicated issue of unreasonable delay in the context of an 11(b) application and exhibits the importance of obtaining a waiver of 11(b). It also exposes some of the pressures on the legal system with the lack of courtroom space and the necessity of taking measures to expedite proceedings.

This case deals with the complicated issue of unreasonable delay in the context of an 11(b) application and exhibits the importance of obtaining a waiver of 11(b). It also exposes some of the pressures on the legal system with the lack of courtroom space and the necessity of taking measures to expedite proceedings.

This case deals with the complicated issue of unreasonable delay in the context of an 11(b) application and exhibits the importance of obtaining a waiver of 11(b). It also exposes some of the pressures on the legal system with the lack of courtroom space and the necessity of taking measures to expedite proceedings.

FACTS

On October 6, 2014, the appellant and his former common law partner, Ms. Amer, were charged with uttering death threats, carrying a concealed handgun and pointing a firearm. They were both released on bail and Ms. Amer absconded by leaving the jurisdiction.

Several attempts to have a preliminary inquiry were made but were impeded for various reasons. On the first date of the preliminary hearing, October 4, 2016, Ms. Amer’s charges were withdrawn by the Crown. The preliminary inquiry could not proceed as the court could not accommodate the matter at that time.

On October 6, 2016, the Appellant’s counsel brought an application to get off the record for lack of communication and breakdown in the lawyer-client relationship. The application was denied and the preliminary inquiry judge put the matter over to the next day to deal with unexpected changes, specifically the Crown’s withdrawal of charges against Ms. Amer and the expressed intention to call her as a witness at the trial.

On October 7, 2016, the appellant’s counsel informed the court that he and his co-counsel needed to withdraw for ethical reasons. This was accepted by the preliminary inquiry judge and the counsel were removed from the record. The matter was remanded to November 1, 2016 and then to November 22, 2016 for new counsel to be retained.

On November 22, 2016, new counsel appeared for the appellant and indicated that the appellant wished to re-elect to be tried before the Ontario Court of Justice. On November 28, 2016, the re-election was consented to by the Crown. However, no waiver of 11(b) was obtained by the Crown or offered by the appellant.

On November 30, 2016, the appellant’s counsel expressed intent to bring a section 11(b) application in advance of the trial. On March 3, 2017, an application judge heard the 11(b) motion and the matter was adjourned to the first date set for trial which was March 27, 2017. In her March 29, 2017 reasons, the application judge quantified the total delay from the charge on October 6, 2014 to the scheduled beginning of the trial (March 27, 2017) to be 2 years, 5 months and 21 days. She also noted that since the matter would have to be continued and would not end on March 31st, 2017 as originally anticipated. Based on courtroom availability, the realistic conclusion was determined to be April 12, 2017. In that case, the total delay would be 919 days or 30.2 months.

The net delay was considered secondly which included three periods of ‘defence delay’ between February 24, 2015 and May 2, 2015 (66 days); January 18, 2016 to March 7, 2016 (49 days) and October 6, 2016 to March 27, 2017 (172 days). With the defence delay concessions, the net delay was calculated to be 287 days. The Crown asked the court to treat 7 months of the delay which was caused by the complainant’s travel plans as a discrete event. This was refused as the dates had been set for 10 months down the road and no evidence was presented as to when the airplane tickets were booked, the purpose of the trip or Crown efforts to ascertain the availability of the complainant.

Notwithstanding the appellant’s re-election, the judge applied the 18-month presumptive ceiling and thus the 20-month net delay was identified as presumptively unreasonable. The presumption was rebutted as this was a transitional exceptional circumstance case, this was a busy jurisdiction lacking institutional resources, the matter was moderately complex, the charges were serious and the Crown withdrew charges on the co-accused to expedite matters.

The matter concluded on April 12, 2017 as predicted and the decision was delivered on May 17, 2017. He was convicted of the charges of making a death threat and carrying a concealed weapon but the charge of pointing a firearm was withdrawn.

The appellant renewed his 11(b) application arguing that the time taken to reach a decision should be included in the delay. This was dismissed by the trial judge on July 20, 2017 finding that deliberation delay is not included in calculating periods of delay under Jordan.

ISSUES

The appellant appealed on both 11(b) rulings, arguing that the net delay was mischaracterized and miscalculated. Further, he argued that the deliberation period should be included in calculating delay.

The Crown argued that the appellant initially elected to have a preliminary inquiry and then re-elected to proceed in the ONCJ, thus, the presumptive ceiling which should apply is 30 months.

WHICH PRESUMPTIVE CEILING APPLIES?

At para 46 of Jordan, there court states:

At the heart of the new framework is a ceiling beyond which delay is presumptively unreasonable. The presumptive ceiling is set at 18 months for cases going to trial in the provincial court, and at 30 months for cases going to trial in the superior court (or cases going to trial in the provincial court after a preliminary inquiry). [Emphasis added].

And then at para 49:

We note the 30-month ceiling would also apply to cases going to trial in the provincial court after a preliminary inquiry.

And in footnote three of the majority decision:

While most proceedings with a preliminary inquiry are eventually tried in the superior court, this is not always the case. For example, a case may go to trial in the provincial court after a preliminary inquiry if the province in which the trial takes place offers this as an option (such as Quebec), or if the accused re-elects a trial in the provincial court following a preliminary inquiry. In either case, the 30-month ceiling would apply.

In the matter at hand, the re-election did not occur after a preliminary inquiry but instead before it had commenced. The court made note of the case of D.M.S. v R, 2016 NBCA 71 where on the date of the preliminary inquiry, the accused waived the hearing and re-elected to be heard in provincial court. The parties agreed the ceiling was 30 months and Quigg J.A. accepted the position at para 17:

In my view, when an accused makes an election and requires the Provincial Court to schedule a preliminary inquiry, barring exceptional circumstances such as a very early re-election to be tried by a Provincial Court judge, the case should be treated as one that included a preliminary inquiry even if the preliminary inquiry is eventually waived.

The court noted that this decision was based primarily on the parties’ joint agreement to proceed with the 30-month ceiling. There was no such agreement here and thus the court found the appropriate ceiling was 18 months.

WAS THE DELAY PROPERLY CALCULATED BY THE APPLICATION JUDGE?

The court determined that the period between February 24, 2015 to May 1, 2015 was misclassified as defence delay. Jordan established at paras 61 to 63 that such delay has two components: periods waived by the accused and periods of delay solely caused by the defence. Upon review, this period was not waived and was not attributable solely to the accused.

The period of delay resulting from the appellant’s counsel’s application to get off the record was treated as a discrete exceptional circumstance. In reclassifying the delay, the court found that at the very least, the delay amounted to 697 days or nearly 23 months.

DID THE APPLICATION JUDGE ERR BY MISAPPLYING THE TRANSITIONAL EXCEPTION?

The court noted that the transitional exception is dependent upon whether the Crown relied on the Morin framework which was pre-Jordan. If the Crown has not, it cannot state that it relied reasonably with respect to delay on the law as it previously existed. The court found that the transitional exception should not have been applied. The delay was presumptively unreasonable by a significant margin that exceeded the Jordan guidelines and that the Morin guidelines, which suggested 8 to 10 months for cases in the OCJ, were exceeded substantially. The court found there was no meaningful demonstration that the Crown had been mindful of its 11(b) obligations, even as they existed prior to Jordan and that the seriousness of the charges and the finality of a stay cannot fairly outweigh those considerations.

CONCLUSION

The appeal was allowed, the convictions set aside and the charges were stayed against the appellant.

What Does a Bail Bondsman Do?

The law can be considered as one of the most complicated that you will ever learn here in this world. Each culture has their set of rules which may have been passed down from generation to generation. There are other rules that were based from a holy book or person. Such is the case with most Muslim communities with the Qur’an and Christians with the Bible. Read more in this link. There are also others based on their own ways of understanding morality. In the modern world, almost every person has a similar view of this morality. It is all just differentiated on how it was interpreted and applied to the real world.

Being convicted by a criminal act can be really problematic for a person. This means that they have to live a part of their lives in prison. If they go out, they can be branded as ex-convicts. Even though most of them have already made a change in their lives, society doesn’t think so. A lot of people still hold a prejudice against those who have committed a crime long after it was already done. People tend to have these notions because they believe these ex-convicts will just do more crimes again. Their position is understandable, but it is also unfair to those who are really trying to live a better life.

The Due Process

On the other hand, those who are just accused, there still needs to be an investigation before the final verdict will be delivered. It is the due process that is followed in most countries. The term “innocent until proven guilty” is still considered as true even though there are many people who disagree with this notion. However, this is how justice in the world works: unless there is evidence of guilt, there should be no presumption of such. It has saved a lot of lives, but it has also affected many other people. They are calling it a bit unfair, and some even would call it as an archaic custom. Read more about this here: https://www.fairtrials.org/innocent-until-proven-guilty-presumption-of-innocence-regularly-violated-across-globe.

There is another part of this whole affair: the concept of temporary freedom. If the investigation is still ongoing, you can pay the state so that you don’t have to stay in a cell for that duration. You might see it as a way for them to make sure that you are not going to escape. It is a large sum of money, and the amount would usually depend on the crime committed. There are even cases wherein you are not even allowed to process bail because of the severity of the crime. It would really depend on the situation and the decision of the jury.

Bails and Bonds

However, if a bail was processed, it will be returned to you if you were declared innocent or otherwise. In the latter case, there are times when this money will be used as compensation for the victims. It is understandable that there are some who wouldn’t want to pay this because they cannot afford it. They would rather wait for the verdict in jail. If you want to have that freedom yet you don’t have enough, then it would be better to just find a bail bondsman that can help you with all of it. Think of them as lenders, and they will cover for your bail instead.

As you may know, the court and possibly the police department will follow you around so that they will make sure that you will not escape. If you are innocent, then it is best not to attempt this anyway. Don’t even try this when you know that you did it. This will just add to the years of your incarceration and will worsen the case against you. It would be wise to just stay where you want to and wait for the court orders.

It is important to follow the rules of the law at all times. They are there for a reason: to keep the order and help us feel safe. Even though this might not be followed in all places around the world, we must maintain our dignity and help ourselves from any kind of misdeeds. Prison time might not be a good thing, and we must avoid it as much as possible. However, if we committed something against those rules, we must face the consequences.

Nursing Home Abuse: America's Silent Epidemic 

According to WHO statistics, we are living longer. That means we have lots of people going past 70 years and many of them living past their nineties and this is expected to rise even higher.

In the past, people lived shorter lifespans. But today, with advanced medical care for seniors, a focus on healthy living, and modern technology, many people are living to their eighties and beyond. 

Taking a loved one to a nursing home

When our parents and relatives get to their eighties, most of them will move from their homes to live closer to their kids, grandkids, and great-grandkids. Well, it used to be the case in the years gone by, but not anymore. Unfortunately, due to the financial demands on families and changing family dynamics, more and more seniors are moving to nursing homes.

According to statistics, over 3 million adults live in homes for the elderly and other facilities set up to care for the aged in the US. And based on the fact that people are living longer, that number is likely to rise in the future. It means that you or someone you know will eventually check in their aged relatives or parent into a nursing home.

Fact! Nobody or at the very least most people are averse to taking their loved ones to a home for the aged. But life happens. And with the rising cost of living, a nursing home becomes a reasonable option. Also, many senior people have various medical needs that would be better handled in a care facility where they get round the clock surveillance.

Elderly abuse in nursing homes

When people book their loved ones into a nursing home, they only want good things for them. Therefore, few consider or think that their loved ones will be victims of abuse in a care facility. But it happens, often. The abuse of elderly people in nursing homes is becoming more and more frequent these days. 

Therefore, if you have a loved one living in a nursing home, it is a good idea to keep a sharp eye on them. The thing that makes old people susceptible to abuse in nursing homes is that they are assumed to be one of the safest places they can stay. 

Sad to say, abusive people are now finding their way into homes for the elderly as workers or medical personnel might be regularly abusing old people.  It is said that one in every six old people in nursing homes is a victim of neglect or abuse every year. And over three-quarters of elder abuse cases are done by a caregiver. 

That makes the abuse of the elderly in care facilities almost an epidemic in the US. The sad thing is that most of this abuse goes undetected as the old people being abused are threatened to silence, or they are too ashamed or incapacitated to speak out for themselves.

How to detect if your loved one is being harmed in a nursing home

When most people hear that abuse of seniors is a reality, they often wonder - is my loved one being abused? If they are, how can I tell? Well, if you are observant, there are a few things that will indicate your elderly relative or loved one is being abused in a nursing home. 

  • The presence of unusual injuries such as fractures or bruises in hidden areas that are covered by their garments

  • Cases of emotional problems characterized by unexplained silences, withdrawing into themselves, or unexplained emotional outbursts 

  • Signs of neglect such as bedsores, frequent unexplained infections, especially STDs, uncleanliness, or cases of your relative running away from the facility.

  • Signs of fear in your loved one when speaking to or in the presence of particular caregivers, especially if these caregivers seem to hover and control your loved one.

  • Incidents of your loved one refusing food or medication and even refusing to leave their room.

Of course, the occurrence of these signs may not always signify abuse, But if you notice such things, you should take it as a sign that you need to investigate how your loved one is being treated in the nursing home.

How to deal with elder abuse


You can investigate the handling of your loved one in a nursing home by setting up a hidden camera in his or her room to capture any incidents of abuse. You could also talk to your loved one and find a way to make him or her open up to you.

Also, make frequent, unannounced visits to the home to check on your relative. You are likely to walk in on things happening to your relative or another resident that are abusive. For example, you could walk in on a caregiver mistreating a resident, or speaking to them harshly, or disrespectfully. 

If you find out your loved one is being abused in a nursing home, your first action should be to contact a nursing home neglect lawyer. He or she will advise you on the right way to handle your complaint so that your loved one gets justice due to them.

A nursing home abuse lawyer will handle things such as;

  • Setting up an investigation to ascertain your claims of abuse

  • Find experts to carry out the necessary tests on your loved one as proof of abuse for the courts

  • File a case of abuse against the nursing home on your behalf

  • Work on the case diligently to get a win and compensation for you and your aged relative

Do you need a nursing home abuse lawyer?

There are other things that a qualified lawyer can do to help you get justice for a loved one being abused in a care facility. Although you may feel like handling the issue on your own, it is better to use a professional as it gives you the best chance of getting a positive outcome. 

So, if your relative is a victim of nursing home abuse, contact a nursing home neglect lawyer today and get the ball rolling towards justice for you and your loved one.

Do I Need a Lawyer for My Workers' Compensation Claims?

To answer this question shortly, it depends.

 All kinds of jobs have a certain degree of risk attached to it. From the simplest office jobs to borderline dangerous ones like mining and police work, risk is a part of the job. We can be as careful as we want when we are working, but accidents happen every time. You can get injured by something as simple as a paper cut to a thrown crowbar. Having any kind of injury can be a determining factor of your performance at work. There is some pain that you can ignore, but you need to be in a better physical state before you can get back to work. Depending on the injury, you can also apply for worker’s compensation.

 However, applying for compensation really depends on the situation. There are times when your own company can just handle the claims and you can get them right away. However, there are also instances when it can get messy and complicated. There are even cases when you need to hire a lawyer just to prove that you are entitled for the compensation. It can be quite daunting to hire a lawyer because you might be worried about the fees. Learn more about this here.

 As we have said before, not all cases need to have a lawyer. One of the best examples of a situation where you don’t need a lawyer is the injury is clearly a result of your work. For example, you are a police officer and you were shot in uniform while handling an altercation. Aside from the benefits that you get as a police officer, you are also entitled to insurance. Field work like mining and construction also covers all injuries related to the work being done. It wouldn’t make sense for the company not to cover these as they can face a backlash if they neglect this. If the injury is also non-fatal, insurance policies will also easily cover the medical fees.

However, there are common cases wherein that you may need to hire a lawyer to help you with your compensation claims. You can go to their offices or visit their websites like https://www.ramoslawfirm.com/contact/ to inquire about their services. Here are some of the best examples when you will need a lawyer:

 Denied Compensation Claim

 There are a lot of reasons why insurance companies will deny compensation regarding your injury. Common allegations include: incident did not happen in the workplace, the person was not wearing the appropriate gear for work, claims of negligence in personal responsibility. A lawyer can defend you from all of these statements by being honest about what really happened. He or she can present your case to the jury in a way that we would solidify your claims.

 Permanent Physical Injury Or Long Period Of Absence Due To Injury

In this type of situation, a lawyer is really needed to assert your compensation claims. There needs to be a thorough investigation since this can be considered as a life-threatening situation. The company might also be investigated since there might be issues on their part. A lawyer will know how to defend your claims and explain your situation thoroughly. The company will also have a team of lawyers to represent them as well as the insurance company. You can let your lawyer face them and you will just have to supply all the details that you know.

 Preexisting Sickness And Psychological Disorder Due To Working Conditions

 The previous situations are relatively easier to claim than this one. Companies can claim that your preexisting condition is not their issue. However, you can still claim that working with them worsened the condition especially if you notified them in the first place. For psychological disorders, not all insurance companies cover this situation. Even though mental health awareness is rampant in modern society, insurance companies might still not cover them because it can easily be “faked”. Aside from obtaining a comprehensive psychological report, a lawyer can defend your claims regarding these situations.

 If you are worrying about the fees, most lawyers would actually charge depending on the compensation claim. They can claim a percentage of what you will be receiving as compensation from the insurance or company. A lawyer can also increase these claims based on the information provided, so the fees can be covered by the compensation.


What to Look for in an Estate Planning Attorney

Estate planning is a complicated process and serious business.  Read more about it here. One misspelled word or lack of signature can make a big difference on a will. If you are one of the people who want to make sure that your assets are in good hands after you have passed away, then you can start to plan where you would want them to be as early as today.

To make your life easier, you might want to get an attorney to do the draft for you. You might think that it is expensive, and you may prefer the DIY route. However, there are things that an attorney can help you, such as knowing the laws in your area and writing the right words in your will. The following are other reasons why you should consider an attorney in the first place.

Why Get an Attorney?

1. Laws are Specific About Everything

In a state, the statutes specify a lot of things of what can or can’t be included in a will. You should know the people who can be your executor or trustee. You should know the people who have the right to be a witness during the drafting of the will. You are required to understand the formalities that you should observe when you sign a will or a trust.

In many states in the US, the people who can represent you to execute the will should be related to you by blood or by marriage. If you can’t trust such people to be your executor, then you should choose someone who is living in the same state as you. Most of the time, people want lawyers who are living outside of the state. Therefore, the will is void, and families can contest the contents of the document.

2. DIY Route Is Not Effective

The old saying of caveat emptor and you get what you pay for can be applied to people who plan to leave a large estate. You might want to save some bucks by downloading generic forms from the internet. You may want to prepare your accounting books and plan the entire estate distribution yourself.

However, after your death, your family may be left with plenty of disputes and problems. After you left a hundred acres to your daughter, she discovers that the document is not considered legal. The state might have required different wordings, formats, or formalities that were not correctly done. After the disputes show up from other relatives, your loved ones may be forced to pay for a trial, and they might need to get a qualified attorney to fix the mistakes afterward.

 3. Attorneys Can Navigate Complicated Relationships

You might want to get the second opinion if you fall to the following categories:

  • You were a second spouse

  • You have lots of businesses

  • You own land and properties on another state

  • One of the family members is ill or disabled

  • You have stepchildren

  • You don’t want your children to inherit your estate

  • You don’t have any children

  • Some of your assets should go to a charity

  • You divorced your spouse

  • You lost a loved one that should inherit the estate

If you find yourself to be one of these situations, then a lawyer can navigate through the complicated relationships or circumstances to make sure that the will is valid. Your estate planning lawyer will prepare and create the documents so that a large chunk of your estate will go to the people that you have intended to inherit. Otherwise, your entire estate will be handled by a probate lawyer where everything goes to paying taxes and other liabilities.

Qualities to Look for in an Attorney

You should hire a lawyer with enough years of experience, mentoring, and legal practice to defending your will in court. They should also understand the laws in your state, and they should adequately advise you on how to settle your affairs after your death.

The right attorney who specializes in this field can develop trust funds while you are still alive. They can draft plans that will avoid large estate taxes after your death. They work to make sure that you are adequately protected, and your family will get a large chunk of your assets. Here are the other qualities to look for when looking for the right attorney.

  • Look for someone devoted to practicing estate laws. They can provide unique insights through years of experience and knowledge like the ones found in David Silverstone PA firm. With a general law practitioner, you may not get the help that you are looking for. You need someone who has specialized knowledge in assisting you with the things that will make the distribution of assets more accessible.

  • Look for someone whom you feel comfortable with. You should be able to share them with some of the intimate details of your life. You can tell them why you would not want your ex-wife to inherit anything, or you can say to them that you have illegitimate children. Of course, not all people have these kinds of sentiments. However, you should have a lawyer whom you are comfortable telling your expectations and what you want to happen after you die.

  • Look for someone well-versed with the law in your area. The rule changes every year or so. If you have made a draft to your will ten years before, you might want a qualified lawyer to check this to make sure that everything that you have written is valid. Being up to date with the laws can prevent a lot of unnecessary problems later on.

A Final Word

Making a will and making sure that it is valid can be complicated. You may need to have a qualified and experienced attorney on your side to make sure that every word is correct and accurate. You need to do this because, after your death, there are a lot of relatives that will contest your testament. Some of them may want a huge piece of your estate, and the ones whom you intended to leave your assets might not be able to fight the other predators. Getting an attorney is easy and is the best action that you can take. Be sure to start looking for one today.