What Is a Class Action Lawsuit

A class action lawsuit is a kind of lawsuit where one of the parties to the lawsuit is a group of people grouped together and represented by one specific member of that group. This type of lawsuit originally occurred in the United States and it is still primarily a U.S legal form of action. A lot of these lawsuits are to help protect consumers from big business and corporations.

In case of a class action lawsuit, a plaintiff sues the defendant for a variety of defendants for a specific group of absent parties. This is completely different from a traditional lawsuit where one specific party sues another specific party and everyone is fully present in the court hearing and case. This is typically something that only occurs when one person has been injured or resulted in damages from one party in particular and hires an Austin personal injury attorney. Instead of everyone suing the defendant in separate cases, all of the members are able to be resolved in one single case and hearing.

These kinds of cases ultimately survived in the United States because the Supreme Court decided in favor of it. When it comes to federal courts, these kinds of cases are governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Cases in federal courts are only allowed to proceed as class actions if the court has the full jurisdiction of the case and if the case meets the specific criteria based on Rule 23.

Some states have their own civil procedure systems which are very different from the federal rules. There are actually four different kinds of class actions in California for example. Also, some states like Virginia, do not provide for any class actions whereas others like New York actively limit the kinds of claims that can be brought on as such.

If you would like some more information on this topic, please check out the following video:

The States That Still Have the Death Penalty

In the United States, there are roughly 3000 inmates on death row awaiting execution and each individual inmate waits 15 years on average for their execution to be carried out. Nearly 25% of these inmates pass away of natural causes before their sentence can be carried out. But how many states actually employ the death penalty, and which ones?

It may surprise those interested in this topic to learn that there are only 19 states that do not use the death penalty. And while Mississippi does use the death penalty, it was revealed in April 2017 that this state is considering bringing back execution by means of firing squad, the gas chamber, and electric chair should they not be allowed to use lethal injection due to a court’s decision.

The states that still use the death penalty are as follows:

Wyoming, Washington, Virginia, Utah, Texas, South Dakota, South Carolina, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, Oregon, Ohio, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Nevada, Nebraska, Montana, Missouri, Mississippi, Louisiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Indiana, Idaho, Georgia, Florida, California, Colorado, Arizona, Arkansas, and Alabama.

All of these states use lethal injection as a means of executing inmates on death row, but the protocols do differ from state to state. Some states choose to use only one drug during execution, while others may use two or three.

When the three drug protocol is used, the inmate sentenced to death is injected first with a sedative or anesthetic. This is followed by an injection of pancuronium bromide, and then finally potassium chloride. This will paralyze the inmate and then stop their heart, causing death.

In conclusion, there are more states that use the death penalty than those who do not. And while each inmate waits a considerable amount of time (on average) before getting their execution carried out, the country has shown that they stand behind the death penalty and will continue to do so as a whole.

Is Judge Judy Really A Judge?

If you’re anything like me, you love court TV. While The People’s Court has been the gold standard to which these shows have been held for decades, it’s hard to say that Judge Judy doesn’t hold the silver standard!

Of course, no matter what court TV shows you like, be it Judge Mathis, Judge Joe Brown, or one of the many others there is one question always asked. Are these people real judges? And what about Judge Judy? She’s made millions of dollars by being a short tempered, take-no-nonsense kind of judge that makes for good TV. But is she an actual judge? Are any of the judges on these shows actually judges?

When people ask this question, they’re really asking two entirely different questions. One is whether or not Judge Judy (or any judge on court TV) is a real judge. The other is whether or not the cases shown on television are real court cases. They do say “the cases are real” in the opening narration, after all!

The answer to the first question is yes, Judge Judy is a real judge. She passed the bar and was appointed in New York City. So on that front, she is very much a real judge.

However, the court cases are only technically real. That is to say, the people are generally pursuing actual litigation. However, what we see on television isn’t a real court case. That doesn’t mean they’re under no legal obligation to follow court orders from a Houston personal injury attorney.

How can that be? Because what we see on television is a legal process called “mediation”. It’s done for a number of reasons, but the end result is that it functions more or less like an actual court session without actually being court. So when we see those cases on television, what we’re seeing is that the plaintiff was willing to drop their case where it was originally filed, and accept mediation in the district that the judge is legally allowed to offer mediation in.

Check out the video below to see Judge Judy in action!

The Presidents Who Were Also Lawyers

Anyone that meets the basic requirements and is elected to the position can serve as president. However, a significant number of presidents come from a legal background. It’s easy to see why so many presidents worked as lawyers before entering politics. Working as a lawyer gives you a deeper understanding of the complexities of U.S. law. Here are some of the presidents who were lawyers:

John Adams

Adams, who was the second president of the United States, was the first of many lawyer presidents.

Thomas Jefferson

Jefferson was a jack of all trades. Although he had many careers over the course of his life, he did spend time working as a lawyer.

Abraham Lincoln

Many consider Lincoln to be the greatest president the United States has ever had. Lincoln accomplished a great deal as president, and he was also an accomplished lawyer.

William Taft

Taft worked as a lawyer and as the dean of a law school.

Woodrow Wilson

Wilson was president of Princeton University, and he was a lawyer as well.

Calvin Coolidge

Coolidge worked as a lawyer and as a public official.

Franklin Roosevelt

Franklin Roosevelt is another president that frequently appears on lists of all-time greats. He learned the skills that made him a successful president while working as a lawyer.

Gerald Ford

Ford had an interesting career path. He was a football player, he served in the United States Navy, and he worked as a lawyer.

Barack Obama

Obama is the most recent U.S. president with a law degree. Obama also taught law at Harvard before starting his political career.

These are just some of the presidents that were also lawyers. It’s likely that the United States will elect more lawyer presidents in the future. Working as a lawyer gives you a foundation that you can build upon after you are elected president.

The Weirdest Reasons People Have Gone To Trial

There are many strange reasons why people go to trial and while some of them are completely ridiculous they are some that are quite humorous. This article will discuss a few of the strangest reasons why people go to trial with an Albany personal injury attorney. Of course, those people going to trial may not have considered it strange.

A California man had a strange visit to a local McDonald’s restaurant. This man ordered some food and asked for an extra napkin. The manager on duty mumbled something that the California man took to be racially discriminated. The California man wrote a letter to the general manager and explained that the incident affected him greatly. He mentioned that he was not able to work due to increased mental anguish and emotional distress. The California man received $1.5 million for the mental and emotional distress that he suffered after the incident.

A judge from Washington DC took a pair of pants to his local drycleaner to have them cleaned. The judge claimed that a pair of pants were returned but they were the wrong ones. He referred to a “satisfaction guarantee”sign in the store as reason to sue the drycleaner for $67 million. He later reduced the lawsuit to $54 million.

The judge claimed that life without his proper pair of pants had been hell. He described the terrible inconvenience, mental suffering, and discomfort that he suffered because of this neglectful dry-cleaning business. During a tirade in court he encouraged thousands of Americans who have been betrayed by satisfaction guaranteed signs to join forces and establish a nationwide lawsuit.

Sadly, his nationwide lawsuit never became a reality because the owner of the drycleaner came in to court and presented the judge with the correct pair of pants. The judge ran out courtroom with tears streaming down his face and to this day he still denies that those were his lost pants.

If you want to learn more about crazy lawsuits, please watch the following video:

Who Are The Oldest Supreme Court Judges?

Who are the oldest Supreme Court judges? This is one question that comes up every four years in the minds of many voters, and for good reason. The President about to be elected would be the one nominating replacements to the court, with Senatorial confirmation.

While Supreme Court Justices are not partisan positions, the nominees selected often reflect the political philosophies of the Presidents that choose them, possibly with temperance to pass an opposition-dominated legislature.

At the time of writing, the two oldest Supreme Court justices are Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Anthony Kennedy, both of whom are in their 80s. The rest of the court is spread across individuals in their 40s through 70s.

Since Supreme Court positions are lifetime appointments without mandatory retirement ages or term limits, the oldest justices are sometimes a campaign issue, as liberals might worry about a conservative president being elected when the oldest justice is a liberal or leans to the left. This is actually the case with Ginsberg.

There’s never any telling when a justice will choose to retire or die, and many choose to stay on the court as long as they are physically and mentally capable of handling the work at hand. The court is not always in session, and while there are hearings requiring the physical attendance of the court, they are not televised.

In truth, much of the work of the Supreme Court is handled by young clerks who represent some of the brightest up and coming minds in the legal profession who do the research and leg work of the justices whose staffs they serve on. Also, many cases are decided rather informally as justices visit each other’s offices when not in session for conversations before a formal ruling is announced with majority and minority opinions attached.

Can You Sue If You Spill Coffee On Yourself?

One of the most famous lawsuits in history is the hot coffee lawsuit. The suit, which was filed after a woman was burned by McDonald’s coffee, is often used as an example of frivolous lawsuits.

If you’re familiar with this case, you may be wondering what this says about civil law. Can you really sue if you spill coffee on yourself?

It’s important to note that the circumstances of the hot coffee lawsuit are extremely unusual. The woman in question didn’t just spill coffee on herself and call a lawyer. The McDonald’s that she bought her coffee from was serving coffee that was boiling hot. The restaurant had been warned about the temperature of their coffee before, but they failed to heed the warning.

The woman burned herself when she was holding the styrofoam cup of coffee between her legs. The coffee was so hot that it actually melted through the cup. She had severe third-degree burns on her legs, and she sued McDonald’s in order to cover her medical bills. The case only went to court because McDonald’s refused to settle with the woman. After she won her case, McDonald’s changed their practices.

Simply spilling coffee on yourself isn’t enough to justify hiring a Marietta personal injury attorney. If you want to file a case, you need to show that the restaurant was negligent in some way. If you have reason to believe that the coffee you spilled on yourself was served at a dangerously hot temperature, you might have a case.

There is a lot of misinformation about civil lawsuits, and the hot coffee case is a great example of that. While you may believe that the lawsuit was frivolous, the woman actually had a very strong case. Most of the time, people that spill coffee on themselves can’t take the case to court.

If you would like to learn more about the McDonalds’ Hot Coffee Case, please check out the following video:

What Is Illegal In The Courtroom?

Going to the courtroom is one of the hardest things for those who have never done it before.

If you have never been in the courtroom, it is important to brush up on what is allowed and what is not. Several acts are deemed “illegal” in the courthouse and therefore should be avoided at all cost unless you want to be jailed or fined.

Here are some of the acts that are deemed illegal when it comes to visiting the courthouse in your state.

1) Breaking Courtroom Decorum

This can include something as simple as not standing up when a judge arrives but can be as severe as yelling at the top of your lungs.

While a judge will be lenient to the former, they will not be to the latter as it is direct contempt of court and illegal. The same applies to using your cell phone or recording the proceedings at any stage without permission.

2) Tampering With Witnesses or Evidence

This is against the law and is not allowed.

It is important not to speak to the witness outside the courtroom as that can be construed as trying to influence them. If found guilty, there are additional charges that can be placed on you along with what is already in place.

It will also weaken your case in the courtroom.

The same applies to those who try to tamper with evidence.

3) Eating, Smoking, Drinking

Depending on the severity of what you are doing, this is illegal and not allowed in the courtroom.

A special area is created for those who wish to eat outside the courtroom, and it is best to head over there. Otherwise, you are not allowed to eat, smoke, or drink inside the courtroom at any stage.

Keep these in mind before you enter the courtroom.

What States Have The Most Expensive Lawyers?

We all know that the cost of a legal defense team can be rather expensive. Although, if you are wanting to steer clear of fines and jail time, it is a necessary evil in life. However, have you ever wondered which states have the highest cost when it comes to defending yourself in the American justice system? We decided we would do a little research and find three of the most expensive states when it comes to lawyer fees. Let’s just hope that if you are looking for a lawyer you do not live in one of these states!

It should come as little surprise that the state of California has some of the highest lawyer fees in the United States, especially if you want to hire a Los Angeles personal injury attorney. New York follows after California, which again should be understandable, especially for those who live in the state. However, the state that does come as surprise for high legal fees is that of Delaware. Who would have thought that such a small state would hold such high attorney fees?

Finally, while it is not a state, one would find the highest attorney fees in the United States in no other than Washington D.C. If you are looking to make a lot of money in the legal profession, one of those four areas would make an excellent choice. If you have a case in one of those areas, you may look for other options such as legal aid.

Of course, these fees are not 100% guaranteed. In many cases, the type of case is going to determine the overall cost of the case and lawyer. If you are fearful of the cost being too much to handle, it is best to look into other options. Depending on the case, the lawyer may be able to work out some form of payment plan or other option.

If you would like to learn some more about expensive lawyers, please watch the following video:

Why Opt For Mediation?

Where there is a conflict between two parties the first impulse may be to immediately turn to the courts in order to find a resolution. However, this process can be costly in terms of legal fees and can be tremendously time-consuming. There is an alternative form of conflict resolution – mediation.

The mediation process calls into a service an impartial third party to assist in the two parties in conflict reaching a mutually agreeable settlement.

There is a myriad of situations where mediation proceedings might take place. These can include divorce, labor disputes, commercial issues, employment issues and many others. The key is that mediation should not require complex evidentiary approaches or be governed by strict procedural issues such as would be the case in a court of law.

Participation in a mediation process is voluntary – however, there may be instances where mediation is part of a contractual obligation. This is common in labor issues were going to court would not be in the best interests of either party, at least as a first step.

The person who is the mediator is chosen for a variety of attributes and skills. Primarily the ability to keep a clear, calm view of the proceedings without being biased towards either side. They are often skilled negotiators who are able to steer the proceedings towards an equitable outcome. In many instances, the mediator is an attorney. this can be useful when it comes time to draw up the documentation covering the mediated settlement between the parties. It is however also true that in some instances the two parties will choose a mediator that is not an attorney due to the costs involved.

It cannot be emphasized enough that the time savings of mediation over court proceedings is hugely attractive. once the two parties sign an agreement to mediate the process can literally be over within weeks. This is as opposed to court proceedings where simply getting an initial court date and preparing arguments can take months. Add to that the time actually spent in court and the attraction of mediation becomes readily apparent.

The attraction of mediation is also the fact that the relationship between the two parties can usually be salvaged. The animosity that almost inevitably follows a court case will in most instances make this impossible. this is especially important where there is a business or personal relationship between the two parties – including divorce where children are involved.