INIQUITY: How court systems, attorneys, and legal aid organizations is available on Amazon.
The electronic version is FREE to read with Kindle Unlimited.
There is a free excerpt on Medium.com (please clap after reading on Medium--click the hands symbol beside or below the story.)
Showing posts with label attorney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label attorney. Show all posts
Thursday, June 27, 2019
Sunday, September 16, 2018
How a Metropolital Planning Organization Ruined a Region: Open Letter to Northwest Indiana Regional Planning Commission
OPEN
LETTER
September 17, 2018
Mr. Ty Warner
Executive Director
Northwest Indiana Regional Planning
Commission
VIA
EMAIL
Dear Mr. Warner:
I was surprised to see an invitation to
participate in a survey by NIPRC. It arrived in my home mailbox in Gary.
Frankly, I did not think your organization
was interested in public input. I base this on long experience. First, you
declined an invitation to meet with Everybody Counts (ECCIL), the local Center
for Independent Living, when you first began your job at NIRPC. ECCIL extended
the invitation to you in public, and you rebuked them in front of several
witnesses. Secondly, your organization has never complied with Federal guidance
concerning public input. This was true even when you chose to thumb your nose
at the consent decree governing your behavior when it was in full effect in a
lawsuit in which people with disabilities sued NIRPC and transit providers for
failing to comply with the ADA. Your efforts to avoid meaningful public input
were so extreme as to risk a finding of contempt of court. You demonstrated
your lack of respect for this community and for the legal system. You have
refused to cooperate with ECCIL to solicit public input from people with
disabilities who rely upon public transit.
Taking you at face value, I logged into the
system. The letter you sent says you will ask about traffic congestion compared
to five years ago, whether public transportation is good and reliable, and
whether sidewalks and bike lanes serve my needs. Not a single question going to
these issues was included in the survey. I have merely been asked to track my
travel on a given day on a form. It seems the sole use of such information
would be to justify further highway funds to continue depriving transit systems
and to continue your decades-long assault on our urban centers. Despite the $276,130.00
paid to the survey “consultant,” the PDF form is not fillable.
Let me tell you a little about my travel. I
live in Gary. I allow at least three hours to travel to court dates in downtown
Chicago because I cannot risk being late. The roads are so frequently congested
and at a complete stop that I am often grateful for having allowed myself the
extra time, arriving just barely in time for court. Because you have long
chosen to hire on a patronage basis, staffing your office with sub-literates
who are technocratically educated (if at all), none of the region’s roads have
resilience. Resilience is a planning term meaning that there is an alternate
traffic corridor when one is impassible. Recently, I have seen people re-routed
from U.S. 51 to a small rural road east of Portage. That should be a cause for
deep shame.
Similarly, U.S. 65 has been impassible for a
long time. Now, U.S. 51—a nearby north-south corridor—is impassible. In
addition, U.S. 12/20 is reduced to one lane or less through Gary—making it
difficult for people to avoid the U.S. 65 on ramp and travel across Gary to the
Broadway or Grant Street ramps or to various tollway ramps (should they choose
to pay to sit at a complete standstill for hours at a time on the tollway).
Anyone with a basic knowledge of planning would have worked around this.
However, you—and your contractors—prefer the cash-grab style of purporting to
do government-funded work on all the roads at one time.
My husband travels to work in Merrillville.
Your agency has long made ideological choices to favor south Lake County,
Porter County, LaPorte County--rural communities and sprawl--rather than
allocating any money to north Lake County. (In fact, as you know, Gary Public
Transportation does an excellent job but is not funded by NIRPC and picks up
much of the slack for your incompetence by serving communities well beyond
Gary’s border—Merrillville and Hammond, for example. In contrast, NICTD is an
exercise in futility, but I understand that it is not funded by NIRPC.)
My husband has been unable to access I-65
South for many months. I do not know what you have convinced yourself you are
doing, but we well remember the time Clay Street was closed for over a year and
no work whatsoever was done during that time. Regardless of what governmental
funding sources were told, it reopened in the same shape it was in when it
closed.
Once my husband arrives in Merrillville, he
faces on overly-congested U.S. 30 corridor. Your poor ideological choices
resulted in emphasizing this area, but your execution is so sub-par that it is
still not passable. Of course, now you have dumped billions of dollars into
developing this area. It is safe to assume you have no plan for what to do now
that young people are eschewing the tasteless and materialistic lifestyle
associated with sprawl, chain restaurants, and malls. A rational choice would
have been to develop healthy urban areas with vibrant transit options, but you
not only left that barn door open—you burned the barn, starving the urban areas
and using NIRPC to actively generate blight.
NIRPC’s incompetence and commitment to
far-right ideology has destroyed Northwest Indiana. It is unlikely the
communities affected by your agency will become livable communities. Pay your
consultants. Read your surveys. Collect your paychecks. And, let us not forget:
use your very liberal tab at local restaurants. Where do y’all go now that
Country Lounge is gone?
Sincerely,
Wednesday, October 18, 2017
Wednesday, September 20, 2017
Smug Smiles and Full Diapers--What the conviction of an Indiana sheriff can remind us about civics
Lake County Sheriff John Buncich was recently convicted of fraud.
While hearing of the conviction did not surprise me, it reminded me of questions I have held through the years. First, the Lake County, Indiana Sheriff's office is a somewhat flawed place. I remember hearing from a friend of mine who got stranded near Gary. Although an officer was nice enough to give him a ride, he had to endure "warnings" about, and racial epithets related to, African-Americans throughout the ride. This was during one of Buncich's reigns.
During another of his reigns, there was an alleged murder in my neighborhood. For some reason, it brought out the Lake County Sheriff as well as the local police. The Sheriff's officers were truly foul people--they ran door-to-door with the energy of excited puppies, speculating the death was a drug crime. Their reactions would have been endearing in a Barney Fife way if not so hateful. They made the episode of The Andy Griffith Show where Andy deputizes Goober look like a stellar police training film. In fact, as I told them was likely, it was a crime of passion. The family affected was in no way involved with drugs. It turned out one spouse had walked in on the other "cheating" and had reacted . . . explosively. Of course, neither the Lake County goons nor the local "press" ever corrected the "drug" story with the public, so the surviving child got to grow up with the stigma attached by shoddy police work coupled with racism.
The real question, though, isn't whether there are flaws. It is why people keep voting for these flawed representatives. In Northwest Indiana, many people brag on this kind of voting with smug looks on their faces, clearly thinking their ignorance is "cute." It is not so cute for a black family whose reputation is smeared or crime victims who don't get justice because we put reprehensible in people in office time and time again.
Although the Supreme Court has deemed much of the Voting Rights Act irrelevant, we really need a new, expanded one. The Voting Rights Act is largely limited to "covered jurisdictions" based on a problematic history, and it forbids practices like gerrymandering and imposing a poll tax or literacy tests. While these protections are important, there is the question of how people are disenfranchised through lack of basic, civic knowledge.
When I ran for a political office in the 1990s, I encountered a lot of weird behavior. There was the smug insistence on voting for a known wife-beater (person, not t-shirt) because, "I knew him since he was in diapers." However, more troubling were people who were disenfranchised for low amounts of money.
When a woman told me should could not vote for me because she would lose her place as an election judge, I assumed this was a mighty position. After all, one would have to be paid a lot to be disenfranchised in exchange for the job. However, the job paid $50.00 for a grueling day of work. Some years might bring two opportunities ($100.00), but some brought none. Others gave up space in their yards for election signs--to the tune of $5.00 per election. Even people holding onto coveted municipal jobs were making a whopping $18,000 year--a salary easily matched (or beat) with honest work in a private-sector job with soul intact.
In the end, questioning of people brought one common theme: they honestly believed they could be observed in the voting booth. Maybe they were--many had stories of lost jobs and other repercussions following a vote. It seems more likely that a stray word about how one voted got back to the wrong person.
Northwest Indiana voters put up with a lot, seeing a lot and saying nothing. Someone knew--some spouse or employee or contractor--about the Buncich scandal before it erupted. But people said nothing. For years. Through multiple Buncich reigns.
Before that, a powerful county politician was controlled by one disgusting, corrupt family. Word was (as was told to me), the drunken patriarch had dangled the politician, a lawyer, from a high window by his feet to drive home the point that he would do the family's bidding. He obeyed (maybe liking not having his skull crashing down onto pavement) for years before he was caught. His misdeeds were public secrets, eliciting that sleazy, aren't-I-cute smile from any number of voters--until he was caught. He crashed so hard and fast that I was the only person civil enough to give him a few minutes at a fundraiser after the "public secret" became public. He ended up doing time in jail, and losing his Illinois and Indiana law licenses.
To this day, Indiana's lack of public transit is one of this best indicators of corruption. Money enters the area, but it does not go into buses and trains. Suspecting we knew where the money went, a friend and I dined at a watering-hole known to be popular with certain political appointees who control transit money for Northwest Indiana. Although the now-shuttered restaurant was truly vile, we poked down a bit of what they called food. We asked for our bill to be applied to the transit conglomerate's tab . . . and the waitress smilingly complied. Perhaps it was the fried gristle, but we didn't have the stomach to carry out fraud. We quickly called the waitress back and settled our bills with cash.
Indiana needs an enhanced Voter Rights Act of its own. Basic civic education is sorely lacking--voters at least deserve to know they are not watched/recording in their polling places. Perhaps the education should be tied to eligibility for a driver's license, since poor political choices have resulted in transit monies being pocketed and few public transit options--making driving a necessity for survival.
At any rate, it is time to wipe the smug smiles away and stop selling votes. And surely we can find a better basis for electing officials than our memories of their full diapers.
While hearing of the conviction did not surprise me, it reminded me of questions I have held through the years. First, the Lake County, Indiana Sheriff's office is a somewhat flawed place. I remember hearing from a friend of mine who got stranded near Gary. Although an officer was nice enough to give him a ride, he had to endure "warnings" about, and racial epithets related to, African-Americans throughout the ride. This was during one of Buncich's reigns.
During another of his reigns, there was an alleged murder in my neighborhood. For some reason, it brought out the Lake County Sheriff as well as the local police. The Sheriff's officers were truly foul people--they ran door-to-door with the energy of excited puppies, speculating the death was a drug crime. Their reactions would have been endearing in a Barney Fife way if not so hateful. They made the episode of The Andy Griffith Show where Andy deputizes Goober look like a stellar police training film. In fact, as I told them was likely, it was a crime of passion. The family affected was in no way involved with drugs. It turned out one spouse had walked in on the other "cheating" and had reacted . . . explosively. Of course, neither the Lake County goons nor the local "press" ever corrected the "drug" story with the public, so the surviving child got to grow up with the stigma attached by shoddy police work coupled with racism.
The real question, though, isn't whether there are flaws. It is why people keep voting for these flawed representatives. In Northwest Indiana, many people brag on this kind of voting with smug looks on their faces, clearly thinking their ignorance is "cute." It is not so cute for a black family whose reputation is smeared or crime victims who don't get justice because we put reprehensible in people in office time and time again.
Although the Supreme Court has deemed much of the Voting Rights Act irrelevant, we really need a new, expanded one. The Voting Rights Act is largely limited to "covered jurisdictions" based on a problematic history, and it forbids practices like gerrymandering and imposing a poll tax or literacy tests. While these protections are important, there is the question of how people are disenfranchised through lack of basic, civic knowledge.
When I ran for a political office in the 1990s, I encountered a lot of weird behavior. There was the smug insistence on voting for a known wife-beater (person, not t-shirt) because, "I knew him since he was in diapers." However, more troubling were people who were disenfranchised for low amounts of money.
When a woman told me should could not vote for me because she would lose her place as an election judge, I assumed this was a mighty position. After all, one would have to be paid a lot to be disenfranchised in exchange for the job. However, the job paid $50.00 for a grueling day of work. Some years might bring two opportunities ($100.00), but some brought none. Others gave up space in their yards for election signs--to the tune of $5.00 per election. Even people holding onto coveted municipal jobs were making a whopping $18,000 year--a salary easily matched (or beat) with honest work in a private-sector job with soul intact.
In the end, questioning of people brought one common theme: they honestly believed they could be observed in the voting booth. Maybe they were--many had stories of lost jobs and other repercussions following a vote. It seems more likely that a stray word about how one voted got back to the wrong person.
Northwest Indiana voters put up with a lot, seeing a lot and saying nothing. Someone knew--some spouse or employee or contractor--about the Buncich scandal before it erupted. But people said nothing. For years. Through multiple Buncich reigns.
Before that, a powerful county politician was controlled by one disgusting, corrupt family. Word was (as was told to me), the drunken patriarch had dangled the politician, a lawyer, from a high window by his feet to drive home the point that he would do the family's bidding. He obeyed (maybe liking not having his skull crashing down onto pavement) for years before he was caught. His misdeeds were public secrets, eliciting that sleazy, aren't-I-cute smile from any number of voters--until he was caught. He crashed so hard and fast that I was the only person civil enough to give him a few minutes at a fundraiser after the "public secret" became public. He ended up doing time in jail, and losing his Illinois and Indiana law licenses.
To this day, Indiana's lack of public transit is one of this best indicators of corruption. Money enters the area, but it does not go into buses and trains. Suspecting we knew where the money went, a friend and I dined at a watering-hole known to be popular with certain political appointees who control transit money for Northwest Indiana. Although the now-shuttered restaurant was truly vile, we poked down a bit of what they called food. We asked for our bill to be applied to the transit conglomerate's tab . . . and the waitress smilingly complied. Perhaps it was the fried gristle, but we didn't have the stomach to carry out fraud. We quickly called the waitress back and settled our bills with cash.
Indiana needs an enhanced Voter Rights Act of its own. Basic civic education is sorely lacking--voters at least deserve to know they are not watched/recording in their polling places. Perhaps the education should be tied to eligibility for a driver's license, since poor political choices have resulted in transit monies being pocketed and few public transit options--making driving a necessity for survival.
At any rate, it is time to wipe the smug smiles away and stop selling votes. And surely we can find a better basis for electing officials than our memories of their full diapers.
Friday, February 10, 2012
Should I hire someone to help modify my mortgage?
This is a repost from www.kellidudley.com.
Generally, you should not hire someone to assist with a loan modification. Free help is available through HUD-Certified Housing Counseling agencies listed at www.HUD.gov.
The Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, one of the state agencies helping protect Illinois consumers, mandates those providing modification services be properly licensed. More information is available here:
http://www.idfpr.com/Banks/RESFIN/mortloanmodscams.asp
Attorneys may also prey on homeowners in foreclosure or seeking a loan modification. Attorneys should not provide these services unless they have the proper license from IDFPR or are providing the service as part of legal representation. For example, an attorney might file a lawsuit against a lender for violating a law when the mortgage was made and include a modification as part of the settlement. However, an attorney should not generally accept money for doing nothing more than working on a loan modification.
I refer my clients to www.HUD.gov to choose a HUD-Certified Housing Counseling agency. It seems unprofessional and unfair to take money to do a service that someone else can do better and cheaper. I am no more a counselor than I am a cook or a housekeeper, and I certainly do not charge legal fees to cook and clean for my clients.
Attorneys who aggressively seek clients for loan modification seem to be missing the obvious: there are plenty of people who need the help of an attorney in court.
Those who have paid for a loan modification service should contact an attorney to ensure it was done in compliance with Illinois law. This includes a written contract and no payment until the service is complete. Homeowners who have paid for loan modification services may be able to bring a lawsuit and collect damanges.
Generally, you should not hire someone to assist with a loan modification. Free help is available through HUD-Certified Housing Counseling agencies listed at www.HUD.gov.
The Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, one of the state agencies helping protect Illinois consumers, mandates those providing modification services be properly licensed. More information is available here:
http://www.idfpr.com/Banks/RESFIN/mortloanmodscams.asp
Attorneys may also prey on homeowners in foreclosure or seeking a loan modification. Attorneys should not provide these services unless they have the proper license from IDFPR or are providing the service as part of legal representation. For example, an attorney might file a lawsuit against a lender for violating a law when the mortgage was made and include a modification as part of the settlement. However, an attorney should not generally accept money for doing nothing more than working on a loan modification.
I refer my clients to www.HUD.gov to choose a HUD-Certified Housing Counseling agency. It seems unprofessional and unfair to take money to do a service that someone else can do better and cheaper. I am no more a counselor than I am a cook or a housekeeper, and I certainly do not charge legal fees to cook and clean for my clients.
Attorneys who aggressively seek clients for loan modification seem to be missing the obvious: there are plenty of people who need the help of an attorney in court.
Those who have paid for a loan modification service should contact an attorney to ensure it was done in compliance with Illinois law. This includes a written contract and no payment until the service is complete. Homeowners who have paid for loan modification services may be able to bring a lawsuit and collect damanges.
Friday, October 28, 2011
Sumpin' Smells Funny; Must be the Money!
Why on earth would the New York Police Department's union threaten to sue Occupy Wallstreet protesters? Does the average officer really believe she or he is aligned with the 1 percent? Or does the average officer remember the hard battle fought because, in recent history, starting wages could be as low as $21,000?
The answer, it turns out, is that attorney James Lysaght knows who butters his bread. And the wielder of all forms of fatty deliciousness to be spread across Lysaght's toast is: the financial industry.
It is a story as old as time. Lawyer meets corrupt official. Corrupt official is removed. Corrupt official transfers business to lawyer's wife (also a lawyer).
Firm gets in legal trouble. Firm closes. Lawyer begins new firm. New firm serves two masters: the union (Patrolmen's Benevolent Association) and corporate America.
Or, to be blunt, firm represents corporate America. Firm lashes out against working people who funded (voluntarily or not, through the misuse of their union dues) lawyer's rise to power.
Former cop, James Lysaght, is a loyal type. He has kept close ties to his former roommate, Richard Hartman. Hartman used union funds for gambling binges. Lysaghts firm was hired to replace Hartman, but then hired him as a "consultant" to sell life insurance policies to the Patrolmen's Benevelent Association.
Then, Lysaght was, in 1997, indicted on racketeering charges for taking kickbacks for $3 million in legal business. (So that's how you get those big clients--I slept through class that day in law school!)
Not one to be kept down, Lysaght, with his wife, started a new firm. And who would hire a lawyer after such an indictment? Why, the financial services industry!
Mr. Lysaght serves a master. And that master is not the average police officer patroling New York City's streets. Mr. Lysaght's sole interest is to protect and defend those who destroy the economy.
The answer, it turns out, is that attorney James Lysaght knows who butters his bread. And the wielder of all forms of fatty deliciousness to be spread across Lysaght's toast is: the financial industry.
It is a story as old as time. Lawyer meets corrupt official. Corrupt official is removed. Corrupt official transfers business to lawyer's wife (also a lawyer).
Firm gets in legal trouble. Firm closes. Lawyer begins new firm. New firm serves two masters: the union (Patrolmen's Benevolent Association) and corporate America.
Or, to be blunt, firm represents corporate America. Firm lashes out against working people who funded (voluntarily or not, through the misuse of their union dues) lawyer's rise to power.
Former cop, James Lysaght, is a loyal type. He has kept close ties to his former roommate, Richard Hartman. Hartman used union funds for gambling binges. Lysaghts firm was hired to replace Hartman, but then hired him as a "consultant" to sell life insurance policies to the Patrolmen's Benevelent Association.
Then, Lysaght was, in 1997, indicted on racketeering charges for taking kickbacks for $3 million in legal business. (So that's how you get those big clients--I slept through class that day in law school!)
Not one to be kept down, Lysaght, with his wife, started a new firm. And who would hire a lawyer after such an indictment? Why, the financial services industry!
Mr. Lysaght serves a master. And that master is not the average police officer patroling New York City's streets. Mr. Lysaght's sole interest is to protect and defend those who destroy the economy.
Sunday, March 6, 2011
The Good, the Bad, and the Unethical: Hints for finding a good lawyer
There is a lot of fraud directed toward homeowners in foreclosure. Rescue scammers, including attorneys, realize that a homeowner faced with the loss of his or her home is vulnerable. Homeowners will pay a lot of money for nothing from a lawyer with a fancy office and slick story while viewing me with distrust because I tell the truth: I cannot guarantee a result.
Many attorneys are taking unethical actions. These include soliciting clients at the courthouse. This is illegal.
Other attorneys promise to "delay" the foreclosure. This is unethical. The rules governing attorneys do not allow anything to be done just to cause a delay. There are many steps an attorney can do, if justified after reviwing an individual case, that happen to also slow down the foreclosure. But, an attorney who promises "a delay" without carefully considering every aspect of your case is breaking the rules--the same rules that guard against the attorney stealing your money or selling your confidential information.
Another unethical practice is taking money on a monthly basis, often equivalent to half one's mortgage payment. This is not permitted because attorneys are required to charge a fee that is reasonable related to services performed. During a lawsuit, there are many months when the attorney does not do anything. For example, the judge may have given the bank's attorney a month to file a paper, and the homeowner's attorney is simply waiting.
I had a recent email inquiry from someone outside my state who wanted to know how to find a good attorney, and may answer is below. For those in foreclosure, one of the most important things is to start out talking to a HUD-Certified Housing Counseling Agency. These services are FREE. A lawyer may be needed, but the counselor can help homeowners get a good start. A listing is available at www.hud.gov
Here are some tips for seeking an attorney that is not out to take advantage of you. There is no substitute for your good judgment after you speak with theGood attorneys:
--Don't advertise with huge ads on the back of phone books or on late-night TV or on billboards
--Don't tell you you have only one option, such as bankruptcy
--Don't sell products like a "forensic loan analysis" or say they are "experts" in areas like being a "short-sale" expert or "modification" expert
--Won't take your money for something another service will do for free. Free services include HUD-Certified Housing Counseling Agencies. There are exceptions--some people choose to hire me once I tell them there are other options. In cases where they have the money, that is fine
--Have a written retainer that tells you your rights and responsibilities
--Have a clear billing plan based on an hourly rate (NOT a monthly payment regardless of whether work is done that month) OR based on recovery from a third-party as a contingency of winning where the main goal is to sue someone and win money (rarely the case with mortgages; almost always the case with things like car accidents)
--Provide you with monthly statements or bills or some other way to know what is being done for you and why you are being asked to pay
Try going to your bar association to see if they have a referral service. It is best if these attorneys are screened. Check the state disciplinary records (official records maintained by the state disciplinary board, usually available online--NOT just a site that lets comsumers post comments) before hiring anyone. The latter often contain falsified information that attorneys post for each other as "satisfied clients."
Bear in mind that every case has a deadline called a statute of limitations. Once this passes, the legal claim is lost. Never delay in seeking an attorney, and always be clear with attorneys about dates as you describe your case.
.
Many attorneys are taking unethical actions. These include soliciting clients at the courthouse. This is illegal.
Other attorneys promise to "delay" the foreclosure. This is unethical. The rules governing attorneys do not allow anything to be done just to cause a delay. There are many steps an attorney can do, if justified after reviwing an individual case, that happen to also slow down the foreclosure. But, an attorney who promises "a delay" without carefully considering every aspect of your case is breaking the rules--the same rules that guard against the attorney stealing your money or selling your confidential information.
Another unethical practice is taking money on a monthly basis, often equivalent to half one's mortgage payment. This is not permitted because attorneys are required to charge a fee that is reasonable related to services performed. During a lawsuit, there are many months when the attorney does not do anything. For example, the judge may have given the bank's attorney a month to file a paper, and the homeowner's attorney is simply waiting.
I had a recent email inquiry from someone outside my state who wanted to know how to find a good attorney, and may answer is below. For those in foreclosure, one of the most important things is to start out talking to a HUD-Certified Housing Counseling Agency. These services are FREE. A lawyer may be needed, but the counselor can help homeowners get a good start. A listing is available at www.hud.gov
Here are some tips for seeking an attorney that is not out to take advantage of you. There is no substitute for your good judgment after you speak with theGood attorneys:
--Don't advertise with huge ads on the back of phone books or on late-night TV or on billboards
--Don't tell you you have only one option, such as bankruptcy
--Don't sell products like a "forensic loan analysis" or say they are "experts" in areas like being a "short-sale" expert or "modification" expert
--Won't take your money for something another service will do for free. Free services include HUD-Certified Housing Counseling Agencies. There are exceptions--some people choose to hire me once I tell them there are other options. In cases where they have the money, that is fine
--Have a written retainer that tells you your rights and responsibilities
--Have a clear billing plan based on an hourly rate (NOT a monthly payment regardless of whether work is done that month) OR based on recovery from a third-party as a contingency of winning where the main goal is to sue someone and win money (rarely the case with mortgages; almost always the case with things like car accidents)
--Provide you with monthly statements or bills or some other way to know what is being done for you and why you are being asked to pay
Try going to your bar association to see if they have a referral service. It is best if these attorneys are screened. Check the state disciplinary records (official records maintained by the state disciplinary board, usually available online--NOT just a site that lets comsumers post comments) before hiring anyone. The latter often contain falsified information that attorneys post for each other as "satisfied clients."
Bear in mind that every case has a deadline called a statute of limitations. Once this passes, the legal claim is lost. Never delay in seeking an attorney, and always be clear with attorneys about dates as you describe your case.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)