Friday, March 4, 2022

Are There Any Advantages to Filing First For A Divorce In Texas?

There are probably all sorts of thoughts going through your mind at this moment if you are considering whether to file for divorce. There are the logistics of the divorce to concern yourself with, the potential financial implications both short term and long term, and questions about how to break the news to your family and discuss changes with your children. To feel like you are overwhelmed with this decision-making would not be uncommon or unjustified. Going through a divorce is a lot to process for anyone. We consider that you very likely have additional responsibilities on your plates, such as family life, work, and things of that nature. We can see that your responsibilities extend well beyond merely deciding whether to file a divorce case.

From my experience, there are two schools of thought when filing a divorce. The first school is our folks who are incredibly hesitant to file a divorce. It will seemingly take forever and a day to finally file their case. This may be where you are. There are certainly reasons why you may not want to get a divorce. Divorce impacts your children and your finances. For most people, these are the two most important areas of focus regarding potentially filing for a divorce. As a result, you may vacate between filing the case and staying put in your marriage to see if things can improve.

On the other hand, you may be chomping at the bit in terms of your desire to file for divorce. In that case, you may not have thought through many of the issues that could impact your life in a divorce scenario. I have been guilty of wanting to get something done so quickly that I didn’t properly think through all of the different issues that may be relevant to your case. Not only did these relevant issues impact your life during a divorce, but they may be things that may cause you to consider delaying a divorce filing. However, these considerations need to be made when you are not thinking clearly and could lead to negative results for you and your family.

Whatever position you find yourself in, you can rest assured that there are resources available for you when deciding for yourself. You do not need to go into this process without information and guidance. The attorneys with the Law Office of Bryan Fagan are equipped to assist you with answering questions and providing information in free of charge consultations. Whether you are far along in your decision-making process about your divorce or are just starting, our attorneys can walk you through what you need to know about your specific divorce.

Who filed first?

Many people in your shoes assume that there must be some advantage when filing for divorce before your spouse can do so. For the most part, however, there is no clear advantage under the law in Texas when it comes to beating your spouse to the punch and filing your divorce before they can get an opportunity to do so. Whether you are the petition in the divorce- the person who filed the divorce, or the respondent- the person who will respond to the petition, the law treats you the same as the other spouse.

However, some advantages may exist when filing first for divorce from a planning and logistical perspective. Filing first for divorce allows you to know that change is coming to your life. This can help you organize the information you need to prepare for your divorce case. For example, at the beginning of a divorce case, it is common for you to inventory and appraises your property subject to division in the divorce. You can be working on doing this as quickly before the divorce as during.

Many people do that I have worked with is to take their cell phone camera into each room of their home and take photographs of the contents of each room. That way, if anything should happen to grow legs and walk away, as my mother would say, then you have proof that the item was inside your home at one point in time. From there, you should walk into closets, open desks, dresser drawers, and even open safes to document what property existed within your home at the beginning of the divorce.

Next, you can write down those items on a legal pad or type them out on a word processing document. I would recommend that you next take some time to estimate the value of these assets. This does not have to be an exact number by any means, but thinking about the importance of these assets can be helpful in the sense that you can begin to craft a strategy and develop goals for yourself when it comes to community property division.

You may also need to line up some money to pay for the divorce. It’s no secret that divorces cost money. It’s not that a divorce has to be the most expensive thing that you ever do in your life, but the reality is that a divorce will cost you money. There are court costs, costs associated with serving your spouse, attorney’s fees, and even disruptions to your schedule that are possible, which may reduce your wages. A divorce will not be inexpensive, but practical ways to reduce those costs. However, it would help if you planned to figure out how you would pay for your case in advance.

In extreme situations, you may need to plan into place due to your spouse being abusive towards you or your children. In that case, you may need to find a new place to stay after you file for divorce. Are there shelters or women’s resource centers in your area? Do you have family or friends who are willing to shelter you and the kids for a period? Even if you do, it will probably take a few phone calls for you to line that up and get everything in order as far as getting yourself and your necessary belongings out of the home. Even developing a safety plan for yourself and the kids may be required. Is there a “safe place” for you to go with the kids if things turn nasty with your spouse? Do your kids know to avoid the kitchen due to sharp objectives being present?

Filing first for divorce may also allow you to get a protective order simultaneously. A protective order can be sought in Harris County from a different court than your divorce was filed in. A protective order allows law enforcement to get involved in the situation if your spouse becomes violent or violates some portion of the protective order. Most of the time, a protective order bars your spouse from coming within a certain distance of you or your children. You need to follow steps to accomplish this; however, the time before a divorce is an excellent opportunity to get all of this inline.

Another advantage that you may be able to seize from your divorce if you can file your case first is choosing where your divorce case will be held. Imagine a situation where you and your spouse are still married but have lived physically separate from one another for several years. Years. During that time, your spouse has moved to Dallas, and you still live in Houston. You all have not been in contact for some time, and your concern is that your spouse may end up filing for divorce from you in Dallas before you can file for divorce from him in Houston.

If you have lived here for at least the prior six months and in your county for at least the previous 90 days, Texas is a state where you can file for divorce here. If you and your spouse have been separated for some time and live in those different counties, then either of you may very well be able to file for divorce. This could put you in a bind as far as your work and home life are concerned. Imagine having to take off work for a day or two to attend a hearing in Dallas. Wouldn’t it be easier for you to file your divorce here in Harris County so that you can listen to matters here in your backyard?

This is an immediate benefit of filing for divorce. If your spouse files for divorce in Dallas on the day after you had already filed for divorce in Houston, it is likely that the Dallas court would tell your spouse that since the case had already been filed in Houston, there is no need to consider having an issue in Dallas. There may be circumstances outside of this hypothetical example that we need to believe, but for the most part, what I am saying here will apply to 99% of divorces. If you file your case before your spouse can, you get to have a home-field advantage. At least as far as travel is concerned.

The above hypothetical example can be taken even further if we consider a situation where your spouse not only no longer lives in Houston but no longer lives in Texas at all. If he left the state and now lives in Oklahoma or Arkansas, this can have an even more significant impact on your life during a divorce. Not only do the distances between you and a potential new court location increase dramatically, but you also would have to contend with a whole new set of family laws. While I’m sure that some family laws in Texas look like the family laws of another state, there are likely to be some significant differences that can have a dramatic impact on your divorce.

For example, suppose that you have a 13-year-old who very much wants to live with you on a full-time basis. In Texas, he would have the right to speak to a judge directly to express that desire. This does not necessarily mean that the judge will listen only to your child when it comes to deciding on this issue, but if I were in your shoes, I would prefer for your child to have a say in this matter than not have one. If your spouse files for divorce first in Arkansas, there may not be an opportunity for your child to voice their opinion in the same way. You run this risk when you do not file for divorce first.

What do you need to do to prepare to file for divorce?

Otherwise, there aren’t that many advantages to filing first for divorce. A divorce won’t blindside you, and you will have an opportunity to prepare your case more diligently before the case gets going. So, if you are convinced that you need to go ahead and file for divorce, what are some of the best ways for you to prepare to do so?

For one, I would recommend that you speak with an experienced family law attorney before moving forward with a divorce. Even if you ultimately decide to file for divorce on your own, it is potentially a big mistake to forego the advice of an attorney. An attorney can help you identify potential problem areas in your case and help you determine if you need to hire a lawyer. You may not “need” to hire a lawyer, but in the grand scheme of things, it may be for the best that you have a lawyer at your disposal.

Next, I would consider what your family needs to do to figure out how to pay for the divorce. In different families, this can mean different things. It may mean pulling money out of investments and getting it ready to spend on a lawyer and court costs. Others reading this blog post may need to take out a loan, spend some of their money in savings or access various lines of credit. This is not a discussion that you should enter lightly. It is one that you should consider after a great deal of thought.

There is nothing wrong with taking out a loan or trying to get your case done now when you don’t necessarily have the cash to do so. You can speak to one of our financial ambassadors here at our office who can work with you on figuring out if there’s a type of financing that we can make available to help you further your divorce cause. It is not easy to drop everything and pay for a divorce all on your own without much notice. By thinking long and hard about Your plan for getting a divorce, you can be better situated from a financial standpoint when getting the divorce you need. So much of this depends upon paying for an attorney who can provide you with quality representation.

Different attorneys cater to other people based on their specific circumstances, as with anything else in the economy. As you begin your search for a lawyer, assuredly, you will find that there are attorneys at all different price points depending on where you look. Depending upon What part of town and what your needs are as a client, you will almost indeed find an attorney who fits your budget period; however, if you are not able to take the time to find the lawyer who suits you and your needs, then you may end up spending more money for an attorney that is not right for you.

To that end, I would recommend that you take whatever opportunity you have to interview multiple attorneys so that you can gain an understanding of what the issues are in your case and how they may impact your family. The last thing you will want to do is rush out at the last minute and hire the first attorney you talked to. Instead, it would be advisable for you to take whatever opportunity you get and sit down with an attorney, preferably face to face, to learn more about the legal process and how it applies to your life.

Questions about the material contained in today’s blog post? Contact the Law Office of Bryan Fagan

If you have any questions about the material contained in today’s blog post, please do not hesitate to contact the Law Office of Bryan Fagan. Our licensed family law attorneys offer free of charge consultations six days a week in person, over the phone, and via video. These consultations are an excellent way for you to learn more about the world of Texas family law, as well as to learn how your family circumstances may be impacted by the filing of a divorce or child custody case.



from Texas Bar Today https://ift.tt/M1jF6Xq
via Abogado Aly Website

Ex-Worden Capital Broker William Athas Accused of Excessive Trading That Cost Customers $1.1M

Ex-NY Worden Capital Broker Barred After Allegedly Charging $1.6M in Commissions

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) has barred ex-Worden Capital Management and former SW Financial registered representative, William Nicholas Athas. This bar comes in the wake of allegations that he engaged in excessive trading in customer accounts. 

According to the self-regulatory organization’s (SRO’s) complaint, Athas controlled the trading in these accounts, deciding the frequency and volume of trades. He also allegedly made the calls regarding which securities to purchase and sell, as well as the quantity and timing of each transaction. William Athas’ customers usually would go by his recommendations.

The post Ex-Worden Capital Broker William Athas Accused of Excessive Trading That Cost Customers $1.1M appeared first on Investor Lawyers Blog.



from Texas Bar Today https://ift.tt/H7QRwId
via Abogado Aly Website

March 4, 2022 Weekly Round Up

Happy Friday!  There have been a number of agricultural law stories in the news over the past couple of weeks.

*Texas Supreme Court hears oral arguments in Hlavinka v. HSC Pipeline Partnership.  The Texas Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments in an important eminent domain case analyzing what a pipeline must show in order to claim common carrier status and the ability of a landowner to testify regarding other pipeline easement values.  To read my summary of the court of appeals’ decision being reviewed by the Supreme Court, click here.  To listen to the oral arguments, click here.

*Settlement discussions delay second phase of Texas v. New Mexico water law trial.  Special Master Michael Malloy postponed the second phase of trial in Texas v. New Mexico, a water law case involving the Rio Grande.  The parties were supposed to report back to the Special Master regarding settlement discussions by March 1.  If no settlement is reached, the trial will be held in the late summer or fall.  [Read article here.]  To read about the case generally, click here.  To listen to a podcast episode discussing this case, click here.

Image by David Mark from Pixabay

*EPA chlorpyrifos tolerance rule goes into effect, lawsuit pending.  On February 28, the EPA’s rule revoking food tolerance for the insecticide chlorpyrifos went into effect.  This effectively bans the use of the insecticide in the United States for any crops intended for use as food or feed.  A lawsuit filed by a number of ag industry groups challenging the rule is pending in federal court.  [Read article here.]

*Monsanto argues appeal in $75 million peach farm case.  The US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit heard argument in Monsanto’s appeal from a $75 million jury verdict related to dicamba drift that damaged Bader Farms, a Missouri peach farm.  [Read article here.]

*Successful Farming article on Ukraine.  Successful Farming published an article with an overview of the current situation in Ukraine, including a detailed discussion of the impact on agriculture.  [Read article here.]

*Article discusses what to do legally when child with special needs turns 18.  For those of you raising children with special needs, it is important to be aware of some of the legal issues that will arise when your child turns 18.  This article gives a basic overview of some of the key documents to consider when that time comes.  [Read article here.]

Upcoming Programs

I’ve got a busy schedule over the next couple of weeks.  On Monday, March 7, I’ll be virtually presenting at a program for Baylor County Extension on landowner liability.  On Tuesday the 8th, I’ll be headed to Texas Tech University School of Law to speak on a Women in the Law panel to celebrate International Women’s Day.  On Wednesday the 9th, I’ll be speaking about estate planning at Master Marketer in Amarillo.  On Thursday the 10th, I’ll be in Stratford for the a 5-States Women in Agriculture Conference.  Then, on Monday the 14th, I will be in Ft. Worth for our Owning Your Piece of Texas program.  We’ve got a few seats left and would love to have you join us!  Click here for registration information.

You can see my full list of upcoming programs here.

The post March 4, 2022 Weekly Round Up appeared first on Texas Agriculture Law.



from Texas Bar Today https://ift.tt/kORYzSX
via Abogado Aly Website

Court Holds That Trust Was Not Ambiguous And Provided The Trustee Discretion In Making Income Distributions

In Wells Fargo, N.A. v. Clower, a trustee filed suit for declaratory relief regarding its discretion to make income distributions. No. 02-20-00058-CV, 2021 Tex. App. LEXIS 7675 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth September 16, 2021, no pet.). The beneficiaries filed counterclaims for breach of fiduciary duty. The trial court ordered the trustee to pay into the registry of the court over $250,000 for attorney’s fees it had paid out of the trust and ordered the trustee to no longer pay its attorneys from the trust. The beneficiaries challenged the trustee’s standing and capacity as trustee, alleging that the trustee was only a de facto trustee and not a de jure trustee. After a three-day bench trial on the issue of standing, the trial court concluded in 2011 that Wells Fargo had standing as trustee, i.e., was the de jure trustee of the trust. The court noted that the beneficiary had also lost on the standing issue in federal court. Id. (citing Clower v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2:07-CV-510-TJW-CE, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162702, 2011 WL 13196511, at *2 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 30, 2011); Clower v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 259 F.R.D. 253, 254, 261-62 (E.D. Tex. 2009) (order granting class certification), order vacated, appeal dism’d, 381 Fed. Appx. 450 (5th Cir. 2010)).

The beneficiaries then moved for summary judgment, alleging that the trustee had to distribute all of the net income, that it had not done so in the amount of over $288,000, and sought damages, interest, and attorney’s fees. The trial court granted the motion, and the trustee appealed.

The court of appeals reviewed trust construction principals:

The construction of a trust instrument is a question of law for the trial court, which must construe it to ascertain the settlors’ intent from the language used within the instrument’s four corners. All terms must be harmonized to properly give effect to all parts, and if possible, the court should construe the instrument to give effect to all provisions so that no provision is rendered meaningless. If a trust’s meaning is ambiguous, its interpretation becomes a fact issue for which summary judgment is inappropriate, and whether the meaning is ambiguous is a question of law for the court. We look to the law that was in effect at the time that the trust became effective—here May 23, 1969—but look to the words of the instrument first and then, if necessary, turn to statutory provisions to fill in any gaps.

Id. (internal citation omitted).

The court then reviewed several of the trust’s provisions concerning distributions. It stated that the trustee shall disburse all net income to the grantors. However, after the trust became irrevocable, it provided that:

[T]hen the Trustee is authorized and empowered to pay the net income of each of said trusts, to or among the beneficiaries of that particular trust, as above named, or to any one of them, in such amounts and proportions as our Trustee in its sole and absolute discretion shall deem advisable, from time to time, without regard to equality of distribution... In exercising its discretion as to the amount (if any) of such net income which is to be paid to any of the aforesaid beneficiaries, our Trustee shall not be required to take into consideration any other income or property which is available to any such beneficiary from any other source.

Id. After the first to die of the grantors, the trust stated:

[I]t is our desire that all of the balance of net income from the said [JCC Trust] and the [EAB Trust], after distributions are made to the surviving Grantor, be disbursed to all or any one of the beneficiaries of each of said trusts, as the Trustee may deem advisable. It being our intention that our children, [John and Edith], and their issue and descendents [sic], shall share in the benefits of their respective trusts, as soon as possible.

Id.

The court reviewed the trust’s provision wherein the settlors stated that they “desire[d]” for the trustee to distribute all of net income and held that it was precatory and not mandatory:

Paragraph V states that after one of the grantors dies, the trustee could pay net income to the trust and sub-trust beneficiaries, with one exception, “in such amounts and proportions as [the] Trustee in its sole and absolute discretion shall deem advisable, from time to time, without regard to equality of distribution.” The exception was that an equal amount was to be taken from each of the four sub-trusts for any and all distributions made to the surviving spouse, with any income not so disbursed to be incorporated into the sub-trusts’ corpus, to continue to be held, administered, and distributed under the trust’s terms.

Paragraph VII likewise provides for the trustee, “in its sole and absolute discretion,” to make disbursements from the trust corpus for emergency or extraordinary expenses arising for the four children, their spouses, and their children, and it reiterates that “the Trustee’s discretion shall be conclusive as to the advisability of any such disbursement and the same shall not be subject to review.” Paragraph XIV(7) allows the trustee the final decision with regard to whether to treat “all receipts or other property received” by the trusts as either corpus or income, and (16) allows the trustee “[t]o deal in any manner as between the trusts” as it thought advisable. And Paragraph XXIII gives the trustee the authority to resolve doubts about the trust’s construction “in such manner as [it] shall deem equitable and proper” and provides that such decisions and actions would be final and binding “in the absence of bad faith.”

Paragraph IX provides that once the trust became irrevocable but a surviving spouse remained alive, then after distributions were made to the surviving spouse and payments made for the deceased grantor’s funeral expenses, cemetery lot, gravestone, and death taxes (and funds set aside for the surviving spouse—from all four trusts—and for the beneficiaries from their individual trusts, for funeral expenses, cemetery lots, gravestones, and death taxes), then the balance of net income in the JCC and EAB trusts could—but did not have to—be disbursed “as the Trustee may deem advisable,” i.e., with due consideration not only for John and Edith but also for “their issue and descend[a]nts.”

In the context of the trustee’s discretion for classifying income and corpus set out elsewhere in the trust agreement, and other terms set out in the trust agreement—specifically Paragraphs III and XI—showing that the grantors knew how to use mandatory language if they wanted to compel the distribution of all net income, Paragraph IX appears to demonstrate nothing more than the grantors’ desire to show the two children from J.C.’s first wife that they would enjoy income from their inheritance sooner rather than later, albeit subject to the trustee’s discretion, distributions for their stepmother until her death, and the cost of various funeral and associated expenses of their father’s death and future funeral and associated expenses of their stepmother’s death.

In short, the trustee was allowed to determine when and how much net income would be paid to each sub-trust beneficiary and was allowed to treat trust income as part of the trust corpus to provide not only for the grantors’ children but also for the grantors’ grandchildren until the trust’s expiration. Within the context of the trust’s four corners, then, Paragraph IX is unambiguous and its “desire” language is precatory rather than mandatory.

Id. Thus, the court reversed the summary judgment and remanded to the trial court for further proceedings, including whether the trustee should be awarded attorney’s fees.



from Texas Bar Today https://ift.tt/Se3Fkf7
via Abogado Aly Website

Biden Signs into Law a Bill Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Harassment Claims – Key Takeaways

Dallas Employment Lawyer Fadi Yousef

On March 3, 2022, President Joe Biden signed into law new legislation banning the use of arbitration clauses in employment contracts that force victims of sexual assault and harassment to pursue their claims in private arbitration rather than in open court. The legislation passed Congress with bipartisan support and has been described as one of the most significant workplace reforms in history. It is estimated that about 60 million Americans are subject to arbitration clauses.

The law allows victims of sexual assault and harassment to have their day in court and to speak publicly about their cases. Until now, victims who had signed an arbitration agreement with their employers were forced to bring their claims in a private and largely employer-friendly arbitration process, where cases are typically decided by a single arbitrator instead of a jury.

The post Biden Signs into Law a Bill Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Harassment Claims – Key Takeaways appeared first on Dallas Employment Lawyer Blog.



from Texas Bar Today https://ift.tt/ExQYb0C
via Abogado Aly Website

Conspiracy

Conspiracy

A conspiracy is defined under 18 U.S.C. § 371 as an agreement between two or more parties to commit a federal crime. Because the accused does not have to successfully carry out its objective to be charged and convicted, conspiracy is referred to as an “inchoate” crime. Federal law penalizes conspiracies under 18 U.S.C. § 371 as misdemeanors or felonies, depending on the classification of the underlying federal crimes.

Federal crimes that often give rise to conspiracy charges include:

Because conspiracy is defined as the act of conspiring to commit a crime, which is a separate offense from the underlying substantive crime, defendants can be charged with conspiracy in addition to the crime supporting the conspiracy charge..

Who Can Be Charged with Conspiracy?

Any legal person can be charged with conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 371 including corporations, unincorporated associations, and other types of organizations. This means that a conspiracy can exist between any combination of two persons, whether they are individuals or entities. Entities can be held liable for the actions of their officers, employees, and agents when they conspire to commit a federal offense, at least in part, for the entity’s benefit.

Elements of Conspiracy

To convict a defendant of conspiracy the government must prove the following:

  • There was an agreement between at least two persons to achieve the same goal;
  • The goal of that agreement was to violate federal law or defraud the federal government;
  • The agreement was entered into knowingly and voluntarily; and
  • An overt act was made in furtherance of the agreement.

The Agreement

The most fundamental aspect of a conspiracy charge is the agreement. Nevertheless, to support a conspiracy charge, an agreement need not be formal or in-depth and its existence can be inferred from the circumstances. This allows prosecutors to charge someone with conspiracy based on circumstantial evidence, even without proof that a co-conspirator ever communicated a plot to commit a crime.

Overt Act

In addition to proving the existence of an agreement, prosecutors must show that at least one party to the conspiracy made an overt act in furtherance of the substantive crime. This requirement serves to ensure convictions are based on actual plans to commit a crime, as distinguished from “mere talk.”

The overt act does not have to be illegal and is often something innocuous, such as:

  • Making a phone call;
  • Meeting with someone;
  • Sending an email or text message;
  • Traveling to another location; or
  • Opening a bank account.

Typically, any act in furtherance of the crime is enough for a conviction.

Penalty and Sentencing Under 18 U.S.C. § 371

Penalties for conspiracy convictions include:

  • Up to five years imprisonment; and
  • A fine of up to:
    • $250,000 for individuals, and up to $500,000 for organizations; or, alternatively
    • Twice the total gain or loss resulting from the offense, regardless of whether that amount exceeds the above limits of $250,000 and $500,000.

Defending Against a Conspiracy Charge

Conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 371 is a commonly charged crime. Federal prosecutors sometimes bring conspiracy charges because they allow for presentation of a broader scope of evidence than would be permissible if the government charged only the underlying crime.

If you have been charged with conspiracy, be aware that the government has substantial resources to draw upon in conspiracy cases. Law enforcement agencies such as the FBI, DEA, Department of Labor, and the IRS sometimes devote significant time, energy, and manpower to these types of investigations.

When confronting a conspiracy charge, the earlier you find competent, experienced legal counsel the better. In addition to constructing the best defense possible while conducting a thorough investigation of the charges against you and of the evidence, your attorney functions as a buffer between you and law enforcement.

The post Conspiracy appeared first on Freeman Law.



from Texas Bar Today https://ift.tt/7wjrURm
via Abogado Aly Website

Thursday, March 3, 2022

An Example of Protections We Do Not Have: The Fight for LGBTQIA+ Rights is Ongoing

Dallas Employment Lawyer Paige Melendez

On February 22, 2022, Governor Abbott penned a letter to the Texas Department of Family Protective Services (“DFPS”) in which he imposed a mandate on the State agency to investigate the parents of children who are undergoing any type of gender transitioning treatment. To call the tone and aim of this letter transphobic would be an understatement. 

More importantly, the fact that Governor Abbott felt emboldened enough to send a transphobic order to the DFPS should act as a call to action. The February 22, 2022 letter is a prime example of how far we have come and yet how far we still have to go in the fight for equal rights. It is an example of all the protections we do not have because, in spite of Bostock County being decided by the Supreme Court, our state entities are not bound to follow those guidelines.  Governor Abbott had the audacity to direct a state agency and licensed professionals to directly harm LGBTQIA+ children by deeming gender reassignment surgeries and treatment as child abuse. This is a clear sign that the Governor’s office is either indifferent or blind to the trials and tribulations that besiege an already marginalized minority.

The post An Example of Protections We Do Not Have: The Fight for LGBTQIA+ Rights is Ongoing appeared first on Dallas Employment Lawyer Blog.



from Texas Bar Today https://ift.tt/Dm8RIJa
via Abogado Aly Website