Five Types of Content Your Audience Actually Wants to Read

Originally published by Stacey E Burke Blog.

You’ve put in the time and effort to create a marketing strategy for your law firm. After a several months of sharing your content you notice very little audience engagement. Is the return on investment (ROI) there? Constructing a strategic marketing plan and implementing that plan are great first steps when it comes to marketing your law firm. But what happens when the content isn’t doing its job of engaging, informing, and attracting new clients?  When this happens, you must ask yourself, “Are we producing the type of content they even want to see?” Fortunately for you, we have some answers to that question.

In a survey conducted by HubSpot in 2016, 1,000 Internet users were asked about their content consumption preferences and typical Internet behaviors. Here is what was revealed:

Internet users are more drawn to visual content, such as images, videos, and educational games. They also read social media posts more often than long form content, research content, and blogs. This doesn’t mean you should ditch writing blogs, drafting research articles, or producing podcasts for your law firm. But, your law firm should approach digital marketing with more diverse methods. Below are a few suggestions on where to start with a more diversified content marketing approach.

1.     YouTube Videos

 

Some of the most popular videos people watch on YouTube include tutorials, question and answer (Q&A) sessions, educational videos, interviews, and behind the scenes clips. Your law firm could either start shooting videos like these or diversify your current video content to include more options.

2.     Social Media Posts

Internet users are consuming more content than ever on social media. With more than 1.7 billion users on Facebook, 500 million on Instagram, and 313 million on Twitter, it only makes sense to include these outlets in your law firm marketing strategy. These social media channels are where your followers gather information and you need to be present and speak their language in order to reach them.

3.     Images

The HubSpot survey mentioned above revealed people are drawn to visual content. Other statistics help this make even more sense –  65% of people are visual learners, information pieces with visual aides are 43% more persuasive, and people have short attention spans.

Images can easily be applied within social media posts, blog posts, and even throughout your website. Create original graphics in the appropriate sizes with Canva to share along with your social media updates or infographics explaining legal processes and then share them across the board.

4.     Research With Tables/Charts

Make sure you’re using the right visualization for every post your law firm shares. Believe it or not, this especially applies to data, research, presentations, or educational pieces your law firm posts about. Using tables, charts, and diagrams gets the point across in a more effective manner and at the same time will be more appealing to your audience.

5.     Numbered/Bulleted Lists

Gone are the days when people actually take the time to read every word written in a blog post. Your audience wants the information, but they want to skim it quickly. Numbering or bulleting your information is a great way to ensure the information is actually seen.

 

If you can generate the type of content that resonates with your audience then interest and engagement will follow suit.  If your law firm needs help with its digital marketing needs, contact us today.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2nq8xPr
via Abogado Aly Website

Louisiana Supreme Court Upholds Expropriation of Commercial Venture

Originally published by Cheryl M. Kornick and Matthew D. Simone.

In a decision announced this week, the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled on the constitutionality and method of compensation for the expropriation by a governmental body of property owned by an ongoing commercial venture.   In St. Bernard Port, Harbor & Terminal District v. Violet Dock Port, Inc., LLC, the St. Bernard Port, Harbor & Terminal District (the “Port”), a government-owned public cargo facility, sought to expand its operations along the Mississippi River. The Port unsuccessfully negotiated the purchase of 75 acres of property owned by Violet Dock Port, Inc., LLC (the “Landowner”) which utilized the property to layberth and service oceangoing ships for the United States Navy.  The Port subsequently expropriated the property under the quick-take expropriation provisions of LA. R.S. 19:141, et seq., for a purported compensation of $16 million.

The Court examined the Landowner’s argument that the expropriation violated  La. Const. art. I, § 4(B)(6), known as the “business enterprise clause.”  This clause prohibits an expropriation if performed “for the purpose of operating that enterprise or halting competition with a government enterprise.”    The Landowner argued that the Port’s purpose to expropriate the property was to take the Landowner’s revenue stream from its contracts with the U.S. Navy or to halt competition with the Landowner’s cargo operations.  The Court rejected both of these arguments, finding no evidentiary support in the record – notably, the Landowner referred to its existing cargo operations as “negligible.”  The Court relied heavily on the testimony of Port officials that (1) the intention of the Port was to expand its cargo operations, meaning there was no real competition with the Landowner’s current operations;  and (2) the consideration of the existing Navy contract was “an afterthought.”  The Court ultimately deferred to the trial court as the finder of fact in evaluating the testimony of the witnesses, including specifically the Port officials, as to the intent and purpose of the taking.

The Court, however, remanded the matter to the appellate court finding legal error in the trial court’s determination of just compensation.  The trial court erroneously ruled that it had no discretion to determine just compensation for the taking other than choosing either the compensation number offered by the Port or the number offered by the Landowner.  The Court held that a trier of fact is not required to make a binary choice of one litigant’s testimony in its entirety.

Three justices dissented.  The dissenters argued that the majority opinion relied too heavily on the stated testimony of the Port officials and should have scrutinized the actual effect of the taking rather than relying on the stated intent of the taking.  The dissenters noted that the Port, after the taking, continued the layberthing services and continued the Navy contract, and that continuation of the Navy contract was planned to help finance the Port’s move to cargo operations. The dissenters argued that the private operation was attempting to use the same path toward more cargo operations, but that competition with the Port was “nipped in the bud” by the taking.  The dissenters ultimately warned that the majority decision rendered the “business enterprise clause” meaningless as long as the government entity could state a “proper motive” for the taking.

Disclaimer: This Blog/Web Site is made available by the law firm of Liskow & Lewis, APLC (“Liskow & Lewis”) and the individual Liskow & Lewis lawyers posting to this site for educational purposes and to give you general information and a general understanding of the law only, not to provide specific legal advice as to an identified problem or issue. By using this blog site you understand and acknowledge that there is no attorney client relationship formed between you and Liskow & Lewis and/or the individual Liskow & Lewis lawyers posting to this site by virtue of your using this site. The Blog/Web Site should not be used as a substitute for legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state regarding a particular matter.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2BFESpv
via Abogado Aly Website

Dole contests OSHA violations

Originally published by Candess Zona-Mendola, Unsafe Foods Editor.

By: Pooja Sharma

Dole Food Company Inc. is contesting safety violations and fines that is linked to its Springfield, Ohio Plant and is filed by the OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration), according to an inspection report.

The report revealed some details about the nature of the alleged violations almost immediately because Dole Inc. has contested them. According to information from the agency, an inspection opened up late in August at the Springfield facility of Dole that is located at 600 Benjamin Drive. The documents of the inspection showed two apparent violations:

• The company was issued a penalty for a total amount of $12,675 in early October. The citation was labeled as a serious violation for the alleged “control of hazardous energy” (lockout/tagout)
• One more citation was labeled as a reiteration of a violation for alleged “mechanical power-transmission apparatus”. It was filed by the OSHA the same day and included a penalty of $69,713.

This lead to a total penalty of $82,388 according to the documents of inspection by OSHA.

This was the only information that was released and federal agency didn’t provide any further details about the violations because Dole has contested them. A Freedom of Information Act request was filed by the Springfield News-Sun to request more information, but OSHA hasn’t responded to the request yet. Even Dole officials declined to comment.

A note was also present on top of the inspection form that was released by the federal agency. It said that the Dole inspection was not declared to be closed yet. The concerned parties should be aware of the fact that the information present might change, e.g. violation could be added or deleted.

In a completely separate case altogether, Dole Food Company Inc. was investigated in 2016 for a Listeria outbreak that caused several illnesses in people across different states and 2 deaths. 1 case was found in a pregnant woman too. The pre-packaged salad that was the source of the Listeria outbreak was manufactured at Springfield, Ohio, Dole processing facility. The salad was also distributed in 5 provinces of Canada. On January 21, 2016, Dole ceased production of all its pre-packaged salads that was produced at the Springfield facility. The very next day, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency also issue a food recall warning for all the pre-packaged salads that were distributed in Canada and were made in Dole’s Springfield facility. On January 27, Dole recalled all the pre-packaged salads that was produced at the facility.

Dole mentioned about the outbreak and about the notice they received after several claims of illnesses and deaths linking to their product. In the filing, they also mentioned being served a subpoena in April 2016 by the US Department of Justice. They wanted further information about the outbreak at the Listeria facility and their Springfield facility.

Dole further added that any product claim even if it is unsuccessful and not fully pursued can attract a lot of negative publicity surrounding the assertion that their produce could be linked to any illness or injury. This can in turn, also affect their reputation with any existing and potential customers and could also affect their corporate brand image. They added in their SEC that the claims or liabilities of this sort might not be covered by the insurance or by any other rights of contribution that they may have against others.

There were no further details released about the Department of Justice investigation that happened this week. The Department of Justice is not allowed to confirm, deny or comment on existence or nonexistence of the investigations as a matter of policy. An affiliate of Dole just purchased a 28-acre property near its plant along the Titus Road that is worth nearly $550,000 earlier this spring. Local officials informed that the company needed the property in case they plan any future expansion.

Dole Inc. opened its processing plant in Springfield in 1998 and employs more than 700 people at the plant. The packaged salad that is produced in the facility can be found in grocery stores all across the country. Dole also recently completed a $9 million expansion to add 1 processing line and 3 new packaging lines. In the SEC filing, Dole Food Company Inc. praises their food safety practices and mentioned that they continuously look for ways to strengthen food safety and agricultural practices.

The filing also mentioned about their routine procedures to process innovations and have also installed produce wash technology in each of their salad manufacturing plants. They have also started a sanitation program that leverages the most recent advancements in cleaning chemistry. The program is leading the industry for environmental surveillance and the latest technology for trending environmental testing results that occurs within a produce processing environment. Earlier in year 2017, the Springfield News-Sun reported Dole Inc. to have reached settlements for two separate civil lawsuits that are related to the outbreak. Even though the terms of agreements were not disclosed. The 2 cases involved a woman from Warren County and another woman from Franklin County. Dole Inc. denied allegations in both the cases according to records produced by court.

About Dole Inc.:

Dole Food Company is an American agricultural MNC that is the largest producer of fruits and vegetables in the world. The company is headquartered in Westlake Village, California. Dole Inc. employees 74,300 full time and seasonal employees. Dole has a own shipping line called Dole Ocean Cargo Express. It operates a fleet of 19 container ships that are fully equipped to support refrigerated containers instead of relying on other port infrastructure.

About OSHA:

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) came into existence in 1970 under Occupational Safety and Health Act, which President Richard Nixon signed into law. OSHA’s mission is to make sure that the company provides safe and healthful working conditions to all the employees that complies with the safety and health standards of OSHA.

Sources:

• http://www.springfieldnewssun.com/business/economy/dole-contests-osha-violations-82k-penalties-springfield-plant/8ree4LsNbWkqWWfvC8lG4J/
• https://www.reuters.com/article/us-dole-food-listeria/dole-under-u-s-probe-after-deadly-listeria-outbreak-idUSKCN0XQ2N2
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dole_Food_Company
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupational_Safety_and_Health_Administration

The post Dole contests OSHA violations appeared first on Unsafe Foods.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2not7PV
via Abogado Aly Website

Wasting $800,000 of Community Assets: Opinions, Jan. 30, 2018

Originally published by mkhtx.

This morning the Fourteenth Court of Appeals released its memorandum opinion affirming a divorce decree in Walzel v. Walzel, No. 14-16-00637-CV, over the husband’s challenge of the trial court’s finding of wasted community assets in the amount of approximately $800,000.

Husband and wife married in 1968. W filed for divorce in June 2014. The property division was tried to the bench; H was pro se at trial.

At the time the divorce was filed, the parties were retired. H had left the marital home in October 2013. W was disabled and could not leave the home or even take care of herself. After leaving, H lived with a girlfriend at a different residence between October 2014 and August 2015.

At trial, H testified that the parties bought a vacant lot in a planned development in Belize in 2010. He also admitted to withdrawals from his retirement account of approximately $703,000.00. He further admitted to withdrawals from non-retirement financial accounts. When asked where the money went, he testified that the money was “used for our pleasure, bills. Everything we did was for our estate. Everything we ever did was for us to live a better life and that’s where it all went.” W’s expert, a CPA hired to attempt to trace the approximately $800,000 in total withdrawals, testified that H did not provide her with or refused to provide her with sufficient documents. H did not call a financial expert to testify or any witnesses regarding the withdrawals.

After trial, the trial court signed a decree which divided the marital estate (awarding H the Belize property) and found H had wasted community assets in the amount of approximately $800,000 and charged H with the wasted funds “as part of the marital property division as if the estate was reconstituted to include the funds that were wasted.” H appealed.

In his sole issue, H argued the trial court abused its discretion because the evidence was legally insufficient. Specifically, H argued that W’s expert CPA based her analysis on assumptions not supported by evidence. The Court of Appeals found that it did not need to review these assumptions because they had no impact on the CPA’s ultimate opinion that she could not account for the unexplained withdrawals. Further, H himself admitted in his testimony that he withdrew the funds and did not adequately explain what he did with them. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2BFH3JV
via Abogado Aly Website

Tenth Circuit Leaves Unresolved When Off-Campus Social Media Posts Can Subject Students to Discipline

Originally published by Seyfarth Shaw LLP.

By Marjorie Clara Soto, Kay J. Hazelwood, and Mary Kay Klimesh

Seyfarth Synopsis: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit’s recent opinion in Yeasin v. Durham, No. 16-3367, 2018 WL 300553 (10th Cir. Jan. 5, 2018), addresses the “tension between some students’ free-speech rights and other students’ Title IX rights to receive an education absent sex discrimination in the form of sexual harassment.” The Court of Appeals did not specify a test to be applied when a student’s alleged First Amendment right to free speech intersects another student’s alleged right to be free from harassment in a university community, but did affirm the district court’s decision that a KU administrator did not violate clearly established law when she expelled Yeasin for misconduct related to an off-campus incident and tweets.

The court specifically refrained from deciding “whether Yeasin had a First Amendment right to post his tweets without being disciplined by the university.” The Court’s analysis in this case is of particular interest to public colleges, universities and schools who grapple with managing and balancing student First Amendment rights and the responsibility to maintain an educational environment free from harassment.

Background and Procedural History

In November, 2013, Dr. Tammara Durham, Vice Provost for Student Affairs, made a decision to expel Navid Yeasin from the University of Kansas (“KU”) after her review of a hearing panel’s findings of fact based on a preponderance of the evidence that Yeasin had violated KU’s sexual harassment policy by engaging in conduct which included posting off-campus social media tweets making derogatory statements about his ex-girlfriend’s body, but not naming her.

Yeasin proceeded to contest the expulsion in Kansas state court which concluded that the findings, adopted by Dr. Durham, “were not supported by substantial evidence” and that “KU and [Dr.] Durham erroneously interpreted the Student Code of Conduct by applying it to off-campus conduct.” KU appealed, arguing that its interpretation of KU’s Code of Conduct was “consistent with the obligations imposed on it under Title IX” and allowed for the University to expel Yeasin since its student code allowed for students to be punished for off-campus conduct that violates federal, state, or local law. In September 2015, that court affirmed the lower state court’s findings and Yeasin subsequently re-enrolled at KU.

Thereafter, Yeasin brought suit in federal court against Dr. Durham under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 alleging her action to expel him from KU for the content of his on-line, off campus speech violated his First Amendment right to free speech and his Fourteenth Amendment right to substantive due process. He sought monetary damages claiming that KU’s wrongful expulsion delayed completion of his education, cost him lost employment and wages, and caused him emotional distress and mental anguish. Dr. Durham moved to dismiss both of Yeasin’s claims on qualified-immunity grounds. The federal district court granted Dr. Durham’s motion to dismiss, concluding that she did not violate Yeasin’s clearly established rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. On January 5, 2018, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed.

The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Analysis and Findings

Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages if their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” In order to overcome this defense, a plaintiff must show (1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was clearly established. The Court of Appeals here found that Yeasin’s claim failed the second prong of this analysis.

In reaching its conclusion, the Court analyzed free speech cases in secondary school and college/university settings including consideration of Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Community Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (1969) (finding that, while secondary-school students retained free-speech rights, schools can still prohibit actions that “would materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school…”); Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393 (2007) (allowing a K-12 school to discipline a student for flying a banner reading “BONG HiTs 4 JESUS” at an off-campus, school-approved activity because the banner could reasonably be viewed as promoting drug use); Bethel Sch. Dist. No. 403 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986) (K-12 schools can restrict lewd, vulgar, or indecent speech even without a forecast of disruption); and Hazelwood Sch. Dist. v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260, 273 (1988) (allowing public officials to restrict K-12 school-sponsored speech).

Yeasin argued that First Amendment cases which allow for the restriction of student speech in the secondary school context cannot be applied in the university context in the same way. Rather, Yeasin argued that cases including Papish v. Bd. of Curators of the Univ. of Missouri, 410 U.S. 667 (1973) (addressing distribution of newspaper in the university setting “containing forms of indecent speech”); Widmar v. Vincent, 454 U.S. 263 (1981) (addressing a university’s refusal to allow a registered religious student group to meet in university buildings); and Healy v. James, 408 U.S. 169 (1972) (addressing a state college’s refusal to officially recognize a student group known because of its potential affiliation with a national organization known for campus disruption) should be applied. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals distinguished the cases advanced by Yeasin noting that the cases didn’t concern “university-student conduct that interferes with the rights of other students or risks disrupting campus order.” The Court also countered with language from Widmar, quoting Healy, which “suggests that the Supreme Court believes that the material-and-substantial-disruption test applies in the university setting.” Ultimately, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that Yeasin could not establish that Dr. Durham had violated clearly established law when she took action to expel him, in part, for his off-campus social media tweets.

The Court considered Yeasin’s substantive due process argument, and found that it was flawed. The Court reasoned that Yeasin needed to show that the school’s decision to expel him was arbitrary, lacked a rational basis, or shocked the conscience. Butler v. Rio Rancho Pub. Sch. Bd. of Educ., 341 F.3d 1197, 1200 (10th Cir. 2003). The court declined to resolve the question of whether Dr. Durham’s decision to expel Yeasin violated his right to substantive due process, and limited its opinion to a finding that she violated no clearly established law in doing so.

The need for college and university administrators and school officials to navigate their legal obligations when addressing decisions to discipline a student for off-campus speech on social media will no doubt remain a prevailing issue, especially when such conduct implicates the rights of another student to be educated in a harassment-free learning environment. Not surprisingly, KU modified its student code of conduct after this incident to explicitly extend its disciplinary jurisdiction to off-campus incidents.

Seyfarth Shaw continues to monitor the developments in the battle between the First Amendment right to freedom of speech and rights under Title IX to an educational environment free of sexual harassment. We will keep our readers apprised.

For more information on this topic, please contact the authors, your Seyfarth Attorney, or any member of Seyfarth Shaw’s Workplace Policies and Handbooks Team or the Labor & Employment Team.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2nlVvT6
via Abogado Aly Website

In Court Testimony: How what you say can make a difference in how the judge views your case

Originally published by 1p21.admin.

The days prior to a
temporary orders hearing or
trial can be extremely tense. For one thing, it’s likely that you’ve
never been inside of a courtroom before and your unfamiliarity will likely
cause you to feel apprehensive. Secondly, this is a family law case we’re
talking about here. Whether it is a divorce or a child custody case your
children, your finances and possibly both are at stake. That alone is
enough to put a few butterflies in your stomach. Whether or not you feel
good about going to court the fact remains is that if you are unlikely
to settle your case either for temporary or final orders the result will
be that you and the opposing party will have to attend a trial in order
to have your case decided by a judge.

One of the best pieces of advice that I was told as a young attorney was
to always make sure you have prepared your client to the best of your
ability prior to any courtroom appearance. Sometimes lawyers get so caught
up in their own responsibilities associated with representing you the
client that we can forget that you are more apprehensive than anyone else.
Taking a step back and helping you is what an attorney does. It’s
the oath that we swore to when we were licensed as attorneys- to put your
interests ahead of our own.

With that said, I would like to share with you some advice on testifying
in court and how it can be impactful- not only on the case itself but
on how your judge will view you. Your credibility as a witness is just
as important as the content of what you actually say while under oath.
It’s with that fact in mind that we begin our discussion with some
basics on courtroom testimony.

Above all else, always tell the truth

Always, always, always tell the truth when you are responding to a question
in court. I could stop the blog right here and you would have learned
the most important lesson of all when it comes to in court
testimony. From my experience clients have the idea that if they do not “perform”
well while on the witness stand that their case will surely be lost and
their lives will never recover. I’m here to tell you that is simply
not the case.

For one, your testimony in court is only a part of the evidence that the
judge will have to consider when rendering a decision. The opposing party,
any other witnesses as well as any documentary evidence entered into the
record will also be critically important. Keeping this in mind, there
is no need for you to feel like you need to provide certain answers in
order so that your case may benefit.

Judges listen to people talk all day long and are very good judges of whether
or not the words that you speak are truthful. Even if an answer you are
about to provide will hurt your case it does not pay to be untruthful.
If the judge sees that you are providing answers even under tough circumstances
he or she is likely to take seriously your responses and your case as
a whole. Stretching the truth is something that you should stay away from
as well. Just because an answer sounds good coming off your lips doesn’t
mean that you should give that response.

Understand the question fully before giving an answer

Prior to a hearing I will always take my client aside and talk to him or
her about testifying. After I go over the importance of telling the truth
I will tell the client to make 100% sure that you understand the question
that is being asked of you before opening your mouth to speak. Take a
moment to let the question sink in and consider whether or not you understand
the question being asked. If you do, consider whether or not you know
the answer to that question. If you do then provide as succinct and clear
a response as you can muster.

If you do not understand a question, whether it is asked by your attorney
or the opposing attorney, you should ask him or her to rephrase the question.
Lawyers are human beings and are not perfect (ask the spouse of any attorney
about that last part). We ask bad questions all the time. Ones that sound
good in our heads but come off our lips making little to no sense. If
you are on the witness stand testifying and a lawyer’s question
doesn’t make sense ask for a rephrasing of the question. We will
take no offense to being asked to do so.

The last thing you want to do is to answer a question that you misunderstood
where you provide information that can be potentially harmful to your
case. Some lawyers will ask questions in ways that could be interpreted
multiple ways just to see if you answer it. Rather than taking a moment
to make sure you understand the question, you run the risk of giving a
response that was not only unnecessary but damaging to your case. It is
always better to collect yourself before testifying and to ask for the
question to be asked again if you do not understand it.

Part Two of our series on Courtroom Testimony to be posted tomorrow

While you may never have to testify in front of a judge in your
family law case knowing how to do so is not only important in terms of strengthening
your case but also in providing you with peace of mind leading up to your
court date. Please stop by our blog tomorrow morning to read part two
of our series on in court testimony.

If you have any questions about what you read in today’s blog post
please do not hesitate to
contact the
Law Office of Bryan Fagan. One of our licensed family law attorneys would be honored to speak with
you regarding your case in a free of charge consultation.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2BHijAO
via Abogado Aly Website

OSC Finds in Favor of San Antonio Employee

Originally published by Thomas J. Crane.

Federal employees have a wide range of options when they run into problems at work. One of those options is the Office of Special Counsel. OSC has the mandate to investigate fraud and violations of law. But they receive too many complaints and lack enough staff to investigate all those complaints. But, one San Antonio federal worker succeeded in attracting the attention of OSC. A Veterans Affairs worker named Jamie McBride complained about the process for transplants at the V.A. hospital.

He said veterans were being short-changed because they were being required to travel to distant V.A. hospitals in Houston and Nashville for heart, lung, liver and kidney transplants. Yet, when the veteran travels to these distant locales, they were actually being treated in non-VA hospitals. Mr. McBride pointed out that several San Antonio area hospitals performed these transplants. For unknown reasons, the V.A. refused to enter into contracts with those local hospitals.

After hearing the V.A.’s explanation, the OSC found Mr. McBride was correct. The V.A. imposed unreasonable eligibility criteria for persons seeking transplants under the Choice program. The OSC found that requiring families to re-locate to distant centers caused financial stress for those families. The V.A. argued that the local hospitals would not accept Medicare rates, which is a V.A. requirement. But,. Mr. McBride showed that some 50% of San Antonio hospitals would indeed accept medicare rates for those transplants.

The OSC agreed that the V.A. satisfied the requirements of the statute, but the V.A.’s actions were still unreasonable.

Mr. McBride submitted a complaint to the V.A. Inspector General’s office in 2013. Three years ago, the IG found in his favor. The worker then submitted a complaint to the Office of Special Counsel in Washington, D.C. See San Antonio Express-News report.

Yes, this is the first time I have experienced the OSC finding in favor of a local employee. Indeed, at least in my experience, they accept very few complaints for investigation.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2noyBug
via Abogado Aly Website

Should Your Injury Lawyer Have Trial Experience?

Originally published by Aaron Herbert – Texas Injury Attorney.

When you think of retaining a lawyer, you might imagine a big courtroom with your legal representative in the midst of a heated argument before a judge and jury. While this scenario is certainly possible, it’s unlikely. In fact, only about 4% to 5% of personal injury cases in the U.S. go to trial. The vast majority reach successful settlements during pretrial negotiations with the insurance company or another defendant. Keep this in mind when wondering whether your lawyer should have trial experience, and then consider these facts:

There is a Chance Your Case Could Go to Trial

Yes, the odds of going to trial are slim; however, it is possible that pretrial negotiations won’t work for your claim, and the courts will need to impanel a jury to decide the case. The prospect of a potential trial will have a significant impact on your case and its value, regardless of whether it ever reaches the courtroom. In the event that pretrial hearings cannot resolve your case, your lawyer needs to be able to accept the responsibility of representing you during a personal injury trial. Imagine discovering your case needs to go to trial, only to find your lawyer has zero courtroom experience. This is why most plaintiffs want trial attorneys, not just personal injury lawyers.

Insurance Companies Are Savvy to Local Law Firms

You want the upper hand when it comes to negotiating your personal injury claim with an insurance company. Otherwise, the insurance agent or claims analyst can take advantage of you and offer much less than your claim is worth. One of the best ways to protect your best interests is to retain a trial-tested attorney for insurance negotiations. Why? If the insurance company knows your lawyer doesn’t typically go to trial, it can offer less because it assumes settlement is the only option. For maximum compensation, you want your negotiations to reflect the fact that if you cannot settle your case, it will go to trial.

You Need an Expert Negotiator

Settlement negotiations can get intense. There is a lot on the line – the amount your lawyer secures you can greatly impact your financial future. A lawyer with trial experience will be thinking of your case in terms of a potential trial. The lawyer will be considering what evidence you need to prove your case, the best methods for presenting this evidence, how to respond to possible defenses, and many other aspects. Even if your claim never goes to trial, you will benefit from the mindset that it could. Trial-tested attorneys excel at juggling many difficult and complex elements of a claim, from beginning to end.

All Trial Experience is Not Created Equal

Keep in mind that just any trial experience might not help your particular case. You need to find an attorney with experience successfully handling claims that are similar to yours. For example, if you need to join a class action against a drug manufacturing company, you don’t want to retain a lawyer who has only gone to court representing car accident lawsuits. Look for a track record of winning cases and securing jury verdicts for clients in similar situations to your own. You always want an attorney with experience in your area of injury law.

No Trial Experience Isn’t a Deal Breaker

Despite the benefits that go along with retaining an experienced trial attorney, it certainly isn’t a requirement. Sometimes, a lawyer with no trial experience is one who is exceptional at negotiating during pretrial meetings. This can work in your favor since settling pretrial is cheaper and faster than going to court. In the end, knowledge of how to successfully negotiate a settlement for maximum compensation might be more important than trial experience. The right lawyer for you depends on your specific claim.

The post Should Your Injury Lawyer Have Trial Experience? appeared first on Aaron Herbert – Texas Injury Attorney.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2BEMnNt
via Abogado Aly Website

Compliance Agencies Are Cracking Down On Trucking Firms – But Is That Enough?

Originally published by Ryan Bormaster.

In mid-January, a transport truck carrying ethanol crashed and burst into flames near Newcastle, Australia. The fire quickly spread to the nearby bushland, taking out nearly 15 hectares and raging for more than four hours after the crash. The driver, tragically, perished in the accident, which involved three trucks and one car.

According to officials, a truck driving southbound hit the back of a truck parked on the side of the road. A third truck then crashed into the two, which were then struck by a car. The other three drivers survived but were taken to the hospital for blood and urine tests.

While investigating the incident, inspectors and police officers looked into the company that employed the deceased driver. What they found was upsetting, but hardly surprising. As it turns out, the Sydney-based company had at least one trailer with an expired registration, and one of its drivers was without driving privileges due to traffic violations.

Two other trucks owned by the company had defective engines, and another had a major defect with one of its seatbelt. Investigators also uncovered a range of other mechanical and compliance issues, including broken brakes, busted headlights, and faulty suspension systems. At the time of writing, it’s not clear if any of the trucks involved in the crash were also faulty – but it does seem likely.

“The operation is another warning to operators to be aware that they will be targeted and they will be removed from our roads if they are found to be unsafe,” explained Roads and Maritime Services Director of Compliance Roger Weeks, speaking to The Australia Herald. “The recent tragic crashes involving trucks are unacceptable and we will continue to work closely with NSW Police to ensure drivers and companies improve their safety and compliance.”

That’s heartening to hear, certainly. But I question whether that will be enough on its own. Even though regulatory agencies are constantly working to take down trucking firms that don’t play by the rules, they always seem to do so after an accident has occurred. What we need is to empower these organizations to investigate and address the issues with these firms on their own – before accidents happen.

We’ve made great strides in that regard – but we’ve still got ways to go. In the meantime, Bormaster Law will step up to help fill the gap. We have a long history of taking corrupt trucking agencies to task for their crimes and ensuring they’re held responsible for the injuries and destruction caused by their carelessness.

Because in our eyes, ignorance is no excuse for causing pain. If you or a loved one has been critically injured in a trucking accident, contact us today for a free consultation. We’ll help you take back your life.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2nnh8SN
via Abogado Aly Website

When Can an Internet Search Be Illegal?

Originally published by Neal Davis.

Did you know it can be illegal just to look at something on the Internet, depending on what it is? That’s why it’s important that you know what’s illegal and should be avoided.

One thing, for instance, that’s highly illegal to view on the Internet — even if you don’t download it — is child pornography involving minors aged 17 and younger. Federal and Texas laws against child porn are severe and can lead to many years in prison.

Even a search for child porn on the Web could get you arrested and charged with a crime. That’s because an active search for child porn can indicate an intent to commit the crime of viewing or possessing child pornography.

Also, simply viewing and not downloading child porn on the Internet still can lead to the material being stored in your browser’s cache. Technically, that means you “possess” the illegal material, despite the fact that you didn’t download it.

Many people accidentally see things on the Internet without actively seeking them, and that’s not a crime. Nor is it a crime to view Internet porn featuring consenting adults, which has become one of the largest forms of online adult entertainment.

But make no mistake, if you actively search for child porn online, you could be arrested.

Today, public outrage, vigorous law officers, tough prosecutors, and severe laws can mean you face a difficult legal battle to remain free from prison.

Keep in mind that if you’re charged with possessing child porn on your computer and claim that you didn’t put it there, your previous searches might make it difficult to prove that claim.

For this reason, it’s important to engage an experienced sex crimes defense lawyer at the Neal Davis Law Firm if you need legal help.

Beyond child porn, there are many other sensitive subjects for online searches. And while simply searching some topics may not be a crime, it could raise a red flag for law officers monitoring Internet activity.

Among such subjects are those related to terrorism, illegally modifying weapons, or making explosives at home.

For instance, if you’re a fan of murder mystery novels and run related searches, having “murder” in your search doesn’t make you a suspected murderer. But in other cases, the nature of your search could spark suspicion and an investigation by authorities, depending on the words you use in that search. Authorities can identify you and your computer’s IP address, and follow up with an investigation and even an arrest.

Beyond that, if you use torrent downloading to obtain legally copyrighted material such as a movie or music, that’s illegal. Torrenting in itself is not illegal, provided that the material being downloaded isn’t protected by copyright. But downloading or sharing copyrighted material is illegal under federal law.

If tagged with such a copyright violation, you could lose your Internet service and even face a copyright infringement lawsuit by the holder of the copyrighted material which you downloaded or streamed. (Unofficial streaming services online also may be illegal.)

It also may be illegal to share another person’s pictures and words on a website without their consent. That can be construed as a copyright violation if you own the website, and you could face fines ranging up to $150,000 and possible time in jail.

Also, be sure to avoid the “Deep Web,” or what’s often called the Internet’s “criminal underbelly.” That’s where the most questionable materials can be found. For instance, just poking around for information such as “how to hire an assassin” may get you tagged by authorities and investigated.

Many things are perfectly legal to view on the Internet. But many others are not. Be aware of these distinctions and protect your legal rights. Contact the Neal Davis Law Firm to discuss your legal rights if you’ve been charged with a computer crime.

The post When Can an Internet Search Be Illegal? appeared first on Neal Davis Blog.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2BEALKs
via Abogado Aly Website

Hooks v. Samson – The Last Chapter

Originally published by John McFarland.

The Texas Supreme Court yesterday denied Samson Exploration’s petition for review, ending a long-fought fraud case against Samson that began in 2007. The case was before the Court for the second time; in its first opinion in 2015 the Supreme Court reversed a court of appeals’ judgment throwing out the Hooks’ $21 million judgment against Samson and remanded to the court of appeals for further proceedings. In 2016 the court of appeals affirmed all but $2.6 million of the judgment, leaving in place a judgment for $17.5 million plus interest.

The Hooks claimed damages resulting from Samson’s fraudulent misrepresentation of the location of a well it drilled adjacent to the Hooks’ property.  The Houston Court of Appeals’ first opinion in the case threw out the judgment because the Hooks’ claim was barred by limitations.  But one Justice on the court made clear that he was joining the majority only because he was bound to do so by the Supreme Court’s opinion in BP v. Marshall:

In that case, the Texas Supreme Court makes clear that no lies on the part of a lessee, however self-serving and egregious, are sufficient to toll limitations, as long as it is technically possible for the lessor to have discovered the lie by resort to the Railroad Commission records. This burden the Court imposes upon lessors is severe. It is now a lessor’s duty to presume that any statement made by its lessee is false and to ransack the esoteric and oft-changing records at the Railroad Commission to discover the truth or falsity of its lessee’s statements. If, as is often the case, these records are technical in nature and require expert review to ferret out the truth, it is the lessor’s job to hire experts out of its own pocket to perform such a review. If a lessor fails to take these steps, then it will have failed in exercising reasonable diligence to protect its mineral interests and, if the lessee’s fraud is successful for longer than the limitations period, the lessor’s claims will be barred by limitations.

Continue reading →

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2nmL01x
via Abogado Aly Website

Picturing Standing in Constitutional Law

Originally published by lawschool academicsupport.

Each spring semester, I lead a structured study group primarily focusing on Constitutional Law. For the last few years, I’ve started the semester off with the same “standing” exercise with students, and it’s been a big hit. I begin by…

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2FuTavI
via Abogado Aly Website

The Socially Isolated Lawyer

Originally published by myadmin.

Feelings of social isolation are an issue common to law students and lawyers.  Social isolation can also be a trigger to problematic alcohol and drug use.

As a law student struggling with addiction, I felt that the only way I could exist was to drink alone and isolate myself from other law students so they could not see my pain and loneliness, not to mention my belief that I was not good enough to be in their presence.

As a lawyer deep in addiction, rather than seeking out and engaging in healthy work and social relationships, I narrowed my interactions down to those also drinking excessively and doing cocaine.  In a room full of drinkers and snorters, I felt totally alone and isolated.

This is not to say that the desire to be alone is in itself a bad thing. In recovery, I narrowed my social connections down to a very small circle of healthy connections and came to embrace myself as someone who is inherently shy. They were very different types of connections. They were sober connections who were part of a sober world that I had forgotten existed.

Here is how a current law student and practicing lawyer have experienced and dealt with social isolation in their lives.

Garret is a second-year law student at the University of New Mexico. Garret is unique in that he also played collegiate football while going to law school. Wow! Garret says:

Playing football amplified the isolation I have felt during law school. On the one hand, I would miss out on opportunities to interact with my teammates because I was studying for school. On the other hand, I would miss opportunities to bond with my classmates because I was travelling every weekend for football. These circumstances made for many lonely nights spent reading countless pages trying to stay caught up. During this time, I did not feel that anyone could understand what I was going through.

How did Garret cope? He says:

I allowed myself to ask for help. Instead of drowning alone, I reached out to others and found that they were more than willing to help. UNM’s career services department helped me form a strategy to stay caught up in school. My classmates also offered comfort and support when I finally opened up about the struggles I was facing. Once I allowed myself to seek help, there was no shortage of love from those around me. I firmly believe that I would not still be in school without the support of my peers and the faculty and staff at UNM during this time in my life.

Miriam is a practicing criminal defense attorney in the Washington, D.C. area. She says:

When I went out on my own, it was pretty jarring. There was no one to ask a question of, no one to just vent frustrations to. And criminal defense is an incredibly frustrating area of law. There was no reason to take a break, because who was I going to socialize with? Myself?

Miriam then joined a listserv called SoloSez (part of the American Bar Association), and it turned out she wasn’t alone:

There were lots of us solo practitioners struggling with the same thing. Who do you talk to when you are literally all by yourself all day long.”

As to how isolation impacted her personally and professionally, Miriam says:

I realized the value of human interaction in professional settings and how important it is as a stress relief. Water cooler talk may be lame but it is important. I ended up renting an office inside a larger firm. Lots of solos in that office space and we became friends. My productivity increased and I was just generally happier.

Today Miriam has a small law office with employees, and they all have an open door policy. She says:

We eat lunch together, we talk about our cases on a regular basis, and we are able to talk to each other freely. What’s the point of working with people if you can’t talk to them? I recommend renting an office in a suite – having someone else there to vent to is incredibly important. And while you may say oh I can talk to my wife when I get home, etc., it really isn’t the same. Being at work and bitching, then being able to go home and not feel so frustrated, is a great thing!

I also reached out to a treatment provider who deals with social isolation issues in his practice. Dr. David Henderson is a psychiatrist practicing in Dallas, Texas.* One of the issues I asked him to address is the difference between damaging social isolation and the simple desire to be alone. He says:

There are two states of aloneness: the physical state of being alone (solitude) and the emotional state of being alone (loneliness). Solitude is not always painful. In fact, it may be quite pleasant for those who are confident and comfortable with themselves, and who understand that it need not be a permanent experience. A stable balance between solitude and time with others is necessary for mental and physical well-being. Even when we are forced to be alone, knowing that someone is with us in spirit helps.

Conversely loneliness, the emotional state of being alone, is the belief that no one else understands our circumstances, our thoughts, or our emotions, nor do they care. Social isolation is the combination of these two states, experienced by an individual for an extended period. The length of time in social isolation for any individual can vary, but both the emotional state and physical state feed off of one another, creating a perpetual inability within the individual to reengage society in a meaningful way.

Here are Dr. Henderson’s tips for dealing with social isolation:

1. Plan ahead. Isolation and loneliness can result from procrastination. When an individual fails to anticipate future isolation and plan for it, it never gets better. Individuals must carve out time in their schedules for social engagement like they would carve out time to study or complete a task for work. Waiting until the last minute always ends with missed opportunities.

2. Confront the mind-games you play. We all have a script that plays over and over in our heads that dictates our actions. The most successful individuals are the ones who recognize the script and make the hard decisions to act contrary to it. The key to overcoming social isolation is being able to acknowledge the very real pain that exists in engaging others and then working to develop the confidence within oneself to know that you have the power to endure and overcome it.

3. Seek out accountability. For many, this accountability starts with one person: a trained professional counselor. A professional can challenge you to think outside the box, provide you with resources that will help you overcome the struggle, and check in with you to measure your progress. Overcoming social isolation is like any other challenge. In order to break the cycle, we must reach a point at which the pain of staying the same is worse than the pain of changing. If you are struggling to reach out and find help, simply ask yourself one question, “What do I have to lose in reaching out for help?” Make a decision today that you are going reengage one step at a time. Fight discouragement with true statements about your abilities, and recognize that with each decision to think and act contrary to what you feel, you are getting stronger and closer to your goals. You are not alone. Keep reaching!

What’s the common thread here to either becoming or staying connected in a healthy way? Reaching out! Regardless of the genesis of your feelings of loneliness and isolation. It all starts there.

* David L. Henderson, M.D., is a board-certified psychiatrist, author, and professional speaker. He is the owner and president of Four Stones Collaborative Group, a mental health practice in Dallas, Texas, treating a wide range of psychological issues including depression, anxiety, substance abuse, and trauma. He is the author of the book My Teenage Zombie: Resurrecting the Undead Adolescent In Your Home. For more information about his practice or for further resources, you can visit his websites at www.drdavidhenderson.com and www.fourstonesgroup.com

---

Brian Cuban (@bcuban) is The Addicted Lawyer. A graduate of the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, he somehow made it through as an alcoholic then added cocaine to his résumé as a practicing attorney. He went into recovery April 8, 2007. He left the practice of law and now writes and speaks on recovery topics, not only for the legal profession, but on recovery in general. He can be reached at brian@addictedlawyer.com.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2E3nj8f
via Abogado Aly Website

Professional Development on the Go

Originally published by lawschool academicsupport.

Academic Support is a great community with how we all share ideas and try to pick each other up. The outpouring of support is invaluable, but I have to admit it sometimes makes me feel like I lack enough knowledge…

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2FuFbWN
via Abogado Aly Website

Update from State Bar President Tom Vick—Candidates Approved and Other News

Originally published by Lowell Brown.

Please read below for updates from Friday’s quarterly meeting of the State Bar Board of Directors in San Antonio.

2018 President-elect Race

The State Bar board unanimously approved the nominations of Lisa Blue of Dallas and Randy Sorrels of Houston in the race for the next president-elect. Click here to read the news release and to learn more about these candidates, and pick up the April issue of the Texas Bar Journal for a Q&A. Voting is April 2 to May 1, and results will be announced May 1. The winner will serve as State Bar president from June 2019 until June 2020.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2rSQbLy
via Abogado Aly Website

Automatic Emergency Braking Will Soon Be Included In All Cars

Originally published by Blizzard & Nabers Blog.

Maybe you were changing the radio station or distracted by something outside your window. You look back to the road and realize you are quickly heading toward the fender of the car in front of you. You slam on the brakes, but it’s too late. Accidents like these are incredibly common. Unfortunately, the resulting car accidents can cause serious injuries, particularly if it’s not a vehicle you collide with, but a pedestrian. However, thanks to car manufacturers, automatic emergency braking will soon be a standard feature on all cars.

What Is Automatic Emergency Braking?

Automatic emergency braking (AEB) is a safety feature available on cars that will apply the brakes to prevent collisions. Sensors on vehicles equipped with this feature constantly scan for other cars, pedestrians, and other hazards and apply the brakes to prevent collisions. While many cars on the road today have AEB, it isn’t a standard feature on most vehicles.

Toyota has made great strides in implementing this technology, reporting that 56% of their 2017 fleet included AEB technology. Unfortunately, other popular manufacturers like Honda and General Motors only included AEB in 30% and 20% of their 2017 fleet respectively. This type of technology can greatly decrease the number of car accidents, and car manufacturers are stepping up to the plate to make it a standard feature on all vehicles.

Automakers Pledge To Make The Roads Safer

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) recently announced a voluntary pledge made by 20 automakers to include AEB in all vehicles by September 1, 2022. These vehicles will have low-speed AEB systems and forward collision warning (FCW). These technologies will make the roads much safer because they will help prevent accidents caused by inattentive drivers. The IIHS estimates the commitment to AEB technology will prevent 28,000 crashes and 12,000 injuries by 2025, just three years after completion of the project.

Luckily for consumers, the automakers included in the pledge make up over 99% of the automobile market, meaning nearly every new vehicle produced will be equipped with this technology. Automakers that made the pledge include: Audi, BMW, Fiat Chrysler, Ford, General Motors, Honda, Hyundai, Jaguar Land Rover, Kia, Maserati, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mitsubishi Motors, Nissan, Porsche, Subaru, Tesla Motors, Toyota, Volkswagen, and Volvo.

Keeping The Roads Safe Is Everyone’s Responsibility

Although AEB technology can prevent many accidents, the technology cannot completely eradicate car accidents. Every day, careless drivers get behind the wheel and put everyone on the roadways at risk. If you were hurt in a Houston car accident, the experienced attorneys at Blizzard & Nabers LLP can help. We’ve helped scores of victims obtain rightful compensation from negligent drivers. Call us today to see how we can help.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2nhy79i
via Abogado Aly Website

Behind the Scenes of Signing on as a Commercial Tenant

Originally published by Manfred Sternberg.

Signing a lease as a commercial tenant has its share of legal considerations. For many businesses, renting space is a significant expense. A select few will blindly sign a commercial lease agreement. It’s important to understand the prospective consequences.

It’s an all too common scenario. Perhaps the commercial tenant is a start-up and worried about expenses. The landlord sounds convincing when presenting the lease for execution. After all, he uses the same commercial lease form for all of the building’s tenants. In fact, the boilerplate language came directly from a trusted internet site.

Although the idea of saving money might sound appealing, there’s something to remember. Even if the commercial landlord is an attorney or law firm, the language of the lease may not be to your benefit. Common sense dictates that the landlord’s interests are different than yours. Under no circumstances should a commercial tenant think otherwise.

Commercial Leases: A Tenant’s Perspective

In Texas, commercial tenancies have their own section of the Texas Property Code. That said, there are clear differences between leasing residential and commercial properties. Meanwhile, it is important to note that a lease agreement supersedes any conflicts between it and the cited law.

Want to see where you can run into some problems as a commercial tenant? For starters, there could be an issue concerning the landlord’s right to interrupt the tenant’s utilities. More often than not, the utilities are in the commercial tenant’s name. According to the law, “a landlord or a landlord’s agent may not interrupt or cause the interruption of utility service paid for directly to the utility company by a tenant unless the interruption results from bona fide repairs, construction, or an emergency.”

In some cases, a landlord may attempt to bypass the law and can do so legally by execution of a lease agreement. For example, the lease may cite specific instances when the landlord can make contact with the electric company and turn off the lights. No doubt this could be disastrous.

Indemnity and Insurance Issues for Commercial Tenants

As part of the commercial lease, the tenant may agree to some critical provisions concerning indemnity and insurance. Most commonly, the rental agreement may state that part of the rent will go to the property owner’s insurance costs.

In the meantime, the lessee should maintain their own policy for liability purposes. The lease agreement often contains language regarding indemnity and insurance. For example, what happens if the tenant’s negligence impacts the building? Does the landlord have a right to go after the tenant’s insurance? Are personal injury claims covered? Any type of negligence claim could present an issue.

Contact Us

These are just two examples of why commercial tenants should not sign lease agreements without attorney review. In some cases, the lease may allow the landlord to put a lien on the commercial tenant’s property. At Manfred Sternberg and Associates, our offices have substantial experience regarding commercial lease agreements. Contact us to see how we can help you!

The post Behind the Scenes of Signing on as a Commercial Tenant appeared first on Manfred Sternberg & Associates.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2DHUue5
via Abogado Aly Website

Avoiding The Three Biggest Law Firm Marketing Mistakes

Originally published by Ryan Bormaster.

Look, I get it – you’re a legal expert, not a marketing professional. Your job is to understand the law and help your clients benefit as much as possible from it. You’re not supposed to understand stuff like metrics, KPI, or SEO, right?

Yes and no.

Like every other industry, legal services has undergone a steep upturn in competition with the advent of the Internet. Billboard and bus ads aren’t the way to reach clients anymore – not on their own. Now that everyone’s online, even the smallest firm can gain an impressive amount of reach if they know how to tap into the web.

The first step in knowing how to do that is understanding what not to do.

Don’t Ignore Local Search

Try something for me – go to Google, and type “accident attorney” into the search bar. Look at how many results there are. Climbing to the top of that heap is an impossibility unless you’re a massive firm with an equally-large marketing budget.

And you shouldn’t be trying to get to the top of that results page, anyway – you should have a much narrower focus on your efforts.

Generally speaking, if your firm is based in Chicago, you won’t be serving clients in Austin. If someone from Texas does come across your site, it probably won’t be of much use to them. They’ll bounce and go to a law firm that’s actually based in their city.

In that same vein, if a client from your region cannot easily find your website, the chance that they’ll instead choose a competitor is all but certain. That’s precisely why local search is so important. By including location-based keywords and your practice area on your website’s pages and blogs, you’ll make yourself findable for the people who will actually work with you.

Don’t Forget To Create Profiles

Two of the most easily-accessible low-hanging fruits that I frequently see law firms forget is Google Places Business Pages and legal directory profiles. These are both easily-searchable databases, and both could be used by prospective clients to learn more about your firm. Yet many lawyers don’t bother with them – either because they aren’t aware they exist or because they don’t know why they’re important.

Be the exception to that rule. Create a well-written, professional-looking business page, complete with a photo of your venue, your address, contact information, and what services you provide. You might be surprised at how well it works to bring in new clients.

To that end, don’t ignore social media. Create a Facebook page and LinkedIn profile. Reach out to and interact with your clients,

Don’t Misunderstand Your Audience

I’ve noticed a lot of businesses – and not just law firms – seem to think that just because content marketing is highly-effective, they can bring in new clients simply by having enough content. It doesn’t work that way, though. Not even in the slightest.

As a lawyer, you know what your clients are looking for. An accident and injury lawyer, for example, wouldn’t be writing pieces on their site about divorce law. A real estate lawyer wouldn’t be droning about copyright law on their blog.

Stick to your area of expertise, especially when blogging. Because that’s what your clients are coming to you for.

 

Online marketing can be tough, especially for someone unfamiliar with it. By knowing the biggest pitfalls you can stumble into, you’ll be one step closer to mastering it. And if all else fails, you can always bring in a marketing agency – though I’d still advise that you endeavor to understand what they’re doing even so.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2Eky57K
via Abogado Aly Website

Too much, too late.

Originally published by David Coale.

Litigation about this year’s primary election led to a mandamus petition about the ballot in a judicial race, in which the Fifth Court “conditionally granted relator’s petition for writ of mandamus by written opinion and ordered the trial court to vacate the temporary restraining order. We determined that the proceeding in the district court was moot as to the primary election ballot at the time it was heard, and the resulting order was void.” The opposing party then filed a “cross-petition” about the same ballot, as to which the Court similarly held: ” That relief is unavailable because overseas and military ballots have already been printed and mailed for the March primary.” In re Williams, No. 05-18-00068-CV (Jan. 26, 2018) (mem. op.) While turning on an issue unique to election law, the opinion also illustrates how equitable defenses such as laches can affect the resolution of mandamus petitions.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2DM8SWV
via Abogado Aly Website

Houston Legal Links

Originally published by Mary Flood.

Top legal news: Texas mayoral aide resigns after side work done on city time; Corporate GCs Pushing Law Firms on Diversity (Texas Lawbook); Justice Sonia Sotomayor Charms UH Crowd of Law Students, Lawyers, Judges (Texas Lawyer); US Supreme Court asked to halt Texas execution this week; Texas Republican executive committee censures House Speaker Joe Straus; Questions remain in ‘uncommon’ FBI shooting that left victim dead (Chron subsc); Texans have one week left to register to vote in time for the 2018 primaries; U.S. 59 bridge lights shine again after donations; Trump’s Immigration Proposal Received Positively By Some Houston Leaders; Texas security regulators target another cryptocurrency operator (Chron subsc); Affidavit: Houston man left girlfriend to die after Christmas Day shootout; Does business group’s use of “dark money” for its political action committee follow state ethics rules?; Jump in late mortgages after Harvey sparks foreclosure fears; Documentary about controversial 2015 Austin PD arrest nominated for Oscar; Texas City Immune From Car Crash Death Suit, 5th Circ. Told (Law360); Inmate arrested breaking back in prison with booze, food; After no-bid deal falls apart, Texas Education Agency review calls for clearer contracting procedures; Reports: Texas toddler accidentally shoots self with shotgun; Remains of 5 immigrants found in South Texas after cold snap & Road crew uncovers tunnel near Mexico border in Texas.

For the water cooler: Lawyer is accused of burglarizing law firm that fired her, using stolen credit card to buy sex toys; A purr-fect ending for Grumpy Cat is a $710K copyright win in court; A glitch in North Carolina law is trapping people for years in unequipped jails; Is It Even Possible To Enjoy Your Vacation Anymore?; Escaped federal inmate is captured returning to prison with booze, pot, home-cooked food; Supreme Court stays execution of Alabama man in judicial override case; Investors Sue Company That Warned It Might Commit Fraud For Fraud; Key Democrats and some conservative groups criticize Trump’s new immigration plan; How can organizations incorporate AI into their workflow?; Can An Emoluments Case Against President Trump Actually Survive?; Maryland man convicted in fatal crash must carry victim’s photo for 6 years & White House counsel reportedly refused to fire special counsel Mueller after Trump ordered it.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2njYVVs
via Abogado Aly Website

Top 10 from Texas Bar Today: Data, an Algorithm, and Writer’s Block

Originally published by Joanna Herzik.

To highlight some of the posts that stand out from the crowd, the editors of Texas Bar Today have created a list from the week’s blog posts of the top ten based on subject matter, writing style, headline, and imagery. We hope you enjoy this installment.

10. Big data, the oil industry, and legal frontiers – Robert Woods of Yetter Coleman LLP in Houston

9. Should You Accept Customer Payments in Bitcoin? –  Drew York of Gray Reed & McGraw @GrayReedLaw in Dallas and Houston

8. Return to Sender: Aetna to Pay $17M to Settle Claims Related to Vendor Mailer Data Breach – Erin Begun of King Fisher in Dallas

7. Can Emails Establish an Easement in Texas? – Charles Sartain of Gray Reed & McGraw, P.C. @GrayReedLaw in Dallas

6. Proving You Are Ready to Go from the Exam Room to the Courtroom – Kirsha Trychta of the Law School Academic Support Blog

5. 5 Tips for Minimizing Trade Secrets Theft by Clients, Contractors and Vendors – Leiza Dolghih @TexasNonCompete of Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP in Dallas

4. Death by Swatting. Should There Be a Federal Law Against Swatting? – Tim O’Hare @TimothyOHare of The Law Offices of Tim O’Hare in Carrollton

3. Trial Lawyer Lesson: The Risk of “So You’re Saying” – Mark Bennett @MarkWBennett of Bennett & Bennett in Houston

2. A New Google Algorithm Update Is Shaking Up The Legal Industry – Emma Hanes of Stacey E. Burke P.C. @StaceyEBurke in Houston

1. Overcoming Writer’s Block – Bruce Vincent of Muse Communications, LLC @MuseCommLLC in Dallas

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2DGnfvJ
via Abogado Aly Website

Busting Myths About Food Safety: Four Common Myths

Originally published by Tony Coveny.

Busting myths about food safety in the home

Food safety is often thought of as a concern in restaurants or supermarkets. However, there are many areas in the home that are sources of common and dangerous myths. Food poisoning can occur when these myths are followed as truth.

Food safety myths that must be dispelled in the home include:

The five second rule: There is actually no amount of time that food can safely remain on a floor or other contaminated surface. Bacteria attaches itself to food immediately once it makes contact.

Leftovers can be cooled and re-heated numerous times: Leftovers may taste better the second time around, but they should only be re-heated once. Cooling, handling, and re-heating food can create new opportunities for bacteria to grow. If there are too many leftovers for one additional meal, they should be packaged separately and frozen for future meals so they can be thawed individually.

Use-by dates are just suggestions: Food that needs refrigeration carries a date that is related to food safety. Consuming these perishable items after the use-by date can actually create a food poisoning risk. The best-before date, however,  is more about quality, indicating that a food item may not taste as good after the printed date.

Raw chicken should be washed before it is cooked: In reality, washing the raw chicken can create a splash effect on the cooking surface, contaminating countertops, stovetops, and cooking utensils. A bacteria called Campylobacter, the most common cause of food poisoning, is often found in raw chicken.   Another is Salmonella, which has been at the heart of a number of chicken related outbreaks in recent years.  As much as 20 t 30% of raw chicken tested positive for Salmonella as recently as five years ago, thought this is trending downwards. When chicken is cooked properly to an internal temperature of 180 degrees, any bacteria should be destroyed.

Food safety is a concern at home as well as at restaurants and grocery stores. Busting these myths at home can help reduce the potential for food poisoning incidents that can be painful and potentially fatal.

For more information about food safety, contact the food poisoning lawyers at 1-888-335-4901.

 

 

 

The post Busting Myths About Food Safety: Four Common Myths appeared first on Food Poisoning News.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2DHl8ba
via Abogado Aly Website

Special Insurance Considerations for Hail Damage to Franchise Restaurants

Originally published by Denied Insurance Claim Blog.

Hail damage to a restaurant can cost thousands in lost revenue with each passing day. But when it comes to fixing broken windows and leaking roofs in franchise restaurants, there could be multiple policies available for the claim. Attorney Bill Voss takes a look at different insurance coverage approaches and why each can make a big difference in the amount you recover.

Several Coverage May Apply to Franchise Restaurants Damaged by Hail

Not only do franchise restaurant operators need basic coverage for property damage and liability, they often require additional endorsements from the franchiser. Multiple policies and coverage limits make these kinds of claims complicated, but if done correctly they can allow for maximum payment for commercial hail damage.

There are many different kinds of policies that could cover hail damage losses in these situations, including:

• Company insurance. Some franchisers directly select the insurance companies that provide policies to a franchise operator. Larger corporations may opt to protect their reputations by making certain coverage options mandatory, such as requiring replacement cost rather than actual cash value for franchise damage claims.
• Franchise endorsements. Restaurants continually change the design of their logos, equipment and interiors, and franchises must make these updates as part of their repairs. Franchise endorsements provide coverage for an owner to update their location to new corporate standards, such as installing a new sign if the old one is damaged in a hailstorm.
• Optional coverage. If a franchise operator selects his own insurance coverage, he must do so carefully. While bare-bones policies may offer cheaper payments, optional coverage (such as extra expense, lost business income, and umbrella coverage) can save the franchisee from total loss or even bankruptcy.

Whether you own one franchise restaurant or multiple locations, the Voss Law Firm can investigate the details of your claim and fight on your behalf. Simply fill out the contact form on this page today or order a free copy of our book, Commercial Property Owners Must Read This BEFORE Filing an Insurance Claim.

RELATED LINKS: Early Repairs Can Prevent Devastating Hail Damage Different Roof Coverings Affect Damage Done by Hailstones How to Inspect Your Roof for Hail Damage

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2nds0BS
via Abogado Aly Website

A Matter of Perspective…Makes All the Difference in Learning!

Originally published by lawschool academicsupport.

Howdy Bar Prep Students: I am writing this note especially to those of you currently in the midst of preparing for the February 2018 bar exam. If you’re like me, about this time in bar prep, I felt like I…

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.

from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2DQT5Fu
via Abogado Aly Website