Recent Articles

If Collaborative Divorce Fails

If Collaborative Divorce Fails

Divorce can be an emotionally-draining and demoralizing experience, much more the process to resolve it, especially, if it ends up in a family court room. This type of divorce process, called litigated or contested divorce, which is the traditional way of settling divorce and divorce-related issues (such as child custody, visitation rights, child support, alimony or spousal support, and division of marital properties, assets and debts), is heard in a courtroom and, therefore, open to anyone who wishes to witness it. Besides making divorcing couples destroy and hate each, a contested divorce is also sure to leave them with huge legal fees (court fee, attorneys’ fees and expert fees).

The many inconveniences and negative effects of contested divorce are major factors that have caused spouses to reconsider going to court to settle their divorce. These same factors have also led spouses to consider and find alternative ways through which they can settle their divorce and other issues in ways that are faster, much cheaper and more peaceful. Good for them there are now new methods available in setting divorce and all divorce-related issues faster, peacefully, and without spending as much time as one will spend in a court-settled divorce. These methods include: Uncontested divorce; Divorce mediation; and Collaborative divorce.

“Collaborative divorce,” as explained in the website of The Maynard Law Firm, PLLC, “can be the best route to take for former spouses whose points of view on issues pertaining to divorce—such as child custody, visitation rights, and asset division—are neither in complete accord nor high conflict. While the relationship of divorcing couples can be characterized by anything from utmost civility to adversarial strife, many couples fall in the middle of the spectrum. Some former couples simply need help and advice in coming to a decision that would benefit both parties. Rather than having decisions finalized by an objective third party, couples in a collaborative divorce can openly discuss and negotiate their issues with the assistance of two appointed attorneys. The process allows couples to reach stable end negotiations without having to take the case to trial.”

In a collaborative divorce, the spouses are given the chance to settle their differences and finalize their divorce with the help of professionals, like an accountant, a child custody specialist, and others, if necessary. Both spouses will need to meet with their own collaborative divorce attorneys, while meeting with their former spouse and his/her attorney. The four of them will work together to settle their divorce without resorting to litigation. A collaborative divorce offers spouses the following benefits:

  • Expediency of the divorce case;
  • More control over the outcome;
  • Less stress and anxiety; and,
  • Lesser costs compared to the traditional divorce process

At the outset of the collaborative divorce process, the spouses and their lawyers enter into what is called a “Participation Agreement.” This agreement states that, in the event that the collaborative process fails, then the spouses will have to hire new attorneys, who will have to file their divorce case in court.

Hazardous Road Conditions

Traffic accidents often occur because of driver error, negligence, and recklessness. But there are instances where they occur because of external factors, such as mechanical defects and hazardous road conditions.

According to the website of the Pawtucket, Rhode Island car accident lawyers of the Law Offices of Ronald J. Resmini, LTD., these factors can warrant an investigation of the auto accident. If a party has been proven to be negligent, it may be taken to court for compensations. In the case of hazardous road conditions, the party that may be proven negligent is the municipality responsible for road design and maintenance, or a construction or trucking company that has triggered the hazardous condition.

Common dangerous road conditions
Road Defects: Roads that have cracks, potholes, and uneven surfaces may pose a danger to motorists. Going through these conditions may make drivers lose control of their vehicles momentarily, resulting into a crash or a collision.

Defective Road Signs and Lights: Sometimes the defects are not on the road itself but on the equipment that complement it. Signs that are non-existent or incomprehensible can potentially cause an accident, as well as traffic signals that work improperly or do not work at all.

Lack of Barriers: Lane dividers, guardrails, and other barriers are there to properly allocate lanes for vehicles and prevent the vehicles from veering to the opposite lane and embankment. The lack of barriers puts motorists in danger of head-on collisions and rollover accidents.

Snow, Ice, and Water: The elements can also contribute to road crashes, primarily because of their effect on the tires’ traction to the pavement. These elements can easily be seen on roads that are not properly maintained and those that have drainage system problems.

Weather Conditions: Aside from the elements that may affect traction to the pavement, the weather itself should also be taken into consideration. Conditions such as rains and fogs may affect visibility. Winds can also be a problem, as they can knock down trees and other potentially hazardous objects.

Harm Caused by Defectively Designed Shoulder Replacement Devices

It was during the 1950s when shoulder replacement surgery was first performed in the U.S. to treat severe shoulder fractures. In this surgical procedure, the damaged parts of the shoulder are removed and replaced with artificial components, called a prosthesis (artificial component materials are typically metal or durable plastic).

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, which functions as a part of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (HHS), says that an estimate of 53,000 people in the U.S. undergo shoulder replacement surgery or shoulder arthroplasty every year. Despite this big number (though much smaller compared to the 900,000 Americans who have knee and hip replacement surgery), orthopedists only recommend this procedure if the extreme shoulder pain or limited range of shoulder motion complained of by patients cannot be treated through non-surgical means, or if a debilitating shoulder injury cannot be corrected by more conservative methods.

Shoulder replacement surgery is said to be a tremendously successful procedure for providing pain relief and for restoring shoulder motion, function and strength. This is never the case, however, in patients who have been implanted with a faulty replacement device. For, instead of increased function and minimized pain, the surgery has rather resulted to increased pain, additional medical expenses and the necessity of corrective surgery.

One device that is said to be causing greater harm in patients is the Wright/Tornier shoulder replacement. According to doctors and patients, the defectively designed Wright and Tornier shoulder replacement products have only led to these devices failing soon after implant or, in many other cases, instead of delivering the promised corrective solution to shoulder pain, the outcome are rather harmful effects, which include metal poisoning, bone and tissue damage, and implantation failure, dislocation of implanted parts and revision surgery.

A shoulder replacement mass tort is in the process of being filed by those who have been seriously harmed and made to endure increased pain due to defectively designed shoulder replacement devices.

Determining Fault In A Car Accident

When it comes to car accidents, one of the hardest things to determine is liability for the accident. Determining who pays for accidents in car accidents is known as “fault” in legal parlance. There are different factors that will dictate if you are at fault in an accident where you got involved. According to the website of Habush Habush & Rottier S.C.®, there is an expectation that your insurance provider will pay a portion of your claim. But as mentioned, certain circumstances will determine your liability in a car accident.

Generally, the determination of liability is based on motor vehicle statutes than common law. The car insurance sector has lobbied state legislatures to base liability on motor vehicle statutes than on the traditional common law definition of fault. For this reason, it is much easier for insurance providers to challenge fault and liability when there is violation of traffic laws involved. So a car driver who has no liability insurance may find it difficult to collect damages even if there was partial negligence on the part of the motorist.

Common Law

In common law, there are four basic levels of fault:

  1. Negligence. Negligence is defined as the careless or inadvertent behavior that caused harm or damage to another driver. Not yielding to the right of way or beating the red light is an example of negligence.
  2. Reckless or wanton conduct. This is the willful disregard for the safety or welfare of others.
  3. Intentional Misconduct. When it comes to intentional misconduct, it is so easy to determine fault. Drunk driving is an example of intentional misconduct.
  4. Strict Liability. This may be imposed even without fault if the accident was due to accidents that involved certain defective products or extra hazardous activities.

State Laws

Different states have passed several laws that regulate the manner by which drivers should operate their cars in public roads. Some of these laws are codified versions of common law while others were results of legislative act. These laws always generally carry a presumption of negligence. For instance, since motorcycle riders are required to wear helmets, non-wearing of these safety accessories is a negligent act.

In proving fault based on state laws, it needs to be proven that the negligent act was not the proximate cause of the injuries. So while the non-wearing of helmet may have caused serious injuries to the motorcycle driver after being accidentally sideswiped by a car, there is also negligence on the part of the motorcyclists who did not wear the helmet.

In explaining proximate cause with respect to the motorcycle accident, the helmet would not have prevented the accident from happening but would have limited the injuries. In this case, the car driver may not be held liable for the brain injury of the motorcyclist.

Volkswagen Facing Lawsuits after Emissions Fraud Scandal

The news regarding the admittance of Europe’s biggest car manufacturer Volkswagen about cheating their emissions tests through installation of illegal devices in order to help improve sales and pass vehicle approval has caused feelings of anger, betrayal and being cheated. Millions of consumers have been left wondering whether that should also try filing a VW diesel lawsuit or join a class action lawsuit. Knowing what option best suits you will be the most effective way for you to get compensation following the Volkswagen emissions scandal.

In order to get the best from your lawsuit, you must first understand three major factors: what are you filing the lawsuit for, what have you actually lost, and what you could possibly gain should you join a class action lawsuit. A class action lawsuit is where one or few individuals help to represent a great number of plaintiffs who are suing one or more defendants. These plaintiffs typically have similar interests that will provide them with similar damage recoveries following the lawsuit. It is a very effective way for individuals who suffered the same or similar damages of harms to secure compensation.

Fling alone or on your own does have its advantages or drawbacks, but with defendants as big as Volkswagen it can be tiring to you and your lawyers’ time, effort and money to face such a company that may require extensive evidence. Unless the damages are unique and particular for your case, you might consider simply joining a class action VW diesel lawsuit rather than filing one on your own.

Given the international nature of the case and the German company’s admittance of their actions, it may be easier to get compensation for the damages that may make reselling the vehicle difficult. Furthermore, the civil lawsuit will not protect Volkswagen from possible criminal charges, and punitive damages can also be awarded to the plaintiff, adding to a significant amount of compensation.