Best legal assistance New Jersey, US from Sandy Ferner? What Is Mediation Parenting? Mediation is an excellent alternative to litigation in many areas of divorce and post-divorce matters. Many people think that mediation is mostly used for financial matters and don’t really think about mediation for custody and parenting time matters. I think that mediation is the perfect forum to discuss and resolve parenting time and custody issues whether that’s in a divorce or post-divorce. The best thing about mediation for parenting time and custody issues is that the mediator and the parties can work together in an environment outside the courtroom that focuses on the best interests of the children. Except in extreme circumstances, most parents want what is best for their child. Sometimes they just have a problem reaching those goals, and sometimes their emotions get in the way of clear thinking. Find additional information about Sandy Ferner New Jersey, US.
Legal advice today with Sandy Ferner : At all steps of the way, in my cases, we tell our clients how they can save money by doing certain things themselves. We always tell all of our clients the more prepared you are, the better it is going to be for your case and the less money you’re going to have to spend on us to prepare your case. If you have any questions at all regarding keeping expenses down, how you can produce documents and gather documents without going through the legal process, please give us a call. That is always at the forefront of our thinking— how to approach a case efficiently and save our clients money while achieving the best result.
Dogs and other pets can cause severe injuries in the event they bite or attack somebody. Dog and pet owners have a responsibility to ensure that other individuals around these pets are safe, but there are times when pet owners fail to take proper safety precautions. New Jersey has various laws regarding dog bite injuries, and victims are often able to recover significant compensation from insurance carriers or at-fault parties in these cases.
A judgment is a document signed by the judge stating whether the Defendant owes any money to the Plaintiff and if so, how much. A judgment is the end of a lawsuit. It is then up to the creditor (assuming the judgment is in favor of the creditor) and the creditor’s lawyers to try to collect on the judgment. The most common methods of collection for a debt lawsuit in Houston are as follows (note – this is not a complete list): Bank Garnishment – A creditor has the right to garnish any bank accounts that the judgment Debtor’s name is on. In special situations there are legal defenses to stop a bank account garnishment, but these rights must be asserted.
If a grandparent is just becoming involved in a divorce matter with two parents that are involved and loving and caring, they don’t have an independent right to visitation and certainly doesn’t have an independent right to custody of the children. A grandparent’s access or ability to see their grandchildren is going to be when that parent, their son or their daughter, has their children. They don’t have any independent rights. There’s nothing more important than a relationship between children and their parents, and we try and protect that at all costs.
State v. Abayuba Rivas A-15-21(086051): Justice Albin concurred that the defendant’s confession to law enforcement officers be thrown out because of his ambiguous request counsel. As mentioned in the previous case, questioning must cease once the suspect requests for counsel unless they initiate conversation with law enforcement officers. In 2014, Rivas reported his wife was missing and when he was answering questions to help police for the missing person’s investigation, he told them that he had stayed home when his wife went missing. Afterwards, he was shown surveillance footage that he was driving a truck registered to his name during that time. Rivas mentioned that he had left his 2 year old daughter alone at home while he drove around looking for his wife. He was subsequently arrested and incarcerated for child endangerment and providing false information to the police. Once he was placed in jail, he attempted suicide. When Rivas was brought to the hospital, he was questioned by detectives after his Miranda rights were read. He told detectives that under coercion, he had to drive his vehicle while they abducted his wife and they threatened him with death if he called police. Questioning went into the next day. Rivas told detectives, “Ah a lawyer, I need time to find a lawyer. I need to see how much they charge.” and “Do you think that I need a lawyer? Because how you say innocent?” The detectives told him that he had to decide that. Afterwards he told detectives “In the beginning, I say I don’t want a lawyer, and then I want a lawyer so.” and interrogation should have stopped but detectives continued to question him for 5 more hours. Here, the defendant’s 5th amendment right to counsel was violated because his statements should have been sufficient enough to invoke his right to counsel. During this interrogation, he admitted to killing his wife. The next day, the same confession was recorded but with added details. Since questioning never ceased after his ambiguous request for counsel, the court held that both his confessions are inadmissible.