Law Questions and Answers

How many years within college for court stenography? also.?

can i go to regular college for it? or do i own to take a tenet school?
Answers: I go to court reporting school at a community college contained by Arizona. I had to pinch legal language, medical terminology, business English and a host of other side classes that would see me to do the job.

I moved to California partly way through my training and go to a regular trade school that specialized contained by court reporting - much more expensive. I also had to purloin all those classes again (rip-off), which kept me within school for an extra year.

Basically, once you finish your side classes (legal, medical, etc.,) it is adjectives on you how soon you graduate. You must pass your speed test at 225 words per minute dictation with 98.5% correctness. You can do that as quickly or as slowly as you want, designation if you practice more, you will break speeds more; if you would rather date and enjoy fun rather than work at your work, you will go slower.

I guess the best channel to put it is this way: My sister, mother, brother and I adjectives got through institution in give or take a few 19 months, from start to finish, from first day of conservatory until we took our CSRs. My aunt Nancy went to academy for five years. It took her one year to get from 60 wpm to 80 wpm. She be much more interested in the dudes who might thieve care of her than in actual fact graduating. She never did graduate.

My sister took her CSR contained by May of 1986. By the time December rolled around, she had made $82,000. She be 19.

BTW, my apostrophe key is broken, so please no joke about my spelling.
Court reporters must complete a 2-to-4-year associate's or bachelor's level program. Most programs cover legal argot, criminal and appellate procedure, in decoration to computer-aided transcription and real-time reporting. NCRA-approved programs require students to capture a minimum of 225 words per minute.

Do I reduce the earnings of this caregiver or not????

7 years ago I started a caregiver at a rather illustrious rate. I need the caregiver and she be efficient. She is very soon age 74 and has asthma and some tart problems in her stomach. She does not hear as okay either. My Mother is getting on within years and need different servies in a minute. The caregiver told me today that if I reduce her wages and pocket in a seond creature to help out that she will give the job.purely say the word and I am gone she told me. I excise l kind of controlled by this woman..I want to trim down her pay by sometime a week and train a back-up person bec if the current female gets sick , I have not a soul to help out. She tell me I can hire her daughter. I don't want her daughter!!!! or I can hire her friend!!! I don't want her friend. I find the caregiver is good and is controlling and taking on her own general public for chores in my Mother's house. I want to steal back my control and the caregiver tell me I will not find anyone as good as her since she have been near me for 7 years now. What do I do
Answers: you are the employer.
she is the member of staff.
what part of that does she not recognize?
if she truly cares almost the care of your mother after she will understand your concerns and her limitations, but for you need to replace her completely. payment the extra now and receive someone you are comfortable with hired and orientated near your mother then cut her foot. she will stay on for less clear since she is doing less work (if she cares) or she will take off.


old maxim:
don't let the door hit you surrounded by the as* on the way out.
As a former Geriatric nurse and area supervisor for a home health supervision my opinion is such.
You hold answered your own questions to some point.
When you as the employer no longer feel comfortable next to an employee to embezzle care of your aging mother afterwards it is time to re-evaluate the situation.
At 74 this woman is also getting up in years and can not hear powerfully .. a potential for disaster with regard to your mom. Asthma and acid reflux are not a judgment to fire someone but if her job deeds is no longer suitable and your mother's care is suffering next by all routine let the woman progress.

You are under no constraint to hire her family or friends. and it is up to you also to whip charge of this behavior . You can not be manipulated by a character unless you are weak and allow them to do so.
If your mom meet the financial guidelines she may be eligble for a paid home robustness aide a few hrs a day.
Speak beside your local home health nurse for an evaluation.

Let me rephrase that.?

my friend was arrested for 11550 - underneath the influence - when the work location he was at be raided by Narcs. He have no drugs on him. none were surrounded by the house. his client (owner of the home) had drugs on him (personal use) and he be caught outside in his parking garage. They took him within after finding probable cause due to a nippy pulse. SWAT had only broken down the door and my friend was working surrounded by the home alone (client was out getting food). unsurprisingly he will have a fast pulse. the 4th ammendment says that a misdemeanor charge must be commited contained by the presence of the arresting officer but a felony only requires probable rationale for an arrest. My friends charge is misdemeanor. Does the proscecutor have a strong casing against my friend?
Answers: First of all the Fourth Amendment say nothing something like misdemeanors being committed within the presence of an arresting officer. Second, your friend undoubtedly has an attorney, from whom adjectives information regarding his baggage should be sought.

What would it take for parental rights to removed ?

Answers: If the other parent does not want to lose rights, it would rob several police reports of what you are stating has occur, some good evidence, probably some witnesses or friends of the other parent likely to cooberate the story, poss a social worker or mental health worker stating it is contained by the best interest of the child.

Terminating parental rights is extremely hard. Even if both parents want to end. Terminating rights means that the terminated developed no longer is bound to give any perfectionism or support to the child or custodial parent. That includes child support, Social Security benefits from the terminated parent if they die before child turns 18, inheritance rights from terminated parent and any of their relations members.

In most cases combat for terminated rights is not a good model. If both parents agree it is in the best interest of the child, later maybe.

But I would right to be heard it is rarily in the childs interests. Changing custody and visitation and child support instructions is 99% of the time the better choice. Again, child support current and any shot at back money, Social Security benefits, and all inheritance opportunity are gone.
your question is imprecise.
a court!
emancipation from parents can be have if this is whats necessary to move within the right direction!
Ask my kids mom. Kidnapping the child and moving to another state with the child seem to make a difference. That and lying surrounded by a court of law roughly speaking doing it doesn't go over to ably.

Constitution?

Why is it so important to follow every amendment of the constitution? Sure some things build sense but over time society's morals change so shouldn't our law accordingly? For instance gun control, I'm not maxim I support gun control, I'm just dictum why should we use the constitution as an argument against gun control? The reason this be ever even put into the constitution was within case the parliament became too powerful, the race would have a agency to fight for democracy.
-Please, correct me if I'm wrong roughly speaking that.

Why is the constitution so powerful?
Answers: you don't only call for to follow the constitution the 9th amendment states that citizens have adjectives rights beyond the constition..also in a agency the constition contradicts itself because the 18th amendment is that liqour is not allowed, but the 21st amendment allows liqour
The constitution must be followed exactly. The interpretation can changeover, but if we give the management the power to ignore it whenever it decide it isn't convenient, then it will become meaningless.


Regarding gun control, the theory of the 2nd amendment was that state militias could transport weapons, not the public.
The bill of rights be, at first, ONLY meant to restrict the just this minute created federal government, so you're not certainly wrong. So the states could do about doesn`t matter what they want (except for what Article I, Sec. 10 says they couldn't), and the federal policy could only do what it be authorized to do (most listed surrounded by Sec. 8).

The states, however, had their own constitutions that could protect the citizens' rights. The 14th Amendment, along next to various Supreme Court rulings, applied the Bill of Rights to state law.

So this means that past the 14th Amendment, the state and local governments did enjoy the power to control guns (unless the states had something within their own constitutions that didn't allow that state's government to). There is a great deal of room for interpretation in the 14th Amendment. For example, up to that time the 14th Amendment, states could ban shouting "fire!" surrounded by a theater, even though the 1st Amendment says that "Congress shall manufacture no law...abridge the freedom of speech", but the federal government could not formulate such a law. Of course the 14th Amendment doesn't guarantee the right to shout "fire!" contained by a theater, so that means that it is up to interpretation.

Here is an article in the order of this:
http://www.constitutioncenter.org/explor...
This is a very firm question because we are dealing near people's INTERPRETATIONS of a document that can be interpreted in numerous ways. The Constitution of the United States of America is similar to the Bible surrounded by the sense that there are different competing interpretations. While in that are dozens of interpretations for both texts, you can pretty much break them down into two category: the literal interpretation (that is, following the Constitution to its exact wording) and a more loose interpretation that allows room for some change. Your track of thinking falls more into the second category, since you believe in varying laws for a varying society. I also hold a similar view.

It's true that our society is varying and thus so should our interpretation of the Constitution. I think the most big thing that we should remember is that the Constitution is not written surrounded by stone, it's more like a blueprint and thus patchy. After all the Constitution's objective has be debated even by the culture who drafted it. You just hold to look at Marbury vs. Madison, which introduced the now adjectives Supreme Court practice of Judicial Review (The Supreme Court's job of aphorism what law is or is not Constitutional). When that court baggage was mortal decided various of the Constitution's Framers were still alive, so even they really didn't know what they have originally meant. Anyways, I judge your question is something that cannot slickly be answered. It all depends on what you believe. All I can recount you is that the Constitution is so powerful, in my feelings, because it has allowed for such debate to continue. It allows room for discussion.
the Constitution is the power of this country, it controlls where on earth and whom has such power, it also set the lines of the power so it be clear where the peolpe stood. The 2nd amendment be created for one simple purpose, to give the nation the ultimate power, even history shows why it be framed, to keep the goverment from becoming insurmountable, and giving the people the arbitrary to preserve it at all costs, since the latter is up to the associates themselves.

Need guidance...cousin went to sentence to prison?

My cousin went to send down after a fight beside her boyfriend. She allegedly stabbed him with a butter run through...She put him in sentence to prison for 3 months for beating her up a while spinal column and so this is like a tit for tat. So there's a history of domestic belligerence. They moved from Cali to ATL and she has be footing the bill. He pressed charges against her and it looks like she might do time. She have an apartment with furniture and a coup¨¦. The boyfriend I believe is still staying in the apartment and could possibly wipe her out and purloin the car. I would close to to protect her belongings but part of me does not want to procure involved.
Answers: Don't anticipate something that hasn't happened however. slow down before you acquire in the middle of something that's not your business. label rational decision instead of emotional ones. Do you really want to obtain in the middle of this cluster___! She's involved beside this critter, you should not be.
support your cousin in other ways. I assume your gut is telling you stay away. listen to it. If she does do time, she inevitability your
letters more than a couch.
Yikes. in good health the best thing you can do, and stay away from the situation, is to comfort her make bail/bond and tolerate her settle things. If she's going to do real time, consequently it'll take awhile.

It's up to you if you want to risk the possibility your $$$ will disappear near your cousin AND her boyfriend - seems similar to she hasn't learned her lesson.. anyway.

Good Luck contained by whatever conclusion you make.
She should ask for anger government classes.

For her belongings, get her to brand name a list and try to verify everything beside receipts and then put them surrounded by your name. You may hold to go to small claims court for some of them. Small claims court is the easiest instrument to get your complaint hear.
have her form you power of attorney while she is in top-security prison and go win the car beside the cops in tow or in recent times report it stolen,,have him removed from the premsis unless he can prove his moniker is on anything,,,, otherwise back away,,, if she be smat she wouldnt have used a butter pierce,,, hes not a pastry

Laid off after parenthood leave california?

oblige what can i do? i went on motherliness leave within sept. had my son within oct. i applied for the flma and my last afternoon is dec. 30th. i called my employer to see when i could shift back to work and they told me that they be overstaffed and they no longer needed me. which i know its BS because there is smaller number people working in that then when i departed. can i apply for unemployment??? is this againist the ruling?? i work for an agency. the sad entry is that i just found out that they are hiring some girl that works here for the company. any advice would be truly appriciated.
Answers: There are some testimonial that must be met before an member of staff qualifies for FMLA.

Employer must hold 50 or more employees
Employee must hold worked 12 months or 1250 hours before eligibility starts.

Did you receive notification from the employer that you be officially put on FMLA?

If you come together these qualifications, contact the EEOC to directory a discrimination complaint, or an employment tenet attorney.

http://jobsearch.just about.com/cs/employment...
Number one, yes you can apply for unemployment, and you will capture it. Next call an attorney if you can prove they hired the other girl. Now...if you work for a temp agency, here may be nothing you can do in the region of them hiring the other girl, but you can still get job loss. Good Luck!

I know that there are frequent variables to consider?

, but generally, if within is such a thing, if my ex husband and I share integrated custody... legal and physical... wouldn't here be a problem...legally speaking. should one of us database a lawsuit on behalf of our (minor) daughter without informing the other.

suit have reached settlement and disbursed a considerably.

It's defining to me that this money is held/invested solely for the benefit of my daughter -- I'm thinking this may not be the case.

my examine is...typically, in a combined custody situation... can one file a lawsuit such as this lacking informing the other parent?
Answers: Yes, one parent generally can. However, if I be representing the other party to the claim I would not settle beside one parent absent consent or settlement near the other or some proof that the other parent has waive his/her claims as a parent. Otherwise we may face a double liability situation. If you believe that here is some asset that should be held in trust or contained by a guardianship and which is not, you should speak to an attorney about petitioning the court to establish such a trust or guardianship.
Generally, surrounded by a joint custody situation, respectively parent has a valid interest contained by the well-being of the child, so each parent can folder a lawsuit on the child's behalf.


But, as you said yourself, there are several variables at play, so it's impossible for us to tell you for sure.
In broad, BOTH custodial parents must be informed. In addition, both parents enjoy the right to input into what is done with the proceeds.

However, I'd most categorically speak to the lawyer who won the settlement
Richard
If you and the father disagree nearly the child's estate, then one of you should database a Court Petition for Guardianship of the Estate (property) of the minor child. Then let the Judge determine who is best for managing the child's property. The Court could appoint a 3rd (independent) character, who would charge the child's estate for his/her time and expertise required for managing and investing the child's estate.

The custody matters business principally with the soul of the child, because most children do not normally enjoy any property of their own.

Talk with the father something like the problem, then communicate with an attorney to put your agreement surrounded by writing, or to file the Petition for Guardianship.

If I'm emancipated at 16, and a legal adult----?

is it trial for my 20 year old husband to own sex with me?
Answers: This is in actual fact quite simple - IF you and your husband are LEGALLY married, nearby can be no statutory rape, as it does not apply to married couples. This is not to say that CRIMINAL rape is not on, which is sex without consent, regardless of wedding.
But it should be legal if you and your husband are married, but double-check your state law first.
Should be okay
Check local laws.
oh come on, stop yank my janking. Of course if you are MARRIED than your husband can do whatever to you, and no statutory law apply.. You technically wouldn't even have to be married. You are close satisfactory in age that if he be only your boyfriend for a few months, you guys could reasonably engage contained by that. Now, if he were enunciate 27, then that would be a huge issue, and risky.
If you are emancipated and married, you may legally enjoy sex with your husband.

However you are not a legitimate adult. You still cannot drink or vote.
If you are emancipated at 16 that manner you are now properly considered to be an adult. As an mature you can have sex near any age you want. I would say Yes. That would label sense. It would be wrong if otherwise.

If the state who decided that you are ably fit to be an adult and transport care of yourself and to produce mature decision affecting your life and adjectives than by that they are saying that you can label mature passable decsions. I believe the reason why anyone over 18 cannot own sex with 16 or 17 year olds is because those 16 and 17 year olds brains havent developed ample to determine what is right and what is wrong and can easily be persuded. But if the state think you can make responsible decision than go build your responsible decision!
Yes, a trial wife can have sex near her husband regardless of age.

Ryan is wrong though - at 16 / 20 extramarital sex would be a felony in heaps States.

Richard
Like the others said, if you are legally married it is not unendorsed to have sex.

Just don't acquire a divorce. Because that legal mature theory will run out the window. Some divorce advocate will tell you to share the courts to say that you be young and innocent, and although emancipated was individual taking advantage of by a developed older man.
Look to your state's criminal law.
However, in Texas, the imperative that criminalizes the sexual contact between a 20 year old and a 16 year mature reads, (see 1. below)"(a) A entity commits an offense if the person: (1) intentionally or on purpose: (A) causes the access . . ., without that person's consent;
(B) cause the penetration of . . ., short that person's consent; or
. . .
(c) In this section: (1) "Child" medium a person younger than 17 years of age who is not the spouse of the entertainer.
(2) "Spouse" means a creature who is legally married to another.
. . .

Therefore, within Texas there is not a crime committed when a husband and wife own sexual relations.

Texas requires you be over 17 to be emancipated. Even an emancipated minor cannot marry until age 18 without consent of the parent. Source(s) Texas Family Code§ 2.003.

Can you believe border patrol officers get 7 -11 yrs for wounding a drug trafficking Illegal at the border?

Border patrol officers Ramos and Compean are serving 11 and 12 years, respectively, after human being convicted of assault, obstruction of sprite and civil rights violations related to the wounding of Mexican drug-smuggler Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila. On Feb. 17, 2005, the agents chased Davila in close proximity the U.S.-Mexican border outside of El Paso, Texas, after Davila abandoned a van containing 743 pounds of marijuana next to an estimated value of more than $1 million.

Prosecutors claimed the agents have violated Border Patrol policy when they pursued Davila without supervisor approval, that Compean moved shell casing, and that both did not properly report the shots fired. Testifying against Ramos and Compean, under the veil of imperviousness from prosecution for his actions on the hours of darkness in quiz, was none save for Davila himself.
Answers: ya that really is bull
At first blush this does seem outrageous - but after a deeper reading, one discovers that the two agents know they were violate the rules right from the get-go, AND, more importantly, they lied to their own supervisors, and covered up evidence, after it happened.

It's tremendously important that the police follow the ruling themselves when enforcing it. Rogue cops are not immune from criminal prosecution.

Richard
they committed a crime. they must do the time.

they should hold told the truth from the get-go.

the drug dealer deserved modest punishment also. which i believe has not happen, to date.
I feel for them. There is without question in my mine that they where on earth set up. I believe that one of their supervisor was have his drugs brought over the border by the guy that got caught. Otherwise, they wouldn't be surrounded by jail right in a minute.

Charged with civil rights betrayal...what a joke!
rickin you necessitate to do some real further investigation.

this situation have been remarkably very suspect.

Davila be not only given imperviousness for that but permission to cross the border by DHS further after, and have been involved surrounded by two more drug trafficking incidences but let travel because of his immunity.

There is alot of thoroughly questionable components to this 'investigation' of Ramos and Compean.

Common sense would tell you soemthing is wrong next to this. They are both hispanic its not like they have it out for some mexican. Also I cant remember if it was compean or ramos but one of the two be border patrol agent of the year previous to this situation.
Yes, this is exactly right. Law enforcement agents in the US, whether city police or federal border guards, cannot indiscriminately shoot associates. Society is entrusting them with guns, we expect that they will be used contained by a responsible manner. The certainty that they are law enforcement and the other guy be an illegal drug trafficker doesn't create any difference. They need to be held in charge for what they did.

More Questions and Answers:
[1995] - [346] - [1947] - [40] - [2534] - [2317] - [416] - [1899] - [1363] - [338] - [340] - [2323] - [622] - [1591] - [1760] - [1257] - [1003] - [322] - [1313] - [824]

The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.

Answer question: