Print this articleIf you’re suspected of a crime, the police can come to your house or work or find you on the street to talk to you. Usually it will be a detective in plain clothes in an unmarked car who will want to talk to you. You might find a card from the detective under your door, or a message on your phone from him asking you to call.
You always have the right to remain silent, as anything you say to a police detective will be used against you in court. You also have the right to be represented by an attorney when talking with the police.
Just because a detective comes around looking for you doesn’t mean you have to speak to him or see him at the police precinct. If the detective is at your door, you don’t have to open it for him unless he has a warrant. If a detective is knocking at your door, you don’t have to answer. You can wait until he leaves if you want and then of course call your attorney.
Usually, a detective will hound you to come into the precinct headquarters to "talk". But once you set foot into the precinct, the detective will have you at his mercy, where he can use different routines - such as "good cop/bad cop" - or violate your rights just enough to be "legal" to get you to talk. Maybe he’ll take your backpack from you or other property you came in with like your cell phone, then direct you to wait for him, leaving you alone in a room for what could feel like a lifetime. He may even ask you to write your version of the story down and then use that against you later.
The police are experts trained in gaining your trust and confidence. They know what to say and what tone to use with you. They will lie and misinform you to get information they want. They can tell you they have witnesses when they do not or say they will lower the charges when they will not. The police most likely will not read you your rights because they want to create an informal, relaxed appearance so you will spill the beans voluntarily.
Good Cop, Bad Cop
If you’re not talking then detectives may use the "good cop/bad cop" routine. The first cop sits alone with you in a small room and talks about the "crime". If he’s not getting the information he wants to hear to nail you, then you may find yourself standing at the fingerprint machine with another more sensitive cop. Once you’re at the fingerprint machine you can be sure you’re being charged despite the fact that no one explained anything to you, read you your rights or told you what you’re being charged with. Part of the game is to keep you disoriented and guessing your situation. If you hear the new cop say "just tell the detective what he wants to hear and you’ll get out of here faster on a lesser charge” then you are being "played" and you definitely need to keep quiet. Don't say something just because you think it will get you out faster, because you're already in there and you're going to go through the arrest process no matter what.
When the police tell you the consequences of a crime they intend to charge you with, or that they can lower the charge, don’t believe anything they say. They can and will lie to you to get you to talk so they can make an arrest. The police are not your attorney, they are not your friends-- they are there to make an arrest.
The only way to protect yourself is to remain silent at all times. Enforce your right by consistently and politely stating "I am remaining silent until I have counsel." The police can not interrogate you once you invoke that right, although they will try to interrogate you. They also can’t interrogate you unless they first read you your rights.
When you arrive at the police precinct , the police should have you sign a paper with your legal rights listed on it. They should have you read your rights while they read it to you, and then have you initial each right and sign the paper at the bottom with the time and date. This paper is a good thing for the police to prove they followed procedure and it will coordinate the time of your arrest closely with the time of reading your rights. It is not mandatory that they give you this paper with your rights, because they can by law verbally read you your rights and note in their notebook the time they read you your rights. Of course, they could never read you your rights and later say they did.
Hiring An Attorney
If a detective is hounding you with phone messages and coming by your house leaving cards with your roommate or family, immediately get an attorney. An attorney can determine if the police are going to arrest you. If you are going to be arrested then your attorney will advise you what to do (and what to say or not say), explain the arrest process, arrange for you to turn yourself in and get you through the process quicker. Also, the police will know they can’t interrogate you if you’re represented by counsel.
A good attorney will fax a letter of representation to the precinct and follow you through the arrest process by calling the proper offices and getting you to arraignment and out quicker. Your attorney should also fax a notice of appearance on your behalf to the Arraignment Clerk’s Office the minute he or she discovers you’ve been “docketed” by the District Attorney’s office (meaning they’ve drafted and filed a Criminal Complaint against you and assigned a docket number to your case so it can be heard by the court).
If you do not voluntarily turn yourself in then the police will remember you made it harder for them to arrest you and they may purposely delay your arrest process and make you sit for three days in jail before you see a judge. They’ll delay filling out your paperwork and sending it to the proper offices. They may even lose your paperwork.
The last thing you want to do is spend a minute longer being arrested and in jail so here's a valuable tip: don’t turn yourself in or get arrested at night or on a weekend because there are less people working those shifts and the courts close certain hours, so the process can take three days or sometimes longer.
You always have the right to remain silent, as anything you say to a police detective will be used against you in court. You also have the right to be represented by an attorney when talking with the police.
Just because a detective comes around looking for you doesn’t mean you have to speak to him or see him at the police precinct. If the detective is at your door, you don’t have to open it for him unless he has a warrant. If a detective is knocking at your door, you don’t have to answer. You can wait until he leaves if you want and then of course call your attorney.
Usually, a detective will hound you to come into the precinct headquarters to "talk". But once you set foot into the precinct, the detective will have you at his mercy, where he can use different routines - such as "good cop/bad cop" - or violate your rights just enough to be "legal" to get you to talk. Maybe he’ll take your backpack from you or other property you came in with like your cell phone, then direct you to wait for him, leaving you alone in a room for what could feel like a lifetime. He may even ask you to write your version of the story down and then use that against you later.
The police are experts trained in gaining your trust and confidence. They know what to say and what tone to use with you. They will lie and misinform you to get information they want. They can tell you they have witnesses when they do not or say they will lower the charges when they will not. The police most likely will not read you your rights because they want to create an informal, relaxed appearance so you will spill the beans voluntarily.
Good Cop, Bad Cop
If you’re not talking then detectives may use the "good cop/bad cop" routine. The first cop sits alone with you in a small room and talks about the "crime". If he’s not getting the information he wants to hear to nail you, then you may find yourself standing at the fingerprint machine with another more sensitive cop. Once you’re at the fingerprint machine you can be sure you’re being charged despite the fact that no one explained anything to you, read you your rights or told you what you’re being charged with. Part of the game is to keep you disoriented and guessing your situation. If you hear the new cop say "just tell the detective what he wants to hear and you’ll get out of here faster on a lesser charge” then you are being "played" and you definitely need to keep quiet. Don't say something just because you think it will get you out faster, because you're already in there and you're going to go through the arrest process no matter what.
When the police tell you the consequences of a crime they intend to charge you with, or that they can lower the charge, don’t believe anything they say. They can and will lie to you to get you to talk so they can make an arrest. The police are not your attorney, they are not your friends-- they are there to make an arrest.
The only way to protect yourself is to remain silent at all times. Enforce your right by consistently and politely stating "I am remaining silent until I have counsel." The police can not interrogate you once you invoke that right, although they will try to interrogate you. They also can’t interrogate you unless they first read you your rights.
When you arrive at the police precinct , the police should have you sign a paper with your legal rights listed on it. They should have you read your rights while they read it to you, and then have you initial each right and sign the paper at the bottom with the time and date. This paper is a good thing for the police to prove they followed procedure and it will coordinate the time of your arrest closely with the time of reading your rights. It is not mandatory that they give you this paper with your rights, because they can by law verbally read you your rights and note in their notebook the time they read you your rights. Of course, they could never read you your rights and later say they did.
Hiring An Attorney
If a detective is hounding you with phone messages and coming by your house leaving cards with your roommate or family, immediately get an attorney. An attorney can determine if the police are going to arrest you. If you are going to be arrested then your attorney will advise you what to do (and what to say or not say), explain the arrest process, arrange for you to turn yourself in and get you through the process quicker. Also, the police will know they can’t interrogate you if you’re represented by counsel.
A good attorney will fax a letter of representation to the precinct and follow you through the arrest process by calling the proper offices and getting you to arraignment and out quicker. Your attorney should also fax a notice of appearance on your behalf to the Arraignment Clerk’s Office the minute he or she discovers you’ve been “docketed” by the District Attorney’s office (meaning they’ve drafted and filed a Criminal Complaint against you and assigned a docket number to your case so it can be heard by the court).
If you do not voluntarily turn yourself in then the police will remember you made it harder for them to arrest you and they may purposely delay your arrest process and make you sit for three days in jail before you see a judge. They’ll delay filling out your paperwork and sending it to the proper offices. They may even lose your paperwork.
The last thing you want to do is spend a minute longer being arrested and in jail so here's a valuable tip: don’t turn yourself in or get arrested at night or on a weekend because there are less people working those shifts and the courts close certain hours, so the process can take three days or sometimes longer.
A power of attorney is a legal document that allows you to dictate who you would like to make decisions on your behalf. While there are many useful purposes for a power of attorney, they are especially important to unmarried couples, which live together, when a partner becomes incapacitated and unable to make decisions.
In such situations, the law usually designates the incapacitated person's next of kin as the decision maker. With a power of attorney, unmarried couples can give their partners the power to make such decisions.
Powers of attorney can be as general or specific as you decide. You can give your partner the power to make decisions on your behalf at any time or only when you become incapacitated. You can also dictate what types of decisions you are authorizing your agent to make. A health care power of attorney (also referred to as a durable power of attorney for health care, medical power of attorney, health care proxy and appointment of health care agent of surrogate) would authorize your partner (or other agent) to make decisions about your medical treatment and dictate who you would like to be able to visit you while receiving medical treatment.
By executing a power of attorney for finances (also referred to as a durable power of attorney for finances) you could dictate whom you want to make decisions about your legal and financial matters. You can be very specific about what actions you are authorizing your partner (or other agent) to make, including which accounts he or she has access to and the types of decisions he or she can make.
Note that Legal Helper Corp. - http://www.legalhelpmate.com/power-of-attorney.aspx - provides an easy-to-use, quick, and economical online method for creating completed power of attorney for any occasions
In such situations, the law usually designates the incapacitated person's next of kin as the decision maker. With a power of attorney, unmarried couples can give their partners the power to make such decisions.
Powers of attorney can be as general or specific as you decide. You can give your partner the power to make decisions on your behalf at any time or only when you become incapacitated. You can also dictate what types of decisions you are authorizing your agent to make. A health care power of attorney (also referred to as a durable power of attorney for health care, medical power of attorney, health care proxy and appointment of health care agent of surrogate) would authorize your partner (or other agent) to make decisions about your medical treatment and dictate who you would like to be able to visit you while receiving medical treatment.
By executing a power of attorney for finances (also referred to as a durable power of attorney for finances) you could dictate whom you want to make decisions about your legal and financial matters. You can be very specific about what actions you are authorizing your partner (or other agent) to make, including which accounts he or she has access to and the types of decisions he or she can make.
Note that Legal Helper Corp. - http://www.legalhelpmate.com/power-of-attorney.aspx - provides an easy-to-use, quick, and economical online method for creating completed power of attorney for any occasions
From Bill Gates at the end of the last century to John D. Rockefeller at the end of the previous century; from Rick Scott, founder of Columbia Health Care, to AT&T: from Richard Branson and British Airlines to Dan Peña and The Financial Times; from government, banking, insurance and every other facet of world commerce - to grow geometrically and stay around, litigation must be (prudently) used and mastered.
I will, as briefly as I can, memorialize the salient points of using litigation as a business tool.
Now before I start, I want it on the record, some 50% of my 30-year track record of litigation has had nothing to do with winning money, i.e., many lawsuits have been over principle, some were to right a heinous wrong such as slanderous remarks made about me; and some were because an entity just needed a good comeuppance and nobody else would carry the flag into battle.
I, like Don Quixote, have fought many a windmill.
As you've heard me speak and write about, when building your 'Dream Team,' you want Big Five accountants and a large national or international firm of lawyers - the best representation you can't afford!
Unlike the success-oriented fees I coach you to use when facilitating transactions, no law firm will litigate initially on this basis.
Perhaps if your case is especially strong, they will do it on a contingency basis. Unfortunately, you will be using, from time-to-time, litigation as a positioning tool and your case may not be something you can seriously leverage.
A year or two ago, being left with a pig-in-a-poke, I had to litigate a case having specious facts at best to support my desired outcome. Fortunately, our (my) apparent lust for litigation was stronger than their desire to fight a hard fight, so a reasonably good settlement was finally arrived at.
Of course, during this process my good lawyers counseled us, advising our case needed to be much stronger, etc. Even with great lawyers, it is their job to tell you the downside risks. Again, what happens is you are often scared from pursuing your case.
Good lawyers win so-so lawsuits. Great lawyers can win lawsuits in which you have little or no chance to win.
Three of my favorite litigators over the years are Steve Susman and Cyrus Marter IV of Susman Godfrey in Houston, Dallas, Los Angeles and Seattle and Tim Harris of Charleston Revich & Williams in Los Angeles. All three have dug me out of some pretty big black holes.
I've dealt with them 10 and 20 years respectively. They are worth every penny they charge!
Our judicial system works, but we grow up being afraid of it. It's way out of our comfort zone so we preclude ourselves from benefitting from it. Normally the cost associated with it keeps us from using it.
In fact, I'm currently embroiled in litigation where the ancillary players to the litigation have rights which are being severely violated. A large group of people could bring great pressure to bear, but they're afraid because of previous bad experiences. They could get what they deserve but aren't pursuing their best interests.
There are lawyers who take on cases for humanitarian reasons, if the case warrants, in business as well, i.e., big major corporations taking advantage of the system because of their size alone.
Why do you want to initiate the lawsuit so you are the plaintiff? As the plaintiff, you pick where and when the lawsuit is fought and probably ultimately adjudicated.
This can be a huge advantage. And secondly, the plaintiff is allowed two closing arguments, meaning you (your lawyer) gets to address the judge and/or jury once and then again after the defendants' closing argument. This can also be very important.
26 Unbreakable Rules of Litigation
#1 CHOOSE YOUR BATTLES
#2 CHOOSE THE VENUE
#3 BE THE PLAINTIFF
#4 HAVE THE BEST REPRESENTATION
#5 LISTEN TO YOUR HEART
#6 DON'T LISTEN TO YOUR SICK STOMACH WHEN YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR COMFORT ZONE
#7 DON'T LISTEN TO RELATIVES, FRIENDS, ET AL
#8 LISTEN TO EXPERIENCED LITIGANTS - LIKE ME!
#9 GENERALLY SPEAKING, DON'T WORRY ABOUT THE COST (THIS IS VERY HARD!)
#10 BIG LAWSUITS ARE BETTER THAN SMALL ONES
#11 ELECT JURY TRIALS, AS OPPOSED TO A JUDGE ONLY
#12 PREPARATION (YOURS) IS EVERYTHING - KNOW THE FACTS
#13 PRACTICE DEPOSITIONS AND TRIALS
#14 IF YOU ARE THINKING OF A BETTER STRATEGY, GET A NEW LAWYER (NOT TRUE IN MY CASE)
#15 NEVER GIVE UP
#16 DON'T BE INTIMIDATED BY THE PROCESS
#17 USE MOCK TRIALS (PRETEND TRIALS YOU DO IN FRONT OF A HIRED JURY)
#18 DRESS SIMPLE AND CONSERVATIVELY IN COURT - NO JEWELRY EXCEPT A WEDDING BAND; WHITE SHIRT, PLAIN TIE AND DARK SUIT FOR MEN AND THE EQUIVALENT FOR WOMEN; SHORT GROOMED HAIR FOR MEN
#19 DON'T LOSE YOUR TEMPER IN COURT - IT'S OKAY TO CRY IF IT'S REAL
#20 HAVE YOUR SPOUSE IN THE FRONT ROW EVERY DAY. CHILDREN ALSO IF POSSIBLE. OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS IN SECOND ROW IS OKAY
#21 NO QUOTES TO THE PRESS OTHER THAN 'WE BELIEVE IN OUR CASE AND THAT IS WHY WE WENT TO COURT'. YOUR WORDS CAN EASILY BE TURNED AROUND.
#22 WHEN YOU BREAK FOR LUNCH OR A RECESS, REMEMBER NEVER TALK IN PUBLIC ABOUT THE CASE - YOU NEVER KNOW WHO MIGHT OVERHEAR
#23 WHEN YOU FIND A LEGAL TEAM THAT WINS, STAY WITH THEM
#24 ALWAYS TELL THE TRUTH, NO MATTER WHAT. THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE.
#25 DURING VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITIONS AND IN COURT, LOOK AT THE CAMERA AND THE JURY. MAKE EYE CONTACT.
#26 WHEN TESTIFYING IN A DEPOSITION/TRIAL, IF YOU DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER, SAY YOU DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER
It's a closed world of top litigators. Virtually all big law firms have good to super-good lawyers. All big law firms don't have great litigators. You don't always need a great lawyer, but sometime if you grow geometrically, you will.
Like any other project management, litigation must be managed. Unfortunately, like speech-giving, you become a great litigant by going through a learning curve.
I don't mean you have to get involved in losing efforts (like making bad speeches so after some time you make good speeches) to get in a position to win in court. Large law firms will allow you to get ahead of the learning curve.
The Quantum Leap methodology talks ad nauseam about following your dreams. Life without dreams is like a bird with a broken wing - it can't fly. I wrote this newsletter because sometimes you'll need litigation to follow your dream.
Go out and kick some butt, and don't let conventional wisdom keep you from achieving your dream.
Conventional wisdom says Don't Litigate.
All high-performance people and the great organizations of the last one hundred years did and do litigate as I write this letter.
Don't litigate frivolously - but don't be afraid to either.
I will, as briefly as I can, memorialize the salient points of using litigation as a business tool.
Now before I start, I want it on the record, some 50% of my 30-year track record of litigation has had nothing to do with winning money, i.e., many lawsuits have been over principle, some were to right a heinous wrong such as slanderous remarks made about me; and some were because an entity just needed a good comeuppance and nobody else would carry the flag into battle.
I, like Don Quixote, have fought many a windmill.
As you've heard me speak and write about, when building your 'Dream Team,' you want Big Five accountants and a large national or international firm of lawyers - the best representation you can't afford!
Unlike the success-oriented fees I coach you to use when facilitating transactions, no law firm will litigate initially on this basis.
Perhaps if your case is especially strong, they will do it on a contingency basis. Unfortunately, you will be using, from time-to-time, litigation as a positioning tool and your case may not be something you can seriously leverage.
A year or two ago, being left with a pig-in-a-poke, I had to litigate a case having specious facts at best to support my desired outcome. Fortunately, our (my) apparent lust for litigation was stronger than their desire to fight a hard fight, so a reasonably good settlement was finally arrived at.
Of course, during this process my good lawyers counseled us, advising our case needed to be much stronger, etc. Even with great lawyers, it is their job to tell you the downside risks. Again, what happens is you are often scared from pursuing your case.
Good lawyers win so-so lawsuits. Great lawyers can win lawsuits in which you have little or no chance to win.
Three of my favorite litigators over the years are Steve Susman and Cyrus Marter IV of Susman Godfrey in Houston, Dallas, Los Angeles and Seattle and Tim Harris of Charleston Revich & Williams in Los Angeles. All three have dug me out of some pretty big black holes.
I've dealt with them 10 and 20 years respectively. They are worth every penny they charge!
Our judicial system works, but we grow up being afraid of it. It's way out of our comfort zone so we preclude ourselves from benefitting from it. Normally the cost associated with it keeps us from using it.
In fact, I'm currently embroiled in litigation where the ancillary players to the litigation have rights which are being severely violated. A large group of people could bring great pressure to bear, but they're afraid because of previous bad experiences. They could get what they deserve but aren't pursuing their best interests.
There are lawyers who take on cases for humanitarian reasons, if the case warrants, in business as well, i.e., big major corporations taking advantage of the system because of their size alone.
Why do you want to initiate the lawsuit so you are the plaintiff? As the plaintiff, you pick where and when the lawsuit is fought and probably ultimately adjudicated.
This can be a huge advantage. And secondly, the plaintiff is allowed two closing arguments, meaning you (your lawyer) gets to address the judge and/or jury once and then again after the defendants' closing argument. This can also be very important.
26 Unbreakable Rules of Litigation
#1 CHOOSE YOUR BATTLES
#2 CHOOSE THE VENUE
#3 BE THE PLAINTIFF
#4 HAVE THE BEST REPRESENTATION
#5 LISTEN TO YOUR HEART
#6 DON'T LISTEN TO YOUR SICK STOMACH WHEN YOU'RE OUT OF YOUR COMFORT ZONE
#7 DON'T LISTEN TO RELATIVES, FRIENDS, ET AL
#8 LISTEN TO EXPERIENCED LITIGANTS - LIKE ME!
#9 GENERALLY SPEAKING, DON'T WORRY ABOUT THE COST (THIS IS VERY HARD!)
#10 BIG LAWSUITS ARE BETTER THAN SMALL ONES
#11 ELECT JURY TRIALS, AS OPPOSED TO A JUDGE ONLY
#12 PREPARATION (YOURS) IS EVERYTHING - KNOW THE FACTS
#13 PRACTICE DEPOSITIONS AND TRIALS
#14 IF YOU ARE THINKING OF A BETTER STRATEGY, GET A NEW LAWYER (NOT TRUE IN MY CASE)
#15 NEVER GIVE UP
#16 DON'T BE INTIMIDATED BY THE PROCESS
#17 USE MOCK TRIALS (PRETEND TRIALS YOU DO IN FRONT OF A HIRED JURY)
#18 DRESS SIMPLE AND CONSERVATIVELY IN COURT - NO JEWELRY EXCEPT A WEDDING BAND; WHITE SHIRT, PLAIN TIE AND DARK SUIT FOR MEN AND THE EQUIVALENT FOR WOMEN; SHORT GROOMED HAIR FOR MEN
#19 DON'T LOSE YOUR TEMPER IN COURT - IT'S OKAY TO CRY IF IT'S REAL
#20 HAVE YOUR SPOUSE IN THE FRONT ROW EVERY DAY. CHILDREN ALSO IF POSSIBLE. OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS IN SECOND ROW IS OKAY
#21 NO QUOTES TO THE PRESS OTHER THAN 'WE BELIEVE IN OUR CASE AND THAT IS WHY WE WENT TO COURT'. YOUR WORDS CAN EASILY BE TURNED AROUND.
#22 WHEN YOU BREAK FOR LUNCH OR A RECESS, REMEMBER NEVER TALK IN PUBLIC ABOUT THE CASE - YOU NEVER KNOW WHO MIGHT OVERHEAR
#23 WHEN YOU FIND A LEGAL TEAM THAT WINS, STAY WITH THEM
#24 ALWAYS TELL THE TRUTH, NO MATTER WHAT. THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE.
#25 DURING VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITIONS AND IN COURT, LOOK AT THE CAMERA AND THE JURY. MAKE EYE CONTACT.
#26 WHEN TESTIFYING IN A DEPOSITION/TRIAL, IF YOU DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER, SAY YOU DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER
It's a closed world of top litigators. Virtually all big law firms have good to super-good lawyers. All big law firms don't have great litigators. You don't always need a great lawyer, but sometime if you grow geometrically, you will.
Like any other project management, litigation must be managed. Unfortunately, like speech-giving, you become a great litigant by going through a learning curve.
I don't mean you have to get involved in losing efforts (like making bad speeches so after some time you make good speeches) to get in a position to win in court. Large law firms will allow you to get ahead of the learning curve.
The Quantum Leap methodology talks ad nauseam about following your dreams. Life without dreams is like a bird with a broken wing - it can't fly. I wrote this newsletter because sometimes you'll need litigation to follow your dream.
Go out and kick some butt, and don't let conventional wisdom keep you from achieving your dream.
Conventional wisdom says Don't Litigate.
All high-performance people and the great organizations of the last one hundred years did and do litigate as I write this letter.
Don't litigate frivolously - but don't be afraid to either.
An injured person contacts a company that offers pre-settlement lawsuit funding, sometimes at the suggestion of an attorney. The finance company contacts the lawyer who is handling the case, and obtains information about the case. Based upon that information provided, the loan company estimates the value of the likely eventual settlement or verdict, and offers a cash advance to the injured person based upon that estimate. The fee may be a flat fee, or a monthly fee that accrues each month the loan is outstanding. When the case settles, or the defendant pays after losing in court, the loan and associated fees are paid to the finance company.
These advances are offered as non-recourse funding, which means that an injured person has no obligation to repay if the lawsuit is lost. Similarly, if the ultimate settlement or verdict is smaller than anticipated, the amount that must be repaid never exceeds the amount of the injured person's share of that verdict or settlement. For legal reasons, these advances are not characterized as loans.
Amounts available vary significantly, depending upon the nature of the case and the company involved. Many companies offer pre-settlement funding amounts between $500 and $25,000. A few offer amounts up to $100,000. Fees also vary depending upon the company and the type of case. Some companies will fix the fee for the advance up front. Others will charge a monthly fee for each month between the time the funding is issued and when it is repaid, sometimes as high as 15% per month.
These advances are offered as non-recourse funding, which means that an injured person has no obligation to repay if the lawsuit is lost. Similarly, if the ultimate settlement or verdict is smaller than anticipated, the amount that must be repaid never exceeds the amount of the injured person's share of that verdict or settlement. For legal reasons, these advances are not characterized as loans.
Amounts available vary significantly, depending upon the nature of the case and the company involved. Many companies offer pre-settlement funding amounts between $500 and $25,000. A few offer amounts up to $100,000. Fees also vary depending upon the company and the type of case. Some companies will fix the fee for the advance up front. Others will charge a monthly fee for each month between the time the funding is issued and when it is repaid, sometimes as high as 15% per month.
Lawsuit Loans which are also known as pre settlement cash advances allow a financially strapped plaintiff to access a portion of their future legal settlement to pay today’s necessary living expenses. Personal Injury and worker compensation lawsuits can take years to resolve and large insurance companies have the financial strength to legally delay the process which can financial ruin an injured claimant who is looking for a fair settlement offer.
Companies like Global Financial (http://www.glofin.com) offer cash advances against all types of Personal Injury & Worker Compensation claims. It works like this: Global Financial will review the merits of an applicant’s legal claim and determine the chance & size of a financial recovery. They then offer the claimant a small percentage of the total value of their claim in return for an assignment of a portion of the potential future proceeds in the claim. If there is no financial recovery from the claim then the funding company receives nothing. This makes lawsuit loans very risky and actually a venture capital investment rather than an actual loan as the names suggests.
The fees charge by lawsuit loan companies can vary dramatically but it is usually best to stick with the larger companies, like Global Financial (http://www.glofin.com) because they work on larger volumes and lower pricing. Usually a funding company will charge either a monthly fee or a flat fee depending on the risk associate with the claim.
It is my personal opinion that a claimant should ask themselves one question before applying for a cash advance against their pending claim. Will the advance that I receive pay immediate and necessary living expense? If the answer is yes then you should accept a cash advance and continue with your legal claim. If the answer is no then it might be wise to hold off and wait before applying for a lawsuit loan or cash advance against your pending claim. In addition, a lawsuit loan may be a very important tool when the defendant’s insurance carrier decides to make a low ball offer for settlement in the claim. You can then use a lawsuit loan as a financial tool to say no to the low ball offer and have the financial strength to wait for a higher and fairer settlement.
Lawsuit Loans have been trademarked by Global Financial as "Lawsuit Insurance" because they offer insurance like protection to plaintiffs in the event that their claim is unsuccessful. If a plaintiff takes a cash advance against their pending legal claim and their claim is unsuccessful then they get to keep the money that was advanced to them. Thus the cash advance guarantees that their claim will be financially successful either by way of the cash advance or by way of settlement or judgment.
Companies like Global Financial (http://www.glofin.com) offer cash advances against all types of Personal Injury & Worker Compensation claims. It works like this: Global Financial will review the merits of an applicant’s legal claim and determine the chance & size of a financial recovery. They then offer the claimant a small percentage of the total value of their claim in return for an assignment of a portion of the potential future proceeds in the claim. If there is no financial recovery from the claim then the funding company receives nothing. This makes lawsuit loans very risky and actually a venture capital investment rather than an actual loan as the names suggests.
The fees charge by lawsuit loan companies can vary dramatically but it is usually best to stick with the larger companies, like Global Financial (http://www.glofin.com) because they work on larger volumes and lower pricing. Usually a funding company will charge either a monthly fee or a flat fee depending on the risk associate with the claim.
It is my personal opinion that a claimant should ask themselves one question before applying for a cash advance against their pending claim. Will the advance that I receive pay immediate and necessary living expense? If the answer is yes then you should accept a cash advance and continue with your legal claim. If the answer is no then it might be wise to hold off and wait before applying for a lawsuit loan or cash advance against your pending claim. In addition, a lawsuit loan may be a very important tool when the defendant’s insurance carrier decides to make a low ball offer for settlement in the claim. You can then use a lawsuit loan as a financial tool to say no to the low ball offer and have the financial strength to wait for a higher and fairer settlement.
Lawsuit Loans have been trademarked by Global Financial as "Lawsuit Insurance" because they offer insurance like protection to plaintiffs in the event that their claim is unsuccessful. If a plaintiff takes a cash advance against their pending legal claim and their claim is unsuccessful then they get to keep the money that was advanced to them. Thus the cash advance guarantees that their claim will be financially successful either by way of the cash advance or by way of settlement or judgment.
Daniel Jaffe's law practice is devoted to the defense of those accused of DUI and related charges in Arizona. He is passionate about his clients, the law, and his practice. Mr. Jaffe will not agree to take your DUI case without first giving you a realistic assessment of the merits and defenses.
Mr. Jaffe is an experienced DUI and Criminal Defense Lawyer. His background covers DUI law, science, courtroom and trial technique. In his experience, many officers do not follow proper field sobriety test procedure, and make concessions when confronted with the proper way of administering and scoring the tests. Many people plead guilty prematurely based on a failed breath or blood test. Mr. Jaffe knows that this is often a grave mistake, as there is always a chance to have the chemical evidence suppressed.
Mr. Jaffe keeps his DUI defense practice small by choice. By accepting fewer clients he is able to give each client the attention and focus necessary to most effectively defend against a DUI charge.
When appropriate, Mr. Jaffe calls on a network of experts who can help clarify issues that permeate various aspects of a DUI charge.
Mr. Jaffe is a member of the State Bar Of Arizona, Arizona Attorneys For Criminal Justice, Arizona Trial Lawyers' Association, the American Bar Association, the Arizona Bar Trial Practice Section, the State Bar Of Arizona Criminal Justice Section, the ABA Criminal Justice Section, and is also admitted to practice law in Washington State. He regularly attends continuing legal education seminars focusing on DUI defense, and other aspects of criminal litigation.
Mr. Jaffe is personable and approachable, and is happy to provide a no-obligation initial consultation to those who are not already represented by an attorney and are serious about retaining private counsel so that you can get to know him before making your choice of which DUI attorney to hire.
Daniel Jaffe knows what it takes to win a DUI case. He knows the real stress, uncertainty, fear and pain that come with a DUI charge. He knows that the political climate disfavors those accused of DUI. He knows that every case involves a fight, and he fights hard for each client, every day.
phoenix criminal lawyer, criminal lawyer phoenix
Mr. Jaffe is an experienced DUI and Criminal Defense Lawyer. His background covers DUI law, science, courtroom and trial technique. In his experience, many officers do not follow proper field sobriety test procedure, and make concessions when confronted with the proper way of administering and scoring the tests. Many people plead guilty prematurely based on a failed breath or blood test. Mr. Jaffe knows that this is often a grave mistake, as there is always a chance to have the chemical evidence suppressed.
Mr. Jaffe keeps his DUI defense practice small by choice. By accepting fewer clients he is able to give each client the attention and focus necessary to most effectively defend against a DUI charge.
When appropriate, Mr. Jaffe calls on a network of experts who can help clarify issues that permeate various aspects of a DUI charge.
Mr. Jaffe is a member of the State Bar Of Arizona, Arizona Attorneys For Criminal Justice, Arizona Trial Lawyers' Association, the American Bar Association, the Arizona Bar Trial Practice Section, the State Bar Of Arizona Criminal Justice Section, the ABA Criminal Justice Section, and is also admitted to practice law in Washington State. He regularly attends continuing legal education seminars focusing on DUI defense, and other aspects of criminal litigation.
Mr. Jaffe is personable and approachable, and is happy to provide a no-obligation initial consultation to those who are not already represented by an attorney and are serious about retaining private counsel so that you can get to know him before making your choice of which DUI attorney to hire.
Daniel Jaffe knows what it takes to win a DUI case. He knows the real stress, uncertainty, fear and pain that come with a DUI charge. He knows that the political climate disfavors those accused of DUI. He knows that every case involves a fight, and he fights hard for each client, every day.
phoenix criminal lawyer, criminal lawyer phoenix
Criminal Lawyer Phoenix Article of the Day
FTC Concludes Do Not Email List A Bad Idea
I appreciate the FTC's talk on spam: it's straightfoward, honest, and absent any spin. The FTC knows it will carry a lot of burden in tracking down and prosecuting spammers. It also knows, as its director has publicly stated, that the do-not-email list idea is rather useless in the battle against spam. Why? Because spammers conceal their identities. And if you can't figure out who the spammer is, you certainly can't slap them with a fine for not using the do-not-email list.
Kinda seems easy to understand, doesn't it? With or without the do-not-email list idea, and even aided by recent federal legislation, fighting spam is going to be a real pain, even when you've got the powers of the FTC backing you up. What the FTC needs is to do is make an example of some individual or business caught violating the accepted rules of permission email marketing. They need to catch someone and throw the book at them.
The public will support it, too, because the anti-spam rhetoric has grown to fever pitch (aided by my own feverish cries, I admit), to the point where a public caning of a couple of spammers seems rather justified. The first spammer to get nailed by the FTC is going to sorely wish they had taken up another line of business altogether.
But if the sound of prison bars slamming down on the first few spammers is loud enough, then perhaps the other spammers will get the message. Analysis: Even with strong legislation, enforcing anti-spam legislation presents a tremendous hurdle. Expect the FTC to set an example in their very first case by coming down hard on some unsuspecting spammer.
Overview:
The Federal Trade Commission told legislators yesterday that a federal spam law should first aim to solve the problem of anonymity for mass e-mailers. In testimony before the House of Representatives, the FTC said it has brought 55 spam cases, and the key to all of them has been establishing the identity of the defendants. "The commission's experience shows that the primary law enforcement challenges are to identify and locate the targeted spammer," said J. Howard Beales III, director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection, in testimony to the Small Business Committee. Hopes dimmed from earlier in the week that House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-IL, would quickly bring the Senate bill to the floor for a vote.
FTC Concludes Do Not Email List A Bad Idea
I appreciate the FTC's talk on spam: it's straightfoward, honest, and absent any spin. The FTC knows it will carry a lot of burden in tracking down and prosecuting spammers. It also knows, as its director has publicly stated, that the do-not-email list idea is rather useless in the battle against spam. Why? Because spammers conceal their identities. And if you can't figure out who the spammer is, you certainly can't slap them with a fine for not using the do-not-email list.
Kinda seems easy to understand, doesn't it? With or without the do-not-email list idea, and even aided by recent federal legislation, fighting spam is going to be a real pain, even when you've got the powers of the FTC backing you up. What the FTC needs is to do is make an example of some individual or business caught violating the accepted rules of permission email marketing. They need to catch someone and throw the book at them.
The public will support it, too, because the anti-spam rhetoric has grown to fever pitch (aided by my own feverish cries, I admit), to the point where a public caning of a couple of spammers seems rather justified. The first spammer to get nailed by the FTC is going to sorely wish they had taken up another line of business altogether.
But if the sound of prison bars slamming down on the first few spammers is loud enough, then perhaps the other spammers will get the message. Analysis: Even with strong legislation, enforcing anti-spam legislation presents a tremendous hurdle. Expect the FTC to set an example in their very first case by coming down hard on some unsuspecting spammer.
Overview:
The Federal Trade Commission told legislators yesterday that a federal spam law should first aim to solve the problem of anonymity for mass e-mailers. In testimony before the House of Representatives, the FTC said it has brought 55 spam cases, and the key to all of them has been establishing the identity of the defendants. "The commission's experience shows that the primary law enforcement challenges are to identify and locate the targeted spammer," said J. Howard Beales III, director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection, in testimony to the Small Business Committee. Hopes dimmed from earlier in the week that House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-IL, would quickly bring the Senate bill to the floor for a vote.
Selecting a divorce lawyer to handle your family law case is a very important decision. The following are a few important criteria to help in finding the right divorce lawyer.
Experience and Focus
Any divorce lawyer you consider should have substantial experience in handling divorce cases in your location. An experienced divorce lawyer will know the tendencies of the various judges in your jurisdiction and should be able to use this knowledge to your advantage. Additionally, that lawyer should practice primarily in the field of divorce law. Often people will hire a lawyer who practices primarily in some other area, thinking that any lawyer will do. However, divorce law is a very specialized field that requires particular skills and experience in order to have a likelihood of reaching a successful conclusion.
Past Client Testimonials
Perhaps the best way to decide which divorce lawyer to use for your divorce case is to find out what former clients have to say about that lawyer. While divorce is never an enjoyable process, some divorce lawyers have more success at satisfying their clients than others. If you do not know someone who has been a client of that particular divorce lawyer, you should consider asking the lawyer for a list of clients that you can contact who can describe their experience with the lawyer. While client confidentiality is important, any good experienced divorce lawyer should have at least a few former clients who are willing to vouch for him or her.
Accessible
When a client becomes dissatisfied with a divorce lawyer, one of the most common complaints is that they were unable to communicate with the lawyer. It is very important that your divorce lawyer be accessible and prompt in responding to your phone calls, emails, and requests for meetings. While you can ask the divorce lawyer about their office policy, this is another area where you can best evaluate the divorce lawyer by hearing what former clients have to say.
If a former client of the lawyer tells you that they found it very difficult to contact the attorney, or that the lawyer either did not return calls or respond to emails or would take several days to do so, you should definitely avoid that lawyer. Divorce is an unpleasant and frustrating process under the best of circumstances. If you are unable to reach your divorce attorney, or at least someone on his or her staff, the frustration level can increase exponentially.
Fees
When you make your initial appointment with the divorce attorney, you should inquire about a consultation fee. Some lawyers do brief initial consultations for free, although most experienced divorce lawyers will charge between $100.00 and $200.00 as a consultation fee, or will charge their normal hourly rate.
For example, I charge a flat $100.00 consultation fee with no additional hourly charges, regardless of the length of the meeting. Essentially, the consultation fee is to "weed out" those people who are not serious about the possibility of hiring me. Given that my normal hourly rate is $200.00/hour and the usual typical consultation takes about 90 minutes, the charge for my consultation is significantly discounted. Therefore, you shouldn't let a consultation fee scare you away from interviewing a particular lawyer.
During the consultation it is vitally important that you have a candid discussion with the prospective divorce lawyer about fees and what you can expect. Typically, an experienced divorce lawyer will require the payment of a substantial retainer up front, against which that lawyer's hourly rate and expenses will be charged. You should find out what that lawyer's hourly rate is, what the up front retainer will be, whether any portion of the retainer is refundable if it is not exhausted, and how often you can expect to receive invoices that detail their hourly charges and expenses. You also will want to know how detailed the invoices are. Once again, this is another area where you can get excellent information from those people who have been clients of that divorce lawyer.
Comfortable
While all the above issues are important, there is one final question you should ask yourself before hiring a divorce lawyer. Are you comfortable with that lawyer and are you confident in his or her abilities? If the answer is anything other than a resounding "yes," you should keep looking. Your case is too important to entrust to someone who does not inspire your confidence.
For more information go to http://www.houstondivorce.com
Experience and Focus
Any divorce lawyer you consider should have substantial experience in handling divorce cases in your location. An experienced divorce lawyer will know the tendencies of the various judges in your jurisdiction and should be able to use this knowledge to your advantage. Additionally, that lawyer should practice primarily in the field of divorce law. Often people will hire a lawyer who practices primarily in some other area, thinking that any lawyer will do. However, divorce law is a very specialized field that requires particular skills and experience in order to have a likelihood of reaching a successful conclusion.
Past Client Testimonials
Perhaps the best way to decide which divorce lawyer to use for your divorce case is to find out what former clients have to say about that lawyer. While divorce is never an enjoyable process, some divorce lawyers have more success at satisfying their clients than others. If you do not know someone who has been a client of that particular divorce lawyer, you should consider asking the lawyer for a list of clients that you can contact who can describe their experience with the lawyer. While client confidentiality is important, any good experienced divorce lawyer should have at least a few former clients who are willing to vouch for him or her.
Accessible
When a client becomes dissatisfied with a divorce lawyer, one of the most common complaints is that they were unable to communicate with the lawyer. It is very important that your divorce lawyer be accessible and prompt in responding to your phone calls, emails, and requests for meetings. While you can ask the divorce lawyer about their office policy, this is another area where you can best evaluate the divorce lawyer by hearing what former clients have to say.
If a former client of the lawyer tells you that they found it very difficult to contact the attorney, or that the lawyer either did not return calls or respond to emails or would take several days to do so, you should definitely avoid that lawyer. Divorce is an unpleasant and frustrating process under the best of circumstances. If you are unable to reach your divorce attorney, or at least someone on his or her staff, the frustration level can increase exponentially.
Fees
When you make your initial appointment with the divorce attorney, you should inquire about a consultation fee. Some lawyers do brief initial consultations for free, although most experienced divorce lawyers will charge between $100.00 and $200.00 as a consultation fee, or will charge their normal hourly rate.
For example, I charge a flat $100.00 consultation fee with no additional hourly charges, regardless of the length of the meeting. Essentially, the consultation fee is to "weed out" those people who are not serious about the possibility of hiring me. Given that my normal hourly rate is $200.00/hour and the usual typical consultation takes about 90 minutes, the charge for my consultation is significantly discounted. Therefore, you shouldn't let a consultation fee scare you away from interviewing a particular lawyer.
During the consultation it is vitally important that you have a candid discussion with the prospective divorce lawyer about fees and what you can expect. Typically, an experienced divorce lawyer will require the payment of a substantial retainer up front, against which that lawyer's hourly rate and expenses will be charged. You should find out what that lawyer's hourly rate is, what the up front retainer will be, whether any portion of the retainer is refundable if it is not exhausted, and how often you can expect to receive invoices that detail their hourly charges and expenses. You also will want to know how detailed the invoices are. Once again, this is another area where you can get excellent information from those people who have been clients of that divorce lawyer.
Comfortable
While all the above issues are important, there is one final question you should ask yourself before hiring a divorce lawyer. Are you comfortable with that lawyer and are you confident in his or her abilities? If the answer is anything other than a resounding "yes," you should keep looking. Your case is too important to entrust to someone who does not inspire your confidence.
For more information go to http://www.houstondivorce.com