The Joel Bieber Firm

Call 1-800-451-6393

Archive for trial

Nazi Dad Fights for Visitation

Tuesday, June 4th, 2013

     There are just some stories that make me question the believability. I guess that’s why they call it news. This one comes from a New Jersey Family Court. (NBC10 Philadelphia)   

     Dressed in a Nazi uniform, Heath Campbell marched into a New Jersey courthouse to petition a Judge for the right to see his youngest son. This was the same son who was taken from him at birth. The New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services said that they took the boy because of previous violence in the home. 

     News coverage is no stranger to Campbell. In 2008, a store refused to write the name of his son on a birthday cake. His 3-year-old, Adolf Hitler Campbell, would make the news with that story. At that time,  it was also accurately reported that he had named his other children  with Nazi themes: JoyceLynn Aryan Nation Campbell and Honzlynn Jeannie Campbell.

     After the news story ran about the birthday cake incident, Social Services received a tip about problems in the home. An investigation began, and ended with a judge removing the children from the Campbell home and placing them in foster care.

     Now, Campbell just wants to see his son. So, he got all dressed up and headed to court for the hearing.Nazi+Dad+in+Court

     When the reporter asked Campbell whether he thought that his dress would influence the Judge, Campbell replied, “If they’re good judges and they’re good people, they’ll look within, not what’s on the outside”.

     Campbell denies that he ever abused any of his children. He believes that he is being targeted because of his beliefs and that he is a Nazi. He added, “I’m going to tell the judge, I love my children. I wanna be a father, let me be it.”

     In June 2012, a New Jersey Superior Court had denied the couple’s appeal to return the children to the Campbell home. “I’m gonna keep fightin’, I don’t care if it kills me. I love ‘em.” Yep… he loves ‘em. 

     For pic o’ day from Dennis,  I guess this one goes under the category of “always working!”.

always working

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!

Comments (1)

The Divorce Decree Charmer

Tuesday, May 21st, 2013

     This is one of those news stories where I barely know where to start. Of course, I start. I do so after receiving a reminder about yesterday’s blog that “you could have made 4 blogs out of that one”. In other words… it was way too long!

     So, let’s head straight for the bacon.Bacon

      To South Carolina and a story from the “SummervillePatch“ .

     A Summerville man has been charged with one count of forgery unrelated to money. He wanted to please his girlfriend. So, he came up with a unique idea. He sent her a copy of his divorce decree. Of course, the blog does not stop there.

        ”Mr Summerville” was not divorced. Instead, he made a fake divorce decree and forged his wife’s signature.  He allegedly used the divorce decree from his first marriage; altered it to fit the current wife complete with wife’s fake signature and then mailed it to his girlfriend. 

     Now, he faces a misdemeanor charge for the forgery of a court document that brings a potential prison and a fine. Maybe flowers or a 6 foot bear would have been better to send. OK, maybe not the bear.

     And now to my favorite part… pic o:

Tip over

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!

Comments Comments Off

What is Virginia’s Statute of Limitations?

Wednesday, May 15th, 2013

     Who is Limitations and why is there a statute named that ? ice cream

     Yes, that’s probably the kind of question that I would have asked when I was a kid. For the same reason that I thought that the song  we were singing in church was, “Bringing in the sheeps… we shall Columbus, Georgia”,  instead of “Bringing in the Sheaves… We shall come rejoicing”.  That’s what happens when you sing what you hear, when you can’t yet read. Like Statute of Limitations, not statue of limitations.

     Of course, I really am doing a round about discussion of the question, “How long do I have to bring a lawsuit”? Well, below is a quick chart on some civil actions, provided from Lawyers.com.  Separately, ”When does the statute start to run” is a question that is sometimes argued to a Judge. 

      Still, even with the following chart, it still can be a bit confusing. kinda like:confusion chart 

Assault and Battery, 2 years

Va. Code § 8.01-243(A)

Contract (in writing), 5 years

Va. Code § 8.01-246(2)

Contract (oral or not in writing), 3 years

Va. Code § 8.01-246(4)

False Imprisonment, 2 years

Va. Code § 8.01-243(A)

Fraud, 2 years

Va. Code § 8.01-243(A)

Enforcing Court Judgments, 20 years

Va. Code § 8.01-251        

Legal Malpractice, 3 or 5 years (Depending on the type of contract or agreement)

Va. Code § 8.01-246(2) or (4)

Libel, 1 year

Va. Code § 8.01.247.1

Medical Malpractice, 2 and up to 10 years (Depending on the type of malpractice and when it’s “discovered”)    

Va. Code § 8.01-243(A) and (C)

Personal Injury, 2 years

Va. Code § 8.01-243(A)

Product Liability, 2 years

Va. Code § 8.01-243(A) and (B)

Property Damage, 5 years

Va. Code § 8.01-243(B)

Slander, 1 year

Va. Code § 8.01.247.1

Trespass, 5 years

Va. Code § 8.01-243(B)

Wrongful Death, 2 years

     So for pic o’ day, just in case you aren’t interested in a chart, how about a little lawsuit adversity that compares to… hand meets fist? I know… it’s getting crazy!

hand meet fist

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!

The Video Deposition

Monday, May 13th, 2013

     Do you remember this Schwab investment TV advertisement? It is comparing a bad stock company to Schwab by portraying some boiler room stock-selling company in a unfavorable way. Their manager is telling all the sales people to get on the phone and pitch some crummy stock to customers by “let’s go out there and put some lipstick on that pig”.lipstick pig

     When I watch it, it still makes me laugh. It also reminds me a little bit about what sometimes happens in some of our cases. A thought on the evidence.  (Practice Alert)  I am going to tell you a blog secret between you and me!  Defense lawyers… your eyes are getting very sleepy. You better go catch a nap.   

     This involves why we video the depositions of the opposing party (defendant) on most of our cases. I am not insinuating that the other side is a pig. Just whether a jury perceives someone trying to be something that they are not. The defense attorney making their client get all  ”dressed up for court”. 

     This past week, I drove to Wytheville, Virginia, for my scheduled depositions. I was taking the defendant’s and the opposing attorney was questioning my client.  We also had the deputy who had investigated this 2010 crash. Because the defense attorney’s office was about 50 miles from the county, we agreed to have the depositions at the courthouse where the trial is scheduled.

     I showed up a little early so I could also get a look at the courtroom. Then, I was shown back to the law library where the depositions were scheduled. Soon, my client, the court reporter and videographer arrived. I had noticed the deposition for video and court reporter. The defense deposition notice was for transcription by the court reporter without any video.

     The defendant arrived before his lawyer. He was dressed in a T-shirt and jeans. Like he would normally dress everyday. Soon, his lawyer arrived. The depositions proceeded. After I had completed the first deposition, the videographer packed up and left.   

     Generally speaking, I think that people should basically dress comfortably. My grandfather was a farmer. He would always dress the way he wanted to… in overalls like a farmer. 

      In court cases, I believe that clients should basically dress in something that they normally and comfortably wear and not wear something that they would normally never wear. I think that some lawyers believe that their clients should always be dressed in their Sunday best; and if they don’t own dress clothes, they should buy some. To me, I think people act differently in clothes that they never wear.

    That takes me to why I like to videotape depositions.  In many cases, I will show the video deposition during trial. The jury usually begins watching the deposition. Then, I will sometimes notice when they look over at the defense table where the defendant is now all dressed up. Consciously or unconsciously, I think that it sends the message that the opposing party is trying to project something that they are not.

     After one trial, I even had a juror come up to me with a smile and comment on how “dressed up” the opposing party came for trial. Maybe it’s just my crazy thinking. I also think that videotaping keeps everyone more alert during the deposition and even captures the tone and pauses of the questions and answers.

     As to last week’s deposition,, it will be interesting to see if the opposing party shows up in his usual clothing or if the defense lawyer will decide to make him get “all dressed up”. 

     Hopefully, the defendant will do something to make the jury ask “why”. Then, maybe that will carry over on to the evidence. In every trial there is a truth-giver and someone who is perceived as less. I think being real about appearance might be part of that. There has to be a reason that “a picture is worth a thousand words”.  What do you think?

     For pic o’ day, I stayed with blame and evidence!!

blame

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!

A Trial Report

Wednesday, May 8th, 2013

     Let me tell you the story about my jury trial last week. Usually, I don’t mention trial results because the bar, rightfully so; wants lawyers to always include disclaimers that each case is different and no result means a guarantee for another case. This result shows why each case is different.

     Kim Raab and I showed up to Richmond Circuit Court last week for a trial on a rear-end impact. Admittedly, it was a low impact case. In fact, the defense had blown up a picture of our car that was two-foot by three-foot big. Get the picture? The question was whether we could prove that our client’s upcoming back surgery resulted from this impact.

     The jury was instructed that the defendant was only responsible for the injuries (harms) that she had caused. An aggravation of a preexisting injury meant that the defendant could be responsible for only the aggravation.

     The first day of trial (Thursday), the judge kept going until about 8:45 p.m. The jury was escorted to their cars. I had packed up my things and was headed to my car. (I am about to digress!) When I got there… I had a flat tire. I said to myself, “Self, seriously?”. I looked around and realized that no one was in the garage. Plus, you had to basically drive a special way to get out of the lot. No AAA wrecker would be able to get to me.

     I know, you are wondering if I changed the tire myself. Well, I must be honest… No. My excuse is that it takes some kind of special tool. The reality is…well, you know the reality. So, I drove very slowly to a nearby hotel and got the tire changed. Now, back to the trial story! Isn’t that what they call “part and parcel”?

     After all the evidence was in. After all closings were done and jury instructions were read to the jury. They retired to deliberate and I went to sit down outside the courtroom, and wait.

     After about ninety minutes, I heard the buzzer and thought that we had a jury verdict. Then, the bailiff said that the jury had sent out questions and we were to go to the judge’s chambers. (office). The judge then read from a yellow piece of paper that the jury had sent out. The paper had a question that indicated that a juror had spoken to someone about the case that was not part of the jury. This, against the judge’s specific instructions.

     Since this is becoming an epistle, let me cut to the end. When the judge called the jury out to inquire about the question, he concluded that a juror had potentially not followed his instructions. The judge declared a mistrial. That means… we have to reset it for trial and try it all over again in front of a new jury. Mistrial… it is the second worst word that I could hear. Well, maybe the third. Those words? The word “defense” in front of verdict; and the word “Denied” on a judge’s ruling of importance.

     A trial report with nothing to report. No result. Only part… no parcel.

     Pic o’ day reminds that some things just don’t make sense:

turning

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!

Categories : Auto Accidents
Comments Comments Off

A Claim for Insomnia

Tuesday, May 7th, 2013

     From 2004 through 2007, attorney Victoria Anderson worked for Discovery Communications. She was commended for her strong technical, legal and drafting skills. Her annual reviews did note that she needed to improve her organizational and interpersonal skills. She needed to do better in getting along with others.

     Acccording to an article in ”Virginia Lawyers Weekly” (Deborah Elkins), in October of 2006, Anderson took a leave of absence from her employer under the Family and Medical Leave Act. She was having difficulty sleeping. 

     Testing ruled out sleep apnea. Her physicians determined that she was suffering from fatique, sleep deprivation and insomnia and prescribed her Ambien, to help her sleep. Anderson then returned to her job in November. She came with a doctor’s note that advised that her daily work schedule had to be limited to eight hours.  After two follow-up doctor appointments, in December she was then released without any work restrictions.

     When Anderson returned to work, she advised her employers that she could only work between the hours of 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Her employers advised that they needed her to work a full 40-hour work week because their core business was during the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

     In December of 2007, Her employer fired Anderson, claiming that she had entered inaccurate time entries for her work; refused to accept a performance plan, and had a ”combative, difficult, and manipulative” nature.

     Anderson sued her employer. The case was styled Anderson v. Discovery Communications LLC.  Her lawsuit was based on her claimed rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act.  

     The Federal Court judge granted summary judgment for the employer. She appealed to the 4th Circuit. The 4th Circuit upheld the lower court’s dismissal; and the appellate panel, in an unpublished opinion, ruled that “sleep patterns vary between individuals and even during a person’s lifetime. On this record, Anderson simply failed to present evidence creating a genuine issue of material fact as to whether she was ‘substantially impaired’ in December 2006, as a result of her insomnia”.

    Separately, Anderson had also brought an action for retaliation and an interference claim. That also was dismissed because she remained employed and was given full benefits until her termination. According to the Court, the employer had a legitimate reason to terminate her; based on her untrustworthiness in completing time sheets and poor communication skills.

     In simple terms the Court was saying… The End.

     And this pic o’ day just seemed topical!

a nap

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!

Courtroom of Narnia

Tuesday, April 16th, 2013

      “The Chronicles of Narnia” is a series of childrens’ books that were written by C.S. Lewis. Lewis wrote the books to illustrate stories from the Bible. In reading the stories, I also see some analogies to the law,  because the stories deal with right and wrong.

     In one scene, talking beavers (imagine that) are describing Aslan the Lion to three newcomers, who have arrived to the realm of Narnia. In anticipation of meeting Aslan, previously described throughout the story as both fierce and loving, the newcomers ask questions that reveal their fears.

     “Oh!” said Susan, “I’d thought he was a man. Is he quite safe? I shall feel rather nervous about meeting a lion.”

     “That you will, dearie, and no mistake,” said Mrs. Beaver, “if there’s anyone who can appear before Aslan without their knees knocking, they’re either braver than most or else just silly.”

     “Then he isn’t safe?” asked Lucy. “Safe?” said Mr. Beaver, “Don’t you hear what Mrs. Beaver tells you? Who said anything about safe? ‘Course he isn’t safe. But he’s good. He’s the King, I tell you.”

     In the story, after the three had met the King, Lucy notes that the Lion’s paws can be soft or terrible. Soft as velvet when the claws are in, or sharp as knives with the claws extended.

      Yes, this is a childrens’ story. Still it also reminds me of the courtroom. Almost everyone goes to court with some fear,  including jurors. The courtroom can be scary for criminals because that is where sentencing takes place. The courtroom is a place of accountability.   

     In Civil cases, the courtroom can also be a place where a person can go with their claim. A place where ”fixing” occurs. Juries can fix, help or make up for harms that have been caused. 

     And for pic o’ day, I stick with a bit of funny from my Mom:  

 

Ole

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!

Comments Comments Off

Punxsutawney Phil Faces Court

Monday, March 25th, 2013

     Well, we now know why Bill Murray was trying to warn Punxsutawney Phil not to “Drive Angry” in the movie “Groundhog Day”.Bill Murray

     It’s now all over the news. Phil’s future was to include the Ohio Court System.

Phil's Lawsuit 

      CNN is reporting that a prosecutor from Ohio is tired of Punxsutawney Phil lying to the public, and he has decided to do something about it. He has filed a criminal “indictment” against the famed groundhog. He claims that when he woke up on the first day of spring, “the wind was blowing, the snow was flying, the temperatures were falling, and I said ‘Punxsutawney, you let us down.’”

     To backtrack with a little history, Phil had emerged from his burrow at Gobbler’s Knob on February 2, to predict whether spring would come early this year; or whether winter would linger. If he sees his shadow, it means that more cold is on the way… no shadow, then spring is right around the corner.

     This year, Phil got it wrong. Supposedly, he did not see his shadow. Now, Gmoser is convinced that Phil intentionally misled the nation. The indictment reads, “Punxsutawney Phil did purposely and with prior calculation and design, cause people to believe that Spring would come early.” The Prosecutor jokingly requests the death penalty.lying Phil

     Already, there has been a good defense mounted for Phil. First, his handlers point to the fact that there was a day since that prediction, when the temperature was up over 60 and that should count as an early spring.

     Then, they acknowledge that Phil ”speaks” to “the Groundhog President in Groundhogese”, and maybe the President just didn’t hear Phil correctly. Finally, they add that Phil’s current existence is that “He’s already serving a life sentence behind bars.”

     When I read Phil’s defenses, it made me think that he was being represented by a good insurance defense lawyer!

     For pic o’ day, I thought we’d reach back for one, since Phil needs a Superhero about now:

Super Hero

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!

Comments (6)

Truth About False Reality Shows

Monday, March 18th, 2013

Dog tired

 

     Here we go… I am dog tired of reality shows. (I know, I just wanted to use that picture!) Now, we are learning more about one show from some divorce proceeding court documents, and what we are learning is telling us that reality is really, “let’s do it again for the cameras”.

     Lawsuits tend to bring out the truth when people are answering questions under oath. That’s what is happening in the Kim Kardashian/Kris Humphries divorce proceedings.

     The wonderful world of romance was initally played out on “Keeping up with the Kardashians”.  Now, through divorce proceedings and deposition transcripts, the testimony is telling how much of the show is really scripted. (Life & Style Weekly)  Here’s what we learned about the lack of reality in this reality show. 

  1. When we saw Humphries propose to Kim K a few years back and he spelled out WILL YOU MARRY ME  on her bed in rose petals; we were actually watching the second take. According to deposition testimony, the scene was re-shot after Kim was not satisfied with the scene or proposal. Apparently, she was bothered with how she reacted to the proposal when on camera, “she had a bad reaction or something and she was embarrassed.”
  2. Another instance of non-reality is  a scene involving Kim and her mother Kris Jenner. They were discussing Kim’s marital problems. We now know that the scene was actually taped after Kim filed for divorce from Humphries in October 2011. By then… difficulties were already down the track.
  3. Another emotion that is not so emotional, according to court documents, is that the characters had tears because of a cosmetic tool known as the “tear stick“. 
  4. In another episode, the mother was angry to learn that there had been a party thrown in her motel room while she was gone. In fact, she was in the room during the shooting of the party. Not such a surprise after all!

       According to the article, Kim Kardashian has attempted to resolve the divorce action of Humphries by offering him an estimated 10 million payoff. Instead, he refuses and is asking for more of her accumulated net worth that is a reported 35 million. Supposedly, under the settlement terms, all matters of the marriage are to be confidential. Humphries apparently believes that he stands to earn a whole lot more with a tell-all book.     

     Maybe this will be the beginning of the end of all of these reality programs. Would people watch, still knowing that reality was not real? Do people watch pro wresting? 

     For pic o’ day we are reminded that reality shows have nothing over real life:

airport reality

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!

Comments (6)

Beat Virginia’s Life Expectancy?

Monday, March 4th, 2013

     In every injury case that we take to trial, we introduce the life expectancy chart (Virginia Code 8.01-419) for the jury to consider when there is evidence of a permanent injury. It also makes me scan the life chart to see how long the law says that I am expected to live.

     According to the chart, at the start, women live to about 80 and men to about 75. The jury instruction tells the jury to give consideration for the rest of that person’s expected life span life. Of course, many clients lean over and whisper to me, “I’m going to beat that!”.

     I have blogged on this before because I am fascinated by the prediction of the length of life. That’s also why I  have blogged on some who have lived long lives, when they discuss their reasons for long life. I am also interested in articles that discuss how to lengthen your life.  

     The March edition of “Parade Magazine” has an article titled “Do You Have a Longevity Personality?” It postulates that having certain emotional traits or even tweaking your behavior can add years to your life. Here are the three characteristics that the article suggests to boost your life expectancy:

     1. Your glass is half full. A study of those over the age of 97.6 consistently found that they were more optimistic and easygoing than the general population. The article recommends that you daily write down things for which you are thankful and it will help to push away the troubles that create negativity.

     2. You’re everyone’s pal. According to a study by Brigham Young University, having strong social relationships can raise survival rates by more than 50%.  It doesn’t mean that you have to be a social butterfly. You can do simple things like invite friends to lunch or join a book club.

     3. You’re never late. Being detail oriented and responsible is consistently associated with longegivity. Making and using to-do lists.

     Staying positive, friendly and organized makes sense,  but coming from a health magazine also gives credence that they really may be a good life-long idea. I just checked the life expectancy chart. Guess what?  I think that it said that I should be writing this blog another 88 years. Let’s all stick together!

     For pic o’ day, here is a cat’s way of keeping the mailman hopping!

cat in mailbox

 

Please click the Facebook “Share” button below this post to let others know you enjoyed reading it. Thanks!