Representative Warren Chisum of Pampa, Texas has introduced a bill (HB 480) that would require the taking of a ten (10) hour course on “conflict management, communication skills and foregiveness skills,” to all parents seeking a divorce. The purpose of the course is to facilitate “marriage restoration.” Thus, the requirement only applies when the divorce is upon the “no fault” or “irreconcilable differences” portion of the statute, and not (for example) adultery or other grounds for divorce. Also, significantly, there is a provision which exempts alleged victims of domestic violence.
As I understand the bill, the person filing the divorce action (or “Petitioner”) would be required to show evidence of having completed the course at the time the Petition is filed (with a certificate attached to the Petition). If the course was not taken, then the divorce case would be dismissed. The non-filing spouse (or “Respondent”) would then have up to sixty (60) days within which to take the course. If the Respondent did not take the course, the Judge could then use this as a factor when awarding property, when ordering spousal maintenance (essentially alimony), when ordering child support payments, and/or when making orders with respect to child custody.
The obvious purpose of this bill is to make it a little more difficult to obtain a divorce, and to ensure that all reasonable avenues for reconciliation are encouraged. Although I don’t necessary think that this bill is a bad idea, I also think that in most of the divorce cases I have handled, the parties have already attended counseling and have tried many of these same strategies to no avail. As a result, I’m not sure that I’m in favor of the “foregiveness” skills portion of the course.
However, because of my opinion that most parents contemplating or going through a divorce do not adequately consider and deal with the very real emotional impact that the legal wrangling, divorce proceedings, and aftermath of the divorce have on the children. As a result, I think that the portions of the course that deal with the children are a good idea. In my opinion, parents who are going through a divorce should be required to learn strategies on how to minimize stress and disruption upon their children during and after the divorce.
Thứ Năm, 26 tháng 3, 2009
Senator Royce West Files Multiple HOA Bills in the Texas Legislature
On February 18, 2009, Senator Royce West (D - Dallas) filed a flurry of bills that would impact the way HOAs transact business. The following is a brief summary of the Bills. I will post updates as the bills work their way through the 81st Regular Session of the Texas Legislature.
SB 234 by West
HOAs are intended to maintain common areas in residential neighborhoods and to protect homeowners' investments in their property by enforcing certain aesthetic guidelines. In recent years, however, many homeowners have become dissatisfied with the operation of their association. Disputes between HOA boards and individual homeowners can generate considerable acrimony and expense. This bill attempts to restore balance to the relationship between homeowner's association (HOA) boards and individual homeowners.
As proposed, S.B. 234 requires a court to allow the prevailing party in an action on a breach of a restrictive covenant reasonable attorney's fees and cost and claims. S.B. 234 requires the seller of residential property that is subject to membership in a property owner's association to provide certain information and notice to a buyer, including a resale certificate. S.B. 236 sets forth certain requirements relating to the content of and fees for such resale certificates.
SB 235 by West
HOAs are intended to maintain common areas in residential neighborhoods and to protect homeowners' investments in their property by enforcing certain aesthetic guidelines. Developers often retain control over most aspects of an HOA while construction and sale of houses within the development is still ongoing.
As proposed, S.B. 235 strikes a balance between the developer's interest in the ultimate completion of a development and the need to prevent discriminatory housing practices. The bill provides that a restrictive covenant providing a right of first refusal for the sale or lease of a residential unit or residential lot in favor of the HOA or its members is void.
SB 236 by West
HOAs are intended to maintain common areas in residential neighborhoods and to protect homeowners' investments in their property by enforcing certain aesthetic guidelines. In recent years, individual homeowners have become frustrated with what they perceive as unduly restrictive HOA board policies regarding the installation of solar energy devices.
S.B. 236 strikes a balance between the community's interest in maintaining consistent aesthetics, and the freedom of individual homeowners to make sensible investments in clean energy.
As proposed, S.B. 236 prohibits a property owners' association from imposing or enforcing a restriction against solar energy devices, except under certain listed circumstances. S.B. 236 provides that restrictions that violate the provisions of this Act are void.
SB 237 by West
HOAs are intended to maintain common areas in residential neighborhoods and to protect homeowners' investments in their property by enforcing certain aesthetic guidelines. In recent years, however, many homeowners have become dissatisfied with the operation of their associations. Many homeowners lack confidence in the conduct of board elections. Additionally, some HOAs operate under extremely cumbersome provisions for the amendment of their declarations. S.B. 237 attempts to restore confidence in the HOA election process and to provide a uniform standard for amending a declaration.
As proposed, S.B. 237 provides that a declaration may be amended on a vote of 67 percent of the total votes allocated to owners of property in the subdivision, unless the declaration creating the subdivision specified a lower percentage. It also establishes that the right to vote in board elections cannot be limited and states the conditions under which a person is disqualified from serving on the board. The bill requires the use of a neutral third party to count election ballots under certain circumstances and sets forth the requirements for the conduct of elections. S.B. 237 sets forth certain property owners' associations to which certain provisions of this Act do not apply. S.B. 237 prohibits a person from serving on the board of an HOA if the person has been convicted of certain offenses and requires an HOA to obtain criminal history information on candidates for HOA boards. Finally, S.B. 237 provides for the use and content of an association's bylaws.
SB 238 by West
HOAs are intended to maintain common areas in residential neighborhoods and to protect homeowners' investments in their property by enforcing certain aesthetic guidelines. In recent years, however, many homeowners have become dissatisfied with the operation of their associations. Often, they feel frustrated in attempts to challenge an HOA board decision due to a lack of information. S.B. 238 attempts to restore balance to the relationship between HOA boards and individual homeowners.
As proposed, S.B. 238 sets forth remedies available to a homeowner if an HOA board fails to comply with its statutory duty to make its books and records, including financial records, reasonably available to a homeowner.
SB 239 by West
(HOAs) are intended to maintain common areas in residential neighborhoods and to protect homeowners' investments in their property by enforcing certain aesthetic guidelines. In recent years, however, many homeowners have become dissatisfied with the operation of their HOAs. Disputes between HOA boards and individual homeowners often begin with the imposition of relatively small fines by the board for violations of deed restrictions. The manner in which the board notifies the individual homeowner is at times the subject of some disagreement.
As proposed, S.B. 239 sets forth the required content and manner of delivery of a notice of enforcement action by a property owners' association . The bill also requires that the homeowner be given a date certain by which a violation must be cured.
SB 240 by West
(HOAs) are intended to maintain common areas in residential neighborhoods and to protect homeowners' investments in their property by enforcing certain aesthetic guidelines. In recent years, however, many homeowners have become dissatisfied with the operation of their associations. Disputes between HOA boards and individual homeowners often begin with the imposition of relatively small fines by the board for violations of deed restrictions. The actions of some HOA boards can cause such fines to become insurmountable burdens for the homeowner. Additionally, because foreclosure is a remedy available to an HOA board for delinquent assessments, the order of application by the HOA board of payments received from a homeowner is a critical issue.
As proposed, S.B. 240 sets forth certain requirements and restrictions regarding a fine imposed by a property owners' association. The bill also requires a property owners' association to adopt reasonable guidelines for an alternative payment schedule, sets forth provisions relating to the priority of application of payments by a homeowner, and sets forth time limitations relating to collection actions against a homeowner. S.B. 240 repeals Section 202.004(c), Property Code, relating to an assessment of civil damages by a court for the violation of a restrictive covenant.
SB 241 by West
HOAs) are intended to maintain common areas in residential neighborhoods and to protect homeowners' investments in their property by enforcing certain aesthetic guidelines. In recent years, however, many homeowners have become dissatisfied with the operation of their associations. Disputes between HOA boards and individual homeowners often begin with the imposition of relatively small fines by the HOA board for violations of deed restrictions. Such fines, when combined with assessments and legal fees, can quickly become insurmountable for a homeowner, ultimately resulting in foreclosure. Currently, a homeowner is not guaranteed access to the courts in a proceeding for the foreclosure of an assessment lien.
As proposed, S.B. 241 requires a property owners' association to obtain a court judgment foreclosing an assessment lien and providing for issuance of an order of sale before the foreclosure of the lien, unless judicial foreclosure is waived in writing by the homeowner.
SB 234 by West
HOAs are intended to maintain common areas in residential neighborhoods and to protect homeowners' investments in their property by enforcing certain aesthetic guidelines. In recent years, however, many homeowners have become dissatisfied with the operation of their association. Disputes between HOA boards and individual homeowners can generate considerable acrimony and expense. This bill attempts to restore balance to the relationship between homeowner's association (HOA) boards and individual homeowners.
As proposed, S.B. 234 requires a court to allow the prevailing party in an action on a breach of a restrictive covenant reasonable attorney's fees and cost and claims. S.B. 234 requires the seller of residential property that is subject to membership in a property owner's association to provide certain information and notice to a buyer, including a resale certificate. S.B. 236 sets forth certain requirements relating to the content of and fees for such resale certificates.
SB 235 by West
HOAs are intended to maintain common areas in residential neighborhoods and to protect homeowners' investments in their property by enforcing certain aesthetic guidelines. Developers often retain control over most aspects of an HOA while construction and sale of houses within the development is still ongoing.
As proposed, S.B. 235 strikes a balance between the developer's interest in the ultimate completion of a development and the need to prevent discriminatory housing practices. The bill provides that a restrictive covenant providing a right of first refusal for the sale or lease of a residential unit or residential lot in favor of the HOA or its members is void.
SB 236 by West
HOAs are intended to maintain common areas in residential neighborhoods and to protect homeowners' investments in their property by enforcing certain aesthetic guidelines. In recent years, individual homeowners have become frustrated with what they perceive as unduly restrictive HOA board policies regarding the installation of solar energy devices.
S.B. 236 strikes a balance between the community's interest in maintaining consistent aesthetics, and the freedom of individual homeowners to make sensible investments in clean energy.
As proposed, S.B. 236 prohibits a property owners' association from imposing or enforcing a restriction against solar energy devices, except under certain listed circumstances. S.B. 236 provides that restrictions that violate the provisions of this Act are void.
SB 237 by West
HOAs are intended to maintain common areas in residential neighborhoods and to protect homeowners' investments in their property by enforcing certain aesthetic guidelines. In recent years, however, many homeowners have become dissatisfied with the operation of their associations. Many homeowners lack confidence in the conduct of board elections. Additionally, some HOAs operate under extremely cumbersome provisions for the amendment of their declarations. S.B. 237 attempts to restore confidence in the HOA election process and to provide a uniform standard for amending a declaration.
As proposed, S.B. 237 provides that a declaration may be amended on a vote of 67 percent of the total votes allocated to owners of property in the subdivision, unless the declaration creating the subdivision specified a lower percentage. It also establishes that the right to vote in board elections cannot be limited and states the conditions under which a person is disqualified from serving on the board. The bill requires the use of a neutral third party to count election ballots under certain circumstances and sets forth the requirements for the conduct of elections. S.B. 237 sets forth certain property owners' associations to which certain provisions of this Act do not apply. S.B. 237 prohibits a person from serving on the board of an HOA if the person has been convicted of certain offenses and requires an HOA to obtain criminal history information on candidates for HOA boards. Finally, S.B. 237 provides for the use and content of an association's bylaws.
SB 238 by West
HOAs are intended to maintain common areas in residential neighborhoods and to protect homeowners' investments in their property by enforcing certain aesthetic guidelines. In recent years, however, many homeowners have become dissatisfied with the operation of their associations. Often, they feel frustrated in attempts to challenge an HOA board decision due to a lack of information. S.B. 238 attempts to restore balance to the relationship between HOA boards and individual homeowners.
As proposed, S.B. 238 sets forth remedies available to a homeowner if an HOA board fails to comply with its statutory duty to make its books and records, including financial records, reasonably available to a homeowner.
SB 239 by West
(HOAs) are intended to maintain common areas in residential neighborhoods and to protect homeowners' investments in their property by enforcing certain aesthetic guidelines. In recent years, however, many homeowners have become dissatisfied with the operation of their HOAs. Disputes between HOA boards and individual homeowners often begin with the imposition of relatively small fines by the board for violations of deed restrictions. The manner in which the board notifies the individual homeowner is at times the subject of some disagreement.
As proposed, S.B. 239 sets forth the required content and manner of delivery of a notice of enforcement action by a property owners' association . The bill also requires that the homeowner be given a date certain by which a violation must be cured.
SB 240 by West
(HOAs) are intended to maintain common areas in residential neighborhoods and to protect homeowners' investments in their property by enforcing certain aesthetic guidelines. In recent years, however, many homeowners have become dissatisfied with the operation of their associations. Disputes between HOA boards and individual homeowners often begin with the imposition of relatively small fines by the board for violations of deed restrictions. The actions of some HOA boards can cause such fines to become insurmountable burdens for the homeowner. Additionally, because foreclosure is a remedy available to an HOA board for delinquent assessments, the order of application by the HOA board of payments received from a homeowner is a critical issue.
As proposed, S.B. 240 sets forth certain requirements and restrictions regarding a fine imposed by a property owners' association. The bill also requires a property owners' association to adopt reasonable guidelines for an alternative payment schedule, sets forth provisions relating to the priority of application of payments by a homeowner, and sets forth time limitations relating to collection actions against a homeowner. S.B. 240 repeals Section 202.004(c), Property Code, relating to an assessment of civil damages by a court for the violation of a restrictive covenant.
SB 241 by West
HOAs) are intended to maintain common areas in residential neighborhoods and to protect homeowners' investments in their property by enforcing certain aesthetic guidelines. In recent years, however, many homeowners have become dissatisfied with the operation of their associations. Disputes between HOA boards and individual homeowners often begin with the imposition of relatively small fines by the HOA board for violations of deed restrictions. Such fines, when combined with assessments and legal fees, can quickly become insurmountable for a homeowner, ultimately resulting in foreclosure. Currently, a homeowner is not guaranteed access to the courts in a proceeding for the foreclosure of an assessment lien.
As proposed, S.B. 241 requires a property owners' association to obtain a court judgment foreclosing an assessment lien and providing for issuance of an order of sale before the foreclosure of the lien, unless judicial foreclosure is waived in writing by the homeowner.
Recovery of Attorneys Fees in Texas Cases Alleging Breaches of Restrictive Covenants
Did you know that the Texas Property Code provides that the "prevailing party" who brings a legal action or lawsuit "based on" breach of a restrictive covenant, sometimes referred to as a "CCR," may recover their costs and attorneys' fees?
More particularly, Section 5.006 of the Texas Property Code provides as follows:
ATTORNEY'S FEES IN BREACH OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ACTION. (a) In an action based on breach of a restrictive covenant pertaining to real property, the court shall allow to a prevailing party who asserted the action reasonable attorney's fees in addition to the party's costs and claim.
(b) To determine reasonable attorney's fees, the court shall consider:
(1) the time and labor required;
(2) the novelty and difficulty of the questions;
(3) the expertise, reputation, and ability of the attorney; and
(4) any other factor.
It should be noted that recovery of fees is not limited to a Homeowners Association. In that regard, a party who successfully challenges an HOA's enforcement of a particular covenant, and even an individual homeowner seeking to enforce the CCRs could recover the fees and expenses. This statute, which is often overlooked, has tremendous "loser pays" implications.
Often times, however, a particular set of CCRs will precribe that the HOA for a given development can recover its fees from a homeowner against whom enforcement is sought. Frequently, there is no reciprocal clause. Thus, it is important to check the language of your particlaur HOA's restrictive covenants and By-laws to consider whether such documents conflict with Section 5.006.
In any event, litigation concerning the enforcement of CCRs is complex and frequently turns on minute legal nuances. Accordingly, any person or entity should seek experienced legal counsel when contemplating litigation based on breach of a restrictive covenant related to real estate.
More particularly, Section 5.006 of the Texas Property Code provides as follows:
ATTORNEY'S FEES IN BREACH OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ACTION. (a) In an action based on breach of a restrictive covenant pertaining to real property, the court shall allow to a prevailing party who asserted the action reasonable attorney's fees in addition to the party's costs and claim.
(b) To determine reasonable attorney's fees, the court shall consider:
(1) the time and labor required;
(2) the novelty and difficulty of the questions;
(3) the expertise, reputation, and ability of the attorney; and
(4) any other factor.
It should be noted that recovery of fees is not limited to a Homeowners Association. In that regard, a party who successfully challenges an HOA's enforcement of a particular covenant, and even an individual homeowner seeking to enforce the CCRs could recover the fees and expenses. This statute, which is often overlooked, has tremendous "loser pays" implications.
Often times, however, a particular set of CCRs will precribe that the HOA for a given development can recover its fees from a homeowner against whom enforcement is sought. Frequently, there is no reciprocal clause. Thus, it is important to check the language of your particlaur HOA's restrictive covenants and By-laws to consider whether such documents conflict with Section 5.006.
In any event, litigation concerning the enforcement of CCRs is complex and frequently turns on minute legal nuances. Accordingly, any person or entity should seek experienced legal counsel when contemplating litigation based on breach of a restrictive covenant related to real estate.
Favorite Quotes About Neighbors
Health consists of having the same diseases as one's neighbors.
Quentin Crisp
A nation is a society united by delusions about its ancestry and by common hatred of its neighbors.
William Ralph Inge (1860 - 1954)
There are many who dare not kill themselves for fear of what the neighbors will say.
Cyril Connolly (1903 - 1974)
The Bible tells us to love our neighbors, and also to love our enemies; probably because they are generally the same people.
G. K. Chesterton (1874 - 1936)
This is the best kind of voyeurism, hearing joy from your neighbors.
Chuck Sigars
Nothing makes you more tolerant of a neighbor's noisy party than being there.
Franklin P. Jones
Love thy neighbor, yet pull not down thy hedge.
English Proverb quotes
Quentin Crisp
A nation is a society united by delusions about its ancestry and by common hatred of its neighbors.
William Ralph Inge (1860 - 1954)
There are many who dare not kill themselves for fear of what the neighbors will say.
Cyril Connolly (1903 - 1974)
The Bible tells us to love our neighbors, and also to love our enemies; probably because they are generally the same people.
G. K. Chesterton (1874 - 1936)
This is the best kind of voyeurism, hearing joy from your neighbors.
Chuck Sigars
Nothing makes you more tolerant of a neighbor's noisy party than being there.
Franklin P. Jones
Love thy neighbor, yet pull not down thy hedge.
English Proverb quotes
Thứ Ba, 24 tháng 3, 2009
R L Wilson Law Firm takes On Case for Coach Randy Palmer -- Pro Bono
In a renewed effort to prevent injustices throughout Texas, R L Wilson, P.C. Law Firm has undertaken the representation of Randy Palmer -- Athletic Director and Head Football Coach for the Poteet ISD. Coach Palmer is a man of stellar character, humility and impeccable credentials. He is a Pleasanton native who rose to the ranks of the NFL, and decided to return to South Central Texas to give back to his community. Unfortunately, South Texas School Board politics has consumed Coach Palmer's job, and he is fighting for his position at Poteet.
Attorney Bob Schaezler of R L Wilson, P.C. Law Firm has been Coach Palmer's public face during this trying ordeal. The media storm has been overwhelming, and Bob has appeared on KENS 5 TV, and on KTSA's Trey Ware radio show.
Watch the Video here.
By Zeke MacCormack - Express-News
POTEET — The school board’s latest spin of its revolving door for athletic directors unleashed a flood of tears and questions — and a walkout by angry students the morning after.
Trustees voted to not extend the contract of first-year athletic director Randy Palmer despite testimonials and demonstrations of support from many in a crowd of about 200 at Monday’s board meeting.
The vote means a fifth new coach in five years will lead the Aggie football squad. Under Palmer, the team went to the playoffs with a 6-5 season — which included beating archrival Pleasanton for the first time in at least 40 years, according to Express-News archives.
Trustee Dicki Lee Sparks, who backed Palmer, said many in the emotional crowd surrounded the board after the vote and wouldn’t disband for an hour.
“We had 15- and 16-year-old boys bawling and demanding to know why, asking ... ‘Why, why are you doing this to us?’” Sparks said. “They wanted answers.”
About 100 students left the Poteet High School campus in protest starting at midmorning Tuesday, Principal Andy Castillo said.
The students will be counted as absent, but whether the absence is excused will vary because “we evidently have some parents who were aware of where their kids were,” he said.
Two other coaches who are already with the district and have family links to trustees voting to oust Palmer have been mentioned as likely successors.
The high turnover among athletic directors is unhealthy for students, parent Irma Estrada told trustees.
“It’s not too late to do the right thing here and do what’s best for our kids, and that is to keep Coach Palmer,” she said.
Morgan Wagner, a senior on the Aggies offensive line, told trustees that Palmer was “liked and beloved” by most students.
But the board’s resolve against Palmer was even stronger than on Feb. 23, when trustees voted 4-3 to recommend termination of his contract, despite support for extending his $57,000-a-year contract by interim Superintendent Tim Coyle.
Trustees didn’t cite any specifics Monday before voting 5-2 for a motion that said terminating Palmer was “in the best interest” of the district.
“I still don’t understand why, what the reasoning is,” Palmer, 33, said early Tuesday. “There was a lot of people in support of me, and there were a select few against me.”
Trustee Barbara Reyes, who changed her stance to favor dismissing Palmer, could not be reached for comment.
School board President Mike McIntyre denied Palmer was dismissed so that a relative of a trustee could get the job, and he said Palmer will soon receive written notification of the basis for the board’s action.
“Once that happens, if he wants to disclose it, he can do it,” McIntyre said. “There are legitimate concerns, and if people were more aware of them there wouldn’t be such a big deal, but that’s sort of the nature of the beast. We’re given access to information that not everybody else gets to see.”
He said he respects the students’ right to express their displeasure but said of the walkout that the weeks before the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills testing “is not the time to have this kind of distraction.”
Sparks said she waited to hear a valid reason for firing Palmer but that none was provided.
Fellow trustees cited “piddly little things, but nothing to me that would warrant someone losing their job,” Sparks said.
Superintendent Coyle said Palmer had no blemishes on his record.
“I can’t believe we couldn’t come to some kind of different solution,” Coyle said Tuesday, calling the mood on campus “disappointed and frustrated.”
Attorney Bob Schaezler of R L Wilson, P.C. Law Firm has been Coach Palmer's public face during this trying ordeal. The media storm has been overwhelming, and Bob has appeared on KENS 5 TV, and on KTSA's Trey Ware radio show.
Watch the Video here.
By Zeke MacCormack - Express-News
POTEET — The school board’s latest spin of its revolving door for athletic directors unleashed a flood of tears and questions — and a walkout by angry students the morning after.
Trustees voted to not extend the contract of first-year athletic director Randy Palmer despite testimonials and demonstrations of support from many in a crowd of about 200 at Monday’s board meeting.
The vote means a fifth new coach in five years will lead the Aggie football squad. Under Palmer, the team went to the playoffs with a 6-5 season — which included beating archrival Pleasanton for the first time in at least 40 years, according to Express-News archives.
Trustee Dicki Lee Sparks, who backed Palmer, said many in the emotional crowd surrounded the board after the vote and wouldn’t disband for an hour.
“We had 15- and 16-year-old boys bawling and demanding to know why, asking ... ‘Why, why are you doing this to us?’” Sparks said. “They wanted answers.”
About 100 students left the Poteet High School campus in protest starting at midmorning Tuesday, Principal Andy Castillo said.
The students will be counted as absent, but whether the absence is excused will vary because “we evidently have some parents who were aware of where their kids were,” he said.
Two other coaches who are already with the district and have family links to trustees voting to oust Palmer have been mentioned as likely successors.
The high turnover among athletic directors is unhealthy for students, parent Irma Estrada told trustees.
“It’s not too late to do the right thing here and do what’s best for our kids, and that is to keep Coach Palmer,” she said.
Morgan Wagner, a senior on the Aggies offensive line, told trustees that Palmer was “liked and beloved” by most students.
But the board’s resolve against Palmer was even stronger than on Feb. 23, when trustees voted 4-3 to recommend termination of his contract, despite support for extending his $57,000-a-year contract by interim Superintendent Tim Coyle.
Trustees didn’t cite any specifics Monday before voting 5-2 for a motion that said terminating Palmer was “in the best interest” of the district.
“I still don’t understand why, what the reasoning is,” Palmer, 33, said early Tuesday. “There was a lot of people in support of me, and there were a select few against me.”
Trustee Barbara Reyes, who changed her stance to favor dismissing Palmer, could not be reached for comment.
School board President Mike McIntyre denied Palmer was dismissed so that a relative of a trustee could get the job, and he said Palmer will soon receive written notification of the basis for the board’s action.
“Once that happens, if he wants to disclose it, he can do it,” McIntyre said. “There are legitimate concerns, and if people were more aware of them there wouldn’t be such a big deal, but that’s sort of the nature of the beast. We’re given access to information that not everybody else gets to see.”
He said he respects the students’ right to express their displeasure but said of the walkout that the weeks before the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills testing “is not the time to have this kind of distraction.”
Sparks said she waited to hear a valid reason for firing Palmer but that none was provided.
Fellow trustees cited “piddly little things, but nothing to me that would warrant someone losing their job,” Sparks said.
Superintendent Coyle said Palmer had no blemishes on his record.
“I can’t believe we couldn’t come to some kind of different solution,” Coyle said Tuesday, calling the mood on campus “disappointed and frustrated.”
Thứ Tư, 11 tháng 3, 2009
R L Wilson, P.C. Law Firm Now Accepts Credit Cards and Paypal
As part of the re-vamp and update of our flagship website R L Wilson, P.C. Law Firm now accepts credit card and Paypal payments online, over the phone, or as an added payment option for monthly invoices. The service is made available through a merchant account procured from the San Antonio Bar Association.
Our law firm merchant account is compliant with ABA and State Bar guidelines for credit acceptance. Unlike a standard merchant account, the Law Firm Merchant Account is designed specifically for the client-attorney transaction, and safeguards and separates client funds.
We hope that this new feature provides convenience to our existing and prospective clients, reduces our costs associated with billing and collections, and encourages prompt payment promptly by providing additional payment options.
Of course, we will continue to accept checks.
Our law firm merchant account is compliant with ABA and State Bar guidelines for credit acceptance. Unlike a standard merchant account, the Law Firm Merchant Account is designed specifically for the client-attorney transaction, and safeguards and separates client funds.
We hope that this new feature provides convenience to our existing and prospective clients, reduces our costs associated with billing and collections, and encourages prompt payment promptly by providing additional payment options.
Of course, we will continue to accept checks.
Thứ Ba, 10 tháng 3, 2009
Houston Holistic Attorneys Happy Hour
I would like for Houston attorneys that are interested in meeting each other for fun (and absolutely no purpose) to contact me. I'm going to try to put together an evening within the next 3 months. I did one in 2008. Unfortunately, the weather did not cooperate.
If you are interested in meeting for an evening of fun and encouragement, send me an email at fran @familylaw4u.com
If you are interested in meeting for an evening of fun and encouragement, send me an email at fran @familylaw4u.com
What is a holistic lawyer?
Good question!
This has been the question that I've been pondering for the past several years. I've taken advanced collaborative law training and advanced mediation training. Before taking collaborative law training I thought that collaborative law was the answer. Unfortunately, collaborative law is great but not what I was seeking. I'd known about IAHL for many years but 2006 I joined their group and attended their annual convention. I was so impressed that I joined the 2006 board.
There are many terms used... therapeutic jurisprudence, restorative justice, and humanistic law. None of these terms seemed to "fit" me. I wanted to use my legal knowledge and training to empower my clients to make their own decisions. I wanted to help my clients in their transformation from being a couple to being a single. I wanted to save my clients money. I wanted to educate my clients about the law. I wanted to work with them to resolve their disputes without bloodshed. I wanted the public to know that judges were not God -- a judge is a "stranger" that will make binding decisions that will impact the adults and their children. I wanted my client to work with their soon to be ex to make the best decisions for their family and their unique situation. Since I've now represented up to 3 generations of the same family and since I've watched my client's children grow up, I felt like extended family. Since most of my clients are younger than my children, I feel like their grandmother. I want to use my life experience and my legal experience to blend. I felt pulled in different directions since I'm an attorney, a mediator, a mother, a mother, a friend, a religious person, etc. I wanted to blend all the parts of myself into one. Therefore, I decided to call myself a holistic attorney.
This has been the question that I've been pondering for the past several years. I've taken advanced collaborative law training and advanced mediation training. Before taking collaborative law training I thought that collaborative law was the answer. Unfortunately, collaborative law is great but not what I was seeking. I'd known about IAHL for many years but 2006 I joined their group and attended their annual convention. I was so impressed that I joined the 2006 board.
There are many terms used... therapeutic jurisprudence, restorative justice, and humanistic law. None of these terms seemed to "fit" me. I wanted to use my legal knowledge and training to empower my clients to make their own decisions. I wanted to help my clients in their transformation from being a couple to being a single. I wanted to save my clients money. I wanted to educate my clients about the law. I wanted to work with them to resolve their disputes without bloodshed. I wanted the public to know that judges were not God -- a judge is a "stranger" that will make binding decisions that will impact the adults and their children. I wanted my client to work with their soon to be ex to make the best decisions for their family and their unique situation. Since I've now represented up to 3 generations of the same family and since I've watched my client's children grow up, I felt like extended family. Since most of my clients are younger than my children, I feel like their grandmother. I want to use my life experience and my legal experience to blend. I felt pulled in different directions since I'm an attorney, a mediator, a mother, a mother, a friend, a religious person, etc. I wanted to blend all the parts of myself into one. Therefore, I decided to call myself a holistic attorney.
Saving money on your electricity!
TXU and Reliant Energey have pissed me off!
I'm trying something new...
http://franscheapenergy.igniteinc.biz
I signed up and am signing up my mom.
Please visit my site and sign up!
Perhaps I can even save you some money!
I'm trying something new...
http://franscheapenergy.igniteinc.biz
I signed up and am signing up my mom.
Please visit my site and sign up!
Perhaps I can even save you some money!
John Paul Barnich
A man that I met almost 20 years ago, John Paul Barnich, recently passed away. We met through our mutual interest and concern regarding people living with HIV and AIDS. His passion for life was huge and definately contagious. He seemed to suck every ounce of life out of every moment. He was exceptionally bright -- with a very dry wit.
The most memorial thing about John Paul is his huge "physicial presence" and his huge and contagious smile. He was a huge "bear" of a man with a matching smile. He had a "wicked" sense of humor. When I would see him all I had to say was "what's going on?" and he could make me laugh for 3o minutes.
When our mutual friend, Jim Griffith, was in town a few years ago (how time flies!) we met at one of my small Mexican food "dumps" close to Chimney Rock and Bellaire Blvd. Both men agreed that the food was outstanding. We lingered over a delicious dinner. John Paul's wit was sharp that night. I laughed until I cried.
The world is definately a better place because John Paul Barnich was in it. I will miss him and how he made me feel.
I'm sure that he's in heaven now & causing all sorts of "havoc" and making God laugh.
The most memorial thing about John Paul is his huge "physicial presence" and his huge and contagious smile. He was a huge "bear" of a man with a matching smile. He had a "wicked" sense of humor. When I would see him all I had to say was "what's going on?" and he could make me laugh for 3o minutes.
When our mutual friend, Jim Griffith, was in town a few years ago (how time flies!) we met at one of my small Mexican food "dumps" close to Chimney Rock and Bellaire Blvd. Both men agreed that the food was outstanding. We lingered over a delicious dinner. John Paul's wit was sharp that night. I laughed until I cried.
The world is definately a better place because John Paul Barnich was in it. I will miss him and how he made me feel.
I'm sure that he's in heaven now & causing all sorts of "havoc" and making God laugh.
Chủ Nhật, 8 tháng 3, 2009
Representing yourself in a Divorce Case.
Personally, I would not attempt an engine overhaul in order to get my car back on the road. I might be able to read a book and get all the parts back together. I might be able to figure out how the valves, springs and all the other parts go back together, but it is likely that there will be mistakes. Sometimes reading the manual is not enough. There is a base of engine mechanics and theory that I am missing. So when it comes time to turn the key, will the engine turn over or will the car blow up?
Just as with the engine overhaul example, most pro se litigants (or those who choose to represent themselves) do not have a base of legal knowledge to know when something is missing, when something is incorrect, or when your rights are not protected. Rather than speaking in generalities or analogies, let me give you an example.
Part of the art of practicing law is to make something that appears to be innocuous but that is greatly slanted toward the attorney's client. Sometimes the danger is in what is not said, versus what is said. Here are two examples of things that can be left out of a Divorce Decree that can have a devastating effect on the rights of the unaware.
1) Most divorce decrees are drafted so as to foster a continued relationship between parent and child. As a result, attorneys will advocate for the placement of a geographical restriction in the Decree. Most judges will order a geographical restriction if there is a request as long as it is not unduly restrictive. A commonly used restriction, is that the custodial parent is restricted to their county of residence and "any county adjoining" that county. This type of restriction allows for reasonable movement, but prevents the custodial parent from leaving the State -- or even country -- with the child. As a result, even though it looks reasonable for the custodial parent to have the right to choose the primary residence, it would be view by most non-custodial parents as unreasonable for the custodial parent to move to the other side of the world. However, if there is no geographical restriction, this is just what could happen.
2) Most divorce decrees have a "Standard Visitation Schedule," or similar schedule. There is a reason for this. The Standard Visitation Schedule says that the schedule is what happens when the parents cannot "mutually agree in advance." This means that the schedule itself (i.e. - the first, third and fifth weekends) is only when the parents cannot agree. Sometimes an attorney (or a party) will omit the visitation schedule from the Divorce Decree in favor of a "feel-good" provision that the non-custodial parent will have visitation whenever the parties "mutually agree." Although this sounds good, this provision is basically worthless. So what happens when the parents disagree? Nothing happens. The visits only occur when the custodial parent wants them to happen. So if the custodial parent thinks the non-custodial parent does not need to visit, then no visit occurs.
As a result, if you are a non-custodial parent, and your Divorce Decree omits a possession schedule and has no geographical restriction, your spouse could move to any part of the world and completely deny you visitation. You would need to then sue to try to get the Court to order your spouse to move back. My point is this -- sometimes you read these legal documents and they appear to be fair; however, appearances can be deceiving. Get an experienced family law attorney and be sure.
Just as with the engine overhaul example, most pro se litigants (or those who choose to represent themselves) do not have a base of legal knowledge to know when something is missing, when something is incorrect, or when your rights are not protected. Rather than speaking in generalities or analogies, let me give you an example.
Part of the art of practicing law is to make something that appears to be innocuous but that is greatly slanted toward the attorney's client. Sometimes the danger is in what is not said, versus what is said. Here are two examples of things that can be left out of a Divorce Decree that can have a devastating effect on the rights of the unaware.
1) Most divorce decrees are drafted so as to foster a continued relationship between parent and child. As a result, attorneys will advocate for the placement of a geographical restriction in the Decree. Most judges will order a geographical restriction if there is a request as long as it is not unduly restrictive. A commonly used restriction, is that the custodial parent is restricted to their county of residence and "any county adjoining" that county. This type of restriction allows for reasonable movement, but prevents the custodial parent from leaving the State -- or even country -- with the child. As a result, even though it looks reasonable for the custodial parent to have the right to choose the primary residence, it would be view by most non-custodial parents as unreasonable for the custodial parent to move to the other side of the world. However, if there is no geographical restriction, this is just what could happen.
2) Most divorce decrees have a "Standard Visitation Schedule," or similar schedule. There is a reason for this. The Standard Visitation Schedule says that the schedule is what happens when the parents cannot "mutually agree in advance." This means that the schedule itself (i.e. - the first, third and fifth weekends) is only when the parents cannot agree. Sometimes an attorney (or a party) will omit the visitation schedule from the Divorce Decree in favor of a "feel-good" provision that the non-custodial parent will have visitation whenever the parties "mutually agree." Although this sounds good, this provision is basically worthless. So what happens when the parents disagree? Nothing happens. The visits only occur when the custodial parent wants them to happen. So if the custodial parent thinks the non-custodial parent does not need to visit, then no visit occurs.
As a result, if you are a non-custodial parent, and your Divorce Decree omits a possession schedule and has no geographical restriction, your spouse could move to any part of the world and completely deny you visitation. You would need to then sue to try to get the Court to order your spouse to move back. My point is this -- sometimes you read these legal documents and they appear to be fair; however, appearances can be deceiving. Get an experienced family law attorney and be sure.
Rio Grande Valley Water Case -- View TCEQ Consideration of Our Request for Emergency Order
On November 5, 2008, San Antonio Attorney Trey Wilson presented a request for Emergency Order to the Commissioners of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. The requested Order was intended to direct the East Rio Hondo Water Supply Corporation to restore water service to RL Wilson, P.C. Law Firm Clients Carl & Janel Parker and Carolina Ruiz. The Parkers and Mrs. Ruiz are elderly residents of Cameron County whose water service was terminated by East Rio Hondo Water when the residents refused to grant punitive easements requested by the utility.
On October 20, 2008 -- approximately 2 weeks prior to the TCEQ Agenda Meeting -- a staff attorney with the TCEQ issued a memorandum opining that the actions of East Rio Hondo Water were illegal. In the memorandum, the TCEQ staff attorney recommended that the TCEQ issue the Emergency Order requested by Trey Wilson. The final sentence of the Legal Recommendation of the staff memorandum was "The WSC has various avenues available to it, such as trying to work out an agreement with the customers or using its eminent domain powers, but terminating the customers' service is not one of them."
Undaunted, East Rio Hondo persisted in its illegal deprivation of water service to our clients. On November 5, 2008, the utility was called to task about its actions. The following Agenda item was considered at the TCEQ Commissioners' Agenda Meeting of November 5, 2008:
EMERGENCY ORDER
Item 73. TCEQ Docket No. 2008-1646-UCR. Consideration of a request by Carl & Janel Parker and Carolina Ruiz for an emergency order to require East Rio Hondo Water Supply Corporation to provide continuous and adequate water service pursuant to Section 13.041 of the Texas Water Code and Title 30, Section 291.14 of the Texas Administrative Code. East Rio Hondo Water Supply Corporation provides retail water service in Cameron County, Texas, under Certificate of Convenience and Necessity No. 11552. (Stefanie Skogen, Lisa Fuentes)
In the end, the TCEQ issued the Emergency Order, and our firm's clients' water was restored with State intervention. But East Rio Hondo didn't go down without a fight. The video of the fight is somewhat entertaining. To view a video of the TCEQ Commissioners' discussion of this item, Click HERE.
On October 20, 2008 -- approximately 2 weeks prior to the TCEQ Agenda Meeting -- a staff attorney with the TCEQ issued a memorandum opining that the actions of East Rio Hondo Water were illegal. In the memorandum, the TCEQ staff attorney recommended that the TCEQ issue the Emergency Order requested by Trey Wilson. The final sentence of the Legal Recommendation of the staff memorandum was "The WSC has various avenues available to it, such as trying to work out an agreement with the customers or using its eminent domain powers, but terminating the customers' service is not one of them."
Undaunted, East Rio Hondo persisted in its illegal deprivation of water service to our clients. On November 5, 2008, the utility was called to task about its actions. The following Agenda item was considered at the TCEQ Commissioners' Agenda Meeting of November 5, 2008:
EMERGENCY ORDER
Item 73. TCEQ Docket No. 2008-1646-UCR. Consideration of a request by Carl & Janel Parker and Carolina Ruiz for an emergency order to require East Rio Hondo Water Supply Corporation to provide continuous and adequate water service pursuant to Section 13.041 of the Texas Water Code and Title 30, Section 291.14 of the Texas Administrative Code. East Rio Hondo Water Supply Corporation provides retail water service in Cameron County, Texas, under Certificate of Convenience and Necessity No. 11552. (Stefanie Skogen, Lisa Fuentes)
In the end, the TCEQ issued the Emergency Order, and our firm's clients' water was restored with State intervention. But East Rio Hondo didn't go down without a fight. The video of the fight is somewhat entertaining. To view a video of the TCEQ Commissioners' discussion of this item, Click HERE.
TEXAS REP. SOLOMONS PLANS REFORM OF HOMEOWNERS’ ASSOCIATION LAWS
Press Release from Rep. Burt Solomons, R- Carrollton
Friday, February 27, 2009
AUSTIN -- State Rep. Burt Solomons (Carrollton) today announced plans for a sweeping reform of the state's homeowners’ association laws, including a constitutional amendment that would prohibit foreclosure of a homestead by a homeowners’ association. Solomons, a recognized real estate attorney in the North Texas area who served for fourteen years on the House committee with jurisdiction over homeowners’ associations, said the legislation is necessary. “It’s clear to me that while homeowners’ associations are valuable” said Solomons, “things have just gotten out of control with some of them. I think it’s amazing that in Texas the courts, not the legislature, have allowed homeowners’ associations to foreclose on a homestead.”
Solomons’ constitutional amendment, HJR 76, would give citizen of Texas the right to vote on whether to prohibit foreclosures by homeowners’ associations on homesteads, whereas HB 1976, filed today, proposes sweeping reforms to the operation of homeowners’ associations, including requirements to allow homeowners access to all homeowners’ association records, meetings, and to fair and transparent elections. Solomons’ proposed changes also give homeowners powerful tools to enforce the law. “Many homeowners’ associations have abdicated their responsibilities to management companies and attorneys who can not be held accountable and use penalties and attorneys’ fees to harass and intimidate homeowners who question the use of their association dues or the arbitrary enforcement of rules or bylaws,” stated Solomons. In response, he has proposed changes that will give homeowners greater access to the courts to battle homeowners’ associations by providing court and attorney fees to homeowners if the homeowners’ associations fail to comply with statutory requirements, as well as granting the courts the authority to assess fines against the associations.
The proposed legislative changes also address a myriad of issues which have negatively impacted homeowners, including priority of payment and prohibiting bans of solar panels. Homeowners are monetarily disadvantaged by prohibitions of solar panels, the use of which could dramatically lower the energy consumption and costs to homeowners. “At a time when the entire nation is focusing on renewable energy and the reduction of negative impacts on our air quality” said Solomons, “it is beyond me why we allow homeowners’ associations to ban the right of individuals to generate their own electricity in a reliable, environmentally-friendly method.”
The bill also addresses the priority of payment issue. While homeowners’ associations are currently prohibited from foreclosing on a home for failure to pay fines or attorneys’ fees, many associations will redirect a homeowners’ payment of association dues to pay for those outstanding fines or fees, which leaves their dues in arrears. Under the law now, failure to pay dues is the only reason for which an association may foreclose on a home; thus redirecting payments allows a homeowners’ association to foreclose on homeowners who have made good faith efforts to stay current with their obligations.
Solomons offered major reforms to homeowners’ association laws last session, but they died on the last day of session. “It is estimated that there are over 20,000 homeowners’ associations in Texas impacting citizen throughout the state,” said Solomons. “While some are conscientious about their fiduciary duties to their neighbors, others tend to operate like little fiefdoms. This is a strong property rights state and I believe we should ensure that homeowners’ associations can not intimidate and harass Texans out of their homes.”
Contact:
Bonnie Bruce, Legislative Director
Phone:(512)463-0487
Friday, February 27, 2009
AUSTIN -- State Rep. Burt Solomons (Carrollton) today announced plans for a sweeping reform of the state's homeowners’ association laws, including a constitutional amendment that would prohibit foreclosure of a homestead by a homeowners’ association. Solomons, a recognized real estate attorney in the North Texas area who served for fourteen years on the House committee with jurisdiction over homeowners’ associations, said the legislation is necessary. “It’s clear to me that while homeowners’ associations are valuable” said Solomons, “things have just gotten out of control with some of them. I think it’s amazing that in Texas the courts, not the legislature, have allowed homeowners’ associations to foreclose on a homestead.”
Solomons’ constitutional amendment, HJR 76, would give citizen of Texas the right to vote on whether to prohibit foreclosures by homeowners’ associations on homesteads, whereas HB 1976, filed today, proposes sweeping reforms to the operation of homeowners’ associations, including requirements to allow homeowners access to all homeowners’ association records, meetings, and to fair and transparent elections. Solomons’ proposed changes also give homeowners powerful tools to enforce the law. “Many homeowners’ associations have abdicated their responsibilities to management companies and attorneys who can not be held accountable and use penalties and attorneys’ fees to harass and intimidate homeowners who question the use of their association dues or the arbitrary enforcement of rules or bylaws,” stated Solomons. In response, he has proposed changes that will give homeowners greater access to the courts to battle homeowners’ associations by providing court and attorney fees to homeowners if the homeowners’ associations fail to comply with statutory requirements, as well as granting the courts the authority to assess fines against the associations.
The proposed legislative changes also address a myriad of issues which have negatively impacted homeowners, including priority of payment and prohibiting bans of solar panels. Homeowners are monetarily disadvantaged by prohibitions of solar panels, the use of which could dramatically lower the energy consumption and costs to homeowners. “At a time when the entire nation is focusing on renewable energy and the reduction of negative impacts on our air quality” said Solomons, “it is beyond me why we allow homeowners’ associations to ban the right of individuals to generate their own electricity in a reliable, environmentally-friendly method.”
The bill also addresses the priority of payment issue. While homeowners’ associations are currently prohibited from foreclosing on a home for failure to pay fines or attorneys’ fees, many associations will redirect a homeowners’ payment of association dues to pay for those outstanding fines or fees, which leaves their dues in arrears. Under the law now, failure to pay dues is the only reason for which an association may foreclose on a home; thus redirecting payments allows a homeowners’ association to foreclose on homeowners who have made good faith efforts to stay current with their obligations.
Solomons offered major reforms to homeowners’ association laws last session, but they died on the last day of session. “It is estimated that there are over 20,000 homeowners’ associations in Texas impacting citizen throughout the state,” said Solomons. “While some are conscientious about their fiduciary duties to their neighbors, others tend to operate like little fiefdoms. This is a strong property rights state and I believe we should ensure that homeowners’ associations can not intimidate and harass Texans out of their homes.”
Contact:
Bonnie Bruce, Legislative Director
Phone:(512)463-0487
Thứ Bảy, 7 tháng 3, 2009
Check out my videos!!
Check out my 2 videos on:
www.cuttingedgelaw.com/video/fran-brochstein-listening-clients
www.cuttingedgelaw.com/video/fran-brochstein-listening-clients
Cutting Edge Law website is now open!
Kim Wright has finally gotten her website up and running. Check out this outstanding website - Cutting Edge Law.com.
Kim is a well known and highly respected attorney and has made a commitment to bring her knowledge and passion to the public.
Kim is a well known and highly respected attorney and has made a commitment to bring her knowledge and passion to the public.
What if we can't afford to Divorce?
Many have heard about the statistics that divorces are down nationally. Obviously, when people are stressed out, their jobs have been lost, and their finances are in shambles, it is not likely that they are suddenly happier in their marriages. The most likely explanation is that people believe that they cannot afford to divorce right now.
First, lawyers are expensive. Many people do not want to spend money on divorce attorneys in this economic downturn. People are having a hard time buying groceries and hanging on to their houses -- the last thing they want to do is to spend money on lawyers. However, the truth is that this may be the best time to seek the assistance of professionals - including attorneys.
Second, with the plunging values of homes, people are not able to sell their homes. In many situations the present indebtedness on the marital residence exceeds the value. Only by paying money to the title company at closing will they be able to sell their houses.
Third, the costs of maintaining two households has not dropped appreciably, and usually one spouse (despite the anger and frustration) is not willing to throw the other out on the street.
As a result, many spouses have decided to stay together, despite the realization that they really need a divorce. Here are some ideas to consider if you are in this situation:
1) You should consider going to a see a marriage counselor to make things better, or perhaps more importantly, save your marriage. At one point you likely vowed to stay married "in good times and in bad," and for "richer or poorer," exploring the causes of your unhappiness -- aside from the financial conditions -- might be an excellent idea. If kids are involved, it should be a priority.
2) Consider a post-nuptial agreement (or agreement between spouses) and divide assets and liabilities while things are still amicable. In most states, including Texas, spouses can agree to turn marital property into separate property while they are still married by way of a partition agreement. This way, when times are better, there are less ties between the spouses.
3) If one or both spouses have lost their jobs, and bills or credit card debts have been amassed, consider a bankruptcy. With reduced income levels, you may be able to qualify for more advantageous treatment under the Bankruptcy Code, or this simply may allow you to reorganize your finances to allow one of the spouses to hang on to the house. If your decision is to let the house go, by filing a bankruptcy, you may be able to discharge the deficiency. By discharging debt, the harassing creditor calls and stresses might be relieved.
4) If Bankruptcy is not an option, consider going to a financial planner. Some financial planners specialize in planning in the context of a divorce, others are more generalized. Consulting an expert is a great idea and nearly always worth the money. Sometimes the consultation, can at least crystallize the options so that there is less arguing about what to do.
5) Schedule a meeting to talk to a divorce attorney. Many attorneys allow you to meet with them for free. This is a good way to sort through your options. Many times the realization that this is for real can really help to light a fire under one or both of the spouses to solve the problems that are plaguing the marriage. Even if you decide against divorce, you may be able to spend the time wisely to choose a lawyer that you trust.
First, lawyers are expensive. Many people do not want to spend money on divorce attorneys in this economic downturn. People are having a hard time buying groceries and hanging on to their houses -- the last thing they want to do is to spend money on lawyers. However, the truth is that this may be the best time to seek the assistance of professionals - including attorneys.
Second, with the plunging values of homes, people are not able to sell their homes. In many situations the present indebtedness on the marital residence exceeds the value. Only by paying money to the title company at closing will they be able to sell their houses.
Third, the costs of maintaining two households has not dropped appreciably, and usually one spouse (despite the anger and frustration) is not willing to throw the other out on the street.
As a result, many spouses have decided to stay together, despite the realization that they really need a divorce. Here are some ideas to consider if you are in this situation:
1) You should consider going to a see a marriage counselor to make things better, or perhaps more importantly, save your marriage. At one point you likely vowed to stay married "in good times and in bad," and for "richer or poorer," exploring the causes of your unhappiness -- aside from the financial conditions -- might be an excellent idea. If kids are involved, it should be a priority.
2) Consider a post-nuptial agreement (or agreement between spouses) and divide assets and liabilities while things are still amicable. In most states, including Texas, spouses can agree to turn marital property into separate property while they are still married by way of a partition agreement. This way, when times are better, there are less ties between the spouses.
3) If one or both spouses have lost their jobs, and bills or credit card debts have been amassed, consider a bankruptcy. With reduced income levels, you may be able to qualify for more advantageous treatment under the Bankruptcy Code, or this simply may allow you to reorganize your finances to allow one of the spouses to hang on to the house. If your decision is to let the house go, by filing a bankruptcy, you may be able to discharge the deficiency. By discharging debt, the harassing creditor calls and stresses might be relieved.
4) If Bankruptcy is not an option, consider going to a financial planner. Some financial planners specialize in planning in the context of a divorce, others are more generalized. Consulting an expert is a great idea and nearly always worth the money. Sometimes the consultation, can at least crystallize the options so that there is less arguing about what to do.
5) Schedule a meeting to talk to a divorce attorney. Many attorneys allow you to meet with them for free. This is a good way to sort through your options. Many times the realization that this is for real can really help to light a fire under one or both of the spouses to solve the problems that are plaguing the marriage. Even if you decide against divorce, you may be able to spend the time wisely to choose a lawyer that you trust.
Wrongful Water Service Interruption Case Makes the Valley Media Again
Elderly residents to take Rio Hondo utility to trial
March 6, 2009 - 10:18 PM
By FERNANDO DEL VALLE/Valley Morning Star
RIO HONDO - Lawyers this week will take depositions from three elderly residents who claim the Rio Hondo Water Supply Corp. cut off water to their homes because they refused to grant an easement across their land for a water pipeline, an attorney said Friday.
Carl and Janel Parker and Carolina Ruiz plan to take the company to trial in state district court on May 13 for cutting off water to their homes on FM 510, Bob Schaezler, a San Antonio attorney who represents them, said.
Meanwhile, the water company has filed a request in state district court to condemn the customers' property. The company wants the land for a pipeline that is needed to provide water service to the growing area, said J.W. Dyer, a McAllen attorney who represents the company.
The customers claim the water company cut off their water because they refused to grant 20-foot easements for the pipeline, Schaezler said. "It's extortion," Schaezler said.
But Dyer said the company had the right to cut off water to Ruiz and the Parkers. The company said the water service was shut off because the customers failed to comply with an agreement that allows this action if an easement is refused, Dyer said.
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality ordered the company to restore water service in the precedent-setting case, Andrea Morrow, a spokeswoman for the agency in Austin, said. "I have not heard of it before," Morrow said, referring to the company's action.
About 30 feet of land separates the customers' front doors from the proposed easement's edge, said family members who spoke for the customers. The water company refused the customers' officer of 10-foot easements, Schaezler said.
Ruiz's water was shut off for about three months last summer as the area recovered from Hurricane Dolly, said Patty Fajardo, Ruiz's granddaughter. Ruiz, who uses crutches to walk, hauled water from an irrigation canal to wash dishes, drank bottled water, and drove to her daughter's San Benito home to bathe, Fajardo said.
"She doesn't want (the water company) to have what she's worked for for so long," Fajardo said of her grandmother's refusal to grant the easement. "She worked out in the fields for years and years."
Dyer said Ruiz's home was damaged by Hurricane Dolly and she wasn't living there for months. But Fajardo said her grandmother remained in her home after the water was turned off. Dyer also said Ruiz wanted the company to pay her about $25,000 in exchange for an easement. But Fajardo denied her grandmother tried to sell the land.
Water to the Parkers' home was turned off from July 30 to 31 and Aug. 13 to 22, Linda Swartz, the couple's granddaughter, said. They used bottled water to drink and bathe, she said. The couple fears the company would cut some trees if they granted the easement, Swartz said.
But Dyer said the company would cut only one tree to install the pipeline.
TCEQ ordered the water company to restore water service to the customers.
In a Nov. 12 order, TCEQ said the company is prohibited by law from cutting off water if customers refused to grant it easements.
"I think (TCEQ) way overstepped their bounds," Dyer said of the agency's order.
March 6, 2009 - 10:18 PM
By FERNANDO DEL VALLE/Valley Morning Star
RIO HONDO - Lawyers this week will take depositions from three elderly residents who claim the Rio Hondo Water Supply Corp. cut off water to their homes because they refused to grant an easement across their land for a water pipeline, an attorney said Friday.
Carl and Janel Parker and Carolina Ruiz plan to take the company to trial in state district court on May 13 for cutting off water to their homes on FM 510, Bob Schaezler, a San Antonio attorney who represents them, said.
Meanwhile, the water company has filed a request in state district court to condemn the customers' property. The company wants the land for a pipeline that is needed to provide water service to the growing area, said J.W. Dyer, a McAllen attorney who represents the company.
The customers claim the water company cut off their water because they refused to grant 20-foot easements for the pipeline, Schaezler said. "It's extortion," Schaezler said.
But Dyer said the company had the right to cut off water to Ruiz and the Parkers. The company said the water service was shut off because the customers failed to comply with an agreement that allows this action if an easement is refused, Dyer said.
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality ordered the company to restore water service in the precedent-setting case, Andrea Morrow, a spokeswoman for the agency in Austin, said. "I have not heard of it before," Morrow said, referring to the company's action.
About 30 feet of land separates the customers' front doors from the proposed easement's edge, said family members who spoke for the customers. The water company refused the customers' officer of 10-foot easements, Schaezler said.
Ruiz's water was shut off for about three months last summer as the area recovered from Hurricane Dolly, said Patty Fajardo, Ruiz's granddaughter. Ruiz, who uses crutches to walk, hauled water from an irrigation canal to wash dishes, drank bottled water, and drove to her daughter's San Benito home to bathe, Fajardo said.
"She doesn't want (the water company) to have what she's worked for for so long," Fajardo said of her grandmother's refusal to grant the easement. "She worked out in the fields for years and years."
Dyer said Ruiz's home was damaged by Hurricane Dolly and she wasn't living there for months. But Fajardo said her grandmother remained in her home after the water was turned off. Dyer also said Ruiz wanted the company to pay her about $25,000 in exchange for an easement. But Fajardo denied her grandmother tried to sell the land.
Water to the Parkers' home was turned off from July 30 to 31 and Aug. 13 to 22, Linda Swartz, the couple's granddaughter, said. They used bottled water to drink and bathe, she said. The couple fears the company would cut some trees if they granted the easement, Swartz said.
But Dyer said the company would cut only one tree to install the pipeline.
TCEQ ordered the water company to restore water service to the customers.
In a Nov. 12 order, TCEQ said the company is prohibited by law from cutting off water if customers refused to grant it easements.
"I think (TCEQ) way overstepped their bounds," Dyer said of the agency's order.
Thứ Tư, 4 tháng 3, 2009
New Texas Court Dockets, CAD and Clerks Web sites
We sponsor these sites developed by a developer friend of ours, but we thought other lawyers that may peruse our blog may also find these tools useful.
TexasDockets.com - When there are court dockets online, or searchable judicial records, this site links to those search pages.
TexasCAD.com - Now improved, and with many more counties added, this site allows people to search Texas County Appraisal Districts for information like property ownership, property values, etc. A great collection tool or real estate market tool.
TexasClerks.com - This is a brand new site, it basically provides links to hundreds of Texas County Clerks, District Clerks and Federal Clerks within the state of Texas.
TexasLocalRules.com - This is a site that links to the local rules of courts in Texas.
Pretty helpful stuff, and obviously many man hours went into the searching for these resources.
TexasDockets.com - When there are court dockets online, or searchable judicial records, this site links to those search pages.
TexasCAD.com - Now improved, and with many more counties added, this site allows people to search Texas County Appraisal Districts for information like property ownership, property values, etc. A great collection tool or real estate market tool.
TexasClerks.com - This is a brand new site, it basically provides links to hundreds of Texas County Clerks, District Clerks and Federal Clerks within the state of Texas.
TexasLocalRules.com - This is a site that links to the local rules of courts in Texas.
Pretty helpful stuff, and obviously many man hours went into the searching for these resources.
Thứ Hai, 2 tháng 3, 2009
JUDGE WATCH: Texas Supreme Court Justice Nathan Hecht - Ethics Complaint Dismissed for Insufficient Evidence
Here in Texas, our highest courts in the adjudication of Texas law are split -- civil matters go to the Texas Supreme Court (TSCt), and criminal cases are reviewed by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA).
And, there's something to ponder in the fact that the national media has justices on both these courts in their headlines for possible bad acts. Yes, folks, let's ponder that for a bit.
While CCA Chief Justice Sharon Keller (see earlier post on her impending trial and possible impeachment) will be in the news for months to come, TSCt Justice Nathan Hecht is probably going to fade away from the national media scene because of a decision released last month, and hitting the media news late last week.
Texas Ethics Commission Clears Justice Hecht
On February 12, 2009, the Texas Ethics Commission issued a final order in a year-long investigation into activities of Justice Hecht. The TEC dismissed the complaint against the Texas Supreme Court justice because "insufficient evidence" was found that the state election code had been violated.
Justice Hecht Accused of Using Political Contributions for Personal Use
Over a year ago, Hecht was accused of using campaign money to travel to Carrollton, Texas (Hecht lives in Austin). Hecht, however, has a home in Carrollton, attends church in Carrollton, does some of his TSCt work in Carrollton, and has "lots of friends" in Carrollton.
Justice Hecht's Reprimand and $29K Fine Still Holds
Of course, this doesn't change the reprimand that Justice Hecht received last fall, from this same ethics commission, to the tune of $29,000. In that matter, Justice Hecht was found to have received an illegal campaign contribution amounting to $168,000 because the law firm Jackson Walker discounted his legal fees by that amount during his legal fight against allegations that he had abused his position as a justice on the TSCt by openly supporting Harriett Miers in her failed bid for the United States Supreme Court.
(Hecht's argument to the underlying legal challenge? He's prohibited from supporting a candidate running for judicial office under the Code of Judicial Conduct, not from supporting someone nominated for appointment.)
That's Not All Folks ....
And, if you're thinking this is all there is to ethics investigations into the high courts of our fair state, think again. There's the 2008 investigation into TSCt Justice David Medina - alleging that he may have violated state law when he reimbursed himself $57,000 in mileage (commuting between his Houston home and Austin) out of campaign funds.
You'll remember that Houston home -- it's the one that Justice Medina's wife was accused of burning down when arson charges were filed against her.
Sources:
Associated Press
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hbVtxppqsV8p1RE_M-z5Uhysp6yQD96JK3280
International Herald Tribune
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/12/05/america/Texas-Justice-Ethics.php
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-hecht_27tex.ART.State.Edition1.4a8701f.html
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/robison/5863268.html
And, there's something to ponder in the fact that the national media has justices on both these courts in their headlines for possible bad acts. Yes, folks, let's ponder that for a bit.
While CCA Chief Justice Sharon Keller (see earlier post on her impending trial and possible impeachment) will be in the news for months to come, TSCt Justice Nathan Hecht is probably going to fade away from the national media scene because of a decision released last month, and hitting the media news late last week.
Texas Ethics Commission Clears Justice Hecht
On February 12, 2009, the Texas Ethics Commission issued a final order in a year-long investigation into activities of Justice Hecht. The TEC dismissed the complaint against the Texas Supreme Court justice because "insufficient evidence" was found that the state election code had been violated.
Justice Hecht Accused of Using Political Contributions for Personal Use
Over a year ago, Hecht was accused of using campaign money to travel to Carrollton, Texas (Hecht lives in Austin). Hecht, however, has a home in Carrollton, attends church in Carrollton, does some of his TSCt work in Carrollton, and has "lots of friends" in Carrollton.
Justice Hecht's Reprimand and $29K Fine Still Holds
Of course, this doesn't change the reprimand that Justice Hecht received last fall, from this same ethics commission, to the tune of $29,000. In that matter, Justice Hecht was found to have received an illegal campaign contribution amounting to $168,000 because the law firm Jackson Walker discounted his legal fees by that amount during his legal fight against allegations that he had abused his position as a justice on the TSCt by openly supporting Harriett Miers in her failed bid for the United States Supreme Court.
(Hecht's argument to the underlying legal challenge? He's prohibited from supporting a candidate running for judicial office under the Code of Judicial Conduct, not from supporting someone nominated for appointment.)
That's Not All Folks ....
And, if you're thinking this is all there is to ethics investigations into the high courts of our fair state, think again. There's the 2008 investigation into TSCt Justice David Medina - alleging that he may have violated state law when he reimbursed himself $57,000 in mileage (commuting between his Houston home and Austin) out of campaign funds.
You'll remember that Houston home -- it's the one that Justice Medina's wife was accused of burning down when arson charges were filed against her.
Sources:
Associated Press
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hbVtxppqsV8p1RE_M-z5Uhysp6yQD96JK3280
International Herald Tribune
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/12/05/america/Texas-Justice-Ethics.php
Dallas Morning News
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-hecht_27tex.ART.State.Edition1.4a8701f.html
Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/robison/5863268.html
Đăng ký:
Bài đăng (Atom)