Monday, July 28, 2014

Are New Gun Laws Coming?


A recent Huffington Post article highlights that more than half of Republicans would support a new law that takes guns away from people convicted of stalking. The NRA stands in opposition. The Senate will meet on Wednesday in its first ever hearing that discusses gun violence against women.

The new legislation was authored by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and would ban ownership of guns by people that are convicted of stalking. A letter was sent from gun lobbyists stating that the bill "manipulates emotionally compelling issues such as 'domestic violence' and 'stalking' simply to cast as wide a net as possible for federal firearm prohibitions."

Although the legal definition of 'stalking' varies from state to state, a protective order (PO) can be issued that is valid nationwide. In some jurisdictions, judges can make the determination of whether or not the person that the PO is levied against can own or purchase a firearm while the PO is active.

What is your opinion? Would you vote to enact this legislation if it appeared on your ballot? If you were a member of Congress, would you support this measure? Do you think the government is simply trying to find ways to ban guns?  Join the conversation below.

___________________________
If you would like more information about this topic or have general legal questions, please feel free to contact me at (973)949-3770 or via email at plamont@peterlamontesq.com We answer legal questions on a daily basis and would be happy to discuss any issues or questions that you have with you.  Offices in: New Jersey New York, Colorado & Puerto Rico.  Affiliated throughout the country.

© 2014, Law Offices of Peter J. Lamont. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between the firm and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.


Sunday, July 27, 2014

Dream Home Nightmare

Thinking about buying that dream home in Pennsylvania? Wondering why your potential neighbors look at you funny? You could be buying a home with a dirty little secret...murder! That's right, the High Court ruled last week that there is no duty to disclose that type of information to potential buyers.

This decision really hinges on what is considered a material defect. The court ruled that history of the property is not a material defect even if it causes a "psychological impact."

Do you think sellers should have a duty to disclose? Comment below!

___________________________
If you would like more information about this topic or have general legal questions, please feel free to contact me at (973)949-3770 or via email at plamont@peterlamontesq.com We answer legal questions on a daily basis and would be happy to discuss any issues or questions that you have with you.  Offices in: New Jersey New York, Colorado & Puerto Rico.  Affiliated throughout the country.

© 2014, Law Offices of Peter J. Lamont. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between the firm and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Saturday, July 26, 2014

Appearing Alone

The Law Offices of Peter J. Lamont believes that an attorney isn't always necessary. We've discussed it on our YouTube page, here on our blog, and on our show Understanding the Law. There are a lot of things that individuals can accomplish without an attorney. However, there are specific times that a person definitely needs an attorney.

If you make the choice to appear in a court of law without an attorney, you are pro se. Plaintiffs or defendants who appear pro se are still required to know and obey the rules of the court. There are some things that a judge may let slide because a judge knows that the person appearing is not a licensed attorney. However, judges expect litigants to obey in and outside of the courtroom.  Monday we will discuss a case about a pro se defendant who found himself held in contempt of court.

Remember that if you choose to appear alone that you are taking your legal rights in your own hands. The Internet is full of misleading information. Make sure that the information you plan to present is on point.

Download our free app and join us on Monday!
___________________________
If you would like more information about this topic or have general legal questions, please feel free to contact me at (973)949-3770 or via email at plamont@peterlamontesq.com We answer legal questions on a daily basis and would be happy to discuss any issues or questions that you have with you.  Offices in: New Jersey New York, Colorado & Puerto Rico.  Affiliated throughout the country.

© 2014, Law Offices of Peter J. Lamont. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between the firm and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.


More Death Penalty Problems

An execution of an Arizona inmate took almost two hours last Wednesday. Most executions only take around 10 minutes. An hour into the execution, the federal public defender sent two lawyers to file an emergency motion to stop the execution. They also called members of the Arizona Supreme Court. Wood died during the discussion.

Convicted double murderer Joseph Rudolph Wood was observed snorting and gasping for breath. The state corrections department disputed saying that he snored. A witness for KSAZ disagreed and called it a "fish on shore gulping for air." Arizona Republic reporter Michael Kiefer stated that Woo must have gasped for air about 640 times.

Gov. Jan Brewer said that they will review the execution, but that "Wood died in a lawful manner." Richard Brown, relative of murder victim Debra Dietz, said that he had no issues with the execution. "This man conducted a horrific murder and you guys are going, let's worry about the drugs."

Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the US Circuit Court of Appeals believes that states should return to more "foolproof" methods of execution such as the guillotine and the electric chair. He is most supportive of a firing squad.

Should we, as a nation, be more concerned about the suffering of someone convicted of a heinous act? If since they committed the crime, should they receive a reprieve that they did not offer to their victim(s)?

Should we do away with the death penalty or should it just be modified as Judge Kozinski suggests? Is an execution botched if the recipient is dead?

___________________________
If you would like more information about this topic or have general legal questions, please feel free to contact me at (973)949-3770 or via email at plamont@peterlamontesq.com We answer legal questions on a daily basis and would be happy to discuss any issues or questions that you have with you.  Offices in: New Jersey New York, Colorado & Puerto Rico.  Affiliated throughout the country.

© 2014, Law Offices of Peter J. Lamont. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between the firm and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Wednesday, July 23, 2014

Business & Personal Law Attorney Peter Lamont Explains What NY Courts Say About Spanking Your Child


On this Episode of Legal BRIEF, Business and Personal Law Attorney Peter J. Lamont explains whether spanking your child constitutes child abuse under New York law.

___________________________
If you would like more information about this topic or have general legal questions, please feel free to contact me at (973)949-3770 or via email at plamont@peterlamontesq.com We answer legal questions on a daily basis and would be happy to discuss any issues or questions that you have with you.  Offices in: New Jersey New York, Colorado & Puerto Rico.  Affiliated throughout the country.

© 2014, Law Offices of Peter J. Lamont. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between the firm and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Oil Export?

In 1974, there was an Arab oil boycott. In response, Congress created a ban on exporting American Oil. They called it an act of national security. Many believe that to be true for that time. Almost 40 years have passed since the oil export ban. Almost 40 years later, Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz asked Congress to reconsider. "those restrictions on exports were born, as was the Department of Energy and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, on oil disruptions."

The International Energy Agency (IEA) believes that America will produce more oil than Russia by 2015. It also states that America will produce more oil than Saudi Arabia by 2017. OPEC revenues are down. Since some OPEC companies use their oil money to support terrorism, should the US change its position and export oil? Would exporting US oil mean less money given to terrorists?

Senator Edward J. Markey (D - Mass) believes that American oil should be kept here for consumers. Yet our gas prices continue to go up despite the increase in oil production.

Should Congress lift the exportation ban? Let us know your thoughts.

Tuesday, July 22, 2014

California Death Penalty: Cruel and Unusual

While we've all been glued to the television watching the news about Palestine and Israel, a federal judge in the central district of California ruled that California's death penalty is unconstitutional.

Judge Cormac J. Carney has ruled that the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment. California has sentenced more than 900 people to the death penalty since 1978. Out of those 900, only 13 people have been executed. Almost 100 have died from other causes such as old age, illness, and suicide.

The court noted that these cases can take more than 25 years thanks to delays in the appellate process that stop the execution from occurring. The appellate delays aren't just on the part of the prisoners. Those delays are often caused by the state. A report by the California Commission on Fair Administration of Justice stated that the death penalty system was "plagued with excessive delay." None of the recommended solutions have been implemented by the system. Other delays occur due to a shortage of qualified counsel and a backup of cases. All state cases must exhaust state remedies before moving on to a federal appeal.

Judge Carney ruled that California's death penalty is a violation of Furman (which struck down death penalty sentencing that "created a substantial risk that it would be inflicted in an arbitrary and capricious manner." He also found that it no longer serves the purpose of capital punishment. 

Do you believe in the death penalty? Share your thoughts with us below. How do you see this ruling affecting the nation in the light of all of the "botched" executions that have also taken place within the last year?

Monday, July 21, 2014

ICYMI - Monday, July 21, 2014: Week in Review

If you missed today's Week in Review podcast, you can go here to listen to it for free. It's also available on iTunes.

Things you should know about:


  • Noriega is suing Activision alleging lost profits. The ousted dictator of Panama believes that a character in a Call of Duty game is him. To find out more on this story, click here.
  • Debra Harrell's attorney spoke out to defend the actions of his client. He stated that his client is not guilty of a crime. We happen to agree with him. Ms. Harrell's daughter is still in state custody. 
  • A nine year old girl called the police on her drug dealing parents. Her reasoning? They were blowing marijuana smoke into the face of their dog. They had more than pot in the home, by the way. They also had a stash of meth. While Debra Harrell had her daughter removed from her custody, this little girl still gets to live with her meth dealing parents. 
  • DEA is sued by an addict. The addict alleges that he was paid in crack. The kicker to this story is that he said that before his involvement with the DEA that he was clean. To find out more on this story, click here
  • Speaking of drugs again, Colorado is selling more pot than expected. Math doesn't lie - legalizing marijuana was good for the state. Click here for more. PS - marijuana is still against federal law. That can affect your employment.
  • Pregnant women are now better protected by the EEOC. Click here to learn more. 
Don't forget to download our free app. It puts you straight into contact with a licensed attorney to get a FREE answer to your legal question.

We are currently preparing for a great episode of Legal Q & A. Submit your legal or business question by clicking here

$25k Florida Shake Down

Recently, Lakeland, Florida officials paid Zoe Brugger $25,000.00. Brugger was pulled over in May 2013 because of a broken headlight. Officer Dustin Fetz made Brugger shake out her bra several times allegedly searching for drugs. The officer's dash cam recorded the encounter, but Fetz left his microphone on mute. Additionally, Fetz searched Brugger's vehicle over her objections and without a search warrant.

Fetz was not reprimanded for his behavior. He served a one day suspension because his microphone was on mute. Brugger will sign a release that promises she will not sue the city in exchange for the money.

If this were you, what would you have done? Would you sue or settle?

Saturday, July 19, 2014

Are Parental Rights Endangered?

Last week, we discussed Debra Harrell and her unfortunate arrest. In case you missed it, she left her nine year old daughter at the park (with a cell phone) and went to work around two miles away at McDonald's. Sadly, this is not an isolated incident.

About two years ago, Tammy Cooper of La Porte, Texas spent 18 hours in jail for allegations of child endangerment. Her two children were playing outside on motorized scooters. A neighbor called stating the children were unsupervised. Cooper states she was watching from a lawn chair. Charges were eventually dropped and she decided to sue.

It should be noted that one of the reasons why Elian Gonzalez was returned to his Cuban father was because of the inherent belief that parents should be allowed to raise their children in the manner in which they see fit. The idea is that it is not the job of the government to decide how parents should raise their children. The government should only be involved in cases where children are neglected or abused.

Participating in age appropriate activities outside is not a crime. If you do not like the way your neighbor chooses to raise their children, that doesn't mean that they are committing a crime. It means that you and your neighbor have conflicting ideals. Disagreeing with political ideology, such as in the Elian Gonzalez case, is also not a crime. The government or police should not always interact as the decision maker.

Do you allow your children to play outside unsupervised? Do you allow them to play outside and keep an eye on them using technology? Comment below.
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...