1QwHbiJ6KXulIEn3RgwclkQLHNZGU

Friday, November 30, 2012

Judgments And Community Property States

I am a Judgment Broker, and am not a lawyer. My articles are my opinions, and not legal advice. If you ever need any legal advice or a strategy to use, please contact a lawyer.

Community Property states are those where both married spouses share responsibility for all debts and income incurred or earned by themselves individually, and also whatever is earned or any debts incurred by their spousal partner. In such states, each spouse has a one-half, undivided, legal or equitable, vested or contingent, present or future interest in their assets and properties.

Sometimes the judgment debtor named on your judgment is judgment proof, meaning they will be difficult or impossible to recover from. In Community Property states, you may have two people to recover from, which doubles your chances to recover the money you are owed. Such states are currently: (occasionally Alaska), Arizona, California, Idaho, (some Indian reservations), Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Puerto Rico, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin.

Judgment enforcement choices sometimes depend on Community Property laws that vary in most such states. A quick visit to the local law library or a few minutes of research on the web, should easily clarify the situation of a judgment in a community property state.

In a community property state, one can usually levy wages, property, bank accounts, or other assets belonging to the judgment debtor and their spouse. Levying a judgment debtor's spouse usually requires approval by the court, and a properly endorsed court-filed affidavit, declaration, or a motion; that documents your reasons why some assets of the judgment debtor's spouse should be available to pay towards the judgment debt.

Not every asset a couple has can be considered community property. What is usually considered to be that kind of property is all the money each spouse earned during the length of their marriage, and any assets bought with their earnings including real estate, vehicles, and most any other asset, and usually also their debts. Unless separate assets can be traced to their origin, commingling separate and shared property usually results in all commingled assets being considered to be community property.

What is usually not Community Property is anything either spouse earned or received before their marriage, or gifts or inheritances the non-debtor spouse received during the marriage that was not used by both parties.

The laws of your state will show the extent of a judgment debtor spouse's liability for a judgment debt. Often in a community property state, you can pursue both spouse's assets to recover your judgment. It might not matter whether they are still married, as long as they were married when the money judgment was issued by the court. In community property states, you probably can levy, garnish, or pursue most any other enforcement strategy against both spouse at the same time.

Automobile Appraisal Expert Witnesses For Litigation Common Types of Bail Bonds Tips for Selecting the Best Legal Staffing Agency Judgment Debtor Exemptions And Timelines Should You Outsource Your Judgments? When Should You Contact a Litigation Lawyer?

Acoustics Expert Witness: An Introduction

What is an Acoustics Expert Witness?

In a nutshell, acoustics is the study of sound, which entails elements related to noise, vibration, and frequency among several others. Acoustic expert witnesses, therefore, are professionals who give their expert testimony about the acoustic nature of a certain place or thing. They are sometimes called "noise expert witnesses" because they sometimes give expert noise evidence. Some of the areas that they focus on are buildings, architectural structure, and the environment in general.

To be a specialist in acoustics, one must comply with the strict requirements of the court. Some of the qualifications include the following: extensive knowledge of all areas of acoustics, years of experience in the field, and at least a bachelor's degree in a related field.

The importance of an acoustic authority in court can be demonstrated in different instances. That is why there are different types of acoustic expert witnesses, depending on the area they focus on. For instance, in the medical industry, some professionals are asked to determine the effect of different sound levels on the health of a person. They will also tell the court how an injured can be cured. These professionals can sometimes be called audio specialists as they focus on the following areas: frequency and waves of sound, sound transmission, sound propagation, and sound reception.

Importance of an Acoustics Professional

As previously mentioned, there are different types of acoustic professionals, and each of them has a different set of roles in and out of court. Among these roles are the following.

1. They provide appropriate advice to solve problems related to sound and noise. 2. They provide a detailed assessment and evaluation of a building's sound proof system. This is usually presented in legal cases where noise is concerned. 3. Outside of the court, these professionals can give advice on the proper way to install a sound system to avoid sound problems. 4. They carry out noise surveys and reports. 5. They represent the client in court in case he is involved with charges relating with noise. They support the client in every way possible since they are well-informed of legal laws relating to noise. 6. They represent clients at local authority license hearing to assist late license application or renewal. Late license application or renewal is a process that may not be possible without an expert witness to help.

In case the need for an acoustic expert arises, there are many of them in the market. One needs to know which type of acoustic professional they need and why. To find one, one can use the Yellow Pages directory or expert witness online directories.

Frequently Asked Questions For Mediation Lawyers

These days, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) services are constantly on the rise for solving legal issues without having to go to court. Not only does it mean that the case takes considerably less time to be solved, it also means that you are more likely to come to a conclusion that both parties are happy with and are willing to adhere to. If you are going to meet with a mediation lawyer soon, knowing the answers to some of the most frequently asked questions may help you out:

1. "What is mediation?"

This is the process by which two parties to a dispute meet with their mediation lawyers and an impartial mediator in order to resolve the issues of their case. The aim of the process is to try and salvage whatever relationship the parties have left (as a court proceeding will, more often than not, end it completely).

2. "What sorts of cases can mediation solve?"

A mediator is able to work with a range of situations, including: divorce or child custody/visitation disputes; personal injury or accident cases; consumer complaints (involving car sales, for example); business and commercial disagreements; complaints against financial and brokerage companies; landlord-tenant fights; and minor criminal matters.

3. "How does mediation differ to a regular court proceeding?"

The main difference between the two is that the mediation lawyers are not the ones in control - the parties of the case are. You are the people who decide how things are going to happen; the lawyers are only there to help you understand different processes and to keep discussions civil. These meetings are also arranged around your schedule, whereas the court doesn't take this into account.

4. "What can I expect from mediation?"

Basically, there are two types of meetings that you may be involved in - the first is one in which all parties (yourself, the opposing party, your mediation lawyers and the mediator) all meet together; the second is one in which only some of the parties meet (yourself, your lawyer and the mediator, for example). At the end of discussions, you can expect to sign a fully comprehensive document outlining the conditions of the agreement.

If you have any other questions, do not hesitate to ask your mediation lawyer when you next meet with them. After all, it is likely that you will meet with your lawyer a number of times before the mediation process commences, which will give you plenty of time to develop a good understanding of what the entire process involves, from start to finish. And, if your case cannot be solved in a civil way through mediation, at least you can rest assured that it will be dealt with by the courts.

Supreme Court Decision Shatters Liberal and Conservative Stereotypes

Recently, the United States Supreme Court drafted and published one of our Nation's most important decisions when it upheld the controversial health care law which President Barack Obama promised to deliver to all Americans during his presidency.

It's a potential victory for Obama and all who wanted universal health care. And putting aside the fact that many thought it couldn't be done, how it got done says more about how our legal system worked properly than most are willing to accept.

Obama had a most unlikely ally in this fight, Chief Justice John Roberts. Known as a conservative's conservative, Roberts broke political rank and actually drafted the majority opinion that now allows the government to continue implementing the health care law, which doesn't take full effect until 2014.

In authoring the majority opinion, Roberts found himself in strange company, i.e., the Supreme Court's notorious liberal group - Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Upholding the law, he wrote: "In this case, however, it is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who have a certain amount of income, but choose to go without health insurance." He noted, "Such legislation is within Congress's power to tax."

He added: "The federal government does not have the power to order people to buy health insurance... The federal government does have the power to impose a tax on those without health insurance."

Yes. "Conservative" John Roberts wrote that. But how could he write that and still be a (gasp) conservative?

Well, he explained that his permissive interpretation of the federal government's power in this case is explained in part by a general reticence that the Supreme Court has "to invalidate the acts of the Nation's elected leaders." He noted from prior case law that proper respect "for a co-ordinate branch of the government requires that we strike down an Act of Congress only if the lack of constitutional authority to pass the act in question is clearly demonstrated."

In a sense, Roberts' refusal to engage in judicial activism, his honoring of prior precedent, and his conservative attachment to the rule of law (all things that conservatives wish for when they ask for a judge) turned him into a (gasp) liberal.

But not really. What he actually did was more significant than that. He was a courageous jurist. He read and followed the law. And he stayed out of politics. Nothing more. Nothing less.

John Roberts shattered the liberal and conservative stereotypes that we too often live within our legal system. He acted as a courageous judge who showed us all how our three branched system of government is supposed to work.

Automobile Appraisal Expert Witnesses For Litigation Common Types of Bail Bonds Tips for Selecting the Best Legal Staffing Agency Judgment Debtor Exemptions And Timelines

More Than One Judgment

I am a Judgment Broker, and am not a lawyer. My articles are my opinions, and not legal advice. If you ever need any legal advice or a strategy to use, please contact a lawyer.

When you won your judgment, your first thought was perhaps something similar to "I want to collect as much as possible from this louse". Your next thought might have been "How can I collect my judgment?" You might have even wished that you could collect more than what was legally required, because that fraud ripped you off.

Alas, the law does not permit one to recover more than what is owed on a judgment, which is the sum of the original amount of the judgment, any accrued interest, and most court-related recovery costs that have been documented and approved by the court.

Sometimes your judgment debtor burned other creditors too, and some other people or entities may also have judgments against your debtor. If your debtor has assets, and you are persistent enough to satisfy your own judgment, perhaps you could try to enforce the judgments other creditors have against your original debtor?

Most judgments are never collected, so perhaps after you learn how to recover your own judgment, you can recover judgments for some other creditors of your debtor. Professional judgment enforcers do that all the time, they look for other judgments against the same debtor.

Once you go through the expense and hassle of discovering your debtor's location and assets, you can use that knowledge, to recover other judgment debts that your debtor owes to other creditors.

At the same court you got your judgment at, or with some kind of information service, you can find other unsatisfied judgments that your debtor owes. Then you can contact the other creditors and offer to purchase their judgments. If the creditors have a realistic interest in getting any money from their judgment, then you can make the creditors an offer, to purchase them.

How much to offer to pay the other judgment owners is up to you. Some states only allow outright cash upfront sales. The average price paid is 50% of what you recover, after you recover the money, on a future payment basis; or a tiny fraction of the original value (2-7% is the average) for a cash upfront purchase. Do not buy a judgment cash upfront for too much money, for many reasons; including the debtor may run out of money, and if they file for bankruptcy protection, you probably will not get a dime.

After the judgment purchase prices are agreed on, then you ask the other judgment owners to sign your judgment purchase agreement, and also your (notarized by them) "Acknowledgement Of Assignment Of Judgment" to transfer their judgment to you. Then, as the new owner of the judgment, you file the completed Acknowledgement Of Assignment Of Judgment with the clerk of court. Then you will own it, allowing you to engage in the same recovery procedures that you used on your original judgment.

Before you try to recover judgments from original owners, make sure doing so is legal in your state. The ability to purchase them and then attempt to recover them, depends on the pertinent statutes and court rules in the debtor's particular state and jurisdiction.

Recovering again, against the same debtor, allows you to benefit from your first enforcement efforts. You can simply repeat the steps, for any additional judgments that you have purchased against the same debtor. Imagine the joy of not only recovering your own judgment, but also making additional money helping others recover what is owed to them by your debtor.

Multiple Judgment Debtors

When there is more than one judgment debtor named on a judgment, it usually increases the odds that some money can be recovered on that judgment. My articles are my opinions, and not legal advice. I am a judgment referral expert, and am not a lawyer. If you ever need any legal advice or a strategy to use, please contact a lawyer.

A simple multiple judgment debtor example, would be if Mr. Chris Creditor won a civil money judgment against Dan Deadbeat, (Dan's sister) Debbie Deadbeat, and their business associate Sammy Scammer. The judgment states that all three are jointly and severally liable, and all owe the $60,000. Jointly and severally liable means that money may be recovered from one, both, or all three of those judgment debtors. One cannot legally collect more than the total of $60,000 in this example (plus costs and interest) owed from each, or all the judgment debtors named on that judgment.

Chris Creditor can perform post-judgment investigations on all three judgment debtors. Chris can identity and locate each of their assets. If one debtor has non-exempt assets available, which are sufficient to satisfy the entire judgment debt, the judgment can be recovered from that one judgment debtor. If that debtor thinks that is unfair, they can file for bankruptcy protection, try to vacate the judgment, or more likely, take the matter up with the other two judgment debtors.

The available assets of all three judgment debtors can be levied to satisfy that judgment. Very few debtors have $60,000 sitting in their checking account. Usually, debtor bank levies only capture enough money to partially satisfy a judgment. If Chris Creditor pays a Sheriff to levy the bank accounts of all three debtors and gets $6,000 more than what is owed; that $6,000 must be returned to the debtor(s) who have paid the most, usually as the result of Sheriff levies of their bank account(s).

When there are multiple debtors, which debtor should you try to recover from first? The first answer is the debtor who seems to have the most available assets. The second answer depends on the way each debtor was served notice of the lawsuit, and which judgment debtors responded and showed up in court, when the lawsuit was getting turned into a judgment.

All other things being equal, default judgments are weaker judgments. When a debtor is served notice of a lawsuit and then does not appear in court, that means any judgment against them will be by default. Sometimes, when multiple defendants are served notice of the lawsuit against them, some of them show up in court, and some do not.

Judgment debtors that do not show up in court get default judgments against them, and the ones that do show up get regular judgments against them. With a default, debtors can lie and claim they were not served, even when they were. If the judge believes them, the court may grant a debtor's motion to vacate it.

Default judgments, where the debtor was not personally served notice of the lawsuit by a Sheriff, Marshall, or a registered process server, are the weakest ones. All things being equal, it makes sense to first try to recover from the debtors that showed up in court. Between default judgment debtors with similar asset situations, the ones served notice of the lawsuit personally, are the ones to try to recover from first.

If a judgment is eventually repaid or settled, a satisfaction of judgment must be stamped and filed by the court to release every debtor named on the judgment.