RSS
 

Posts Tagged ‘way’

Win Without Risking Trial!

28 May

 

Do you really know how to win before trial? 

Lawyers may drag out a case (so they can make more money billing for their time), and many insist on going to trial (which costs even more money).

If you hold the winning cards (i.e., if the law and the facts favor your case) you can win before trial!

Let me explain. The full details you need to know are in my affordable step-by-step Jurisdictionary course, but I can give you a few starting points to convince you of the value of my affordable course and why you should order today … if you don’t already have my popular course!

#1 … There is absolutely nothing in the way of evidence you can get into the record at trial that you cannot get into the record before trial, using your five (5) powerful evidence discovery tools, as more fully explained in my popular and affordable step-by-step 24-hour course.

There are no witnesses you cannot question under oath before trial.

There are no documents or things you cannot get into the recordbefore trial.

There is nothing going to happen at trial that cannot be made to happen before trial.

If the facts are on your side, you can get them all into evidence beforetrial, using my Jurisdictionary methods.

#2 … There are absolutely no legal arguments you can make at trial that you cannot make before trial using the research and memorandum system my course explains.

If the law is on your side, you don’t have to wait to go to trial to make your legal arguments. You can and should make all your legal arguments before trial the way my popular self-help course explains.

You can quote and cite all the statutes, constitutional provisions, common law doctrine, and court rules that may apply to your case using the research and memorandum system my course explains to make your winning record.

#3 … There is absolutely nothing that can be done at a trial that cannot be resolved in your favor before trial, if you have a winning case (i.e., if the law and facts are on your side).

In a very real sense, the “trying” of your case begins at the filing of the very first pleading and continues through every phase of litigation.

Here are 4 common reasons cases go to trial and why you need my course whether you have a lawyer or not.

  1. They had a lazy lawyer who didn’t do the pre-trial work hecould have done.
  2. They had a stupid lawyer who didn’t know how to do the pre-trial work he could have done.
  3. They had a greedy lawyer who dragged out the case to the bitter end to take more money from his client.
  4. They didn’t have a lawyer, and they didn’t know what my popular Jurisdictionary course makes so easy-to-understand that an average 8th grader can learn it all in single weekend.

You don’t have to wait until trial to win!

Here are a few of the dozens of reasons why you should do all you can possibly do to avoid going to trial:

  1. Trial is uncertain, especially with unpredictable juries or corrupt judges.
  2. Trial is a “think on your feet” exercise that keeps you on your toes, where pre-trial work is slow and steady and lets you work at your own pace.
  3. Trial exposes you to the dirtiest lawyer tricks in a way that failure to react quickly to put a stop to the high jinks of your opponent can be fatal.

If you have a winnable case, win before trial!

There are no questions you can ask at a trial that you cannot ask before trial using interrogatories, requests for admissions, depositions, and subpoenas as explained in my affordable course.

There are no documents or things you can bring to trial that you cannot get into the trial record before trial using requests for production, subpoenas, and depositions duce tecum as explained in my course.

There are no legal arguments you can make at trial that you cannot make more effectively and powerfully before trial using the legal research and memorandum system my course explains.

Winning starts with solid, effective pleadings!

The battle begins with the initial pleadings where each party alleges what he or she intends to prove.

Proving what they allege can all be done before trial, if you do things the Jurisdictionary way.

If you don’t win before trial, you didn’t do what you could have done earlier in the case when you still had lots of time to do it. Trial is crunch time! Not a good place to be, if you can avoid it by fighting for justice before trial the Jurisdictionary way.

You won’t believe me, but most lawyers (and nearly all law school professors) don’t have a clue what it takes to winbefore trial.

One thing that’s required to win beforetrial is brave willingness to stand up to the judge and demand your right to get evidence into the record using your five discovery tools. Many lawyers are afraid to upset judges, so they let things slide. They don’t object. They don’t “instruct” the judge on the law. They just lay back, take their hourly fee, and let their clients lose … and those who pay lawyers yet don’t know what Jurisdictionary teaches about winning before trial are none the wiser. Sad, but true!

I know what it takes to win before trial.

My Jurisdictionary will show you how, too … in just 24-hours … step-by-step!

The Jurisdictionary Method wins lawsuits!

Watch my video and see for yourself how easy it is to use knowledge, stealth, and wisdom to win in court!

See what’s important, what’s not, and how to focus all your energy where it belongs: getting court orders!

If you gain from watching my video, please forward this newsletter to ALL YOUR FRIENDS by hitting “Forward” on your email program now.

Or use this link to send an email to all your friends. You probably know people who need to knock down judges and overcome crooked lawyers and their dishonest tricks. They will thank you for turning them on to this!

Or, do both! Forward this newsletter AND send emails to friends fighting in court who desperately need to know how to win!

Most lawyers never learn what Jurisdictionary makes so easy-to-learn. People have been telling me since I started Jurisdictionary in 1997 that, “Your course should be required in first year law school.” But, of course, that’s not likely to happen, because whatJurisdictionary shows you isn’t politically correct! I teach you how to control judges, instead of bowing to them, I I teach you how to overcome crooked lawyers and their all-too-common sneaky tricks!

Political correctness prevents justice too often!

Winning lawsuits is a brutal axe fight!

Jurisdictionary is your axe!

Read the testimonials in the right column ⇒

Thousands of people just like you are winning with my easy-to-learn 24-hour step-by-step course. Ask anyone who has my course.Everyone loves it!

If you don’t know what my course teaches, you lose!

End of story!

Winners do what Jurisdictionary makes easy-to-learn and don’t wait until trial to get justice!

Those who learn my affordable 24-hour step-by-step Jurisdictionary self-help course win … no matter how high the odds are stacked against them!

Winners know how to fight to win!

Losers believe internet fables. Losers get their legal education at the barbershop or on websites or expensive weekend seminars run by people who never practiced law, never went to law school, and don’t know mud from sand about rules or how to use them to control judges.

Too many good folks believe mythological silver-bullet easy solutions to their legal problems and, as a result, are losing when they would be winning if they knew what I make so easy-to-learn in my Jurisdictionary course!

The internet is infested with hare-brained schemes that sound too good to be true … and, like the old adage says, “If it sounds to good to be true, it probably isn’t.”

Remember: The most dangerous falsehoods are ones we most want to believe!

Why not learn from a real lawyer with nearly 25 years of case-winning experience?

My course is not expensive!

People who finish my course say an average 8th grader can learn it all in a single weekend.

Please read the testimonials in the right column ⇒

If you have a lawyer, you will save thousands in legal fees by knowing what your lawyer should be doing, and at the same time you will maximize your chances for success by making certain your lawyer does what should be done, instead of taking you for a ride to the poorhouse – as happens to too many good people these days.

If you don’t have a lawyer, you’ll know how to stop the opponent’s crooked tricks and control the judge!

To learn more, go to: www.Jurisdictionary.com


============================

My affordable 24-hour step-by-step lawsuit self-help course includes:

  • 5-hour video CD simplifies process of litigation
  • 2 audio CDs present tactics and procedures
  • 15 tutorials on a 4th CD go beyond the basics
  • Free EasyGuide to the Rules of Court
  • Temporary online access while CDs in Mail

Still Only $249 (plus $7.50 for Priority Mail S&H)

Control judges!

Save legal fees!

Defeat crooked lawyers!

www.Jurisdictionary.com

Ask anyone who has it: Jurisdictionary Works!

Call Toll Free for details: 866-Law-Easy

Get your competitive edge before the price increase.

Force judges to enforce the rules, instead of allowing the lawyer on the other side twist the law against you!

You cannot win if you don’t know how to control the judge and all the lawyers (including your own lawyer, if you can afford to pay one to go to court for you)!

You’ve heard the horror stories from others.

Don’t let it happen to you!

Order my course now, if you don’t already have it.

Know the rules and how to force everyone to obey!

Know how to draft proper pleadings, how to get your own evidence in the court’s record, how to keep the other side from getting their evidence in, how to move the court to enter orders favorable to your cause, and how to use your Jurisdictionary legal know-how and case-winning strategies to control the judge and win your case!

My self-help course is presented in such an easy format people tell us an 8th grader can learn it in just 24 hours!

Know what you must know to win!

Stop courtroom corruption!

I’ll show you how in just 24-hours … step-by-step!

Control judges and lawyers – or lose!

My “Tips & Tactics” newsletters are only introductions to the complete course you need to win. If you don’t already have my 24-hour step-by-step self-help course, go to my website and order now!

Read the testimonials in the right column ⇒

www.Jurisdictionary.com

As Woody Guthrie used to sing, “This Land is our Land,” and that includes every courtroom and every courthouse from San Diego to Bangor, Maine. Why let lawyers control our lives with trickery? Why let judges destroy our lives by letting lawyers get away with their trickery?

YOU CAN WIN!

Forward this newsletter to ALL YOUR FRIENDS!

If you aren’t involved in a lawsuit or threatened with one today, learn what my course teaches and help others who will be destroyed by all-too-common courtroom corruption if YOU don’t help them learn what it takes to win!

There are more than 150 lawsuits filed every minute in the United States – nearly 100 million each year. Try to imagine how many thousands of good, honest people will be destroyed in the next 7 days just because they have no idea how to protect themselves and have nobody they can trust (or afford) to help them win!

Urge everyone to get my affordable 24-hour course!

Do it for your nation … and for your children!

Dr. Frederick David Graves, JD

Jurisdictionary

 

 

Charles Bronson’s Estate Sues Warner Bros., MGM

27 May

Of course, their suit is about residuals for past work performed by this actor. They should know not to cross him, even in death!

Maybe one day the unions will be able to negotiate that all income for all shows goes into a common escrow pot. From that account, revenue and expenses would be distributed equitably, according to a given plan administered by an independent fiduciary. As any accountant should know, debits and credits are supposed to balance. Another way to say this is that goods and services equal money, and money equals goods and services, the amounts fixed by governing contracts.
However, let no man or woman hold their breath. The producers maintain a stranglehold on this possibility, and the unions seem to be powerless to change it. Guess they retain better lawyers.

 

Why You MUST do Legal Research …

23 May

 

You cannot win without controlling judges! 

And, you cannot control judges unless you research and cite controlling “legal authority” for every legal argument you seek to make on the court’s record!

The judge is not the legal authority!

Don’t let any judge scare you into believing otherwise!Control Judges with Jurisdictionary!

The law is the law, not the judge!

You must make it crystal clear on the court’s record that the judge will be reversed on appeal if he rules against you … because your legal research found appellate court opinions that control his jurisdictionand his decisions!

Read the testimonials ⇒

If you don’t do what the official Jurisdictionary course teaches, the judge will be free to ignore everything you say and rule any way he pleases in spite of what the law and facts prove to the contrary …because he knows he cannot be reversed on appeal.

The appeal process will not give you another bite at the proverbial apple. Either you make your points with the trial judge by citing “legal authority” that controls him, or run the risk of losing your case and being stuck with the decision forever!

Don’t believe me?

Go tell a judge what your personal opinions are about the law and how you think he should rule in your case, and see how far it gets you!

How you choose to read and interpret the law doesn’t count a bit … not even a tiny bit!

The only thing that counts is how the appellate courts read and interpret the law, and what they say the law means in regard to the facts of your case.

The other side will cite legal authorities for their case.

You must do the same … if you want to win.

If you’ve wandered through a law library in search of legal authority, you were probably amazed to find crowded shelves stuffed with volumes of similar-looking books, differing only by the mysterious numbers printed on their spines. Books that give no hint which one might hide the key to unlock the judge’s favor in your case. In a well-stocked law library there are thousands of books.

You cannot possibly read them all to find what you seek, and even the indexes, appendices, and annotations are a complex nightmare that requires years of experience to master.

On the other hand, on-line legal research is easy.

We show you how to do it in our official course.

Learn how to use on-line legal research and how to cite case-winning legal authority in my affordable step-by-step 24-hour official Jurisdictionary self-help course!

Know how to control the judge – or you will lose!

These “Tips & Tactics” newsletters are only the very tip of the iceberg of lawsuit knowledge you need to win. If you don’t already have my 24-hour step-by-step self-help course, go to my website and order now!

Learn how to research and cite … so you can WIN!

www.Jurisdictionary.com

Dr. Frederick David Graves, JD

 

 

Trial By Declaration: How to Request a TBD and Win

23 May

Trial by Declaration is a way to fight a traffic ticket on paper prior to actually going into court. The forms for a TBD are free. Continue reading


 

Nolo is Acquired by Internet Brands as Part of Legal Roll Up

01 May

After 40 years of leading the self-help law movement, Nolo, is being acquired by Internet Brands an advertising driven Internet company. Nolo was created by two frustrated legal aid lawyers, Charles (Ed) Sherman and Ralph (Jake) Warner, who wanted to figure out a way to help the thousands of consumers with their legal problems who could not afford an attorney and were turned away by legal aid because their incomes were too high.

Based in Berkeley, California, the center of the counter cultural revolution of the 1960’s, Nolo assembled a group of radical lawyers, editors, and writers who were determined to do something about a broken legal system where 90% of the US middle class were priced out of the legal system. Championing legal reforms that would make the U.S. justice system accessible to everyone, the company has seen these reforms become mainstream in the US.

Courts now offer their own automated self-help legal forms, legal aid agencies publish state-wide legal information web sites and also distribute automated legal forms, legal form web sites give away legal forms for free as a way to generate traffic, small claims court limits have been raised in many states, and lawyers are delivering "unbundled legal services" and creating virtual law firms,  figuring out ways to deliver legal services online for a fixed and affordable fee.

Its ironic that Nolo is being acquired by  Internet Brands, for an amount rumored to be in the range of $20,970,000, by an advertising company that is focused primarily on generating leads for law firms through their directories and advertising properties. How does self-help law fit into this business model?

The amount being paid is little more than one times revenue — not exactly a premium.  Although, Nolo  publishes Willmaker and several other excellent web-based legal software programs, it is still primarily a book publisher. In its hey day, before the Internet penetrated almost every household in America, Nolo self-help law books were the primary source for accurate do it yourself legal information and forms.

As the web expanded hundreds of legal information and legal form web sites also emerged, plus national brands such as LegalZoom. These web-based alternatives also provided  legal solutions without the need to use a lawyer — the same need that Nolo was meeting. Except that instead of reading a 200-300 page book in order to get to a legal solution —  web-based applications delivered a legal solution more efficiently, faster, and at less cost.

Nolo has migrated many of its legal forms online, too little and too late, and except for a few major products, non-automated forms. Here is another example of a print publisher whose business, despite the excellence of its product, has been eroded by the Internet.

It is well known that Nolo’s book business actually declined during this recession and growth has been flat. The fastest growing area of Nolo’s business is their Lawyer Directory. This is ironic for a company that prided itself in developing self-help legal solutions that don’t require the assistance of an attorney.

The challenge for Internet Brands will be to figure out how to unlock the assets buried within Nolo’s vast collection of self-help law books and turn these assets into web-based applications that can be distributed over the Internet. It remains to be seen whether the quality of Nolo’s self-help legal content will deteriorate under the management of an advertising-driven company that measures results in page views and unique visitors.

Internet Brands, previously a public company, was recently taken private private when it was acquired by Hellman & Friedman, a private equity firm, based in San Francisco,  in December, 2010. Internet Brands has acquired over 70 vertical web sites in areas ranging from travel to cars to real estate. Internet Brands derives more than 70% of its revenues from advertising on its portfolio of web sites.

In December, 2010 Internet Brands also acquired ALLLAW.com , a consumer legal information portal and AttorneyLocate – an Attorney Directory Service. Both of these web sites are relatively weak properties. Compete.com shows that in March, 2011 Nolo had 498,769 unique visitors ( an 8% decline for the year), ALLLAW.com  had 190,069 unique visitors, (for the of March, 2011); AttorneyLocate.com was especially weak with only 18,277 unique visitors (for the month of March, 2011). Internet Brands also owns ExpertHub, which in turn manages web sites in verticals markets such as dentists, plastic surgery, accountants, tummy tuck, and of course lawyers. The ExpertHub site for lawyers only generates 96,289 unique visitors a month (March, 2011), so I wonder if that level of traffic is high enough to support their advertising rates.

There is irony in the fact that LegalZoom, a company that prides itself on offering  legal solutions from a non-law firm generates more traffic than any of the sites mentioned above at 889,762 unique visitors in March, 2011, trailing only Findlaw and Lawyers.com, (both of which offer similar services as the Internet Brands properties).  With the traffic that LegalZoom gets, maybe LegalZoom should consider creating their own lawyers directory for consumers who need just a bit of legal advice to go with their forms to keep them on the right track? I wonder what solos and small law firms would think if LegalZoom moved in that direction?.

It will be interesting to see how Internet Brands integrates these legal properties to leverage the assets in each acquisition as its tries to compete with the likes of Findlaw and Lawyers.com . It will also be interesting to see whether the quality of Nolo’s self help legal content deteriorates under the management of an advertising company that measures results in impressions, clicks, and unique visitors. If Jake Warner, the present CEO stays involved, I am sure the quality of Nolo’s products will remain "top of class."

It’s an odd mix, –the best in class self-help legal book publisher with an excellent reputation, with some less than best in class lawyer directories and a legal information web site. Only time will tell whether this combination will work. (Although Internet Brands may intend to run each of these properties as separate brands, which would help Nolo maintain the quality of it self help legal content).

 

Illinois DUI Quick Reference Guide If You Are Stopped

06 Apr

The simplest way to avoid a DUI conviction in Illinois is to refrain from driving if you have been drinking. However, this is not always the case. Every

 
No Comments

Posted in Uncategorized

 

LegalZoom is Considering an IPO

22 Mar

Apparently LegalZoom is in the early stages of planning an IPO, (going public),  according to an unnamed source at VentureBeat. Employing more that 500 employees, and having raised over $45 million in venture capital over the last few years, LegalZoom is clearly the leading non-lawyer legal document preparation web site. This is a good example of a disruptive innovation in the delivery of legal solutions by a non-lawyer provider that continues to eat away at the market share of solo practitioners and small law firms.

Focusing on a market that is not served well by the legal profession, in the same way that Southwest Airlines first targeted people who traveled by bus, rather than by air because air travel was too expensive, LegalZoom is will undoubtedly figure out a way to move up the value chain, capturing even more complex business from law firms, without actually giving legal advice.

In the United States, because the definition of what constitutes the "unauthorized practice of law" is so vague. (perhaps unconstitutionally vague),  it would seem that even though LegalZoom does not actually provide legal advice, it would be prohibited from assembling legal documents, even when the document assembly is purely software-driven. 

The reality is that bar associations have a tough case to make against a non-lawyer provider when no actual legal advice is given. UPL statutes haven’t been truly tested on the issue of whether a non-lawyer can assemble legal documents without actually giving legal advice. In Florida, when the issue came up, there was a compromise between the bar and non-lawyer providers and non-lawyers can help a consumer complete court forms as long as no legal advice is provided. It gets murky when you move beyond courts forms, to more complex transactional documents such as a will,  a living trust, or a marital separation agreement, even if the user is making the selection through a software driven questionnaire. Some UPL advocates, have argued that the selection of alternative clauses is still UPL, because a person had to "program" the clauses. There is some precedent for this position, but the State of Texas on the other hand, specifically excludes software driven document assembly from the "unauthorized practice of law., provided there there are disclaimers which state "clearly and conspicuously that the products are not the substitute for the advice of an attorney."

I think the risk portion of the prospectus will make for fascinating reading, particularly since in many states UPL is a felony. I can just visualize this language: "Investors should be aware that the company may be violating unauthorized practice of law statutes in many states, and as a result, if convicted, one or more executive officers may be required to serve time in the pokey."

In the interest of full disclosure,  Epoq US,  of which I am President, and which is the parent company of DirectLaw, also provides legal document preparation services over the web directly to consumers through a network of legal web sites    So perhaps I should be worried as well.

 

When you’re old enough, friends pop up in the oddest way

14 Mar

Celebrities are full of stories about their exploits, their famous friends, who they mix with, who they work with.  It’s often to do with the size of their billing, or their latest agent’s gaffes.   Then there are the less famous.  People like me, with stories more down to earth, but, I think, more interesting, unless you’re a fan follower.

This is by way of saying that I went to a play the other evening, at the East-West Theatre downtown, a play called “Wrinkles”.  Couldn’t believe what I saw, for there, playing the lead, was my old fellow worker at, of all places, First National City Bank, Park Avenue, N.Y.  5th floor. The year was 1963, the place the computer room, midnight to 8 am shift, Burroughs check sorting machine.  His name – Sab Shimono.  I remember him as a delicate, shy, self-effacing youngster,  wrestling with the machine just as I was.

I met him after the curtain came down, and we swapped a few stories in the car-park.  He has developed into a splendid actor, and reached an age of maturity reflected in his command of the stage.

I plan to see more of Sab.

 

 

 

Will LegalZoom Become the Largest Law Firm in the US?

05 Jan

 

LegalZoom has been beta testing a concept which links its marketing capabilities to a network of law firms that offer legal services under the LegalZoom brand. With some state bar associations accusing LegalZoom of  the unauthorized practice of law,  it might makes sense for the company to seek deeper alliances with networks of attorneys who are able to offer a full and ethically compliant legal service. Solos and small law firms, leveraging off the visibility and prominence of the LegalZoom brand, could reduce their marketing costs and enable these firms to better capture consumers who are part of the “latent legal market”  on the Internet. It could be a win/win for both parties.

Unfortunately, linking the capital and management resources of profit-making organization with private law firms is almost impossible in the United States, given the regulatory framework that governs law practice. Unlike, the United Kingdom, which is in the process of deregulating the legal profession, enabling profit-making companies, from banks  and insurance companies to retail chains like Tesco,  to actually own a law firm, and/or split legal fees with a non-law firm, these practices in the US are strictly taboo.

In the US, law directories can charge a flat marketing fee for a listing, but sharing legal fees with a marketing organization can get you disbarred.

During the dot-com boom around 1999-2000, a company emerged by the name of AmeriCounsel that tried to create a hybrid organizational structure similar to the LegalZoom experiment. The company sought to enable a network of attorneys to offer legal services at a fixed and reasonable price and to mediate between the consumer and the law firm in terms of guaranteeing the quality of the legal services offered. The company failed during the dot-com bust for various reasons, including lack of financing, but on the way to failure, secured some opinions from state bar associations that blessed their model and provides a blue print for hybrid delivery systems which combine the expertise of a law firm with the marketing, management, and technological resources of a non-law firm.

One such opinion was issued by the Nassau County Bar Association New York State.

The Bar Association reasoned that the AmeriCounsel scheme was permissible because:

[S]ince AmeriCounsel does not charge attorneys any fee and since AmeriCounsel does not “recommend” or “promote” the use of any particular lawyer ’s services, it does not fall within the purview of DR 2-103(B) or (D). Rather, AmeriCounsel is a form of group advertising permitted by the Code of Professional Responsibility and by ethics opinions interpreting the Code.

In this model, AmeriCounsel provided technology and administrative services to link the client with the lawyer, but the law firm made no payment to AmeriCounsel. Instead, a separate administrative/technology fee was paid by the consumer to AmericCounsel for using the web site and gaining access to the lawyer. (This is not a practical scheme in today’s web environment, in my opinion), Moreover, AmeriCounsel did not choose the lawyer. The client was able to compare the credentials of different attorneys and choose their own lawyer. Thus no legal referral was involved, which would not be permitted in New York, as only an approved non-profit organization can make legal referrals.

In my opinion, this model, forced on AmeriCounsel, by the Rules of Professional Responsibility, is cumbersome, hard to implement, and was not economically viable for AmeriCounsel. Perhaps this was one of the causes of its failure.

Almost a decade later, companies that want to enter into this kind of hybrid relationship with lawyers, have to follow the same rule structure, as the ABA Model Rules of Professional Responsibility as the rules have not changed in any significant way. changed.  It will be interesting to see whether the ABA Ethics 20/20 Commission, which was set up just last year, will address these issues at all.

Perhaps there should be a “safe harbor” that enables organization’s like LegalZoom to experiment with new patterns of legal service delivery that could operate for a limited period of time in a specific state, like California, The experience would be evaluated carefully as a basis for rule and policy change. The evaluation would be aimed to see if client’s interests are compromised in any way, and whether the delivered legal service is less expensive, without compromising the quality of legal service.

Instead of creating legal profession regulatory policies that are based on the legal profession’s idea about what is good for the consumer, policy could be based on real experience and facts. Experimentation is good. It leads to change, and in other industries improvement of methods and approaches over a period of time.

Of course, I don’t believe that this will ever happen in the US, at least not in my professional lifetime.