Purple Sage Santa Fe
The idea of alimony goes as far back as 1754 before the current era, that I could find. Hammurabi, in his Code of Laws, decreed in rule 137 that “if a man wish to separate from a woman who has born him children, or from his wife who has born him children, then he shall give that wife her dowry, and a part of the usufruct of field, garden, and property, so that she can rear her children. When she has brought up her children, a portion of all that is given to the children, equal as that of one son, shall be given to her. She may then marry the man of her heart.”
They had more to worry about back then than who would keep their hundreds of shared collectibles. They were worried about not having enough food or water, and being attacked by rival savages because the gods didn’t get enough sacrificial lambs. Could you imagine having the limited knowledge of an ancient citizen and then seeing a tornado come down from the sky? My mind would be blown.
Apparently, humans evolved with the idea of providing for a former partner nearly 4,000 years ago! Humanity has changed significantly since the Babylonian times of Hammurabi the exalted prince and his god-fearing rule of righteousness in the land, but I think it’s pretty interesting that he was an advocate for an idea that has lasted well into modern times. According to these Georgia Alimony Attorneys, there is quite the punishment for avoiding alimony, just like like in ancient Babylon.
Hammurabi’s laws were written on a giant stone monolith in his city so the people could read them and understand why they were being sentenced to death for failing to adhere by the new laws. Many of the new laws that Hammurabi is credited with creating were already in place in society but were never written down. The brutal order he imposed was rooted in the “eye for an eye” mentality that set him in history as a legend as an inspiration for our modern laws.
But he didn’t get everything right. For instance, law 200 refers to knocking another’s teeth out if they knock your teeth out first, regardless if it is an accident or not. Another example of how severe some of the punishments were is law 229 that imposes the death penalty for builders that poorly construct a home in the city. Yikes, good thing fracking wasn’t around back then. I can just see the poor builder, now being condemned to death because a microburst destroyed one of the homes they built, standing there in bewilderment as the crowd calls wildly for his execution.
I am so grateful that I live in modern times where we attempt to settle things in a civilized manner. Of course, there are still prime examples of people who could be transported back to ancient and barbaric civilizations and fit right in—I’m looking at you Reality TV. But for the most part, we’ve come a good long way over the years.
No matter the circumstances, death is always devastating for family, friends, and other loved ones. Even after a long and happy life, we cannot help but feel sad for this loss of life and companionship. These feelings of grief are only worsened, however, when an individual faces an untimely death. In some cases, these deaths could not be prevented, such as after a long battle with sickness, or in military combat, or in other unfortunate circumstances. Nevertheless, there are some incidents which could have been prevented, and the person or people involved should not have lost their lives. These situations are perhaps the most devastating of all because the anger we face about the injustice of this death. A family of a Chicago woman is personally experiencing this tragedy after this woman was killed in her apartment in April of 2017.
The Chicago Tribune recently reported on this case, as the family decided to move forward with a lawsuit against the attacker and the apartment company. Tiffany Thrasher lived alone in her apartment in Schaumburg, Illinois. A construction worker, housed by his employer in the same apartment complex, entered her home through a window and proceeded to sexually assault and strangle Thrasher. The construction worker, Bulmaro Mejia-Maya, had several arrests for violent crimes on his record, but the company who hired him did not find this to be a problem. Thrasher’s family believes that the apartment manager is partially at fault for this incident because they did not perform required background checks on Mejia-Maya, before allowing him to live in the complex. This placed Tiffany Thrasher at risk, by allowing him to become a part of the community, without understanding the risk that he posed. Additionally, Thrasher’s family indicates that the apartment complex did not follow a Schaumburg city ordinance that requires landlords to protect their tenants from violent crimes. Tiffany’s family is no doubt upset and frustrated by the management’s actions, and this lawsuit may help them gain some peace of mind after this incident.
Tiffany Thrasher’s death is a tragic occurrence, and it indicates a serious lack of concern for residents’ safety in this apartment complex. Unfortunately, this is not an uncommon problem in many different complexes and other residential areas. Managers have a responsibility to create a safe environment and protect their residents as best as possible. When they fail to do so, serious accidents and even deaths may occur as a result of their negligence. This is absolutely unacceptable behavior and hopefully, the Thrashers lawsuit will help encourage other Chicago area apartments to increase security measures.
Although this lawsuit will not end this family’s pain and suffering after the loss of their loved one, it can help them gain a sense of justice and manage the financial costs of this loss. Anyone facing the wrongful death of a family member has the right to seek this kind of compensation with the help of local attorneys, like Karlin, Fleisher, & Falkenberg. This money can help families begin to recover from their tragedy.
In June of 2016, about 60 million U.S. residents (retired workers, aged widows, dependents, young survivors and disabled workers) collected Social Security retirement/survivors benefits, dependent’s benefits or disability benefits. Social Security provides essential financial support to millions of citizens in the U.S., especially retired and disabled workers. Close to half of all beneficiaries rely on SS benefits for the majority of their income, while about five percent has Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) as the source of nearly all of their income.
Since this Social Security Act was signed on August 14, 1935, millions of employees in Social Security covered jobs, who have sustained unexpected permanent disabilities that have rendered them unable to continue working, have found the much needed financial support from SSDI.
The SS Administration determines the severity of a disability based on a person’s inability to work. The type of disability that the SSA considers to be eligible for benefits payments, however, include only total disability, since under the program, it is assumed that those who sustain and suffer partial disability or temporary disability will have other sources for financial assistance, such as the Workers’ Compensation Insurance Program or their personal health insurance.
The SSA has prepared an impairment listing manual, otherwise known as the “blue book,” wherein different types of physical and mental impairments are listed. Any of the impairments included in the list will automatically qualify an SS insured member to receive payment of benefits from the SSDI program (SS insured members refer to those employed in SS covered jobs, have earned the required number of credits through the monthly payment of SS taxes; this tax is indicated as Federal Insurance Contributions Act or FICA in employees’ payslips).
Qualifying disabilities for SSDI include:
- Musculoskeletal problems, like back injuries;
- Cardiovascular conditions, like coronary artery disease or heart failure;
- Senses and speech issues, like loss of vision and hearing;
- Respiratory illnesses, like asthma or COPD;
- Neurological disorders, like Parkinson’s disease, cerebral palsy, multiple sclerosis, and epilepsy;
- Mental disorders, like retardation, anxiety, schizophrenia, autism, or depression;
- Immune system disorders, like HIV/AIDS, lupus, and rheumatoid arthritis;
- Various syndromes, like Sjogren’s Syndrome and Marfan Syndrome;
- Skin disorders, like dermatitis;
- Digestive tract problems, like liver disease or IBD;
- Kidney disease and genitourinary problems, and cancer; and,
- Hematological disorders, like disorders of bone marrow failure and hemolytic anemias
There are illnesses, however, which are not included in SSA’s listing but may still qualify under the SSDI program. Examples of these illnesses are rheumatoid arthritis and migraine headaches that are severe enough so that these make it impossible for an individual to have a full-time job. These types of medical condition, which are medically equivalent to those in SSA’s list, are called “equaling a disability listing.”
For individuals whose lives have been affected by disabilities, the Social Security disability programs can provide a crucial source of financial support and assistance, allowing them to support themselves and their families. Whether a person has suffered the disability for their entire lifetime or has only recently become disabled, the benefits provided through Social Security disability programs may be essential to maintaining their way of living.
The re-election of Vladimir Putin and a quickly growing upper class have resulted to many wealthy Russians looking to leave the uncertain future of Russia, take advantage of the EB-5 investment immigration visa and make homes in the United States.
The EB-5 green card is an Immigrant Investor Program that was created by U.S. Congress in 1990 to stimulate the U.S. economy through the creation of jobs and capital investment by immigrant investors. It requires investors to place a substantial amount into a U.S. business either though:
- Direct Investment, which requires investors to invest a minimum $1,000,000. This amount is for the creation of a new enterprise, purchase an existing business, or reorganization of a former business into a new entity.
- Regional Center Investment, which requires investors to invest a minimum $$500,000. This amount is to be used to finance a business in an area designated by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) as having an especially high need for economic stimulus.
Many of those who have already obtained permanent residency through making an investment advise on making the investment in a Regional Center for the following reasons:
- Investing in an EB-5 Regional Center costs lower;
- Ensuring that the “create 10 jobs” requirement is met becomes the responsibility of the EB-5 Regional Center;
- By choosing a more stable and well run Regional Center, meeting the “create 10 jobs” requirement becomes more certain and faster; and,
- Allows the investor to do something else, such as practice his or her real profession.
Regardless of the form of investment chosen, an investor’s prime responsibility or visa commitment is to create at least 10 full-time U.S. At the end of the two-year conditional residency, USCIS will evaluate the business and determine if the investor has invested the full amount of capital and created the required number of jobs. Fulfillment of the terms of the visa will allow the investor to apply for the removal of the conditions on his/her visa and enjoy unrestricted access to the U.S. with his/her permanent green card.
Many applications, however, are denied because of a lack of sufficient evidence (documents, records, and other important paperwork) to support application.
A bomb explosion plus the threat of a second bomb at the Spanish Gran Canaria airport on March 27, 1977, temporarily resulted to many aircrafts needing to be diverted to the Los Rodeos Airport (now called Tenerife North Airport). The crowding of planes in Los Rodeos, however, forced air traffic controllers (ATC) to direct some of the planes’ pilots to park their aircraft on one of two taxiways which, eventually, also got congested.
As the Gran Canaria reopened later that same day, planes originally en route to it prepared to proceed there. Two of these planes were the Pan Am Flight 1736, with 380 passengers and 747s: the KLM Flight 4805, which had 234 passengers and 14 crew members4.
Communications began between these two 747s and the ATC for takeoff instructions. With two taxiways clogged with parked planes, though, the ATC saw the need to assign Runway 12/30 (normally used for takeoffs only), as both taxiway and runway. However, due to the fog that blanketed the airport and the absence of ground radar, the ATC knew only of the planes’ activities and locations through the inputs made by both pilot.
Eight minutes after communications began between the planes and the ATC, an explosion was heard: Pan Am Flight 1736 and 747s: the KLM Flight 4805 collided, killing 583 crew members and passengers in what is now considered as the deadliest accident in aviation history.
Parts of the recorded exchanges revealed two things: (i) the obvious miscommunication between the ATC and the two flight crews; and, (ii) the absence of standardized English phrases that would allow flight crews and ATCs to clearly understand each other. And while many aviation accidents in the past have been blamed on pilots, this tragic aviation accident was blamed on the ATC.
In 2012, he Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) discovered 4,394 errors committed by ATCs from the 132 million flights they handled; 41 of these errors were high risk, meaning, these could have ended catastrophically.
Critics say that the yearly number of ATC mistakes reported to the FAA is far below what is real. ATCs have the primary duty of ensuring safety in aviation activities by keeping planes at a safe distance from each other.
Despite the increase of ATC errors in 2013, which saw about 6,700 situations wherein planes flew nearer each other than allowed in U.S. airspace, it is held that air travel remains to be the safest and fastest means of long distance transportation. But while all studies may point to experts’ concurrence about the safety of air travel, when an accident occurs, the fact that victims and/or their families may be entitled to compensation due to damages resulting from the accident cannot be denied.
Claiming compensation, though, is not easy and airline companies usually make settlement offers to victims or their families during the 45-day rule imposed by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) (this 45-day rule prohibits law firms from contacting the victims or their families until the 45th day after the accident). Due to this, many victims, who are not aware of what the law contains regarding aviation accidents, receive settlement offers that are lower than what the law prescribes.
Though the 45-day rule prohibits law firms from contacting the victims or their families, no rule prohibits the victims or their families from contacting a law firm. According to airplane accident lawyers from the law firm Schuler, Halvorson, Weisser, Zoeller & Overbeck, P.A., pursuing the compensation the victim and his/her family deserves, especially if the injury sustained is severe, is necessary as this will help cover the costs of the accident and secure much needed closure.
An airplane accident lawyer may be prohibited from contacting you, but no one prohibits you from contacting one; get in touch with one now and so receive the full compensation that you deserve.
When someone enters your premises, there is always an assumption that you will be safe and not get injured. Property owners have the assumption that their premises provide a safe environment. According to the website of Schuler, Halvorson, Weisser, Zoeller & Overbeck, PA, property owners have the responsibility to address any dangerous situation. Unfortunately, many are unable to do so and this is where visitors or tenants can file a premise liability claim against the owner.
While premise liability holds the property owner liable for any accidents or injuries that occur on their property, there are certain instances when they are not totally liable. The laws and procedures of the state where the injury occurred will determine liability. In some states, the status of the injured visitor determines liability while in other states, the condition of the property and the activities of the owner and visitor will decide who has responsibility. It is worth noting that the tenant is treated similarly as a landowner in most situations.
However, in the case of commercial properties such as an apartment or condominium, liability is determined by the contract between landlord and tenant. In these cases, the tenant has more liability for accidents since they have more control over the safety of the premise than property owners. The latter will bear the responsibility for any accidents if they did not inform tenants about the presence of a dangerous condition.
Moreover, tenants have liability for accidents or injuries caused by movable objects inside their apartments. Property owners are liable for non-movable things such as windows, floors, walls, and ceilings. They are also responsible for fixtures outside the apartment. This is usually the principle followed by courts when the case involves rented apartments.
Premise liability is also governed by the legal obligation of acting reasonably as a prudent person under the circumstances. This concept is now starting to replace the old approach of trespasser/licensee/invitee.
Defining each term, an invitee is one who is invited to the property by a tenant. There is usually an implication that the person who invited has taken reasonable steps to assure the safety of the premises. The licensee enters the premises for personal purposes while a trespasser enters without any rights whatsoever. In the case of the licensee and trespasser, there is no implied promise of safety.
It can be difficult to care for the elderly; sometimes it can be more demanding than caring for able-bodied children. Children, after all, grow up from their behavior and are taught to care for themselves. Those who are of an elderly age sometimes need assistance just for their day to day and there’s no growing out of it—they’re already at the last stage of natural life; there’s not much development that can go from there. The best loved ones can do is to ensure that their remaining years are as happy and comfortable as possible.
So maybe you’re considering assisted living for either yourself or for your elderly loved ones. First, it is necessary to define what actually is assisted living. Assisted living is an option of long term care when it is evident that the elderly person in question is no longer capable of caring for themselves, by themselves. They require help – assistance, if you will – hence, assisted living.
A carer, as it were, is someone who cares for them so that they won’t have to—because they can’t.
The signs are always there. Perhaps they’re losing significant weight that they can’t really afford to lose; maybe they avoid showers because they find they can no longer lift their arms up for even a few minutes at a time; it is a strong possibility that they even neglect or intentionally refuse to take necessary medication or eat well. It is the duty of care of the elderly person’s loved ones to ensure that they are in an environment that they are cared for and are comfortable as they live out what years they have left in this life.
Assisted living – which, as the name might suggest, living with assistance – can be a viable option. It is recommended to contact professionals about the matter, in order to be advised on the best options for your specific circumstances.
When you are driving two to three blocks away to pick up your kids or buy your monthly groceries, you might be thinking about not wearing a seatbelt at all. You may feel that it wouldn’t be necessary because you are driving not far from your home and will not go all the way beyond the speed limit. But, no matter how mundane the task of wearing a seatbelt is, it is by far the most important thing that you can do to ensure your safety while on your car.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, thousands of lives could have been saved if occupants had not failed to wear a seatbelt prior to an accident. Although airbags are also effective in preventing fatalities during car crashes, seatbelts provide incomparable protection among adults and older children.
Imagine driving at a speed of 80 miles per hour. Because your body adopts the speed of the moving car, a sudden stop (a head-on car crash, for instance) would make your body continue to move on at the same rate. If you fail to restrain yourself, chances are you will be thrown out of the vehicle at 80 mph, or hit the steering wheel or the windshield at the same speed. Seatbelt’s ultimate goal is to keep you within your car at the time of the crash, where there is the highest possibility of survival.
However, there are instances when seatbelts themselves pose safety concerns among its users. An improperly worn seatbelt, for instance, may cause chest and abdominal injuries during collisions. Lawyers at the Sampson Law Firm also warned about car safety products, including seatbelts, which have been designed and manufactured defectively, causing them not to function in times of need. So, it is not enough to just wear your seatbelt; you have to wear it properly and ensure that you are using only those that have been manufactured within quality standards.
Regardless of how defensively we may drive, there are numerous ways in which the actions of others can cause a car accident, and leave victims facing a wide variety of challenges in the aftermath of an accident.
Recent accident rates suggest that each of us is likely to be involved in about 4 accidents in our lifetime. There are millions of accidents each year. Hundreds of thousands of people are injured, and thousands of these injuries are severe. In fact, according to the most recent statistics, of the close to 6 million reported accidents in 2012, the NHTSA states that more than 6,000 passengers were injured and 644,000 were killed in these accidents. Fortunately, the lowest car accident fatality and injury rates are among children ages 9 and under. The majority of these low rates can be attributed to child safety restraints. However, after an accident, many people do not realize that these restraints may need to be replaced.
According to the NHTSA, it is recommended that child safety restraints be replaced after an accident that is considered to be moderate to severe. They suggest that doing ensures that the child will experience the highest level of safety in case the integrity of the seat was compromised in a previous accident.
A child’s seat may also need to be replaced after a minor accident. However, the NHTSA does not necessarily suggest that this is necessary. According to one study conducted by the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, all seats tested that sustained minor damage in accidents up to 30 mph continued to meet all federal standards even after being involved in four more accidents. The study therefore concluded that there were no cases in which a child’s safety seat was damaged in a minor crash.
According to the NHTSA, a minor crash must meet ALL of the following criteria:
- The vehicle was able to be driven away from the crash site;
- The vehicle door nearest the safety seat was undamaged;
- There were no injuries to any of the vehicle occupants;
- The air bags (if present) did not deploy; AND
- There is no visible damage to the safety seat
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the U.S. Census Bureau, single parenting after a divorce can have a number of negative effects on a child’s life. Statistics show that, when raised by a single parent, 35 percent of these children account for 63 percent of teen suicides, 71 percent of high school dropouts, and 90 percent of child homelessness. It should be of no surprise that many are attempting to curb the effects of single parenting households through child custody reforms.
One group advocating for change is the National Parents Organization. In addition, as many as 20 states are considering making changes to laws that dictate which parent gets legal and physical custody of a child after divorce. Currently, according to the website of attorneys at BB Law Group PLLC, a firm specializing in divorce and family law, child custody is determined by what the court considers is in the best interest of the child. However, advocates pushing for the implementation of equal custody schedules state that equal custody is what is actually in the best interest of the child. Many are citing a recent study conducted by Swedish researchers which found that in Western countries, when children are able to spend substantial time with each parent after a divorce, the child is significantly less stressed.
Despite the newfound benefits of shared custody, others are stating that shared custody can also lead to negative effects on children’s mental health. Some believe that shared custody causes a continuous contention between parents and anxiousness for children that are constantly going back and forth between homes and parenting styles. Therefore, they suggest that while there are certainly benefits to shared custody, the best current course of action is to decide a child’s custody on a case by case basis.