Family Law Update

By David Siegel
Standard

The findings of the trial court in an action to increase support payments will not be reversed unless contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.

Settlement Agreement

If parties to a marital settlement agreement intend, on dissolution, to preclude judicial modification of maintenance as to amount, it may be better practice to do so in clear and express terms in a paragraph separate from that limiting termination of maintenance. While maintenance provisions are modifiable upon a showing of a substantial change in circumstances, property settlement provisions are not, unless a court finds the execution of the settlement agreement was accompanied by some element of fraud, coercion or misrepresentation. Where the agreement contained no provision which specifically precluded modification, the agreement was modifiable. Once an agreement is embodied is embodied in a divorce decree, its terms will not be modified absent fraud, coercion or contrariness to public policy. The power of the court to modify periodic payments of maintenance and child support is not diminished because the amount of payments was fixed by a settlement agreement agreed to by the parties and incorporated in the decree.

Standing

The Department of Public Aid had standing to bring a petition to modify a child support obligation on behalf of a public aid recipients without regard to any assignment of an arrearage to the Department. Illinois Dep't of Pub. Aid. The filing of a petition to modify a child support obligation is a support services contemplated under the Public Aid Code (305 ILCS 5/10-1 et seq.) providing the department with standing to file a petition. Illinois Dep't of Pub. Aid.

Support In General

Bankruptcy court determined that the Illinois state court ordered child support debt was nondischargeable; the court found that the debtor waited too long after his divorce and after he assumed the responsibility of support payments to challenge paternity of the child and get retroactive relief, pursuant to 750 ILCS 45/5(a)(1). "Support" is simply a general term that can include educational expenses for a child who has turned 18 but is still in high school, and educational expenses may include room and board, just as the more generic term, support, may include shelter and food; a trial court can award support to disabled unempancipated children, minor or nonminor under 750 ILCS 5/513(a)(1), and a kind of support, educational expenses, to nonminor children in school under 750 ILCS 5/513(a)(2). In short, if the child has attained majority, the trial court must tern to §513 of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act, 750 ILCS 5/513, when deciding whether to award support for that nonminor child. Subsection (a) of this section allows for modification of child support orders only upon a showing of substantial change in circumstances, and the burden of proof is on the party who seeks the modification.

Las Vegas divorce and family law firm handling divorce and family law cases throughout Las Vegas and the surrounding areas. Results driven law firm with experience and skill to handle the most difficult cases. http://www.divorce-lawyers-lasvegas.com

Article Source: http://www.ArticleBiz.com

Wrongful Death Law In California, A Basic Understanding2

By: Paul Ralph
The law permits recovery of damages for non-economic losses in these specific cases: First,

1. The loss of the decedent’s love, companionship, comfort, care, assistance, protection, affection, society, moral support;

2. Decreased enjoyment of sexual encounters or

3. The loss of any training and guidance provided by the deceased.

Exclusions: potential grief, sorrow, or mental trauma the loved ones and decedents face; or the poverty or wealth of survivors.

In most cases, wrongful death actions cannot result in the recovery of punitive damages.

One exemption, however is when there is death from a felony homicide where the defendant was previously convicted. (California Civil Code, s 3294(d).)

Sometimes there are conflicting and competing interests among surviving parities and since it's often difficult to figure out the losses sustained, the judge and jury is the one who has to allocate any recovery among the parties. In viewing the Canavin vs. Pacific Southwest Airlines (1983) 148 Cal.App.3d 512) case, you see that there was more than one relative who presented a claim. The jury awarded an amount for the survivors’ that was then split by the court. More often than not, cases involving wrongful death that are settled before the trial begins are due to the family reaching an agreement. The court must approve an arrangement if minors are involved.

This is only an overview of the wrongful death laws in California. This is not legal advice for any particular case. The law is very complex, so you need to talk to a knowledgeable trial attorney to understand your rights in the event of such a loss.

For over 15 years, Paul W. Ralph has been a personal injury attorney Orange County dealing with court cases and lawsuits in California. Because of the importance of the cases handled in the past as a wrongful death attorney Orange County and high profile personal injury cases, Mr. Ralph has appeared on CNN, has been quoted on the front page of the Los Angeles Daily Journal and his cases have made the cover of Trials Digest.

Article Source: http://www.ArticleBiz.com

Wrongful Death Law In California, A Basic Understanding1

By Paul Ralph
In California, the law relating to claims against loss arising out of wrongful death is a creature of statute and very often, it is found to be complicated or even illogical. If a loved one has been lost because of a wrongful conduct of another, it's crucial to understand your rights and those of other surviving loved ones.

Use of the term "wrongful death" refers to any case in which a death occurs due to negligence or intentional misconduct from another person. Such carelessness can include a physician whose negligent actions during surgery result in death, or who should have diagnosed a curable condition but did not. You might have a valid claim if the death was the result of a car accident, or a slip, trip, or fall. The same rights would be for an untimely death that comes from a premeditated act like assault and battery.

Determining who has "standing", or the right to bring a wrongful death action, depends on statutes having to do with the order certain heirs are entitled to property of the deceased. You can bring a wrongful death suit to court depending on which order the heirs are entitled to the deceased's property. For instance, in most cases, the people with the most standing to bring such a lawsuit are the parents and siblings of the victim. In normal circumstances, the ability to bring such a lawsuit is not available to other family members such as the parents and siblings of the victim. However, depending on the circumstances, there are some exceptions. The rules determining people allowed to recover damages are complicated.

One example of such circumstance would be the death of a person that is unmarried and without children. This person’s "domestic partner" is entitled to bring forth a lawsuit. If the spouse and children are passed away, but there are grandchildren, then the grandchildren would have a claim. However, unless the deceased has been supporting their parents, this is true for the surviving parents of the deceased as well. To make matters even more confusing, a spouse in a voided marriage who believed in good faith that the marriage was legal might have the right to initiate action.

After it has been clearly established which parties have standing, damages can be addressed. Always remember that these and other types of personal injury actions come under two headings: economic and non-economic. The economic grouping has to do with items such as the funeral, burial expenses, lost support, etc. Non-economic damages include loosing a relationship with the deceased.

Below is a list of economic damages in detail:

1.Financial support contributed to the family by the late person or expected during the loved one's remaining life expectancy;

2. Deprivation of benefits and expected gifts from the deceased;

3. The cost of the funeral including all other expenses involving the burial

4. The estimate of the value of household services that the person who passed would have provided.
For over 15 years, Paul W. Ralph has been a personal injury attorney Orange County dealing with court cases and lawsuits in California. Because of the importance of the cases handled in the past as a wrongful death attorney Orange County and high profile personal injury cases, Mr. Ralph has appeared on CNN, has been quoted on the front page of the Los Angeles Daily Journal and his cases have made the cover of Trials Digest.

Article Source: http://www.ArticleBiz.com

The Law against sacrificing children to Moloch in Bible versus Quran

By Dr. Ibrahim Khalil

Kill who gives any of his seed unto Molech in the Bible
The Law against sacrificing children to Moloch

In Leviticus 20:1-5, the LORD gives the Law against sacrificing children to Moloch.
The law is to kill anyone who gives any of his children to Molech.
The Lord gave this law to Moses and commands him to say it to the children of Israel.
It goes without saying that the law is applicable for the children of Israel.
It is interesting that this law is not only for Any Israelite or any alien living in Israel
However, the Lord commands to apply this law for the strangers that sojourn in Israel or any alien living in Israel who gives any of his children to Molech.
The law is to KILL him!
Moreover, What if the Israelites do not apply this law?
If they close their eyes when a man gives one of his children to Molech and they fail kill him
The LORD will set his face against that man and HIS FAMILY
and will cut all of them off!

---------------------------------------
Kill anyone who gives his seed to Molech in the Bible:

Leviticus 20:1-5 King James Version (KJV)

1] And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

2] Again, thou shalt say to the children of Israel, Whosoever he be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn in Israel, that giveth any of his seed unto Molech; he shall surely be put to death: the people of the land shall stone him with stones.

3] And I will set my face against that man, and will cut him off from among his people; because he hath given of his seed unto Molech, to defile my sanctuary, and to profane my holy name.

4] And if the people of the land do any ways hide their eyes from the man, when he giveth of his seed unto Molech, and kill him not:

5] Then I will set my face against that man, and against his family, and will cut him off, and all that go a whoring after him, to commit whoredom with Molech, from among their people.

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

Kill who gives any of his seed unto Molech in the Noble Quran:
The Law against sacrificing children to Moloch

There is no such law in the noble Quran.
Also, there is no Molech in the Noble Quran

-------------------------------

What if the Quran was the Book which commands to kill all of these many kinds of people? What the Western Media would have to say in such case?
=========

Back to the main issue of my series of articles; this is my question to you smart readers: "Is the Quran quoted from the Bible?"


About the author:
Professor Dr. Ibrahim Khalil
Prof. of Clinical and Chemical Pathology,
Head of Clinical Microbiology and Infection Control Unit,
Ain-Shams University., Egypt.
And, President of The Egyptian Society of Inventors.
Member of the Egyptian union of Writers


Article Source: http://www.Free-Articles-Zone.com

An Interview With Michael Mehas, Author, Film Maker, And Lawyer, About Stolen Boy

by: Simon Barrett
Stolen Boy is a work of fiction, but based on the Jessie James Hollywood case … what author Michael Mehas says may make the difference between Hollywood's life and death.

Stolen Boy is powerful stuff. How did you get interested in it?

One day in April of 2003, while I was tending to my dying dog, Sadie, I got a call from an old buddy, Nick Cassavetes, who said he wanted to make a film about Jesse James Hollywood, the youngest man ever on the FBI's Most Wanted List. Since I lived so close to Santa Barbara, where the crime took place, I had read all these articles about this amazing crime involving all these young kids. Kids accused of committing crimes against kids. It was an unbelievable story. One I wanted to know more about.

For anyone who doesn't know what it's like to work on a Cassavetes film, it's one of those rare opportunities in life that you just don't want to turn down. Making a Cassavetes movie is not so much about fame or fortune as it is about experiencing a piece of life. And that was one piece of life that I just didn't want to miss. So about a week later, after Sadie had moved on, I asked Nick where I could sign up. He set up a meeting with the Santa Barbara District Attorney, and the rest is just sort of history, as they say. The whole thing took on this life of its own — taking all these unbelievably crazy turns before becoming the movie (Alpha Dog), my book, and then the craziness of my legal involvement with the death penalty case.

It certainly is unusual for a 'casual' outside observer to become part of a trial, yet you have been subpoenaed twice to appear in court. What are your thoughts?

Actually, I've been subpoenaed three times in Jesse Hollywood's case. So far, I've testified twice and suffered the misfortune of having the court order me to turn over all the notes and tapes from my interviews. Early on in the process, I twice faced the very real prospect of going to jail for not complying with the subpoenas, which at first I had seriously considered doing.

In the beginning, after Hollywood got captured in Brazil — after one of the greatest global manhunts in history — my life got turned totally upside down. I met with Hollywood's famed trial attorney, James Blatt, several times, and he asked me to testify in the case. He wanted me to help him save his client's life.

While Hollywood had been on the lam, the Santa Barbara County District Attorney, and other law enforcement agencies, had totally demonized him through the media. They had basically tried and convicted him in absentia. As a result, the public sentiment was seriously against Hollywood. People wanted to see him die a violent death for a crime he hadn't even yet appeared in court for. The prosecutor wanted to put him to death. The victim's family sought a ten-eyes-for-two kind of justice. I truly believed Mr. Blatt's client stood very little chance of getting a fair trial. I think, at the time, any jury would have handed down a swift conviction followed by an even swifter justice — that being the death sentence.

I'm a criminal defense attorney by heart and by trade. I'm also a humanist. And I sincerely believe that all living things have this inherent right to life. It's not our job to make the ultimate decision about each other. I'm not a fan of government-sanctioned murder. So I wanted to do whatever I could to help save Mr. Blatt's client.

Besides, I knew Jesse Hollywood's family. Jesse had a little brother that he was very protective of. He had parents who loved their son. They didn't want him to die. And neither did I. But the problem with Mr. Blatt's request was that if I ended up testifying, my testimony could be used as the cornerstone for criminal prosecution against Ron Zonen, the prosecutor on the case — and also his office — for potential illegal misconduct in their dealings with me. I got a lot of information from the prosecutor. A lot of it — he probably shouldn't have given to me. It wasn't until the California Attorney General decided not to prosecute him or his office that I finally agreed to testify. And then when I did, the court ordered me to turn over my notes. If I didn't comply, I'd go to jail. So, ultimately, I complied. I wasn't really that interested in staying at the Gray Bar Hotel. I had a life to live. I had a book to finish. So I turned the notes and tapes over. But I wasn't really happy about the way the situation had materialized at all.

Maybe I have it wrong, but when I compare your writings about the fictional Mickey with those of Jesse James Hollywood I see a divergence. Mickey is the devil incarnate, yet I get a real sense that your feelings for Jesse are something else. Am I right?

The real Jesse James Hollywood is far from the devil incarnate. He's actually a very smart kid. When you think about it, he was very successful at what he did. But Jesse wasn't evil. He was an arrogant hothead, maybe. And he was scared, definitely. He was living in some pretty rough company at the time. But through all this, Jesse James Hollywood—in spite of the reputation his name assumes — is a human being. And at the time he did whatever it was that he really did do, he was just a kid. He was a twenty-year-old kid trying to play the big man's game, and it got away from him. But he, just like his co-defendants, doesn't deserve to die as a result of it. If he does get the death penalty, and if we, as the state of California, agree to put him to death, what does that make us? People who kill to avenge a killing? Is that really what being a member of the human race is all about? Taking justice into our own hands? I know that's not what I'm about. I believe in life, and I try not to put my energies toward creating death. So I will do whatever I can to help someone who's in serious trouble. To help raise the consciousness of anyone who cares. To try to change the world around us by dedicating our collective-consciousness to life-enhancing measures, not death.

Are you still involved with the case? You clearly have formed a bond with Jesse's father.

These are two very different issues. First of all, yes, I am still involved in the case in that I suspect the prosecutor and defense attorney are not finished with my services yet. The new prosecutor on the case has tried to subpoena me. From what I understand, he's a really nice guy. But he wants to get more information from me, and I think that's totally uncool. What could I possibly know or have at this point that he could possibly need? He's trying to kill Jesse Hollywood. And I'm not going to help him do it, even if it does put me at risk of going to jail. It's that simple. That's why I sent my lawyer into court this past June, and the mouthpieces argued about the subpoena. The judge, in his wisdom, told the prosecutor and my attorney that he wouldn't decide the issue of the validity of the subpoena until the case came back down from the California Supreme Court.

The Supremes are set to decide a very important issue in this case. As I understand it, they are dealing with how prosecutors should or should not be able to cozy up to the media while trying high-profile cases. It's similar to the whole debacle with the Duke lacrosse team. The District Attorney on that case basically tried and convicted those poor kids through the media before they ever had a chance to defend themselves. The same thing happened here. The prosecutor wants Jesse James Hollywood on death row. I'm going to do what I can to help make sure that doesn't happen. We have to change things around here. I believe that if we put our energies into life-enhancing measures we will all benefit as a whole. We are all related, you know. We all benefit when the rest of us do well. We need to stop killing our brothers. And it's certainly not the job of our government to do that for us.

As far as Jesse's father, Jack, is concerned. I could totally empathize with the guy. Here's a man who felt terrible about his involvement in raising his son. His son was looking to be put to death, and this guy somehow felt responsible for that. Jack told me a story about the time law enforcement agencies raided his house and served a search warrant on him not long after Jesse disappeared. One of the law officers, a supervisor from the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Department, told Jack that he hoped to be the one to find Jesse, because he wanted to be the one to shoot and kill him. Can you imagine someone telling you that about your kid? Jack was devastated. He didn't want his son to be murdered by a member of the Sheriff's department. At the time, I think all he really wanted was to be able to hold his son in his arms and know that he was going to be all right.

Usually the sequence of events is book first, movie later. In this case you reversed the order. Looking at both works, which is your favorite, and what are your thoughts about this sequence?

I loved the movie. I thought Nick (Cassavetes) did an exceptional job with it. It was raw. Some of the performances were raw. It was a truly unusual blend of pure, hot-looking energy that told a very compelling story, an important story, one that needed to be told. The book tells roughly the same story, but in a completely different way. And I'll tell you why.

Back in October of 2003, Nick had a reading of the project that influenced me tremendously when it came to which version of the story to tell through the book. There was so much to this story. So much information. There were so many people involved. It was difficult to decide exactly which storylines to follow. When we started out on the project, we wanted to tell as truthful a version of the story as we possibly could. That's why Nick hired me. He knew I'd figure out a way to get the information that we needed. So Cassavetes had this reading with many of Hollywood's top young talent. Great young actors and actresses. This was back with the first draft of Nick's screenplay, when Leonardo DiCaprio and Tobey McGuire were set to produce it. Tobey read Hollywood's part while Leo read the part of his chief antagonist, the victim's brother. As the reading progressed deep into the screenplay, you could feel the excitement building. The room filled with tension. And as we neared the climax, you could literally feel the anxiety intensify within the actors. It was like — No way, this isn't going to happen. They're really not going to do this. There's no way these guys are going to hurt this kid. And then, all of a sudden, the room went dead silent. This huge collective gasp escaped. It was like a huge ball had burst. Everybody fell back, totally deflated. They couldn't believe it could happen like that. It was like — There's no way these guys, who had spent all this time partying with this kid, would… And then suddenly they commit the worst act you could possibly imagine. The actors were devastated. And I knew that's how my story had to end.



About The Author

Simon Barrett is an adult educator in Calgary, Alberta. With the 11 months a year of winter, he reads a lot of books! He is also a contributing editor for http://www.bloggernews.net and maintains a personal blog at http://zzsimonb.blogspot.com.