Choosing an Asbestos Attorney in Mesothelioma Lawsuits

By : Tim Dillard
Choosing an asbestos attorney to represent you in a mesothelioma lawsuit is one of the most important decisions that you'll make if you decide to pursue compensation for your illness. Your choice of asbestos attorney can make a very big difference not only to the size of your settlement, but to your overall experience in bringing suit.

An experienced asbestos attorney can do far more than fight for your rights in court. He or she and his law firm can help you in many other areas while you are awaiting a court date or awaiting settlement. Your choice will affect whether you win or lose, the size of your settlement, how long it takes to settle your suit or bring it to trial, and how involved you will have to be during the process. That's why it's important for you to make a careful choice when considering which asbestos attorney to choose. Here are some recommendations to help you make your choice.

1. Look for recommendations from others who are dealing with or have dealt with a mesothelioma lawsuit.
There are many networks of people who are dealing with or have dealt with asbestos related diseases. If you belong to a mailing list, support group or online network of people who are living with or have lost loved ones to an asbestos related disease, ask for personal recommendations from the members of your group. A personal recommendation will allow you to get a feel for how a law firm or attorney actually handles asbestos cases.

2. Look online for experienced asbestos attorneys.
But don't stop there. Check your local legal directories and your local and state bar associations. You can find a great deal of information about local lawyers in the Martindale-Hubble Law Directory which you can find in most public libraries. Doing a bit of research can help you narrow your choices down to those lawyers who specialize in personal injury law and mesothelioma cases.

3. Check the background, education and records of the asbestos attorney that you are considering.
Check with your state bar association to be certain that the attorneys you are considering are licensed to practice law in your state. You can also check their background, education, experience and any disciplinary record through your state bar association.

4. Ask questions. Be prepared with a list of questions when you first contact the asbestos attorney or attorneys that you are considering. Among the questions you should ask:

- What is your experience in asbestos litigation?

- Have you handled many cases like mine?

- Will you be handling my case yourself or will you be referring my case to another law firm? Many law firms will refer your asbestos case to a law firm in your area that specializes in asbestos litigation. It's a common practice, but you should know in advance who will actually be handling your case.

- How many mesothelioma and asbestos related cases has your firm handled? How many are you handling currently? An experienced asbestos attorney or law firm has many resources on which to draw when preparing your case. They also have the knowledge to evaluate your case and help you make a decision on whether to settle or go to trial.

- How many mesothelioma lawsuits have you won? How many have you settled out of court?

- What was the average settlement in each case (in court and out of court)? No law firm can give you a guarantee of a positive outcome, nor predict how high an award or settlement you'll receive, but knowing the average settlement won in a case like yours can give you an idea of how successful the law firm is in handling these cases.

- What is the average length of time it takes for your law firm to settle a case? How often do you choose to settle rather than go to trial? Sometimes, it will be in the client's best interest to settle rather than go to trial. Jury trials can be long, involved processes that take up valuable energy and time that you might prefer to spend on your health or with your family. Knowing the philosophy of the law firm that you are working with about this can be valuable.

- What is your fee setup for mesothelioma cases? Most asbestos attorneys work on a contingency basis. You only pay if they win the suit or get a settlement for you. This isn't always the case. Be sure that you know in advance what it will cost you to work with a law firm or attorney.

Consider all of these factors when you're choosing an asbestos attorney, and weigh them against your own personal comfort with the law firm and lawyers. Pursuing compensation in an asbestos case can be difficult and time consuming. The asbestos attorney that you choose can make it much easier for you in so many ways.

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


Tim Dillard is a marketing executive who has worked with some of the largest law firms in America. Dillard is currently the president of Dillard Local Branding (www.dlbllc.com), a Houston-based web design, Internet marketing and search engine marketing firm.

Employment Law - The Enforceability Of Post Employment Restraints Of Trade (vic.)

By: Michael Pickering - LAC Lawyers


Deal of the Day! - SAVE $5 - PNY 1GB USB 2.0 Portable Flash Drive $4

Employing highly intelligent and highly qualified employees in a range of sophisticated commercial businesses is a risky business for employers.

To acquire competitive business advantage in an increasingly globalized and networked world of pharmaceuticals, genetics, telecommunications, power supply and information technology requires the employment of highly qualified, well educated, experienced and clever employees.

Potential employers and employees are both well advised to seek legal assistance when drafting or accepting terms of employment. Due to the seniority of these employees, their employment contracts are less likely to be workplace agreements but more likely to be private , one-off, contracts of employment.

Often, employees in the pharmaceuticals, genetics, telecommunications, power supply and information technology industries will have access to secret and confidential information which is both price and market-sensitive. This information might be chemical formulae, scientific and technological data, chemical, electrical or manufacturing trade processes, hardware or software engineering designs, or a range of other sophisticated technological and scientific information. The potential employee will need access to this information to perform his or her anticipated role. When the employment relationship ends, however, the employer is faced with a double problem. First, the employee is leaving. Whether the departure is voluntary or involuntary, it will be an inconvenience and a disruption to the employer. Secondly, and more importantly long term, the departing employee will take with him or her, knowledge of the secret and confidential information which may be the very basis of the employer's competitive advantage in a particular industry or market.

To minimise this long term disruption, employers often include restraint of trade clauses in employment contracts when employing people in these sensitive areas. Commonly, the restraint of trade will prevent the former employee from seeking employment with any competitor of the former employer in the particular market for a period of time.

In current times, where there is a shortage of trained staff, particularly in scientific and technological areas, the reason why an employee departs is generally because he or she has received a better offer from a competitor.
In deciding whether or not to enforce the restraint of trade clause against a departing employee, Victorian courts have to balance a number of competing factors.

First, neither Australian nor Victorian general law will restrain a former employee from seeking employment with a competitor. Any such restraint must be found in an enforceable clause in the contract of employment with the former employer. Employers, therefore, should always ensure that staff are employed pursuant to written contracts of employment which contain enforceable restraints of trade.

Secondly, Victorian courts will not allow employers to prevent former employees from conducting a living by practising the skills which may have taken many years to acquire through university courses or practical experience. However, this is only a general rule or starting point.

Thirdly, Victorian courts will not allow former employees to obtain an unfair springboard into a new career by abusing the trust of the former employer. Examples are where employees spend an entire weekend photocopying price lists, formulae, client contact details and other confidential information and then resign the following Monday morning to set up a competitive business the following Tuesday morning.

Essentially, Victorian courts perform a balancing act between the competing interests of the employee to be able to continue to gain a living on the one hand and the employer's interests of being able to reasonably prevent the disclosure of confidential and secret trade-sensitive information to competitors when the employment relationship ceases.

The sorts of factors courts have taken into account are as follows. First, Victorian courts will look to see whether the restraint of trade is reasonable or is too restrictive. Any restraint which tries to prevent an employee from working not only in the particular business of the former employer but any other associated or ancillary business is likely to be struck down. Likewise, a restraint which seeks to prevent an employee from working for an excessively lengthy period (generally more than 12 months) is also highly likely to be struck down and declared unenforceable. To overcome these problems, lawyers draft restraint of trade clauses to have a "waterfall" effect. The clause contains a number of alternatives, for example, starting from a very wide restraint and then proceeding to an increasingly narrow restraint in terms of future employment activities or in terms of length of time. Each one of the alternatives is severable from the contract if declared unenforceable by a court. Accordingly, a court might reject a restraint which provided for former employee X not to be employed in any pharmaceutical industry within South East Asia including Australia. The court, on the other hand, may be prepared to enforce a restraint which prevented employee X from being employed in the field of molecular genetic artificial-blood technology in either Melbourne or in Sydney for a period of one year. Such a restraint is far more precise and reasonably protects the former employer's confidential information whilst allowing the employee to seek employment in the general field of molecular genetics.

A court must also be satisfied that an employer's fears are genuine. For instance, is the information really secret and confidential? If the information is only knowledge which an employee would obtain through the repetitive working of his or her ordinary job, courts are less likely to regard this as secret or confidential information. Other sorts of information which are publicly available (even such as client contact details and price lists) may also not qualify. If there is no secret or confidential information, then there can be no restraint of trade.

Courts will also look to see whether the employee was specifically compensated for the restraint when first employed. If an employee received a specific additional sum as a hiring incentive for a longer than normal restraint of trade, courts are more likely to be persuaded that the restraint, when ultimately applied, is reasonable. The employee has accepted the restraint when first employed and has received a specific benefit for it.

Another factor which courts will examine is the seniority of the former employee. The more senior, the more likely it may be that the now departed employee may be capable of encouraging other staff to follow him or her and more capable of influencing former clients to switch allegiance. Alternatively, if the former employee was not employed in a managerial position and was only employed at either a junior or specific technical level, courts may be less worried about wholesale client or staff defections which would need to be prevented by the restraint of trade clause.

Until recently, courts seemed reluctant to enforce restraints of trade for more than 3-6 months. However, recent New South Wales Supreme Court authorities seem to be swinging the pendulum back in favour of employers where the balancing exercise outlined above suggests that the restraint of trade does need to be enforced to reasonably protect the former employer's market and confidential information interests. For instance, Brereton, J., in John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd v. Bert & Ors [2006] N.S.W.S.C. 995 upheld a restraint of trade for 12 months in relation to a former employee who had been employed at a senior level. The same judge, in Cactus Imaging Pty Ltd v. Peters [2006] N.S.W.S.C. 17 (18 July 2006) also enforced a restraint of trade for 12 months in a situation where the former employee operated in a restrictive market or oligopoly.

This is a complex area of law. Contracts of employment generally and restraints of trade particularly need to be carefully drafted to have their intended legal effect.

Employers and employees need to be carefully advised on the range of tactics available in post employment scenarios.

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


Michael Pickering is a solicitor employed at LAC Employment Lawyers Melbourne. He has nearly 20 years experience as a lawyer.

Cheap Car Insurance: Benefits of being a Law-Abiding Motorist

By Allan Elvin
You are responsible for taking care of your car and its health and at the same time you must be careful about yourself while driving it. You are getting good comfort and convenience by using your car but do you think about its safety and security. Now, people who take care of their vehicle are opting for cheap car insurance too often.

Generally, most of the people think that they don’t need car insurance because they take good care of it and nothing can happen with it. But this is the tragedy with misfortune that it is unforeseeable. In fact, anything can happen with your car despite of your great care. Your car is susceptible to car theft, vandalism, fire and road accidents. Cheap car insurance is always a good idea to avoid bad implications of any of these misfortunes.

In fact, car insurance is a legal requirement in the UK and it is an absolute minimum before venturing on to the road. You are required by law to have car insurance to cover your potential liability to other road users. The law requires every person using a motor vehicle on the road in the UK, or permitting others to use that vehicle, to be insured against damage by causing personal injuries to third parties. Previously, many drivers were avoiding car insurance due to high premium but now many cheap car insurance plans have come up with great benefits.

Most auto-insurance companies offer three types of cheap car insurance, third party only (TPO), third party, fire and theft and comprehensive car insurance. The TPO plan insures against accidental damage to a third party vehicle and injury to third parties. Third party, fire and theft include all the benefits of third party only with the addition of cover for fire, lightning, explosion, theft, attempted theft and taking without consent. Whereas, fully comprehensive car insurance covers against accidental damage to a third party vehicle and to the policyholder's car, injury to third parties and liability to passengers in the policyholder's car.

You also can get various hidden benefits and additional features with cheap car insurance and that is why most of the motorists are opting for it.

About the author:
Allan Elvin is an MBA in Finance and has a rich experience of writing on topics related to finance. He professes special interest and expertise in cheap car insurance and in guiding you on its various details.

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