Litigation Legal Questions

Unless California law is very differeent from where I practice, you can't simply "place a lien" on someone's house.  You either need a contract that allows you to do so (e.g. a mortgage), have provided certain materials or services to improve the house (e.g. a contractor who performs work on the house), have a claim to ownerhsip of the house that you litigate (e.g. you sue claiming that the owner breached a contract to sell the house to you, in which case you have to start your suit within a certain period of time or the lien is invalid) or obtain a judgment against the homeowner in a lawsuit, which allows you to place a judgment lien on the house untill the judgment is satisfied.  Of couse I don't know the whole story, but of these the only one that sounds plausible is that your neighbor sued you and obtained a judgment against you.  You can't get rid of the lien unless you either pay the judgment, or gat the judgment vacated by a court, and almost the only way you can do that is if you were not properly served with the suit and a default judgment was entered against you.  You need to investigate exactly what type of "lien" your neighbor has against your house to see on what it is based and if it's valid.  You may want to engage a local attorney.... Read More

Please accept my condolences for your loss.  There are several excellent lawyers in the State of California. Stephen Sirota of my office handles estate litigation.  You can also look on lawyers.com and review their ratings.  Google, Avvo and Yelp also have ratings but they are consumer based and don't necessarily reflect the capabilities of the attorney, but the consumer's experience with that attorney.  The best way to do it is to have a consult with the attorney (they're usually free) and see if it's a good fit for you.  You're welcome to contact our office and ask for Ms. Johns or Mr. Sirota.... Read More

Well if you are going to self lawyer your case and tel us what it is or is not legally, why bother us? Unfortunately, from your description you are dead wrong. It is likely covered under Fla. Stat. 766. Everything else you hang your hat on will likely involve you spending an inordinate amout of money out of pocket on legal fees fighting over those issues, and thats a practical factor in the viabole of any of your 4 claims related to those events.... Read More

First of all, notify your insurance company immediately.  Unless there is s omething unusual about your policy, it will provide you with an attorney.  Second, of course you are being sued; in an accident case especially, you sue everyone who could possbily be held liable, expecially anyone who has insurance coverage.  The plaintiff has nothign to lose by naming everyone he/she can.  That is why I am very surprised that the mechanic and repair shop aren't being sued as well, but you can cross-claim agiainst them when you answer the complaint.... Read More

Probably nothing at this point.  Other thatn selling below market value, for which the estate could recover money damages, you've written nothing to indicate that the representatiove exceeded her authority pr breached her duties to the estate.  Even if you could prove that she had done so, the estate could not rescind the sale unless it could prove that the buyer knew about the wrongdoing prior to the sale.  If the buyer was what is known as a bona fiide purchaser for value, the estate would be limited to money damages from the representative, and could not rescind the sale, even if the representative had engaged in wrongdling. ... Read More

UNless you had a contract with a particular physician as opposed to the clinic, your remedy is most likely get the work done by the new doctor. I fthis is a NVC-19 issue where you are looking to get out of the deal for finainical reasons be careful you don't find yourself fofeiting the money. ... Read More

The lawyer hired by your brother presumably represents your father's estate and its executor, not you.  If your brother the executor can't, or won't, answer your questions to your satisfaction and you feel that you need an attorney to protect your rights, you will have to hire your own.... Read More

It's hard to answer your question because I don't know what you want the banker to testify about.  He can't testify about what he "knew", only about what occurred, in this case what somebody said to him. Hearsay is an out of court statement offered in evidence for the truth of the matter asserted.  If a statement is not offered for its truth, it is not hearsay.  Thus, if I ask you your age and you say "39", I can't offer that statement in evidence to show your age (unless a hearsay exception applies) but I can offer it to show that you understand English.  Are the statements to which the banker will testify being offered for their truth? Hearsay is considered less reliable than non-hearsay because a jury not only has to determine if the witness is lying (whch they have to do with qny evidence) but also whether the person who made the statement was lying, and they have to do this without being able to hear or observe the person making the statement.  There are many exceptions to the hearsay rule, most based on the inherent reliability of the type of statement.  For example, a statement against interest is an exception to the hearsay rule because people will generally not say something against their interest unless they're telling the truth.  An excited utterance ("Oh my god, Jim just shot Carl!") is an exception to the hearsay rule because people usually do not have the time or presence of mind to formulate a lie while in an excited state.  There is nothing in your question which indicates that the banker's statements fall withing any hearsay exception (of course, I don't know all the facts).  There could be an exception, however, based on who "she" (the person who made the statement) is.  If "she" is the other side to the dispute, the statement would not be hearsay - statements by opposing parties are not hearsay because they can always testify to contradict the statement if they want, and therefore the jury will have a chance to hear and observe the witness. ... Read More

Glad you have such a high opinion of yourself. Unfortunately, that is NOT the basis to addess security deposit litgation. Absent a forfiture issue - security deposit litigaton is NOT productive for a tenant unless they are willing to spend legal fees fighting over the amount to make a point. Fla. Stat. 83.49(3) sets out the process. ... Read More

Mr. Bergeron, if you want to sue big tobacco for COPD related to cigarette smoking, certain elements must  be established pursuant to the case of Engle v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.: 1) You must prove that the person was addicted to cigarettes; 2), you must prove that the cigarette adiction caused one of the smoking-related illnesses specified in the original Engle case (COPD is enumerated.) 3)  You must establish that the illness was discovered or diagnosed by November 21, 1996. These elements must be met or the case will be dismissed by the Court.  Please contact me if I can be of further assistance. ... Read More

You've raised a lot of issues.  There is no need for an attorney to be present when your father gave or sold his stock to your sibling, however the contract would obviously be invalid if it is forged, if your sibling defrauded your father or used undue influence or duress to get your father to sign it, or if your father was not legally competent when he signed the document.  If you believe that any of these situations apply, you can sue to invalidate the contract, but you will have to prove the basis on which you claim the contract is invalid. ... Read More

The general rule of thumb is "buyer beware".  This is why it is important to obtain a inspection from a reputable company.  The seller is only responsible for covering something up that you could  not find out about, or fraud.  The other recourse is against your inspector. They should have told you that there was certain testing that they could not perform.... Read More

You can sue him for breach of contract and may be able to seek rescision of the contract.  That said, you'd have to pay him the fair value of the work he has done which would be less that the $350,000.  Might make sens to send him a demand letter before suing him to see if you can negotiatie a resolution before starting a lawsuit.  Feel free to contact me if you need help writing that demand letter or commencing the lawsuit agaisnt the contractor.   Best, Lou Russo lrusso@russolaw-llc.com at www.russolaw-llc.com ... Read More

Employers are responsible for the acts of their employees if those actions were taken in the course of their duties for the employer.  business.  For example, if a pizza delivery van negligently causes an accident.  I don't think the intentional actions of these employees would fit, but it might be worth a shot.   An employer can also be liable for negligent hiring/retention of an employee if the employer knew or should have known that the empployee was not suitable for the job, and that employee's actions damaged a customer.   For example, if the employees here had had numeorus prior complaints against them for theft and the employer had kept them on anyway, the employer might be deemed responsible for their theft of your valuable.  While this is possible here, at this point you don't seem to have any facts to support this theory.... Read More