PUBLISHED IN THE CLAREMORE DAILY PROGRESS, CLAREMORE, OKLAHOMA, JANUARY 10, 17 & 24 , 2013.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT
IN AND FOR
STATE OF OKLAHOMA
DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS F/K/A BANKERS TRUST COMPANY AS TRUSTEE FOR RASC 2002-KS1 A/K/A DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS F/K/A BANKERS TRUST COMPANY AS TRUSTEE; Plaintiff,
BRICE G. FERGUSON, JR. A/K/A BRICE GLENN FERGUSON, JR. AND TINA S. FERGUSON AK/A TINA SUZANNE FERGUSON; et al. Defendants,
Case No. CJ 2012-270
Judge Sheila Condren
NOTICE BY PUBLICATION
THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO COLLECT A DEBT AND ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED WILL BE USED FOR THAT PURPOSE.
THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA TO:
TINA S. FERGUSON A/K/A TINA SUZANNE FERGUSON; IF LIVING, AND IF DECEASED THEIR HEIRS, PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES, DEVISEES, TRUSTEES, SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS AND THE UNKNOWN SUCCESSORS
You are hereby notified that you have been sued by Plaintiff in the above cause in the District Court of Rogers County, Oklahoma, entitled Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas f/k/a Bankers Trust Company as Trustee for RASC 2002-KS1 A/K/A Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas f/k/a Bankers Trust Company as Trustee, Plaintiff v. Brice G. Ferguson, Jr. a/k/a Brice Glenn Ferguson, Jr. and Tina S. Ferguson a/k/a Tina Suzanne Ferguson, et al., Defendants, and that you must answer the Petition of said Plaintiff on or before the 3rd day of March, 2013, or the allegations of said Petition will be taken as true and a judgment will be entered for the sums due under the note and Mortgage which are the subject of said suit in the amount of $248,664.94 with interest, attorney fees and all costs and a Decree ordering foreclosure of said Mortgage, barring your interest in the following described real property:


60+ Years’ Experience. Millions of Dollars Recovered.
Why Clients Choose Our Firm for Counsel:
- We have more than 60 years of combined legal experience.
- Our managing partner is board certified in personal injury and civil trial law.
- We have a proven record of success—recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for past clients.
- Our firm knows how to investigate medical malpractice incidents.
- We handle cases on a contingency fee basis, which means we are personally invested in clients’ case.
Our Houston medical malpractice lawyers are skilled, compassionate, and ready to listen to your side of the story. We accept cases we are confident in and care about the results we obtain for our clients. We go above and beyond to secure maximum compensation in each and every case. More than that, we have the resources to go the distance for our clients in complex cases.
Tell us more about your case in a free consultation. Call (713) 489-0993 to schedule yours.
Comprehensive Representation for Medical Malpractice Cases
Hampton & King knows that this time can be very overwhelming. You may be wondering who to turn to and how to move forward with your medical malpractice case. Our proven advocates are extremely selective with the cases we take on so that we can provide the personalized counsel and attention each client deserves. When you come to us, you can be confident knowing we have the expertise to help.
We handle a comprehensive range of cases including:
- Birth Injuries
- Cerebral Palsy
- Diagnosis Mistakes
- Medication Errors & Drug Interactions
- Treatment Errors
- Surgical Errors
- Mismanaged Health Conditions
- Cancer Treatment Errors
- Central Pontine Myelinolysis
- Spinal Cord Abscess
- Medical Device Failures
- Stevens Johnson Syndrome
- Posterior Ischemic Optic Neuropathy (PION)
With our experience handling medical malpractice cases throughout Texas, we can provide the high level of legal advocacy you need, no matter how complex your case may be. From hospital negligence and mistreatment to failure to diagnose, we are prepared to tackle any type of malpractice claim.
Equipped to Handle the Most Complex Medical Mistakes
Our Houston firm is one of the only firms prepared to handle the types of medical issues other lawyers avoid or turn away. Anesthesia cases are particularly difficult to parse for non-medical professionals. Understanding what happened to you, why it happened, and who is responsible is especially difficult because anesthesia use comes with severe baseline risks.
The common types of anesthesia mistakes are:
- Misintubation (aka inadvertent intubation)
- Right mainstem bronchus intubation
- Laryngeal Mask Airway misplacement
- Propofol overdoses
- Versed overdoses (oral midazolam)
- Midazolam overdoses
- Benzodiazepine toxicity (aka Xanaz or alprazolam toxicity)
Our medical and legal experience empowers us to understand what happened to you as well as your own doctor or hospital. Our medical experts help us develop these cases first hand to ensure that when we pursue a claim, it has the strength to succeed in court.
Fighting for the Justice Our Clients Deserve
When you entrust your case to our firm, we commit to providing state-of-the-art service to the very end. Having handled such a broad array of medical malpractice cases, we know how to recognize factors that led to medical errors. We have the expertise and resources to see your case through to the end. We also understand that the manner in which we do our job can determine whether or not our clients get the compensation need to cover life-long costs.
Trust your case to our Houston firm today. Reach out to us at 713.489.0993.


Foot fetish: Man sought for ogling 12 y.o. girl's feet on Nieuwegein street
The police are looking for a man who "showed unusual attention to the feet of a 12-year-old girl" on Symphonielaan in Nieuwegein on September 17.
The girl was approached by a man she does not know on the street at around 5:00 p.m., the police said on Wednesday. "He asked the girl to show him her bare feet. After the girl had complied with this unusual request, the man cycled away."
According to the police, the man is around 18 years old, with tanned skin and brown, curly hair. He was wearing shorts and a white t-shirt, and cycled over Sweelincklaan, possibly in the direction of City Plaza.
The police would like to identify this man and call on anyone who may recognize him to come forward.


Ogdensburg police blotter, Feb. 16
Ogdensburg police blotter, Feb. 16, 2018
• Report of hit-and-run accident on Ford Street around 7 p.m. Rickie D. Lawton was cited for leaving the scene of a property-damage accident.• Larceny reported at 4:21 p.m. on Pearl Street.
• Motor vehicle accident in SeaComm Federal Credit Union parking lot at 4:21 p.m. Parties handled without police assistance.
• Caller asked to speak with police about possible drug activity on Paterson Street at 4:10 p.m.
• Caller reports a scam involving Craigslist. Police advised caller to report scam to Craigslist.
• Mail carrier contacted police to make them aware of a home on Grant Street that had the front door open with no one answering when she tried to make contact with anyone inside. No one inside and no signs of forced entry. Police will make contact will homeowner to see if anything is missing.
• Report of a hit-and-run accident at the Department of Public Works at 1:47 p.m. No tickets reported.
• Two vehicle property-damage accident at intersection of Paterson and Greene streets at 11:24 p.m. Stanley A. Seguin was cited for failure to yield right-of-way at a stop sign. Ogdensburg rescue was requested to the scene.
• Fern Larue was arrested on an Ogdensburg City Court Warrant at 11:03 a.m. on Park Street. The charge was second-degree harassment. Larue was released with a no contact order of protection issued in favor of the victim.
• Brandon Joanette was picked up on a warrant related to a third-degree assault charge on Edwards Lane at 10:39 a.m. He was also charged with second-degree aggravated unlicensed operation. A no harass order of protection was issued in favor of the victim.
• Grace E. Snider was cited for inadequate break light at 8:26 p.m. on Lafayette Street.
• Peter F. Labella was cited for uninspected motor vehicle on Jay Street at 8:05 a.m.


Days after an intruder showed up at the singer’s Beverly Hills home to pop the question, Rihanna’s driver’s car was reportedly stolen this week.
According to TMZ, her driver left the engine running as he ran back inside the house, which resulted in the theft of the $37,000 2012 Audi Sedan.
The LAPD is reportedly looking into the incident, though it is unclear if the Rude Boy singer, 35, who is expecting her second child with rapper A$AP Rocky, was at home at the time.
After a man from South Carolina allegedly traveled to California to propose to the Fenty CEO, the home was surrounded by police last week.
Her security team called the police to report their worries, and the would-be Romeo was handcuffed and put in the back of a squad car.
After investigators concluded that he had not broken any laws, he was later released and told not to come back.
Rocky, whose real name is Rakim Athelaston Mayers, and Rihanna may not have been home when the alleged man approached.
They have not yet made any public remarks about the incident.


Covered by NYDaily News. Las Vegas man accused of threatening a prominent attorney and making vile remarks.
Covered by New York Times, and other outlets. Fake heiress accused of conning the city’s wealthy, and has an HBO special being made about her.
Accused of stalking Alec Baldwin. The case garnered nationwide attention, with USAToday, NYPost, and other media outlets following it closely.
Juror who prompted calls for new Ghislaine Maxwell trial turns to lawyer who defended Anna Sorokin.
Clients can use our portal to track the status of their case, stay in touch with us, upload documents, and more.
Regardless of the type of situation you're facing, our attorneys are here to help you get quality representation.
We can setup consultations in person, over Zoom, or over the phone to help you. Bottom line, we're here to help you win your case.
The Spodek Law Group understands how delicate high-profile cases can be, and has a strong track record of getting positive outcomes. Our lawyers service a clientele that is nationwide. With offices in both LA and NYC, and cases all across the country - Spodek Law Group is a top tier law firm.
Todd Spodek is a second generation attorney with immense experience. He has many years of experience handling 100’s of tough and hard to win trials. He’s been featured on major news outlets, such as New York Post, Newsweek, Fox 5 New York, South China Morning Post, Insider.com, and many others.
In 2022, Netflix released a series about one of Todd’s clients: Anna Delvey/Anna Sorokin.
Why Clients Choose Spodek Law Group
The reason is simple: clients want white glove service, and lawyers who can win. Every single client who works with the Spodek Law Group is aware that the attorney they hire could drastically change the outcome of their case. Hiring the Spodek Law Group means you’re taking your future seriously. Our lawyers handle cases nationwide, ranging from NYC to LA. Our philosophy is fair and simple: our nyc criminal lawyers only take on clients who we know will benefit from our services.
We’re selective about the clients we work with, and only take on cases we know align with our experience – and where we can make a difference. This is different from other law firms who are not invested in your success nor care about your outcome.
If you have a legal issue, call us for a consultation.
We are available 24/7, to help you with any – and all, challenges you face.
Dealing with a criminal charge in New York City can be an incredibly stressful and scary experience. The stakes are high, and the legal system complex. You may feel anxious about what will happen next and desperate to get the charges dropped.The good news is that experienced NYC criminal defense lawyers have numerous strategies they can use to get charges dismissed or reduced, or even avoid charges altogether. This article outlines the most effective ways top attorneys are able to get criminal cases thrown out in New York City courts.
The first step is to meet with your criminal defense lawyer right away after being arrested or charged. The days and hours after an arrest are critical, because that’s when your attorney can take actions to protect your rights and start working on getting charges dropped or reduced.Your lawyer may be able to get charges dropped right away if there were any problems with your arrest or with how the case was handled. For example, if your Miranda rights were violated or evidence was obtained illegally, a lawyer can file a motion to suppress and get evidence thrown out. This can sometimes get the entire case dismissed.
Experienced New York criminal attorneys have working relationships with prosecutors and can negotiate with them to get charges reduced or dropped. Often, a lawyer can make an argument about problems with the prosecutor’s case or present mitigating circumstances that show why the charges are excessive or unwarranted.In many cases, prosecutors will agree to drop or lower charges rather than go to trial over a weak case. An attorney may also be able to get a favorable plea bargain that avoids more serious convictions.
If the police violated your rights or did anything improper during your arrest, your lawyer can challenge the legal validity of the officers’ conduct.For example, common illegal police activities that can result in dropped charges include:
Anything found by the police through illegal means can be suppressed and prevent prosecutors from using it against you. This may result in dropped or reduced charges.
There are often extenuating reasons why someone may have broken the law. Your lawyer’s job is to identify and skillfully present any mitigating factors that show why the charges are unjustified or should at least be reduced.For example:
If your attorney can show the context behind your alleged criminal behavior and argue why the charges are unwarranted, there is a good chance of getting charges lowered or dismissed.
Prosecutors often have a weak case without enough solid evidence to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. An experienced criminal lawyer knows how to analyze the prosecution’s case and challenge questionable or contradictory testimony and evidence.By exposing flaws and inconsistencies in the prosecutor’s version of events, your attorney can raise enough doubt to either get charges dropped or secure a “not guilty” verdict at trial. Even if the case does go to trial, your lawyer may be able to get certain charges thrown out so you face less serious convictions.
In cases involving non-violent crimes or first-time offenders, lawyers can sometimes negotiate alternative agreements that avoid formal convictions. These resolutions – such as participating in counseling programs, doing community service, paying restitution, etc. – allow you to resolve the case without pleading guilty.If you successfully complete the terms of such an agreement, the charges are dismissed. Alternative resolutions avoid the consequences of pleading guilty while still accountability that satisfies prosecutors and judges.
For more information on fighting criminal charges in New York City courts, check out the following resources:How to Get Criminal Charges Dismissed in New York (Video overview)What You Should Know to Beat Criminal Charges (Podcast)Getting an NYC Case Dismissed (NYC Bar Association)Motions to Suppress Evidence in New York (NY Criminal Lawyer Blog)
Please fill out the form below to receive a free consultation, we will respond to
your inquiry within 24-hours guaranteed.


Deputies with the Santa Clarita Valley Sheriff’s Station are looking for two suspects connected to a reportedly armed smash-and-grab on Monday afternoon near the Starbucks on the 23300 block of Lyons Avenue in Newhall.
Natalie Arriaga, spokeswoman for the SCV Sheriff’s Station, confirmed two men were seen smashing a car window and then reportedly stealing a laptop and a phone from the vehicle.
The first suspect was described as a man wearing a white hat and a blue bandana. The second suspect was described as a heavy-set man in his 30’s. They both were last seen by witnesses driving a white newer-model Lexus westbound on Lyons toward Interstate 5.
Arriaga also confirmed that witnesses saw one of the suspects brandish a silver-colored gun of unknown type.
There is no additional information available at the time of this publication.


|Middletown Township Committee||5 voting members|
|Middletown Board of Education||9 voting members|
|Monmouth County Freeholders||5 voting members|
|Middletown Library Board||9 voting members|
|Middletown Sewerage Authority
|5 voting members plus 2 alternates|
Property taxes are made up of several pieces – municipal (town), school, and county. There are separate lines on your tax bill to fund each of those entities, plus dedicated municipal and county open space taxes.
While there is also a separate line on your tax bill for the municipal library, the library rate is not an additional tax. The appropriation for the library is part of the municipal budget, however the appropriation is required by law to be listed as a separate line item on your tax bill.
Sewer fees are currently billed separately from taxes.
The municipal budget is managed by the Township Committee. School and county budgets are managed by the Board of Education and County Board of Chosen Freeholders, respectively. All three bodies operate independently, though commonly enter into shared service or purchasing arrangements to reduce costs.
The Library Board of Trustees and the Sewerage Authority (TOMSA) Board are appointed by the Township Committee. However, one member of the Library Board is appointed by the School Superintendent. The Library and TOMSA budgets are separately managed from the Township budget by the respective boards.


In State v. Mele, 140 Conn. 398, 100 A.2d 570, we stated that where a short form information was used by the state, the so-called "evidence test" was to be used to inform an accused whether a lesser crime was included in the crime charged.Summary of this case from State v. Brown
If upon the evidence an accused can properly be found guilty of a lesser offense than that charged and the allegations of the information include the elements constituting the lesser offense, he is entitled to have the jury instructed concerning the elements of the lesser offense and that they may find him guilty of it if there is a reasonable doubt as to the existence of the additional elements necessary to conviction of the greater crime. A short-form information not stating the means by which the offense was committed is to be read as though it alleged the means proved by the state on the trial. The information charged the defendant with assault with intent to murder. The court instructed the jury that they might find the defendant guilty as charged, or of assault with intent to kill, or of assault, or not guilty, and it defined the elements of each of those crimes. It later defined aggravated assault but did not charge that this was one of the lesser offenses of which the defendant might be found guilty. Held that, although the short-form information did not allege that the assault was with a dangerous weapon, as proved to be the case, the information must be read as though it did allege this means, and the jury should have been instructed that a verdict of guilty of aggravated assault was possible.
Argued October 15, 1953
Decided November 10, 1953
Information charging the defendant with the crime of assault with intent to murder, brought to the Superior Court in New Haven County and tried to the jury before Wynne, J.; verdict and judgment of guilty of assault with intent to kill, and appeal by the defendant. Error; new trial.
Anthony A. E. DeLucia, for the appellant (defendant).
Abraham S. Ullman, state's attorney, with whom, on the brief, was Arthur T. Gorman, assistant state's attorney, for the appellee (state).
Upon an information charging an assault with intent to murder, the defendant was convicted of assault with intent to kill. From that conviction he has appealed, assigning several errors in the charge, one of which is that the court failed to instruct the jury that they might bring in a verdict of guilty of aggravated assault.
The information charged that "Andrew Mele did commit an assault upon one Henrietta Amici Mele, with intent to murder her, against the peace, and contrary to the Statute Section 8356 in such case made and provided." The state claimed to have proved that on the night of September 29, 1952, the defendant inflicted thirty or forty lacerations and stab wounds upon the complainant, who was his wife; that his motive for doing so was revenge upon her for having made a complaint to the police that he had committed adultery; and that, after his arrest on the present charge, he had made a statement to the effect that he had gone to the home of the complainant that evening for the purpose of killing her.
The defendant claimed that when he arrived home on the night in question there were suspicious circumstances which led to his accusing his wife of having had improper relations with another man. Thereupon an argument started in which his wife struck him and he went into the kitchen, took the knife and stabbed her.
The court charged the jury, in part, as follows: "In this particular case there are four possible verdicts which it is possible for you to render. If you find that an assault has been committed upon the wife of this accused and that that assault was with the intent to kill her and that the assault was characterized by malice aforethought, then your verdict must be guilty, which will mean guilty as charged; that is, guilty of assault with intent to murder. Should you find that the accused committed an assault upon his wife, as alleged, with intent to kill her, but find that the State has not sustained the element of malice aforethought, then your verdict would be guilty of assault with intent to kill. Should you find that the accused committed an assault upon his wife, but find that the State has not satisfied you as to any specific intent to kill her, then your verdict is simply assault. Should you find that the State has not satisfied you that the accused committed an assault, then, of course, the verdict would be not guilty." The court went on to say that "if, as between any of these three verdicts of guilt, you entertain a doubt between the higher and the lower, you must give the accused the benefit of that doubt." The accused had filed no requests to charge, but at the end of the charge he took exception to the court's failure to mention aggravated assault.
In response to an inquiry from the jury as to the difference between assault with intent to murder and assault with intent to kill, the court gave them a supplemental charge. In that it mentioned that there was "a third grade of assault, which is aggravated assault, with a dangerous weapon. Where an assault is made upon the person of another with a dangerous weapon, that is aggravated assault." It did not, however, instruct the jury that it was possible for them to render a verdict of guilty of aggravated assault. After the jury had again retired, the defendant called the court's attention to the omission to so charge. Thus the question is presented whether the defendant was entitled to a charge that the jury might find the defendant guilty of aggravated assault.
It is well settled that upon a trial on a charge of a greater offense there may be a conviction of a lesser offense if two conditions are satisfied. The first of these conditions is that the evidence must be such that it warrants a finding that the defendant is guilty of the lesser offense, and the second is that all of the essential elements constituting the lesser offense are alleged in the information. 42 C.J.S. 1294, 271. When these two conditions are met, the defendant is entitled to a charge that the jury may find him guilty of the lesser offense if there is a reasonable doubt as to the additional elements necessary to prove the greater crime. State v. Monte, 131 Conn. 134, 135, 38 A.2d 434; State v. Buonomo, 87 Conn. 285, 289, 87 A. 977.
Section 8520 of the General Statutes provides: "Any person who shall make an assault upon another with any deadly or dangerous weapon shall be guilty of an aggravated assault. . . ." In the present case, so far as the evidence goes, the jury might reasonably have found that the defendant committed an assault upon the complainant with a knife and that the knife was a dangerous weapon, but they might have failed to find that the assault was made with an intent either to kill or to murder. In other words, the evidence might have warranted a finding that the defendant was guilty of aggravated assault. The substantial question, therefore, is whether the second condition referred to above was satisfied, that is, whether the essential elements of the crime of aggravated assault were included in the allegations of the information.
The state, to support its claim that the crime of aggravated assault was not alleged, points to the fact that nowhere in the information do the words "aggravated assault" or "deadly or dangerous weapon appear. This, however, does not completely answer the question. The information is in the short form authorized by Practice Book, 344. Section 349 of the Practice Book provides that an information in this form need contain no allegation of "the means by which [the offense] was committed." At common law it was necessary for an information charging assault with intent to murder to set forth in detail the means by which the assault had been accomplished. 2 Swift's Digest 378. Except for the rules permitting short-form informations, the information in the present case, for example, would have had to allege that the wounds had been inflicted with a knife. The result of the rule is, therefore, that a short-form information charging an assault with intent to murder, as in the instant case, in effect charges that the assault was committed by any means which the state may prove on the trial. If it appears in evidence that the assault was committed by means of a dangerous weapon, then the information must be read as though it alleged that the assault was committed by that means. See State v. DiLorenzo, 138 Conn. 281, 284, 83 A.2d 479. There can be no doubt that, under the allegations of the information, evidence that the assault was committed with a dangerous weapon was admissible. People v. Cassler, 332 Ill. 207, 217, 163 N.E. 430. Nor can there be any doubt that a conviction under it of assault with intent to murder would have been a bar to a prosecution for assault with a deadly weapon arising out of the same transaction. State v. Parmelee, 9 Conn. 259. These considerations lead to the conclusion that the essential elements of the crime of aggravated assault were included in the allegations of the information and that the jury should have been charged that a finding of guilty of that crime was possible.
The other assignments of error have no merit.


(EVANSVILLE ) - A federal court in Evansville will hear oral arguments Friday in a same-sex marriage case.
Attorneys will ask the court to compel Indiana to continue to recognize the marriage of a lesbian couple from Munster, as well as to extend the freedom to marry to all Indiana same-sex couples.
Friday's arguments are the latest chapter in Baskin v. Bogan, the federal lawsuit Lambda Legal filed in March in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana on behalf of five Indiana same-sex couples seeking to overturn Indiana's discriminatory marriage ban.
Have a question or comment about a news story? Send it to firstname.lastname@example.org


Dow Chem offers cash to people with land in floodplain
Midland — Dow Chemical is offering money to 450 property owners along the Tittabawassee River in exchange for not developing the land and giving the company access to check for contaminated soil.
The land is in a floodplain in Midland and Saginaw counties. The company says property owners would get $10,000, plus $1,000 per acre, for a permanent easement.
Spokesman Nate Kerns says 76 percent of the floodplain already is undeveloped. Property owners would agree to keep the land in its current state and allow Dow to perform any sampling or cleanup. Decades ago, the company released dioxins to the air and water.
Tittabawassee Township Supervisor Rick Hayes says it’s a generous offer because land in a floodplain typically can’t be developed.


Officer arrested Bradley Sean Westbrook, 35, on two felony warrants and on charges of possession of methamphetamine and possession of drug paraphernalia.
According to a statement from the police department, officer spotted Westbrook and Shante Marie Davaz, 31, walking near Lincoln and John Adams Parkway. Westbrook allegedly attempted to run from police initially and threw a backpack over a fence. Westbrook stopped running when ordered to and was arrested.
Davaz allegedly continued to run and was later located in a vacant house in the 600 block of Holbrook. She was arrested for unlawful entry, resisting arrest, obstructing police officers and four warrants.
The backpack was located and allegedly contained 12 syringes and approximately 4.34 grams of methamphetamine.
Mike Price, EastIdahoNews.com


WASHINGTON -- House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said Thursday he's confident the House will "work its will on immigration" reform and come to a deal -- he's just not sure how.
"We're not going to be stampeded by the White House or stampeded by the president," Boehner said at a press conference. "The Senate is working its will, a lot of good work that's going on over there, but the House will work its will. Don't ask me how, because if I knew I'd certainly tell you, but the House is going to work its will."
Boehner has stayed largely out of the immigration debate, stating his support for the members working on a deal but without weighing in on the details. A bipartisan group in the House is currently working on an immigration bill, but although they have said they agreed on major principles, there are still details to be ironed out.
When asked whether he thinks the group is on the brink of collapse, Boehner said, "Well, I've heard that before, too."
"We've got a problem with legal immigration, we've got a problems with illegal immigration, and they've been through an awful lot," he said of the House group. "But I've got to say, there are people on both sides of the aisle who have done their best to try to undermine their ability to get to an agreement."
"Whether they actually finish and agree on everything or not, they've done a lot of really good work," he added later.
Despite his support for the group, Boehner said he is also encouraged by work outside the House's bipartisan team. He commended House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) in particular for holding hearings and offering piecemeal immigration legislation.
"There are a lot of efforts that I've encouraged, because if we're going to solve this problem, we've got to educate our members," he said. "We've got to help educate them about the hundreds of issues that are involved if we're truly going to have immigration reform."
Boehner gave a further response on his view for immigration reform -- albeit still a vague one -- in a joint statement later Thursday with other House GOP leaders. Part of the statement, from Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), Republican Conference Chairman Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), and Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), is below:
"While we applaud the progress made by our Senate colleagues, there are numerous ways in which the House will approach the issue differently. The House remains committed to fixing our broken immigration system, but we will not simply take up and accept the bill that is emerging in the Senate if it passes. Rather, through regular order, the House will work its will and produce its own legislation. ... The House goal is enactment of legislation that actually solves these problems and restores faith in our immigration system, and we are committed to continuing the work we’ve begun toward that goal in the weeks and months ahead."


NASHUA — Police are seeking the public’s help in locating a local man.
Victor Varela Colindres was reported missing to the Nashua Police Department on January 19.
He was last seen in the late evening hours of January 15.
Colindres is 24 years old, 5’11”, weighs approximately 205 lbs, and has black hair and brown eyes.
Since he was reported missing, the family has not had contact with Victor.
However, the Nashua Police Department has continued investigating Colindres’ disappearance since it was reported.
Anyone with information about Colindres or his disappearance is being asked to contact Detective Tim Roach at 603-589-6136.


SUSQUEHANNA TOWNSHIP SCHOOL DISTRICT
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17109
- Attend public meetings of the board.
- Attend board planning meetings or executive sessions.
- Prepare or approve contracts, upon request, entered into for the hiring of personnel or the purchase of supplies or services.
- Prepare or approve all advertising for the purchase of supplies and services.
- Prepare a resolution adopting taxes to fund the annual budget.
- Keep the board advised on recent legislation affecting school districts.
- Conduct all litigation on behalf of the school district.
- Conduct all tenure hearings and hearings involving expulsions and suspensions of students.
- Arrange for hearings involving home education programs (24 P.S.-13-1327.1 (k)).
The Solicitor should receive copies of board agendas, copies of all correspondence involving contractual obligations of the board or other matters on which may eventually require an opinion to be rendered.
Membership in the Pennsylvania School Boards Association and a subscription to the School Law Information Exchange published by the Pennsylvania School Boards Association shall be provided for the solicitor by the board of school directors.
The school solicitor should regularly be provided with copies of all administrative memorandums issued by the Department of Education or central administration.
All matters referred to the school board solicitor by any individual administrator or board member will be subject to review by the official board of school directors. All opinions requested by school officials or school board members shall be made a part of the official files of the school district.
Approved by the School Board – April 23, 1973
Amended by the School Board – June 8, 1987
Amended by the School Board – November 19, 2007


At the law firm of Law & Moran, we are committed to making a difference in the lives of our clients. As a personal injury firm, we work diligently to help people who have been injured by the negligence and wrongdoing of others.
What makes our firm unique is our combination of experience, proven results and personal service. We have obtained numerous six, seven and eight figure awards and settlements on behalf of our clients. However, while we are focused on results, we never forget the importance of personal service.
As a law firm that has helped many clients that have suffered a catastrophic injury and many family members that have lost a loved one in a fatal accident, we understand that personal service is essential. Our goal is to handle all legal challenges as effectively and comprehensively as possible so our clients can focus.
Contact us today if you need legal assistance with any of the following:
Call Law & Moran today at 770-727-2851 to arrange your free initial consultation.
$81,000,000.00 - Premises Liability – 12 person jury verdict for injuries to a Navy veteran who was robbed and shot multiple times at a Kroger. The jury apportioned 86% of the fault to Defendant Kroger and 14% of the fault to the two non-party shooters, resulting in a net verdict of $69,660,000.00 in favor of Plaintiff. (Post-trial motions currently pending).
$72,960,000.00 – Premises Liability - 12 person jury verdict for burn injuries to a 53 year old man where his apartment exploded after he turned on the light at Defendants’ apartment complex. Jury found gas line was uncapped due to Defendants’ negligence. Jury awarded $17,900,000.00 in compensatory damages, $7,160,000.00 in attorney’s fees, $47,900,000.00 in punitive damages, and the judge added $561,640.96 in pre-judgment interest, for a total award of $73,521,640.96. After the verdict, the trial judge reduced the punitive verdict in accordance with Georgia’s punitive damages cap. The Defendants maintained adequate insurance to cover the entire verdict and the case settled while on appeal.
$54,420,000.00 - Tractor Trailer Negligence -12 person jury verdict for death of a 50-year-old woman killed by PFG Milton, Inc.'s tractor-trailer. Jury awarded $10,420,000.00 in compensatory damages and $44,000,000.00 in punitive damages. $4,000,000.00 settlement offer from AIG and Great West Insurance was rejected at trial. Settled on appeal after verdict.
$45,000,000.00 – Premises Liability - 12 person jury verdict for injuries to a 47 year old man who was robbed and shot at a CVS. The jury apportioned 95% of the fault to Defendant CVS and 5% of the fault to Plaintiff, resulting in a net verdict of $42,750,000.00 in favor of Plaintiff. (Post-trial motions currently pending).
$21,600,000.00 - Tractor Trailer Negligence - 12 person jury verdict involving a tractor trailer failing to yield while turning left and blocking the highway. An oncoming motorist left the roadway, striking Plaintiff and causing serious injuries, including a below the knee amputation of his left leg. The jury apportioned 99.99% of the fault to the trucking company defendants and 0.01% fault to the defendant driver who struck Plaintiff. (Post-trial motions currently pending).


Often, the most complicated part of estate planning is figuring out who you want to benefit from your estate. For blended families, estate planning can feel especially complicated – after all, you’re now dealing with more family members and more dynamics to keep in mind. Whether you are a longstanding member of a blended family or entering a new relationship (and possibly a new family unit), it’s important to think about the implications when creating your estate plan.
With Ontario’s Make-a-Will Month running throughout November, we’re covering the benefits of estate planning for individuals at various stages of their lives. Today, we’ll be talking about some of the unique considerations for estate planning in a blended family and why there’s no better time than the present to begin your estate planning journey.
The Inheritance Rights of Individuals in Blended Families
As a starting point, we’ll cover the legal rights of former partners, current partners, and stepchildren for estate planning purposes.
As covered in some of our previous posts, Ontario’s Succession Law Reform Act provides direction regarding how your estate will be handled if you die without a will. Typically, if your spouse survives you, they are entitled to your assets. If your spouse does not survive you, your children will be entitled to your assets.
These considerations become a little more complicated in blended families, as you may also be considering the rights of your former spouse, a common-law spouse, or stepchildren.
Former Spouses and the Succession Law Reform Act
Section 43.1 of the Succession Law Reform Act specifies that separated spouses cannot benefit from the intestacy rules. To be considered “separated” for the Succession Law Reform Act, the former spouse must have been living separate and apart at the time of the testator’s (will-maker) death and meet one of the following scenarios:
- The testator and former spouse lived separate and apart because of the breakdown of their marriage for three or more years before the will-maker’s death
- The testator and former spouse entered into a valid separation agreement
- The testator and former spouse have a court order settling their affairs because of the breakdown of their marriage
- A family arbitration award was made under the Arbitration Act, settling the parties’ affairs after the breakdown of their marriage
Common-Law Spouses and the Succession Law Reform Act
Common-law spouses do not have the right to inherit from an intestate estate under the Succession Law Reform Act.
Stepchildren and the Succession Law Reform Act
The Succession Law Reform Act defines “child” to mean a child conceived by the testator (either before or after death). However, s. 1(3) of the Succession Law Reform Act notes that, despite the legislative definitions, non-blood relatives (e.g., stepchildren) may be deemed to fit the description of a direct family member even though they are not a blood relative unless a contrary intention is expressed in a will. While the legislation suggests that a stepchild may be considered a “child” for intestacy, this assessment can become complex depending on the unique circumstances of the will-maker and stepchild’s relationship.
Key Takeaways for Individuals in Blended Families
Complications can arise when a member of a blended family dies without a will. For example, failing to address a separation or prepare a will can confuse the status of a former spouse or a stepchild. Furthermore, common-law spouses are not automatically entitled to inherit from your estate. The best way to ensure your loved ones are cared for is to prepare a will.
Important Estate Planning Considerations for Blended Families
We’ve talked about the challenges of dying without a will in a blended family. But what are the benefits of having a will in place? In addition to avoiding some of the issues we’ve flagged above, here are just a few reasons why blended families need a solid estate plan.
Guardianship for Your Minor Children
If you have minor children, you’ll want to ensure they are well-cared for if you and your partner pass away. Additionally, in a blended family scenario, you may have unique considerations regarding who will care for the children after you’re gone (for example, whether they will stay together). It’s important to consider the legal implications of guardianship in these circumstances, especially if any former spouses still have parenting rights.
Providing for Your Minor Stepchildren
Children cannot inherit property until they turn 18 in Ontario, and you will need to think about providing guardianship of property for your children (whether they are stepchildren or otherwise). You can appoint a guardian to care for your minor children’s property until they are old enough to do so themselves. You can also create a trust for your children, which holds the funds for your children for a certain period and can be executed in different manners. For example, you can dictate that the trust be paid out in installments or released to the child in a lump-sum payment at a particular time.
Providing for Your Current Partner
As noted above, common-law partners do not have the right to inherit from an intestate estate. If you are in a common-law relationship and have minor children, it’s critical to have a will in place to ensure your common-law partner is cared for after you’re gone.
If you are married to your current partner, you will still want to look carefully at your assets and policies to determine whether any designations need to be updated. For example, if you named your former spouse as a beneficiary on your life insurance policy, they may still be entitled to the proceeds of that policy even if you executed a separation agreement.
Providing for Your Former Partner
You can provide for your former partner in your will if you choose to do so. Depending on your wishes regarding the guardianship of your children, providing for your former partner may be in your best interests.
Additional Notes on Estate Planning for Blended Families
Estate planning for blended families can be a complex and, at times, emotional experience. It’s important for anyone creating an estate plan for blended families to consult an experienced estate lawyer to ensure they understand the respective rights of their family members and other legal issues, such as obligations to a former spouse or guardianship of minor children. Regardless of your situation, the best way to protect your family in the event of the unthinkable is to make your wishes known by creating your estate plan today.
Contact the Toronto Estate Litigation Lawyers at Derfel Estate Law for Guidance with Wills
If you need help with an existing will or are considering applying to challenge a will or to dispute a trust, contact the estate litigation lawyers at Derfel Estate Law before you proceed. We can help you determine whether you are eligible to bring such a claim, help you understand your options and rights, and represent you throughout the process. To find out how we can help, call our office at 416-847-3580 or contact us online to schedule a consultation.


I create the visual art displayed on my website, and the copyright belongs to me; I am the website creator (through a template); and I am the art business owner.
Email address: email@example.com
Left: 'Green and white'.
Luminous acrylic paint on chunky canvas.
£199 plus postage and packing (P&p £5 in UK).
To contact me:
All rights reserved Copyright Julia Wilkinson 2021.


Judge rules "anti-gay" Christian couple can't be foster parents
A judge in Great Britain has ruled that a Christian couple can no longer serve as foster parents due to their religious views that homosexuality is wrong.
Yes, really. It's come to this.
The couple, Owen and Eunice Johns have been foster parents to over twenty children, but were banned from the program by social workers in 2007 as a result of interviews associated with the program where they expressed their opposition to homosexuality because of their faith. Now a British court has upheld that ban.
The Associated Press reported that judges at London’s Royal Courts of Justice determined that laws protecting homosexuals from discrimination take precedence over the couple’s religious beliefs.
Britain, the judges ruled, was a “secular state, not a theocracy.”
Of course they failed to explain just what that has to do with anything. I don't think it's lost on anyone who knows absolutely anything about history that England is not a theocracy. But (at least until this point it seems), that hasn't stopped anyone from having their own personal religious beliefs.
“We have been excluded because we have moral opinions based on our faith, and we feel sidelined because we are Christians with normal, mainstream, views on sexual ethics,” Mrs. Johns said.
Then there was this from the gay rights crowd...
“In any fostering case, the interests of the 60,00 children in care should override the bias of any prospective parent,” gay rights activist Ben Summerskill told Pink News, Europe’s largest gay news service. “Thankfully, Mr. and Mrs. Johns’ out-dated views aren’t just out of step with the majority of people in modern Britain, but those of many Christians, too.”
Of course there really wasn't much from the judge or the gay rights folks regarding just what this has to do with being willing to be a foster parent and looking out for the welfare of children who don't have anyone to care for them.
In fact, it would seem that the actions of the judges in this case are much more akin to what one would expect from a theocracy than the couple in question, in that they are deeming certain citizens unfit to participate in a public program solely on the basis of their religious views.
So now they're saying that Christians who oppose homosexuality can't participate. What's next? Only "Christians" who embrace it will have rights? And how long before a court would slide further down this slippery slope and use this logic to step in between parents and their biological children.
It just underlines that, despite how they frame the issue, liberalism and political correctness is the new theocracy. And disagreeing with their orthodoxy is heresy. If you "stray from the path" you will be punished.


Fire Extinguisher Course
RoSPA & CPD
To be compliant with the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, all employers must provide adequate training in fire safety to all members of their staff. The legislation is set out to ensure businesses provide adequate training to help them identify and reduce the risk of fire in the workplace.
This online course provides training in the use of different types of fire extinguishers and the protocol of tackling a fire. It is a cost effective way for employers to fulfil their legal obligation to provide their employees with the necessary understanding of fire awareness.
This is based on the amount of video content shown and is rounded off. It does not account in any way for loading time or thinking time on the questions.
To successfully pass the online Fire Extinguisher course you will be required to gain the following results.
|Module Number||Module Name||Pass Mark|
|3||Using a Fire Extinguisher||100%|
On successful completion of your online Fire Extinguisher course, you can download and print your certificate.


If you have been in the legal profession for any length of time, you probably want to know how to define advantages of law. While there are many advantages of practicing law, it is often difficult to distinguish between the positives and negatives. For instance, the use of lawyers has made the legal profession much more complicated than it needs to be. Lawyers often make very fine distinctions that are impossible for average people to comprehend. In addition, lawyers have an inherent desire to draw as many legal decisions as possible, which often makes it difficult for non-lawy-related problems to be solved.
Despite the fact that judges are fallible, the laws and rules of law are more reliable than individual judgment. In addition to this, the wisdom of the legislature serves as the representative of the people. The ideal legal system is one that keeps changing with the needs of society. A rigid law is difficult to keep up with a fast-changing society. This causes the people to suffer in the process. To define advantages of law, you must understand its limitations auto accident lawyers chicago.
Law is necessary to maintain evenhanded justice. The rule of law requires that judges provide justice without any favoritism. This is important because justice should be administered fairly and equally in the same manner, and all persons should be equal before the law. Therefore, a law-abiding society is more likely to thrive in the future. The rule of law is a valuable tool that is beneficial to society and the economy. If the government doesn’t protect the rights of its citizens, they won’t be able to meet their goals.
Another benefit of law is that citizens are more aware of their rights and liberties. This way, they will be able to know when their rights are being violated. Additionally, Rule of Law is essential for preserving the constitution of the land. It protects it against arbitrary laws and dictatorships. The rule of law also helps ensure that the constitution is the ultimate law of the land. Its importance cannot be overemphasized. If you’re a citizen of a nation, it’s important to understand how to define advantages of law.
In addition to ensuring justice, law also protects society from individual mistakes in judgment. Aristotle commented on this, saying that “good laws forbid seeking to be wiser than the law.” Aristotle argued that a law must reflect the will of the body politic. And it should save judges from individual judgment errors. If this is the case, it’s a clear win for law. However, we should not underestimate the limitations of the rule of law.
Rule of law is a powerful concept that encourages citizens to respect authority. It protects citizens’ fundamental rights and prevents the abuse of power by officials. It also promotes equality before the law. For example, people should be equal before the law, so that they can be free to pursue their goals. And officials must follow the law as it is intended. And law is the highest authority in society. This means that law is not in a politician’s bosom.


Robin Phelan has been honored in the annual Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business 2016 directory in the practice area of Bankruptcy/Restructuring (Nationwide and Texas).
Independent and objective, Chambers USA is carefully researched and widely considered to be the most reputable law firm directory in the world. Its rankings are based on thousands of interviews with leading practitioners and clients from coast to coast. Ranking criteria include technical legal ability, professional conduct, client service, commercial astuteness, diligence, commitment and other qualities most valued by legal clients.
Robin Phelan was ranked individually in the recently released Chambers Global legal directory. In the USA in the Bankruptcy/Restructuring category Robin Phelan maintains a solid banding and is described as a “highly experienced restructuring practitioner.”
Chambers Global, published by London-based Chambers and Partners, is a legal directory that ranks business lawyers from around the world. Chambers publications stand out from others because of the depth of supporting research.
D MAGAZINE’S BEST LAWYERS
D Magazine recognizes Robin Phelan in their annual Best Lawyers of Dallas directory in the area of Bankruptcy & Workout.
To compile the list, editors first call for peer nominations of lawyers both within and outside of their own firms whom they have witnessed firsthand and “would rank among the current best.” All nominations are then evaluated by a panel of eminent Dallas-area lawyers and D Magazine editors before the final list is generated. The complete list can be found in the May issue of D Magazine.
- Recognized as Best Lawyers’ 2012 Dallas Litigation – Bankruptcy “Lawyer of the Year,” Woodward/White, Inc., 2012
- Recognized as Best Lawyers’ 2011 Dallas Bankruptcy and Creditor-Debtor Rights “Lawyer of the Year,” Woodward/White, Inc., 2011
- Recognized as one of The Best Lawyers in America, Woodward/White, Inc., Bankruptcy and Creditor-Debtor Rights/Insolvency and Reorganization Law, 2010-2016, and Litigation – Bankruptcy, 2012-2016
- Recognized for Insolvency and Restructuring in Expert Guides, Euromoney Institutional Investor PLC, 2014
- Recognized by Chambers Global, Chambers & Partners, for Bankruptcy and Business Restructuring, 2012-2016
- Recognized by Chambers USA, Chambers & Partners, as one of the leading practitioners for Bankruptcy and Restructuring in the United States, 2008-2015, and in Texas, 2015
- Recognized in Texas Super Lawyers, Thomson Reuters – Bankruptcy & Creditor/Debtor Rights, 2009-2015; a Top 100 Texas Super Lawyer, 2011-2012; and a Top 100 Dallas/Fort Worth Region Super Lawyer, 2010-2013, 2015
- Recognized as a Best Lawyer in Dallas for Bankruptcy and Workout, D Magazine, D Magazine Partners, 2009, 2011, 2013-2016
- Recognized in The International Who’s Who of Insolvency & Restructuring Lawyers, Law Business Research Ltd., 2000-2008, 2010, 2014
- Recognized as being among the outstanding attorneys practicing in restructuring, reorganization, insolvency and bankruptcy by The K&A Restructuring Register, America’s Top 100, Eighth Edition, 2007
- Martindale Hubbell® Law Directory with a Peer Review Rating of AV® Preeminent™


Lisbon man accused of threatening to blow up DHHS building
Lisbon police have arrested a man for allegedly threatening to blow up a Department of Health and Human Services building.
Alexander Hanks, 24, of Lisbon, is charged with terrorizing.
According to Lisbon police, Hanks made the threat on Facebook. Hanks was arrested in Lewiston on Wednesday just hours after police were notified of the threat.
Police searched his home on Sabattus Creek Drive but did not find any explosives.
Hanks is being held on $2,500 bail and is due in court on June 6.


Rosneft flotation19 Jul 2006
Rosneft's float clears final hurdle
The controversial London flotation of Rosneft, the state-owned Russian oil company, will go ahead today after a UK High Court turned down a last-ditch challenge by Yukos to block the share offer.
Yukos's lawyers had attempted to derail the $79.8bn (â‚¬63.8bn) initial public offering alleging that Rosneft's flotation would amount to "laundering" of illegally-acquired assets.
But Justice Charles turned down Yukos' request for a judicial review, which would have allowed it to challenge the Financial Services Authority's decision to approve the flotation.
The FSA was so worried about money laundering claims against Rosneft that it asked for Treasury advice before agreeing the shares could be listed in London today.
The FSA also discussed whether to inform Gordon Brown of its decision "due to the diplomatic implications," according to documents lodged with the high court.


Prosecutors are wrapping up their case against Dharun Ravi, a former Rutgers University student charged with using his computer's webcam to spy on and cyberbully his dorm roommate. But legal analysts who have been following the trial say the prosecution has struggled to build a solid case on the most serious charge: that Mr. Ravi targeted his roommate because he was gay.
Some go so far as to say prosecutors didn't present irrefutable evidence as to Ravi's motive for attempting to humiliate his roommate, Tyler Clementi. Clementi killed himself on Sept. 22, 2010, and an investigator testified this week that Clementi, in his final hours, had viewed one last time Ravi's online posts on the social media site Twitter – something his computer records show he had monitored 59 times over the previous nine days. Clementi had saved two screen shots of things Ravi had tweeted about him.
"The bias aspect of the case is still weak," says John Fahy, a former New Jersey prosecutor. "Prosecutors have presented a very good invasion-of-privacy case, but [they] also have to show that he [Ravi] tried to intimidate his roommate because of his sexual orientation. I don't think they have shown Ravi hated gays or hated his roommate because he was gay."
Robert Honecker, a New Jersey prosecutor for 25 years now in private practice, has a similar assessment. "What stands out is that among the witnesses, particularly his friends and those he was with, each and every one of them said Ravi never exhibited to them antigay or homophobic sentiments and was not affronted by that type of sexual orientation," he says.
The case, being tried in New Jersey before Middlesex County Superior Court Judge Glenn Berman, has already become a national symbol of antigay bullying. That, plus its similarities to other cases of meanness and bullying via high-tech tools and social media, means the trial has attracted heavy media attention.
"This is a case where, for the first time, prosecutors are utilizing many different social network mediums – Twitter, text messaging, Internet and computers, webcams – to prove a criminal case," Mr. Honecker says. "Young people use these mediums as if they are in face-to-face conversations, and they need to recognize that anything in these social networking forums can be retrieved and utilized to establish crimes."
Prosecutors argue that Ravi set up a webcam on his dorm-room computer to watch Clementi and a guest, known in court as M.B. He witnessed Clementi and M.B. kissing. Ravi subsequently laid plans to watch via webcam a second tryst, according to prosecutors, and urged others to take an online look, with the intent of humiliating Clementi because of his sexual orientation.
Ravi has not been charged in Clementi’s death. He faces 15 counts of invasion of privacy, witness tampering, hindering prosecution, and the most serious charge, bias intimidation, a hate crime that could draw a 10-year sentence. The standard for conviction on bias intimidation is "beyond a reasonable doubt."
Jurors, of course, will be the last word on the intent behind Ravi's tweets and deleted text messages. In one tweet, according to investigators who probed Ravi's digital devices, Ravi invited his friends to tap into his webcam to watch Clementi in private moments with M.B. But Ravi later sent tweets that appear to reverse his invitation – a move prosecutors say was part of Ravi's effort to cover up his actions and tamper with evidence.
Ravi did delete some tweets and phone records, according to testimony. Prosecutors say that shows Ravi was trying to obstruct justice and tamper with evidence.
"The problem is: Did he know he was under investigation?" says Mr. Fahy. "You have to know that you are being investigated in order to be convicted of tampering with evidence – and in this case he may not have known that."
The prosecution was most effective at bolstering the invasion-of-privacy charge – building the case that Ravi had arranged for a followup viewing of his roommate's trysts after an aborted initial viewing, analysts say. Still, some cite a few damaging digital comments that indicate Ravi may have targeted Clementi because he was gay.
For instance, Ravi tweeted this message to friends on Sept. 19, 2010, after turning on his dorm-room webcam from a friend's room: "I saw him making out with a dude. Yay." On Sept. 21, he sent another tweet "daring" anyone to view his web camera that night. And Michelle Huang, a friend of Ravi's from high school who was then attending Cornell University, has testified that Ravi sent her a text message – possibly as a joke – that said he had a computer program that would warn him if someone approached his own bed. “Keeps the gays away,” he told her in one message.
"Digital evidence is a very powerful tool that people need to become aware of," concurs Bradley Shear, a Washington, D.C.-based social media lawyer who writes a blog on the topic. "Just like real DNA, digital DNA follows you forever – and could help put in you in jail."


By Jo Schaper
First of all, I’m not a lawyer. My background is a degree in geology, with a couple of classes in hydrology and a general familiarity with water law, and paddler’s law in Missouri. This is a personal and not a legal opinion. I’ve been paddling since 1974. I’d be interested in hearing what others think. (If you want a primer on Missouri water law, I recommend take a look at Harry Styron’s blog, Ozark Law and Economy, Missouri water law primer.)
Missouri House Bill 955, titled “Changes the laws regarding natural resources,” has some people upset as they wonder what effect this bill, if passed, would have on the iconic Missouri pastime of enjoying our rivers in canoes, kayaks, johnboats, jetboats, rafts and all manner of floatation devices.
Representative Robert Ross, (R- Dist. 142) the author of the bill, is a land surveyor by trade. A land surveyor must be familiar with both the craft of surveying, and survey law in order to do his job, which is measuring land parcels to define ownership of tracts of land. Many Missouri tracts have water on it or defining its boundaries.
Water law is a mix of statutory law (law enacted as statues) and case law (legal guidance issued as a result of court cases.) Statutory law is usually written generally to apply in all cases. Case law may be either specific to a situation to settle a dispute or it may, after going through several levels of courts, be applied generally to all such situations. One may turn into the other. Continue reading House Bill 955: is it a threat to Missouri floating?


By JOEY P. NACALABAN
OPERATIVES of the Cagayan de Oro City Police Office here seized cannabis plants worth almost a million pesos in two separate sting operations Saturday.
Senior Insp. Maricris Mulat, head, City Drug Enforcement Unit, identified the suspects as Francisco Neri, 39, residing at sitio Biasong, Barangay Macasandig, this city; Don Claudio Absin,33, San Francisco street, Jasaan, Misamis Oriental, and Estephen Nery, 22, also of this city.
Mulat said, their team first arrested (Estephen) Nery while at Paseo del Reo in Nazareth at 3:45 am.
The raiding group was able to recover a large sachet containing marijuana from Nery worth P1,000. Another 120 grams of the same drugs worth P36,000, and the P1,000 marked money were also found from his possesion.
Mulat revealed that prior to the arrest of Nery her office has already received reports that the suspect is selling drugs in the area.
“We then planned for an operation in the area and arrested the suspect. During an investigation Nery revealed to us the source of his illegal drugs,” Mulat said.
The group immediately proceeded to the residence of (Francisco) Neri at Biasong, Macasandig and conducted a buy-bust.
In an interview with reporters, Neri did not deny owning the marijuana.
He said he stocked cannabi for medicinal purposes.
“In fact, I’m preparing for my license and permit for a cannabis clinic to be opened next year here in the city,” said Neri.


You have searched for 11th cantaram competition
LAST UPDATED : Jul 27, 2017, 01.46PM IST
- 2 arrested for smuggling 11th C idol
The idol wing of the CID on Wednesday arrested two more people in connection with the theft of the Ardhanarishvara stone idol stolen from the temple in Vriddhachalam. A senior police officer said they were looking for international idol smuggler Subhash Chandra Kapoor in the case too, based on the confessions of the arrested suspects.


Find out about the penalties you might face if you start building work without an approved building consent.
Potential penalties for building without a consent
If your project needs a resource consent and you start work without one, or you don’t comply with your building consent, you’re committing an illegal offence.
The penalties include fines of up to $200,000 and the removal of the work you’ve done.
The work you do without a build consent won’t qualify for a Code Compliance Certificate. This will make it difficult to sell the building and get insurance.
If we learn that you’re building without a consent, we may issue you with a Notice to Fix, which means you’ll have to either:
- apply for a building consent or an amendment to an existing building consent
- apply for a Certificate of Acceptance (a statement from us that says the work you’ve done complies with the New Zealand Building Code, or
- stop the building work straight away, and not start again without our permission.
How to avoid penalties
Get a pre-application meeting
You can book a pre-application meeting with us to talk about your proposal before you submit a building consent application.
These meetings can save you time and money in the long run.
Get professional help
Building consent applications can be very complex. Depending on the project, they might need a lot of technical detail too. We recommend that you use a planning consultancy, surveyor or architect to apply for resource consent for you. We can help you find the right people.
- Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Telephone: +64 04 570 6666 | 0800 488 824


Fairly straightforward, Kim Davis was supposed to issue marriage licenses to same-sex marriage couples, as is “the law”, but refused to, due to her personal beliefs being in opposition … now she’s in jail, and refuses to comply …
(Thanks to Fr. Marcus Halley for photo, and an interesting read )
Some are pro Kim’s decision to stand up for what she believes in, slogans like “Kim Davis for president”. Others are very anti in that – she, an elected government official, feels she’s “above the law” and refuses to “do her job”. And obviously the bigotry angle – why shouldn’t same-sex couples enjoy the same rights as everyone else ?
Personally, I’m in the anti Kim camp – on the basis that the rest of us have to obey the law, regardless of whether we “agree” with it or not. That’s life.
Kim Davis – Bigot Or Hero ?
Resources & Sources
Photos courtesy of Pixabay CC0/Public Domain and Fr. Marcus Halley
Unless otherwise stated everything here is (c) DonCharisma.org, all rights are reserved.
Notes for commenters:
Comments are invited. BUT you are reminded that this is a public blog and you are also reminded to think before you press the “post comment” button.
Good manners are a mark of a charismatic person – so please keep comments civil, non-argumentative, constructive and related, or they will be moderated. If you feel you can’t comply, press the “unfollow” button and/or refrain from commenting.
I read ALL comments but can’t always reply. I will comment if I think there’s something that I can add to what you’ve said. I do delete without notice comments that don’t follow rules above. For persistent offenders I will ignore you permanently and/or report you.
Most decent people already know how to behave respectfully. Thank you for your co-operation on the above.
The Don Charisma Team
50 thoughts on “Kim Davis – Bigot Or Hero ? – Don Charisma’s Opinion”
I have to agree with you: I consider Kim to have violated the law. Religion is not above the law so if you can’t uphold the law, quit your job and go sit at home. I am a Christian and I believe that all human beings have the right to be treated equally regardless of their sexual orientation. We must learn to see the human being in people and not judge them by their actions. God loves everyone.
Nicely said … religion and law have tended to get intermingled, which only adds to the confusion here … at the end of the day LGBTQ people EXIST and will continue to do so, and don’t they deserve the same rights (and responsibilities) as everyone else …
The trouble with her actions, is obvious. She is a government official. The trouble with the ‘law’ she disobeyed, is that it was a diktat from a cabal in black robes. It was not legislation which passed by way of vote and then a signature by the President. The state laws being passed against same-sex marriage were such, and/or put to the people of the respective states for a vote in order to become law.
That’s why her supporters had such a strong belief she was in the right. The only worse ruling to come out of SCOTUS, was illegally re-writing the Obamacare Law to make it legal…lol That’s what Chief Justice Roberts literally did to make it ‘legal’, which he does not have the Constitutional authority to do.
The one comical punchline to this saga, is that Davis is of the Democrat Party, which of course is the one in support of gay marriage. Democrats in Washington all thought she was a ‘wascally wepublican’.
As for gay marriage, my brother was openly gay and he used to say it was the most ridiculous idea he’d ever heard of. He never explained why. I really don’t care either way. I only wonder why it is that some gays feel the need to participate in a decidedly ‘straight’ ritual and have it on display to everyone when the vast majority are perfectly comfortable being gay, couldn’t care less who accepts it or doesn’t, and feel their intimacy as gays is just as private a matter as that of any straight couple.
Thanks for the comment Kevin, made my day actually amongst a sea of people taking themselves too seriously … ‘wascally wepublican’, love it !
Everyone has the right to stand up for what they believe in. But once you do, everyone else has the right to stand up and call you out when your beliefs happen to trample the rights (in this case personal and legal rights) of others.
Well said averagebob !
Short and sweet. It’s easy for me to agree. Let’s hope that everyone continues to obey the simple red light at intersections without too many exceptions.
🙂 The law often benefits us …
She’s not a bigot. Obama does not follow the law either. Sanctuary cities are thoroughly illegal. He does nothing. One example of hundreds. But who is doing anything about his crimes against his office? No one.
To compare her to Nazis (one commenter) is ignorant at best as so many of them were homosexual.
She should have had those under her sign. She misunderstands that she holds an office & it does not mean she personally approves of anything. Those under her could have issued the liscences while preserving her conscience.
Also just because the culture or a unconstitutional court says some action is right does not make it so. Beware of letting our baser natures rule us. We will not like how it ends up.
The real bigotry is the hatred of all things religious. Notice how baser natures are rooting it out completely. Outlawing it. That’s what Nazis did as well as Marxists.
A bigot is defined as – “a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions”. Refusing to issue marriage (civil partnership) licenses to couple who hold different beliefs to one’s own, personally I would regard as “intolerant towards those holding different opinions” … hence bigot …
I read around on the net, it seems that the marriage licenses which have been issued by her subordinates in her absence (due to jail) may not be legal, so I’m not sure that they could have been issued by her subordinates with her in office …
As for constitution, that’s a conversation for another day. From what I understand it’s LEGAL for same sex couples to get a legal union in her state, presumably it’s a civil ceremony not a religious one, the same as we have registry office for civil marriages in UK. So religion actually shouldn’t have anything to do with it. If one doesn’t like the term “marriage” then call it a “civil-partership” or whatever else.
As for Nazis and Marxists, a conversation for another day. Same for Obama.
Personally, I can’t see a reason why same sex couples should be treated differently from MF couples, that just strikes me as inequality … however everyone’s entitled to their opinion …
I agree it should be called something else.
But in this country there is a 1st Amendment (The Bill of Rights) that gives freedom of religion. No religion has to agree with the culture. A person has the right to believe what they want and should not be called a bigot for it. This country even gives Satanists the same right. The Constitution was not ruled on when they gave this ruling, it was ignored. 2nd, the Supreme Court has NO LEGISLATIVE abilities. It was an activist ruling that had no legal basis and so it will cause great disarray. The courts many years ago ruled Blacks were not full people and had no right. That was reversed because it was so perverse to the Constitution and to humanity. By the way no Democrat voted for the 13th, 14th Amendments and few voted for the 15th Amendment.
However none of the topics you said were for another day are absent the present argument. It’s highly nuanced.
Bigotry was seen writ large when the gay groups went after the photographer and baker issues. The gays were not discriminated against. The Christians were. Gays could shopped next door, no one prevented them. But they insist all must agree with them. The Christians were fined. That’s intolerant & bigoted.
This case is different since she ran for elective office, not private business. The best option short of resigning would be those under her to issue the licenses. Since the judge ordered it, it would be legal at least at this time since we have activist judges.
There’s plenty of injustice in the world, we all know this. And do people always behave like saints … no of course they don’t !
I think a person has the right to stand up for what they believe in. I think it’s the way she went about it that causes people problems.
And obviously “gays”/LGBTQ are people same as anyone else, so can be bigots themselves …
I’m not a lawyer so tend to stay out of matters relating to the mechanics and details of the law, other than to say I generally follow them, laws not lawyers that is, at least in my layman’s understanding …
Bottom line – “gays”/LGBTQ have been getting married, will continue to get married and resisting this fact is largely a waste of effort … and with this in mind, then one does wonder about Kim’s potential hidden agendas, perhaps in financial gain over this “stunt” … or perhaps she’s just a dumb redneck … I couldn’t say, I don’t know … mostly I find it interesting to hear people’s opinions …
I agree completely with the first half. But I don’t know about the second. We’ll have to wait and see how it all goes. But it is good to talk and sort through all the nuances as we’ve done. There’s probably a zillion things we don’t know about it. Best wishes to you!
Interesting to get a pro-Kim point of view … all the others were anti …
Actually I’m not. I think she imposed her beliefs on those under her. They could have done it. She did the same thing she’s fighting against. But it’s still an unconstitutional ruling. This really is a mess.
So you’re against same-sex “marriage” or a homophobe ?
Marriage is for a man and a woman. I am not afraid of homosexuality but do believe in Christ our Creator and He did make men and women to be married. By the way, adultery in heterosexuality is also sin and against God’s Word. That is what Christianity teaches. Calling someone a homophobe is a cultural distraction, and it does seek to outlaw Christianity, Judaism, Islam and religion in general. It could never be called tolerance.
Well what word would you use for someone who “fears or hates” gay/LGBTQ people if homophobe is a “cultural distraction” ?
And perhaps you should also define what term you find acceptable for “gay”/LGBTQ for a legal partnership, with the same societal rights and responsibilities as a married MF couple ?
Otherwise we’re having a conversation about what you and I believe words mean, rather than discussing the topic … which becomes a very short conversation for me …
If someone disagrees with some behavior or “lifestyle” it does not mean they fear them. It does mean it’s part of their faith. We have freedom of religion, or at least used to. Do you wish to brand all that disagree with you with a pejorative name? Wouldn’t that be intolerant?
I don’t have a term for a gay legal partnership. We’ve entered into new territory. But that should not mean that all of a sudden the Christian faith is to be condemned.
The problem with this whole thing is that it was not legislated. In our system of government the Congress writes the laws not the Supreme Court. Regardless that you may like their ruling it was unconstitutional. There is nothing in the Constitution about marriage at all. But there is in the Constitution Freedom of religion.
We all want a lot of things. But we are a nation of laws. The Supreme Court acted outside of the law. So this will continue to present problems in the coming days.
Nope, was simply trying to establish where you stand in your opinions towards “gay”/LGBTQ people, pejorative didn’t come into it, it’s the word I understand that is used for people who are “anti-gay/LGBTQ” … if you can provide a better word, then please do so …
“civil partnership” – “(in some countries) a legally recognized union of a same-sex couple, with rights similar to those of marriage.” (from Google)
If there’s nothing in the constitution about marriage/civil partnerships, then how can a same sex marriage/civil partnership be “unconstitutional” ? And presumably the constitution is for every religion, not just Christians ?
Oh yes that’s right, every religion. Gay is not a religion. Marriage is not in the Constitution at all. But it in religion. If the congress legislated civil partnership, or any other name, and it passed, it would be law. But they didn’t because the majority of the people were against it. Much the same thing happened with Roe v Wade. It could not pass the congress. So activists got it through an activist court. That’s why it is still a problem today.
As I understand it the UK has had civil partnerships since 2004 :
“Civil partnerships in the United Kingdom, granted under the Civil Partnership Act 2004, allow same-sex couples to obtain essentially the same rights and responsibilities as civil marriage” (source wikipedia)
Add to that :
“The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 legalised full same-sex marriage in England and Wales starting from March 2014, although civil partnership also remains available.” (source wikipedia)
So it surprises me that after more than 10 years, a country that’s supposed to be progressive and a “world leader” hasn’t followed suit … bit backwards really …
Ironically, I think Kim may actually be helping those who want same-sex marriage FULLY legal and accepted, insofar as she’s brought the attention right into the public eye. Perhaps there’s a wealthy LGBTQ benefactor behind the scenes ?
Hmmm…now that’s a thought. We’ll see.
We will … good to chat !
It was great. You wore me out. Now get some sleep. There’s always tomorrow. Best wishes Don!
LOL, alls well then, get some sleep !
A similar case in the Netherlands took place. In the end the civil cervant had to work somewhere else or face bad PR due to not doing his or her job.
I understand people who have strong beliefs. Thing is, as a civil cervant you work for the people first. The state employs you to serve the citizens not your holy book and temple. When you live in a secular state and society is more secular than religious you adapt as a civil servant or you do something else.
When I was a Christian I could not comprehend homosexuality. It was and is sinful from that perspective, full stop. For me though religion made less sense as I started to think about life and well, when two adult people want to be partners for life they are a couple, regardless of holy books and temples.
Sounds like you’ve moved to a more enlightened perspective of live and let live … Homosexuality isn’t right for me personally, but I accept that others feel differently and it’s what they want, so I have no issue
When it comes to your personal beliefs & your job you have to know how to keep the two separate! You can believe anything you want but once you set foot into that office building you have to remember that you are working for the government & that whatever the government says you HAVE to comply! No-one is beneath you, you are not the “perfect Christian”, you are HUMAN just like everyone else.
Same for most jobs, your paid to do what you’re told by your employer … and yes, we’re all equals at the end of the day …
Wrote something about that on my blog as well. Like her, I am both a Christian and a government worker. Unlike her, I know the differences and roles that I must take on in each of those positions.
I know that, when I have my government role on, the things I have to do are not my personal actions but the actions of the government with me doing the execution. The government has no religious beliefs or even emotion. It’s just follow the law.
In my personal life, then I follow my beliefs. Even then, I don’t treat people as though they are less than me or anything else. My parents went through being treated as less than a person in their youth in America. They marched in the 1960s so that I could be seen and treated as equal today. Why would I seek to treat someone like trash knowing what my parents went through?
I agree, why would any of us want to deny someone their right to equality ?
My only guess is an over inflated opinion of self importance.
Humility cures many ills …
Shes a government official she cantm push her personal beliefs on others through her job shes blurring the lIneb between church and state which is unconstitutional yet seems to be popular when people want the right to take away other peoples rights
It bothers me when people use Jesus as a shield for their own bigotries and prejudices, and to deal with societal issues. Every problem that we have today – abortion, alcoholism, war, prostitution, everything except racism – existed in Jesus’ time. Yet Jesus did not stand in front of the Praetorium and protest in front of Pilot. Jesus spent his time in front of the Temple telling people to love one another, even those with whom they disagreed. That the neighbor you are to love may well be the person with whom you have issues, and not those who agree with your beliefs.
Kim was elected to her position, and took an oath to uphold the duties of her office as presented by the government. If she finds her job no longer suits her tastes then she can resign her position. It’s nice to say that no one is above the law in America, but our current president has shown that such is not the case, even when told so by SCOTUS.
It bothers me too … perhaps why I err to not being fixed to a particular religion …
And yes, she didn’t do her job … and yes there are people who are “above the law”, doesn’t make us ordinary folks very happy …
No, it does not. Leaders never realize how unhappy people are until it is too late for the leaders. History has proven that time and again, yet we never learn.
Well the law is what it is…no one is above the law.
True that …
She was hired to do a job. If she is incapable or unwilling of doing every aspect of her job, no matter what the task or her reason, she should resign or be fired. End of question. Her conscience is her business, it is not part of her job. If she truly had a moral conscience, she would do every part of her job exceptionally well. What separates her behavior and that of the nazis who refused to recognize the citizenship of German Jews? Of Gypsies? Of those who were mentally ill or physically handicapped? Nothing, nothing at all.
Thank you, Don, for giving a world platform to this issue.
You’re welcome Sharon, and you’ve pretty much summed it up there …
I wonder if any pro-Kim’s will speak up ?
Although we all have a constitutional right to have an opinion or firmly held religious belief, we don’t have a constitutional right to disrupt a business. The dignified thing to do would have been to resign and then speak openly or start a blog on your feelings. Whether we agree or not with the law, it is the law. What if everyone wanted to run a government office (besides the politicians, of course! :-)) according to their individual feelings?
“The dignified thing to do would have been to resign and then speak openly” – Totally what I was thinking … and yes most of us have to obey laws we don’t always totally wholeheartedly agree with … most learn this as children …
Within that you can’t fault her for standing up in what she believes in … provided that’s all she’s up to – there’s some sites suggesting it’s a disguised financial play …
“Within that you can’t fault her for standing up in what she believes in”
I’m sure she believes that same sex unions are sinful, but what do the Ten Commandments say about them? What did Jesus say about them? Ummmm? Nothing!
The Ten Commandments clearly state “Thou shalt not Kill” (not until number six or seven, though, I grant you), and Jesus clearly said that the poor, the hungry and the dispossessed should be taken care of, and he kept on saying this. the only thing that Jesus said about sexual morality was when he rescued the adulterous woman from the pharisees and told her to go and sin no more. Jesus, and his main man Paul, also spoke out against loud and showy displays of religion, something a lot of the brethren (and sisterhood) conveniently ignore as they loudly show off how Christian they are.
(For ‘adulterous’, read ‘divorced’ as that was the only grounds a man could divorce a woman – a woman could never divorce a man in Jesus’ world). enough has been said about Ms Davis’ divorces and adultery, so I shan’t go into that here.
It would be a wonderful thing if the followers of Jesus who like to get all up in other people’s faces, would get up in our faces about homelessness, child poverty, hunger and executions. But they don’t. I expect it’s more difficult to get your ‘more-righteous-than-you feelgood groove on by actually doing good, rather than condemning people you don’t like.
Wait! What’s that sound? Oh, just the clashing and clanging of empty cymbals.
Nicely put, and yes my god aren’t some people are hypocrites …
She was perfectly within her right to stand up for her beliefs but not to include her staff and to disrupt the order of business, that’s for sure. I don’t know if she is in it for the financial but to go down in history as a ‘martyr’. She is going about it the wrong way, however.
Pretty much 🙂


This Policy Note was written by Universidade Católica Brasília (UCB) in Brazil. The policy note assesses the impact of different tobacco tax reform scenarios, including the reform proposed in Constitutional Amendment Bill 45/2019 and the Bill PL3887-2020. The findings show that setting the Tobacco Special Tax (TST) to match current total revenue-collection levels would result in a decrease in revenue collection in some Brazilian states, as well as an increase in cigarette consumption. Alternatively, setting the TST to 19.74% would total tax revenue would increase by 3.3% to 12.4 billion BRL per year without decreasing revenues for any states. In this scenario, the tax burden for cheaper and premium cigarettes would be 75.7% and 72.3%, respectively. Consumption of cheaper cigarettes would decrease by 8.7% and consumption of premium cigarettes would decrease by 31.6%. The researchers also considered the effects of this tax increase on illicit trade and found that illicit consumption would not increase. Stronger control of the supply chain, on the other hand, would reduce illicit trade and raise the price of illicit cigarettes, encouraging some smokers to quit, while others return to the legal cigarette market. This would further increase revenue collection and especially benefit the poorest Brazilian states that currently have higher levels of illicit trade. The policy note concludes with recommendations for policy makers to improve the tobacco tax system and effectively reduce cigarette consumption while raising tax revenues.


Have You Been Injured By A Drunk Driver?
Car accidents are some of the most common, and tragically, most serious kinds of personal injuries. When they are caused in part by a bar or restaurant over-serving a patron, another layer of grief and agony accompanies these tragedies. Businesses that serve and sell alcohol are legally obligated to adhere to state dram shop and liquor liability laws. In Iowa, an establishment is legally forbidden to serve and sell alcohol to an intoxicated person or to a person who will reach the point of intoxication if served.
In Iowa, it is important to note that you are entitled to punitive damages for these injuries, and there are no caps (or limitation) on the amount you can be compensated for over-serving liability. Similarly, in these types of cases there can be multiple defendants, adding another layer of complexity to these cases.
If you or a loved one has been injured in one of these accidents, you have six months to give the establishment notice that you are pursuing a suit. As such, it is critical to reach out to an attorney as soon as possible.
We Can Help You
Since 1981, lawyer Leanne Tyler has worked on dram shop liability cases, reaching significant success in her tenure. She can advise you about your case and inform you of all rights. From there she will guide you through the legal process, answering your questions and keeping you informed as the case progresses. She will investigate all aspects of the case to determine negligence and liability. From there she will bring her experience to obtain the compensation to which you are entitled in settlement or litigation.
To schedule a free initial consultation to discuss social host liability and personal injury with Bettendorf, Iowa drunk driving accident attorney Leanne Tyler, call 563-275-4793 or email Tyler & Associates, PC.


The NFL story that just won't die is back in the news again.
New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady's four-game suspension for his role in the "Deflategate" scandal was reinstated Monday by the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York.
As a result, Brady will not face the Buffalo Bills in Week Four. He'll also miss games against Arizona, Miami and Houston, potentially tipping the balance of power in the AFC East.
In a 2-1 decision, the court concluded that Commissioner Roger Goodell "properly exercised his broad discretion under the collective bargaining agreement and that his procedural rulings were properly grounded in that agreement and did not deprive Brady of fundamental fairness. Accordingly, we reverse the judgement of the district court."
Goodell originally suspended Brady for his alleged involvement in the deflation of footballs before the AFC Championship Game against the Indianapolis Colts in January 2015, an investigation that became known as Deflategate.
That suspension was nullified by U.S. District Judge Richard Berman in September, just a week before the regular season started.
Brady ended up playing in all 16 games in 2015, leading New England to a 12-4 record and an appearance in the AFC Championship Game. The Patriots' dominance of the AFC East with Brady has been remarkable. They've won 12 of the past 13 divisional titles, with the only year they failed to do so, 2008, coming when Brady missed nearly the entire season because of a knee injury.
The NFL appealed Berman's ruling, arguing that Goodell has the right to suspend Brady as part of the collective bargaining agreement with players.
"This is not an individual player issue. This is about the rights we negotiated in our collective bargaining agreement," the commissioner said at the Super Bowl. "We think they are very clear, we think they are important to the league going forward, and we disagree with the district judge's decision."
In writing the majority opinion Monday, Judge Barrington D. Parker concluded that the court's "role is not to determine for ourselves whether Brady participated in a scheme to deflate footballs or whether the suspension imposed by the Commissioner should have been for three games or five games or none at all.
"Nor is it our role to second guess the arbitrator’s procedural rulings. Our obligation is limited to determining whether the arbitration proceedings and award met the minimum legal standards established by the Labor Management Relations Act."
Goodell, the appeals court found, "acted within the bounds of his bargained for authority."
In a statement Monday, the league said "we are pleased the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled today that the Commissioner properly exercised his authority under the collective bargaining agreement to act in cases involving the integrity of the game. That authority has been recognized by many courts and has been expressly incorporated into every collective bargaining agreement between the NFL and NFLPA for the past 40 years."
That authority, Parker noted, is "especially broad."
"In their collective bargaining agreement, the players and the League mutually decided many years ago that the Commissioner should investigate possible rule violations, should impose appropriate sanctions, and may preside at arbitrations challenging his discipline," he wrote. "Although this tripartite regime may appear somewhat unorthodox, it is the regime bargained for and agreed upon by the parties, which we can only presume they determined was mutually satisfactory."
As part of the league's findings, New England was fined $1 million and lost a first-round draft pick in the 2016 NFL Draft and fourth-round draft pick in the 2017 draft. New England owner Bob Kraft did not appeal those penalties, meaning there will be just 31 choices made in the first round Thursday.
The case might not be over just yet, though.
The NFL Players Association released a statement of its own, saying it "is disappointed in the decision by the Second Circuit. We fought Roger Goodell's suspension of Tom Brady because we know he did not serve as a fair arbitrator and that players' rights were violated under our collective bargaining agreement. Our Union will carefully review the decision, consider all of our options and continue to fight for players' rights and for the integrity of the game."
According to legal experts, Brady's next step would be to ask that the full, 22-judge Second Circuit hear an appeal, which is known as an "en banc" hearing. He could also petition the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case, according to ESPN business expert Andrew Brandt.
So it's possible we haven't heard the last of Deflategate after all.