Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Franklin D. Roosevelt - Quote
"Remember always that all of us...are descended from immigrants and revolutionists." - Franklin D. Roosevelt
Winston Churchill - Quote
"The jury system has come to stand for all we mean by English justice. The scrutiny of 12 honest jurors provides defendants and plaintiffs alike a safeguard from arbitrary perversion of the law." -Winston Churchill
Monday, April 7, 2008
One Bite can Cost a Bunch.........
Connecticut Dog Bite
The legal relationship between owners and their dogs as well as our liability for damages caused to others by our dogs is of critical importance to the dog owner.
The Connecticut dogs bite statute (Connecticut General Statutes section 22-357) and cases interpreted by our courts provides that the owner of any dog who does damage to a person or his/her property is liable for such damages. However, a dog owner may assert a defense if the owner can prove that at the time such damage was sustained, the injured party was trespassing on your property or was committing any other civil wrong. The statute provides further exception to the dog owner’s legal responsibility if the injured party was teasing, tormenting or abusing such dog.
The Connecticut courts have clarified that merely entering another person's property does not constitute trespass under this statute. "Trespass or tort" means more than mere entry; the statute bars recovery only where the victim is committing or intends to commit an injurious act. (133 C. 509: 140 C. 358.) If the victim was neither a trespasser, not committing a tort, nor provoking the dog then there is no defense.
Dog bites rank second among other common causes of emergency-room injuries (table derived from Weiss HB, Friedman DI, Coben JH. "Incidence of dog bite injuries treated in emergency departments," )
Cause of injury
Emergency room incidents annually
Baseball/softball
404,364
Dog bites
333,687
Playground accidents
268,810
All-terrain vehicles, mopeds, etc.
125,136
Volleyball
97,523
Inline skating
75,994
Horseback riding
71,162
Baby walkers
28,000
Skateboards
25,486
The legal relationship between owners and their dogs as well as our liability for damages caused to others by our dogs is of critical importance to the dog owner.
The Connecticut dogs bite statute (Connecticut General Statutes section 22-357) and cases interpreted by our courts provides that the owner of any dog who does damage to a person or his/her property is liable for such damages. However, a dog owner may assert a defense if the owner can prove that at the time such damage was sustained, the injured party was trespassing on your property or was committing any other civil wrong. The statute provides further exception to the dog owner’s legal responsibility if the injured party was teasing, tormenting or abusing such dog.
The Connecticut courts have clarified that merely entering another person's property does not constitute trespass under this statute. "Trespass or tort" means more than mere entry; the statute bars recovery only where the victim is committing or intends to commit an injurious act. (133 C. 509: 140 C. 358.) If the victim was neither a trespasser, not committing a tort, nor provoking the dog then there is no defense.
Dog bites rank second among other common causes of emergency-room injuries (table derived from Weiss HB, Friedman DI, Coben JH. "Incidence of dog bite injuries treated in emergency departments," )
Cause of injury
Emergency room incidents annually
Baseball/softball
404,364
Dog bites
333,687
Playground accidents
268,810
All-terrain vehicles, mopeds, etc.
125,136
Volleyball
97,523
Inline skating
75,994
Horseback riding
71,162
Baby walkers
28,000
Skateboards
25,486
Insurance Issues in Your Home
Liability as a part of your Household - The need for proper Insurance.
According to the Insurance Information Institute, dog bites cost insurers $317.2 million during the year 2005. Little changed from $321.6 million in 2003 but down 8 percent from $345.5 million in 2002. While the number of claims paid by insurers fell from approximately 20,800 in 2002 to 15,000 in 2005 -- a decrease of 28 percent -- the cost of the average dog bite claim rose sharply, from roughly $16,600 in 2002 to $21,200 in 2005.
Liability claims account for approximately 4 percent of homeowner’s claims. Dog bite claims in 2005 accounted for about 15 percent of liability claims dollars paid under homeowner’s insurance policies.
As dog owners, we need to consider the following statistics;
· According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, more than 4.7 million people are bitten by dogs annually, resulting in an estimated 800,000 injuries that require medical attention. With over 50 percent of the bites occurring on the dog owner’s property, the issue is a major source of concern for insurers.
· There currently are 65 million dogs in the USA. (American Pet Products Manufacturers Association (APPMA) 2003-2004 National Pet Owners Survey, cited by The Humane Society of the United States,
· Every year 2,851 letter carriers are bitten. (US Postal Service.)
· An American has a one in 50 chance of being bitten by a dog each year. (CDC.)
Every dog owner needs to have homeowner insurance or renters insurance that (a) provides coverage for, and does not exclude, injuries inflicted by dogs or animals in general, and (b) has a limit of at least $100,000 for personal liability. This type of insurance will enable the dog owner's insurance company to pay an appropriate amount of compensation for all but the most severe accidents caused by a dog. Because the dog owner's own relatives, friends and neighbors are the most likely victims of a possible dog attack, having insurance means protecting the people who are closest to the dog owner, thereby protecting valuable relationships and ensuring proper treatment of loved ones.
Given the fact that a dog is most likely to bite someone whom the dog owner loves most, it is recommended that dog owners have higher limits, such as $1 million, through either their homeowners and renters policies or by an "umbrella" policy. It is very inexpensive to obtain an umbrella policy and you should strongly consider such an “excess” policy by contacting your insurance agent for a price quote.
The good news for dog owners, accident victims and society is that homeowners insurance and renters insurance normally provide at least $100,000.00 in benefits for victims.
Other types of insurance also afford protection for the dog owners. Examples include automobile liability insurance, which may cover dog bites that happen in a car, landlord insurance that protects the landlord (but not the tenants) from claims that result from the actions of renters' dogs, and workers compensation coverage which may apply to bites and injuries that happen "on the job." Some companies even sell dog liability insurance. Your insurance agent can provide you with this information and it is always a good idea to update all your insurance coverages no less than annually.
At present, however, the insurance industry is attempting to sell homeowner insurance policies that exclude dog-inflicted injuries. Some insurance companies refuse to sell homeowner insurance to the owners of breeds of dogs that have a reputation for biting, such as pit bulls, Rottweilers, Akitas and Chow-Chows. Other insurers refuse to sell to anyone who owns any dog whatsoever.
A recent article in the Wall Street Journal summed up the problem this way:
Some big insurers, including Allstate and Farmers Insurance Group, won't cover homes in some states if residents own certain breeds. Others exclude some breeds from liability coverage, or charge extra for it. The so-called vicious-breed lists include German shepherds, Akitas and Siberian huskies, along with Alaskan Malamutes, Chow Chows, Doberman Pinschers, American pit bull terriers and their cousins. (M.P. McQueen, "Snarling at Insurers," Wall Street Journal, July 18, 2006.)
No dog owner should purchase a homeowner policy or renter’s policy that excludes canine-inflicted injuries, unless he or she buys a supplemental policy that covers them.
The insurance industry also is quietly revising homeowner policies that protected dog owners when they originally bought those policies. Homeowners must carefully read all of the short slips of paper and other notices sent from insurers, in case they eliminate coverage for accidents caused by dogs. If that happens, a dog owner must get a different policy or an umbrella that provides both the coverage plus higher limits of protection.
Connecticut has a law before the State Senate entitled “An Act Concerning Homeowners and Tenants Insurance Underwriting based on Breed of Dog”. This Bill is currently stalled in the Senate Insurance Committee. It has been stalled there for over a year. You should each contact your state senator to urge passage of this bill. If passed, it would limit the ability of an insurance carrier to use the breed of dog owned by the insured as a basis for (1) establishing rates or minimum premiums under the policy, or (2) canceling, refusing to renew or refusing to issue such policy.
Suffice it to say, that all dog owners need to be covered by sufficient insurance to protect themselves and those who may be injured as a result of a dog attack.
According to the Insurance Information Institute, dog bites cost insurers $317.2 million during the year 2005. Little changed from $321.6 million in 2003 but down 8 percent from $345.5 million in 2002. While the number of claims paid by insurers fell from approximately 20,800 in 2002 to 15,000 in 2005 -- a decrease of 28 percent -- the cost of the average dog bite claim rose sharply, from roughly $16,600 in 2002 to $21,200 in 2005.
Liability claims account for approximately 4 percent of homeowner’s claims. Dog bite claims in 2005 accounted for about 15 percent of liability claims dollars paid under homeowner’s insurance policies.
As dog owners, we need to consider the following statistics;
· According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, more than 4.7 million people are bitten by dogs annually, resulting in an estimated 800,000 injuries that require medical attention. With over 50 percent of the bites occurring on the dog owner’s property, the issue is a major source of concern for insurers.
· There currently are 65 million dogs in the USA. (American Pet Products Manufacturers Association (APPMA) 2003-2004 National Pet Owners Survey, cited by The Humane Society of the United States,
· Every year 2,851 letter carriers are bitten. (US Postal Service.)
· An American has a one in 50 chance of being bitten by a dog each year. (CDC.)
Every dog owner needs to have homeowner insurance or renters insurance that (a) provides coverage for, and does not exclude, injuries inflicted by dogs or animals in general, and (b) has a limit of at least $100,000 for personal liability. This type of insurance will enable the dog owner's insurance company to pay an appropriate amount of compensation for all but the most severe accidents caused by a dog. Because the dog owner's own relatives, friends and neighbors are the most likely victims of a possible dog attack, having insurance means protecting the people who are closest to the dog owner, thereby protecting valuable relationships and ensuring proper treatment of loved ones.
Given the fact that a dog is most likely to bite someone whom the dog owner loves most, it is recommended that dog owners have higher limits, such as $1 million, through either their homeowners and renters policies or by an "umbrella" policy. It is very inexpensive to obtain an umbrella policy and you should strongly consider such an “excess” policy by contacting your insurance agent for a price quote.
The good news for dog owners, accident victims and society is that homeowners insurance and renters insurance normally provide at least $100,000.00 in benefits for victims.
Other types of insurance also afford protection for the dog owners. Examples include automobile liability insurance, which may cover dog bites that happen in a car, landlord insurance that protects the landlord (but not the tenants) from claims that result from the actions of renters' dogs, and workers compensation coverage which may apply to bites and injuries that happen "on the job." Some companies even sell dog liability insurance. Your insurance agent can provide you with this information and it is always a good idea to update all your insurance coverages no less than annually.
At present, however, the insurance industry is attempting to sell homeowner insurance policies that exclude dog-inflicted injuries. Some insurance companies refuse to sell homeowner insurance to the owners of breeds of dogs that have a reputation for biting, such as pit bulls, Rottweilers, Akitas and Chow-Chows. Other insurers refuse to sell to anyone who owns any dog whatsoever.
A recent article in the Wall Street Journal summed up the problem this way:
Some big insurers, including Allstate and Farmers Insurance Group, won't cover homes in some states if residents own certain breeds. Others exclude some breeds from liability coverage, or charge extra for it. The so-called vicious-breed lists include German shepherds, Akitas and Siberian huskies, along with Alaskan Malamutes, Chow Chows, Doberman Pinschers, American pit bull terriers and their cousins. (M.P. McQueen, "Snarling at Insurers," Wall Street Journal, July 18, 2006.)
No dog owner should purchase a homeowner policy or renter’s policy that excludes canine-inflicted injuries, unless he or she buys a supplemental policy that covers them.
The insurance industry also is quietly revising homeowner policies that protected dog owners when they originally bought those policies. Homeowners must carefully read all of the short slips of paper and other notices sent from insurers, in case they eliminate coverage for accidents caused by dogs. If that happens, a dog owner must get a different policy or an umbrella that provides both the coverage plus higher limits of protection.
Connecticut has a law before the State Senate entitled “An Act Concerning Homeowners and Tenants Insurance Underwriting based on Breed of Dog”. This Bill is currently stalled in the Senate Insurance Committee. It has been stalled there for over a year. You should each contact your state senator to urge passage of this bill. If passed, it would limit the ability of an insurance carrier to use the breed of dog owned by the insured as a basis for (1) establishing rates or minimum premiums under the policy, or (2) canceling, refusing to renew or refusing to issue such policy.
Suffice it to say, that all dog owners need to be covered by sufficient insurance to protect themselves and those who may be injured as a result of a dog attack.
Pet Breeds and Insurance Coverage
Are you covered for the damage your Pet may inflict?
The insurance industry is clamping down on dog owners. Two tactics are being used:
Banning sales of policies to owners of certain breeds. (To read more about excluding dog bites from coverage, see Insurance for the dog owner.) Excluding dog bites and other dog inflicted injuries from coverage (in other words, the dog owner is covered for other things, but not canine inflicted injuries).
Currently, owners of pit bulls and Rottweilers have the most trouble finding insurance. Most companies look suspiciously at those breeds. See generally, Humane Society of the United States, "Insurance Companies Unfairly Target Specific Dog Breeds," January 2005.
Some companies have a comprehensive list. Here is the list from Automobile Club:
Pit Bulls & Rottweilers (No full bred or mix) Akita - including Japanese and Akita Inu Bernese - including Mountain Dog, Berner Sennenhund and Bernese Cattle Dog Canary Dogs - including Perro de Presa Canario Chow Chow Doberman Husky - including American, Eskimo and Greenland (Siberian is OK) Karelian Bear Dog Rhodesian Ridgeback Russo-European Laika - including Russian Laika and Karelian Bear Laika Any breed of guard dog trained to attack Wolf Hybrids The foregoing applies to both purebred and mixed breed dogs.
Overview - insurance for dog owners:
Every dog owner needs to have homeowner insurance or renters insurance that (a) provides coverage for, and does not exclude, injuries inflicted by dogs or animals in general, and (b) has a limit of at least $100,000 for personal liability. This type of insurance will enable the dog owner's insurance company to pay an appropriate amount of compensation for all but the most severe accidents caused by a dog. Because the dog owner's own relatives, friends and neighbors are the most likely victims of a possible dog attack, having insurance means protecting the people who are closest to the dog owner, thereby protecting valuable relationships and ensuring proper treatment of loved ones.
Given the fact that a dog is most likely to bite someone whom the dog owner loves most, it is recommended that dog owners have higher limits, such as $1 million, through either their homeowners and renters policies or by an "umbrella" policy. It is very inexpensive to obtain an umbrella policy.
Every dog owner is exposed to possible liability for dog bites and other canine-inflicted injuries. Dogs bite nearly five million Americans every year, children are the victims of the most serious attacks, and the annual losses equal approximately $1 Billion (see Dog Bite Statistics). These losses do not have to be borne by the dog owners and victims, because insurance is available to pay for it.
The good news for dog owners, accident victims and society is that homeowners insurance and renters insurance normally provide at least $100,000.00 in benefits for victims.
Other types of insurance also afford protection for the insureds. Examples include automobile liability insurance, which may cover dog bites that happen in a car, landlord insurance that protects the landlord (but not the tenants) from claims that result from the actions of renters' dogs, and workers compensation coverage which may apply to bites and injuries that happen "on the job." Some companies even sell dog liability insurance. See below for details.
At present, however, the insurance industry is attempting to sell homeowner insurance policies that exclude dog-inflicted injuries. Some insurance companies refuse to sell homeowner insurance to the owners of breeds of dogs that have a reputation for biting, such as pit bulls, Rottweilers, Akitas and Chow-Chows. Other insurers refuse to sell to anyone who owns any dog whatsoever. (See Breed specific laws, regulations and bans.)
A recent article in the Wall Street Journal summed up the problem this way:
Some big insurers, including Allstate and Farmers Insurance Group, won't cover homes in some states if residents own certain breeds. Others exclude some breeds from liability coverage, or charge extra for it. The so-called vicious-breed lists include German shepherds, Akitas and Siberian huskies, along with Alaskan Malamutes, Chow Chows, Doberman Pinschers, American pit bull terriers and their cousins. (M.P. McQueen, "Snarling at Insurers," Wall Street Journal, July 18, 2006.)
No dog owner should purchase a homeowner policy or renters policy that excludes canine-inflicted injuries, unless he or she buys a supplemental policy that covers them.
The insurance industry also is quietly revising homeowner policies that protected dog owners when they originally bought those policies. Homeowners must carefully read all of the short slips of paper and other notices sent from insurers, in case they eliminate coverage for accidents caused by dogs. If that happens, a dog owner must get a different policy or an umbrella that provides both the coverage plus higher limits of protection.
For all these reasons, dog owners need to learn about insurance.
The insurance industry is clamping down on dog owners. Two tactics are being used:
Banning sales of policies to owners of certain breeds. (To read more about excluding dog bites from coverage, see Insurance for the dog owner.) Excluding dog bites and other dog inflicted injuries from coverage (in other words, the dog owner is covered for other things, but not canine inflicted injuries).
Currently, owners of pit bulls and Rottweilers have the most trouble finding insurance. Most companies look suspiciously at those breeds. See generally, Humane Society of the United States, "Insurance Companies Unfairly Target Specific Dog Breeds," January 2005.
Some companies have a comprehensive list. Here is the list from Automobile Club:
Pit Bulls & Rottweilers (No full bred or mix) Akita - including Japanese and Akita Inu Bernese - including Mountain Dog, Berner Sennenhund and Bernese Cattle Dog Canary Dogs - including Perro de Presa Canario Chow Chow Doberman Husky - including American, Eskimo and Greenland (Siberian is OK) Karelian Bear Dog Rhodesian Ridgeback Russo-European Laika - including Russian Laika and Karelian Bear Laika Any breed of guard dog trained to attack Wolf Hybrids The foregoing applies to both purebred and mixed breed dogs.
Overview - insurance for dog owners:
Every dog owner needs to have homeowner insurance or renters insurance that (a) provides coverage for, and does not exclude, injuries inflicted by dogs or animals in general, and (b) has a limit of at least $100,000 for personal liability. This type of insurance will enable the dog owner's insurance company to pay an appropriate amount of compensation for all but the most severe accidents caused by a dog. Because the dog owner's own relatives, friends and neighbors are the most likely victims of a possible dog attack, having insurance means protecting the people who are closest to the dog owner, thereby protecting valuable relationships and ensuring proper treatment of loved ones.
Given the fact that a dog is most likely to bite someone whom the dog owner loves most, it is recommended that dog owners have higher limits, such as $1 million, through either their homeowners and renters policies or by an "umbrella" policy. It is very inexpensive to obtain an umbrella policy.
Every dog owner is exposed to possible liability for dog bites and other canine-inflicted injuries. Dogs bite nearly five million Americans every year, children are the victims of the most serious attacks, and the annual losses equal approximately $1 Billion (see Dog Bite Statistics). These losses do not have to be borne by the dog owners and victims, because insurance is available to pay for it.
The good news for dog owners, accident victims and society is that homeowners insurance and renters insurance normally provide at least $100,000.00 in benefits for victims.
Other types of insurance also afford protection for the insureds. Examples include automobile liability insurance, which may cover dog bites that happen in a car, landlord insurance that protects the landlord (but not the tenants) from claims that result from the actions of renters' dogs, and workers compensation coverage which may apply to bites and injuries that happen "on the job." Some companies even sell dog liability insurance. See below for details.
At present, however, the insurance industry is attempting to sell homeowner insurance policies that exclude dog-inflicted injuries. Some insurance companies refuse to sell homeowner insurance to the owners of breeds of dogs that have a reputation for biting, such as pit bulls, Rottweilers, Akitas and Chow-Chows. Other insurers refuse to sell to anyone who owns any dog whatsoever. (See Breed specific laws, regulations and bans.)
A recent article in the Wall Street Journal summed up the problem this way:
Some big insurers, including Allstate and Farmers Insurance Group, won't cover homes in some states if residents own certain breeds. Others exclude some breeds from liability coverage, or charge extra for it. The so-called vicious-breed lists include German shepherds, Akitas and Siberian huskies, along with Alaskan Malamutes, Chow Chows, Doberman Pinschers, American pit bull terriers and their cousins. (M.P. McQueen, "Snarling at Insurers," Wall Street Journal, July 18, 2006.)
No dog owner should purchase a homeowner policy or renters policy that excludes canine-inflicted injuries, unless he or she buys a supplemental policy that covers them.
The insurance industry also is quietly revising homeowner policies that protected dog owners when they originally bought those policies. Homeowners must carefully read all of the short slips of paper and other notices sent from insurers, in case they eliminate coverage for accidents caused by dogs. If that happens, a dog owner must get a different policy or an umbrella that provides both the coverage plus higher limits of protection.
For all these reasons, dog owners need to learn about insurance.
Connecticut Domestic Violence and your Pet......
Connecticuts Domestic Violence Statute and how it can Protect Your Pet.
We’ve all heard about the increase in domestic violence that seems to have reached epic proportions in far too many families around our state. For many years the courts have addressed these cases utilizing two state laws specifically designed by our legislature to provide relief to a victim of serious physical abuse or to any individual who has been placed in fear of serious physical harm.
Typically, an applicant of a civil restraining order or a victim in a criminal case who receives the benefit of a protective order faces many difficult problems in addition to the physical and emotional trauma. But what about the pets of the applicant/victim? What happens to them when the abusive spouse or roommate threatens to remove the pet when he or she is removed from their dwelling?
Effective October 1, 2007, the Connecticut legislature enacted an “AN ACT CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF PETS IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CASES”. The law amends the civil restraining order law and the criminal protective order law by allowing the issuing Judge of the Superior Court to “…make such orders as it deems appropriate for the protection of any animal owned or kept by the applicant including, but not limited to, an order enjoining the respondent from injuring or threatening to injure such animal.”
This new law now allows a judge to protect the animal from injury or the threat of injury by the person against whom the restraining order or protective order has been issued.
Connecticut has now joined the ranks of many states across the country in addressing this very difficult dilemma posed in cases of this kind.
The Courts are full of cases involving not only harm to people in domestic relationships, but actual theft and serious injury or death to domestic animals at the hands of the violent perpetrator.
This new law has finally recognized the rights of pet owners to protect their loved animals against this terrible problem. While the law is still new, many courts in our state have begun to implement it’s provisions, protecting the pet from harm in these difficult and highly charged emotional proceedings.
We’ve all heard about the increase in domestic violence that seems to have reached epic proportions in far too many families around our state. For many years the courts have addressed these cases utilizing two state laws specifically designed by our legislature to provide relief to a victim of serious physical abuse or to any individual who has been placed in fear of serious physical harm.
Typically, an applicant of a civil restraining order or a victim in a criminal case who receives the benefit of a protective order faces many difficult problems in addition to the physical and emotional trauma. But what about the pets of the applicant/victim? What happens to them when the abusive spouse or roommate threatens to remove the pet when he or she is removed from their dwelling?
Effective October 1, 2007, the Connecticut legislature enacted an “AN ACT CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF PETS IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CASES”. The law amends the civil restraining order law and the criminal protective order law by allowing the issuing Judge of the Superior Court to “…make such orders as it deems appropriate for the protection of any animal owned or kept by the applicant including, but not limited to, an order enjoining the respondent from injuring or threatening to injure such animal.”
This new law now allows a judge to protect the animal from injury or the threat of injury by the person against whom the restraining order or protective order has been issued.
Connecticut has now joined the ranks of many states across the country in addressing this very difficult dilemma posed in cases of this kind.
The Courts are full of cases involving not only harm to people in domestic relationships, but actual theft and serious injury or death to domestic animals at the hands of the violent perpetrator.
This new law has finally recognized the rights of pet owners to protect their loved animals against this terrible problem. While the law is still new, many courts in our state have begun to implement it’s provisions, protecting the pet from harm in these difficult and highly charged emotional proceedings.
Sunday, April 6, 2008
You can't make this stuff up.....
Laws that you see you fined or Jailed from across the United States
While most of us would agree that laws are not meant to be broken and certainly not laughed at, how can we not raise a smile when we discover a law which could see us fined or JAILED for making funny faces at dogs!
Take a peek at just a few wacky dog laws that I have uncovered and by all means take a note of some, you can use them next time you need to impress anyone with a deep knowledge of genuinely useless trivia.
California: In some areas of California, animals are banned from mating publicly within 1,500 feet of a tavern, school, or place of worship. Cats and dogs are not allowed to mate without a permit.
Hartford, Connecticut it is illegal to educate dogs.
Northbrook, Illinois it is illegal for dogs to bark for more than fifteen minutes.
Zion, Illinois it is illegal for anyone to give lighted cigars to dogs, cats, and other domesticated animals kept as pets. (So cigarettes are ok?)
Palding, Ohio A police officer may bite a dog to quiet him.
In some areas of Oklahoma: People who make "ugly faces" at dogs may be fined and/or jailed.
Dogs must have a permit signed by the mayor in order to congregate in groups of three or more on private property. (Combating the problem of gangs of canine 'hoodies', good forward thinking legislation huh?)
North Carolina Laws applying to some areas of North Carolina prohibit fights between cats and dogs.
Michigan: It is illegal to kill a dog using a decompression chamber.
Fort Thomas, Kentucky Dogs may not molest cars.
Anchorage, Alaska, United States No one may tie their pet dog to the roof of a car.
Belvedere, California, United States "No dog shall be in a public place without its master on a leash.(do you think they got this one backwards?)
Denver: The dog catcher must notify dogs of impounding by posting, for three consecutive days, a notice on a tree in the city park and along a public road running through said park.
Illinois it is illegal to give a dog whiskey (presumably Vodka is ok right?)
Chicago it is illegal to take a French poodle to the opera.
Honestly, you couldn't make this stuff up...or could you?
While most of us would agree that laws are not meant to be broken and certainly not laughed at, how can we not raise a smile when we discover a law which could see us fined or JAILED for making funny faces at dogs!
Take a peek at just a few wacky dog laws that I have uncovered and by all means take a note of some, you can use them next time you need to impress anyone with a deep knowledge of genuinely useless trivia.
California: In some areas of California, animals are banned from mating publicly within 1,500 feet of a tavern, school, or place of worship. Cats and dogs are not allowed to mate without a permit.
Hartford, Connecticut it is illegal to educate dogs.
Northbrook, Illinois it is illegal for dogs to bark for more than fifteen minutes.
Zion, Illinois it is illegal for anyone to give lighted cigars to dogs, cats, and other domesticated animals kept as pets. (So cigarettes are ok?)
Palding, Ohio A police officer may bite a dog to quiet him.
In some areas of Oklahoma: People who make "ugly faces" at dogs may be fined and/or jailed.
Dogs must have a permit signed by the mayor in order to congregate in groups of three or more on private property. (Combating the problem of gangs of canine 'hoodies', good forward thinking legislation huh?)
North Carolina Laws applying to some areas of North Carolina prohibit fights between cats and dogs.
Michigan: It is illegal to kill a dog using a decompression chamber.
Fort Thomas, Kentucky Dogs may not molest cars.
Anchorage, Alaska, United States No one may tie their pet dog to the roof of a car.
Belvedere, California, United States "No dog shall be in a public place without its master on a leash.(do you think they got this one backwards?)
Denver: The dog catcher must notify dogs of impounding by posting, for three consecutive days, a notice on a tree in the city park and along a public road running through said park.
Illinois it is illegal to give a dog whiskey (presumably Vodka is ok right?)
Chicago it is illegal to take a French poodle to the opera.
Honestly, you couldn't make this stuff up...or could you?
Saturday, April 5, 2008
What to Do When Involved in a Car Accident in Connecticut
What to Do When Involved in a Car Accident in Connecticut
Connecticut Auto Accident Information
If you are involved in an auto accident, you may be entitled to recover damaged for your pain and suffering, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life, disability, medical expenses, loss of earning, inconvenience and property damage.
What to do When Injured in a Car accident in Connecticut?
1. If you are seriously injured or concerned that you may require immediate medical attention then seek help for emergency workers.
2. If you are not in need of emergency or immediate medical attention, take time to survey the area where the accident occurred including important details:
a. Identity of the driver of the other vehicle(s);
b. Identify any possible witness to the accident – identify them to the police officer;
c. Look for skid marks as well as other evidence such as broken glass, broken tail lights
or other parts that have been damaged also noting any debris location;
3. Obtain information from the other driver:
a. Name;
b. Address;
c. Phone number;
d. Name of insurance company.
4. Talk with the police officer
a. Make sure you clearly inform the investigating officer of your understanding of how
the accident happened.
5. If you have a cell phone with a camera or a other camera take pictures of the scene, roadway, driver(s), passenger(s) and the vehicles themselves.
6. Obtain information of any witnesses:
a. Name;
b. Address;
c. Phone number;
From the beginning , you need to have the understanding that you life may change as a result of what just occurred. Cooperation and assistance from the insurance companies will play a major component in getting your affairs back in order. The insurance adjuster has one mindset – pay you a little as possible to get you to sign a release.
Successfully dealing with this process are those who can find an attorney who will take on the responsibility of getting their clients car fixed and properly adjusted or replace if required, dealing with doctors or other medical providers to verify you get the treatment you need and lastly how it will get paid – either med pay (part of your automobile policy) or your medical insurance.
Connecticut Auto Accident Information
If you are involved in an auto accident, you may be entitled to recover damaged for your pain and suffering, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life, disability, medical expenses, loss of earning, inconvenience and property damage.
What to do When Injured in a Car accident in Connecticut?
1. If you are seriously injured or concerned that you may require immediate medical attention then seek help for emergency workers.
2. If you are not in need of emergency or immediate medical attention, take time to survey the area where the accident occurred including important details:
a. Identity of the driver of the other vehicle(s);
b. Identify any possible witness to the accident – identify them to the police officer;
c. Look for skid marks as well as other evidence such as broken glass, broken tail lights
or other parts that have been damaged also noting any debris location;
3. Obtain information from the other driver:
a. Name;
b. Address;
c. Phone number;
d. Name of insurance company.
4. Talk with the police officer
a. Make sure you clearly inform the investigating officer of your understanding of how
the accident happened.
5. If you have a cell phone with a camera or a other camera take pictures of the scene, roadway, driver(s), passenger(s) and the vehicles themselves.
6. Obtain information of any witnesses:
a. Name;
b. Address;
c. Phone number;
From the beginning , you need to have the understanding that you life may change as a result of what just occurred. Cooperation and assistance from the insurance companies will play a major component in getting your affairs back in order. The insurance adjuster has one mindset – pay you a little as possible to get you to sign a release.
Successfully dealing with this process are those who can find an attorney who will take on the responsibility of getting their clients car fixed and properly adjusted or replace if required, dealing with doctors or other medical providers to verify you get the treatment you need and lastly how it will get paid – either med pay (part of your automobile policy) or your medical insurance.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Is it worth it to pay an Attorney and/or Mediator?
Should I hire an attorney and/or mediator?
One of the biggest – and most often cited – expenses related to litigation, divorce and/or contested judicial matters is the attorney and/or mediator. There is a perpetual debate over the value of services provided by professionals, attorney and/or mediator. In the legal practice this controversy is sometimes confronted head-on by judicial system itself. After all, going “pro se” (individuals representing themselves) requires greater resources to be allocated by the State and Federal Government than individuals or businesses with the assistance of legal counsel who can navigate their way throughout the process.
In this blog we’ll examine the underlying factors that come into play when involved in a lawsuit, litigation or general dispute with – or without – an attorney and/or mediator, so that you can make your own informed decisions about the subject. After all, it’s your money, your property, your children or the like and most of all your choice.
Representing yourself, or “pro se” is worthy of consideration, and can save you an initial expenditure of funds to hire an attorney but you must consider not just the present but your future obligations both direct and indirect. To represent yourself, you will need to understand the legal and judicial process, and let alone the laws and statutes they may impact your ability to obtain the relief that you are seeking. But many people decide to represent themselves instead of hiring attorneys and/or mediators during the initial process and only involve an attorney after the fact i.e. judgment had entered, and for that reason it is a reasonable and common practice to hire your advocate before the process potentially may impact your future advocates ability to undo what occurs during the initial proceedings.
You will be forced to deal with many issues when involved in litigation. There may be depositions, court dates, hearings, trials or a process you don’t know about, or an issue that you are too involved with to view with objective eyes. You might need experienced advice to assist you in examining your options when faced with a fork in the road. Without quick and professional resolution of these types of problems, you could face serious consequences, both financially and emotionally.
For these reasons, the most overlooked, underrated, and valuable justification for hiring an attorney and/or mediator is that it gives you the opportunity to negotiate through a professional, experienced, and emotionally objective third party who has your best interest in mind.
Because the attorney will be negotiating/advocating on your behalf, it is essential that you hire someone you can trust, communicate with, and rely upon. Many parties feel most confident when they are able to choose an attorney from their own community who understands their needs.
The decision to hire an attorney and/or mediator or go it alone as a “pro se” is a complicated and important one, and there are many variables to take into consideration.
If I can be of any assistance to you when your situation requires legal counsel please contact me mfasanojr@duffyandfasano.com. My name is Michael A. Fasano Jr. and I am with Duffy & Fasano, attorneys and counselors at law. I service the New Haven County area, Litchfield County Area with a focus on Waterbury, Litchfield and the beautiful Northwest Hills.
One of the biggest – and most often cited – expenses related to litigation, divorce and/or contested judicial matters is the attorney and/or mediator. There is a perpetual debate over the value of services provided by professionals, attorney and/or mediator. In the legal practice this controversy is sometimes confronted head-on by judicial system itself. After all, going “pro se” (individuals representing themselves) requires greater resources to be allocated by the State and Federal Government than individuals or businesses with the assistance of legal counsel who can navigate their way throughout the process.
In this blog we’ll examine the underlying factors that come into play when involved in a lawsuit, litigation or general dispute with – or without – an attorney and/or mediator, so that you can make your own informed decisions about the subject. After all, it’s your money, your property, your children or the like and most of all your choice.
Representing yourself, or “pro se” is worthy of consideration, and can save you an initial expenditure of funds to hire an attorney but you must consider not just the present but your future obligations both direct and indirect. To represent yourself, you will need to understand the legal and judicial process, and let alone the laws and statutes they may impact your ability to obtain the relief that you are seeking. But many people decide to represent themselves instead of hiring attorneys and/or mediators during the initial process and only involve an attorney after the fact i.e. judgment had entered, and for that reason it is a reasonable and common practice to hire your advocate before the process potentially may impact your future advocates ability to undo what occurs during the initial proceedings.
You will be forced to deal with many issues when involved in litigation. There may be depositions, court dates, hearings, trials or a process you don’t know about, or an issue that you are too involved with to view with objective eyes. You might need experienced advice to assist you in examining your options when faced with a fork in the road. Without quick and professional resolution of these types of problems, you could face serious consequences, both financially and emotionally.
For these reasons, the most overlooked, underrated, and valuable justification for hiring an attorney and/or mediator is that it gives you the opportunity to negotiate through a professional, experienced, and emotionally objective third party who has your best interest in mind.
Because the attorney will be negotiating/advocating on your behalf, it is essential that you hire someone you can trust, communicate with, and rely upon. Many parties feel most confident when they are able to choose an attorney from their own community who understands their needs.
The decision to hire an attorney and/or mediator or go it alone as a “pro se” is a complicated and important one, and there are many variables to take into consideration.
If I can be of any assistance to you when your situation requires legal counsel please contact me mfasanojr@duffyandfasano.com. My name is Michael A. Fasano Jr. and I am with Duffy & Fasano, attorneys and counselors at law. I service the New Haven County area, Litchfield County Area with a focus on Waterbury, Litchfield and the beautiful Northwest Hills.
Lawyer Joke
Give the Lawyer a Hand
A young trial lawyer was defending a man accused of burglary, known for being witty (and the judge knows this) tried yet another one of his creative defenses. The judge, while not known for having a sense of humor, decided to hear the young lawyer out. “While my client admits he did, in fact, reach his arm into the window and removed a few trifling articles. However his arm is not himself, and I fail to see how you can punish the whole individual for an offense committed by just his limb.” “Well put,” the judge replied. “Using your logic, I sentence the defendant’s arm to one year’s imprisonment. He can accompany it or not, as he so chooses.” The defendant smiled. With his lawyer’s assistance he detached his artificial limb, laid it on the bench, and walked out.
A young trial lawyer was defending a man accused of burglary, known for being witty (and the judge knows this) tried yet another one of his creative defenses. The judge, while not known for having a sense of humor, decided to hear the young lawyer out. “While my client admits he did, in fact, reach his arm into the window and removed a few trifling articles. However his arm is not himself, and I fail to see how you can punish the whole individual for an offense committed by just his limb.” “Well put,” the judge replied. “Using your logic, I sentence the defendant’s arm to one year’s imprisonment. He can accompany it or not, as he so chooses.” The defendant smiled. With his lawyer’s assistance he detached his artificial limb, laid it on the bench, and walked out.
Talking and driving? Go hands-free or pay up – maybe?
Talking On a Cell Phone in a Car without also using a Hands-free device
Connecticut’s cell phone prohibition law, making it a ticketable moving violation to drive a car while talking on a cell phone without also using a hands-free accessory. Connecticut General Statute Section 14-296aa. entitled: “Use of hand-held mobile telephones and mobile electronic devices by motor vehicle operators and school bus drivers, prohibited or restricted, when. Penalties,” governs the use of telephones in automobiles.
Driving down the road every day, whether heading to court, home or on an errand I can’t help but see all of the people on the road using their cell phones in clear violation of this statute. The funny part about it is that some of these drivers enjoy the speakerphone option of their new high tech phone, of course while holding it in their hand. I have not heard about a major crackdown or let alone enforcement of this law but that does not mean it cant or wont occur if you are pulled over for some other motor vehicle violation or other cause. Specifically, the law states: “(2) "Using" or "use" means holding a hand-held mobile telephone to, or in the immediate proximity of, the user's ear.”
On most days it’s hard not to notice a police officer, bus driver or other emergency type vehicle driving past you while attached to their cell phone. Are we going to enforce this or just let it go by the wayside? I am not privy to the studies that I am sure having been conducted linking use of a cell phone to increased accident or the like. What is the point of this law if the ones used to enforce it also decide to violate its terms? I have often thought to take my digital camera with me to document these types of acts because I am certain this type of behavior would be denied by the offending officer, bus driver, Emergency technician or just general driver.
On that same note should we ban those individual reading a newspaper or book while driving? Is putting on makeup been banned yet? I have not heard of this specific law yet but is that something else our state should consider as not appropriate to conduct while driving? Have there been studies linking listening to you radio or CD’s in your car to increased number of accidents?
I think it is wise to have this law in effect but a little enforcement would be nice. I know that at depositions or at trial for personal injury cases these are the types of issues raised to discredit the injured parties in an attempt to reallocate blame their way. Watch who you talk to while you drive especially without a handsfree device.
Connecticut’s cell phone prohibition law, making it a ticketable moving violation to drive a car while talking on a cell phone without also using a hands-free accessory. Connecticut General Statute Section 14-296aa. entitled: “Use of hand-held mobile telephones and mobile electronic devices by motor vehicle operators and school bus drivers, prohibited or restricted, when. Penalties,” governs the use of telephones in automobiles.
Driving down the road every day, whether heading to court, home or on an errand I can’t help but see all of the people on the road using their cell phones in clear violation of this statute. The funny part about it is that some of these drivers enjoy the speakerphone option of their new high tech phone, of course while holding it in their hand. I have not heard about a major crackdown or let alone enforcement of this law but that does not mean it cant or wont occur if you are pulled over for some other motor vehicle violation or other cause. Specifically, the law states: “(2) "Using" or "use" means holding a hand-held mobile telephone to, or in the immediate proximity of, the user's ear.”
On most days it’s hard not to notice a police officer, bus driver or other emergency type vehicle driving past you while attached to their cell phone. Are we going to enforce this or just let it go by the wayside? I am not privy to the studies that I am sure having been conducted linking use of a cell phone to increased accident or the like. What is the point of this law if the ones used to enforce it also decide to violate its terms? I have often thought to take my digital camera with me to document these types of acts because I am certain this type of behavior would be denied by the offending officer, bus driver, Emergency technician or just general driver.
On that same note should we ban those individual reading a newspaper or book while driving? Is putting on makeup been banned yet? I have not heard of this specific law yet but is that something else our state should consider as not appropriate to conduct while driving? Have there been studies linking listening to you radio or CD’s in your car to increased number of accidents?
I think it is wise to have this law in effect but a little enforcement would be nice. I know that at depositions or at trial for personal injury cases these are the types of issues raised to discredit the injured parties in an attempt to reallocate blame their way. Watch who you talk to while you drive especially without a handsfree device.
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Don’t let your lawyer act like that
Six Mistakes Lawyers Make
This blog from the Maryland Divorce Legal Crier with their entry on March 25th entitled: “Don’t Try Your Divorce Case in Letters (Six Mistakes Lawyers Make)”. It is funny so go read it here.
Now do not let your lawyer act like that. Or be impressed when he or she does.
Posturing is expensive (and usually pointless)!
This blog from the Maryland Divorce Legal Crier with their entry on March 25th entitled: “Don’t Try Your Divorce Case in Letters (Six Mistakes Lawyers Make)”. It is funny so go read it here.
Now do not let your lawyer act like that. Or be impressed when he or she does.
Posturing is expensive (and usually pointless)!
Connecticut’s Conveyance Tax May Be Extended for Two Years
House Bill 5885 - Is Connecticut’s Conveyance Tax Increase Temporary?
The temporary fix to Connecticut’s financial problems may continue to be supplemented by the increased conveyance tax for both the State and local municipalities. A conveyance tax is imposed and collected based upon the sales price of the real property being sold. In Connecticut the conveyance tax is customarily paid by the seller at the time of the sale.
The increase in the conveyance tax was supposed to expire (sunset) July 1, 2007. A sunset gives lawmakers a chance to review laws and then after its review decide to continue them or not. Apparently, this increase shall not expire but continue for at least two more years at this rate.
If you are selling your home at a loss you may have to bring money to the closing table to pay this conveyance tax in addition to the other fees associated with the closing, including real estate commissions, attorneys fees etc. Conversely, a bank that acquires a property through the foreclosure process does not pay a conveyance tax on that foreclosed property. A conveyance tax is bourn only by a home seller regardless of the length of time the seller has owned the home.
The tax is calculated on the total sale price, not the equity or the profit that the seller makes. Every day at the closing table you can feel the stress that the homeowner, often bringing money to the closing table to avoid foreclosure or a high interest rate usually unexpected with that variable rate mortgage. Seniors in this state are being affected who live on a fixed income and need all of the equity that they have built over years of home ownership when it's time to sell their property.
Your home is one of your greatest investments and you don't want to see your equity going to a state government that continues to increase our taxes. Sunset the conveyance tax and hold the politicians to their word of a temporary increase and not a permanent increase disguised by temporary renewals of the tax.
The temporary fix to Connecticut’s financial problems may continue to be supplemented by the increased conveyance tax for both the State and local municipalities. A conveyance tax is imposed and collected based upon the sales price of the real property being sold. In Connecticut the conveyance tax is customarily paid by the seller at the time of the sale.
The increase in the conveyance tax was supposed to expire (sunset) July 1, 2007. A sunset gives lawmakers a chance to review laws and then after its review decide to continue them or not. Apparently, this increase shall not expire but continue for at least two more years at this rate.
If you are selling your home at a loss you may have to bring money to the closing table to pay this conveyance tax in addition to the other fees associated with the closing, including real estate commissions, attorneys fees etc. Conversely, a bank that acquires a property through the foreclosure process does not pay a conveyance tax on that foreclosed property. A conveyance tax is bourn only by a home seller regardless of the length of time the seller has owned the home.
The tax is calculated on the total sale price, not the equity or the profit that the seller makes. Every day at the closing table you can feel the stress that the homeowner, often bringing money to the closing table to avoid foreclosure or a high interest rate usually unexpected with that variable rate mortgage. Seniors in this state are being affected who live on a fixed income and need all of the equity that they have built over years of home ownership when it's time to sell their property.
Your home is one of your greatest investments and you don't want to see your equity going to a state government that continues to increase our taxes. Sunset the conveyance tax and hold the politicians to their word of a temporary increase and not a permanent increase disguised by temporary renewals of the tax.
Friday, March 28, 2008
Driving while Intoxicated
First Time Offender – (Alcohol Education Program)
In the State of Connecticut an arrest for driving while intoxicated is defined in Connecticut General Statute 14-227a. If you are reading this article then I shall assume that you have and at least heard of the handcuffing, breathalyzer and/or blood/urine screening and incarceration for the sobering up period.
The Alcohol Education Program is a diversionary program available to, typically first time offenders, to avoid the consequences stemming from a conviction. This diversionary program permits that offender to attend classes designed to educate the offender on the dangers of driving after having consuming to much alcohol. Typically, after one year after successfully completing the classes the case is dismissed.
But, the fun is not over with the trip the criminal court – your driving privilege may be subject to suspension. Generally, that loss will amount to ninety days but you are given an opportunity to have a per se department of motor vehicle hearing to determine whether the proper protocol were followed when your initial arrest was made. What occurs at this DMV hearing has no bearing on your separate and distinct criminal matter. FYI the suspension rendered by the Department of Motor Vehicle may be in addition to any suspension rendered by the criminal court.
In the State of Connecticut an arrest for driving while intoxicated is defined in Connecticut General Statute 14-227a. If you are reading this article then I shall assume that you have and at least heard of the handcuffing, breathalyzer and/or blood/urine screening and incarceration for the sobering up period.
The Alcohol Education Program is a diversionary program available to, typically first time offenders, to avoid the consequences stemming from a conviction. This diversionary program permits that offender to attend classes designed to educate the offender on the dangers of driving after having consuming to much alcohol. Typically, after one year after successfully completing the classes the case is dismissed.
But, the fun is not over with the trip the criminal court – your driving privilege may be subject to suspension. Generally, that loss will amount to ninety days but you are given an opportunity to have a per se department of motor vehicle hearing to determine whether the proper protocol were followed when your initial arrest was made. What occurs at this DMV hearing has no bearing on your separate and distinct criminal matter. FYI the suspension rendered by the Department of Motor Vehicle may be in addition to any suspension rendered by the criminal court.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Parenting Education Classes
Parenting Education Classes – Controversy at the Connecticut Supreme Court
On March 19, 2008 the Hartford Courant ran a story about the argument before the Connecticut Supreme Court regarding the constitutionality of citizens of the State of Connecticut having to take parenting education classes in all divorces/custody actions where there are minor children born issue of the relationship. The entire article can be found at http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-ctprose0319.artmar19,0,5830536.story.
In the Connecticut the parenting education program is defined at Connecticut General Statute 46b-69b which requires amongst other items that the parties are required by the automatic orders to complete this program within sixty days of the return date. A list of providers is available at the courthouse specifically the clerk’s office or through the office of family relations.
A certificate must be issue from the program provider that you have completed the program prior to the Court permitting your matter to go to judgment when children are involved. The parenting education classes are completely different than co-parenting classes that are typically uses in high conflict cases wherein the parents cannot communicate regarding the major decisions to be made about their children.
Completion to the parenting education class is mandatory before any final judgment on custody or visitation will be entered.
So back to our friend who did not want to take the class. Why not, knowledge is power and when children are involved post-divorce why would parents not want to have all the resources available to them to assist their child or children in this very difficult time in their lives. For the mere hours it takes to complete the class it appears that is would be a greater disservice upon their children if this Court were not to mandate this class. This is clearly not designed to teach parents how to parent but to stress the impact of divorce and how their actions during the pendency or post-divorce will have on their kids. So instead of going quietly into the night we again use our States limited resources to challenge a productive and important source of information for parents. Understandably, not everyone wants to spend time back in a classroom but if the class even remotely benefits children let alone their parents dealing with divorce then it seems to defy logic to challenge what apparently is a win win situation for all those involved especially those (the kids) who did not create the problem which their parents seek judicial relief.
On March 19, 2008 the Hartford Courant ran a story about the argument before the Connecticut Supreme Court regarding the constitutionality of citizens of the State of Connecticut having to take parenting education classes in all divorces/custody actions where there are minor children born issue of the relationship. The entire article can be found at http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-ctprose0319.artmar19,0,5830536.story.
In the Connecticut the parenting education program is defined at Connecticut General Statute 46b-69b which requires amongst other items that the parties are required by the automatic orders to complete this program within sixty days of the return date. A list of providers is available at the courthouse specifically the clerk’s office or through the office of family relations.
A certificate must be issue from the program provider that you have completed the program prior to the Court permitting your matter to go to judgment when children are involved. The parenting education classes are completely different than co-parenting classes that are typically uses in high conflict cases wherein the parents cannot communicate regarding the major decisions to be made about their children.
Completion to the parenting education class is mandatory before any final judgment on custody or visitation will be entered.
So back to our friend who did not want to take the class. Why not, knowledge is power and when children are involved post-divorce why would parents not want to have all the resources available to them to assist their child or children in this very difficult time in their lives. For the mere hours it takes to complete the class it appears that is would be a greater disservice upon their children if this Court were not to mandate this class. This is clearly not designed to teach parents how to parent but to stress the impact of divorce and how their actions during the pendency or post-divorce will have on their kids. So instead of going quietly into the night we again use our States limited resources to challenge a productive and important source of information for parents. Understandably, not everyone wants to spend time back in a classroom but if the class even remotely benefits children let alone their parents dealing with divorce then it seems to defy logic to challenge what apparently is a win win situation for all those involved especially those (the kids) who did not create the problem which their parents seek judicial relief.
Saturday, March 22, 2008
Connecticut Probate
After You Are Gone, Who Gets Your Stuff?
Probate is the public process of filing and validating a will in court, publication to creditors, paying all the debts and taxes of deceased person, and dividing up the assets according to the will or Connecticut law.
The Connecticut law of intestate succession provides who will inherit your property. Generally, if you are married and have no children, or have no surviving children at the time of your death, all of your property passes to your spouse.
If no one is qualified to claim your estate under any rules, your intestate estate passes to the State of Connecticut. For that reason and that reason alone you need to consider who your estate and how it will pass after you are gone.
For the most part, if you do not have a surviving spouse, your property then passes to your descendants. If you do not have any descendants, to your parents. If you are not survived by any descendants or parents, then to the descendants of your parents. If you do not have any surviving descendants, parents or descendants of your parents, then to your grandparent(s) if they survive you, and if they do not survive you, to your grandparents’ descendants.
Estate planning covers the transfer of property at death as well as a variety of other personal matters that may or may not involve tax planning.
Your ability to direct who gets what is significantly impaired if you do not plan ahead.
Probate is the public process of filing and validating a will in court, publication to creditors, paying all the debts and taxes of deceased person, and dividing up the assets according to the will or Connecticut law.
The Connecticut law of intestate succession provides who will inherit your property. Generally, if you are married and have no children, or have no surviving children at the time of your death, all of your property passes to your spouse.
If no one is qualified to claim your estate under any rules, your intestate estate passes to the State of Connecticut. For that reason and that reason alone you need to consider who your estate and how it will pass after you are gone.
For the most part, if you do not have a surviving spouse, your property then passes to your descendants. If you do not have any descendants, to your parents. If you are not survived by any descendants or parents, then to the descendants of your parents. If you do not have any surviving descendants, parents or descendants of your parents, then to your grandparent(s) if they survive you, and if they do not survive you, to your grandparents’ descendants.
Estate planning covers the transfer of property at death as well as a variety of other personal matters that may or may not involve tax planning.
Your ability to direct who gets what is significantly impaired if you do not plan ahead.
Monday, March 17, 2008
What if you Settle and Judgment Enters
What if a Judgment Has Entered Against You?
The plaintiff, the individual or other type of entity could now proceed upon their judgment. Collection procedures once commenced can in most circumstances include executions against your bank accounts, personal property, or income.
If Judgment has not entered and you have failed to respond and you may have been insured for this type of loss and they are demanding an amount greater than your insurance policy it does not mean that they are entitled to an amount greater, just that they are claiming they are. You should turn this matter over to your insurance company. If they do not respond to the claims made against you, you may have a claim for bad faith against your insurance company. Your insurance company is required, in good faith, to represent you.
The plaintiff, the individual or other type of entity could now proceed upon their judgment. Collection procedures once commenced can in most circumstances include executions against your bank accounts, personal property, or income.
If Judgment has not entered and you have failed to respond and you may have been insured for this type of loss and they are demanding an amount greater than your insurance policy it does not mean that they are entitled to an amount greater, just that they are claiming they are. You should turn this matter over to your insurance company. If they do not respond to the claims made against you, you may have a claim for bad faith against your insurance company. Your insurance company is required, in good faith, to represent you.
Auto Accident
Injuries from an auto accident that may exceed your insurance limits?
A minor fender bender with someone just took on a life of its own. You are now in a situation where those injuries that are being claimed by the injured party, other driver, passenger whomever are claiming damages in excess of your bodily insurance limits.
Do you have extensive personal assets? If not, it's usually in your best interests to allow the plaintiff to determine your policy limits. If you refuse to, they can sue you and then they get to find out anyway. If you have substantial personal assets, or just stuff -- and I'd urge you to visit with a personal injury lawyer on these important details.
A minor fender bender with someone just took on a life of its own. You are now in a situation where those injuries that are being claimed by the injured party, other driver, passenger whomever are claiming damages in excess of your bodily insurance limits.
Do you have extensive personal assets? If not, it's usually in your best interests to allow the plaintiff to determine your policy limits. If you refuse to, they can sue you and then they get to find out anyway. If you have substantial personal assets, or just stuff -- and I'd urge you to visit with a personal injury lawyer on these important details.
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Death Penalty - Capital Punishment in the United States
Capital Punishment in the United States
"Your eye shall not pity; it shall be life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot." Deuteronomy 19:21
Does this bible verse support those in their belief that advocate for the death penalty? Was it 'Daniel Frank' the first executed in the territory called the United States that created this ongoing debate?
The debate over the use and imposition of capital punishment varies over a wide spectrum of beliefs and issues. What cannot be debated is the fact that murder is an unjustified intentional killing. Murder can be committed by an individual acting against our enacted laws and morality as well as a government acting on behalf of its citizenry. State authorized killings and criminal murders both demonstrate a lack of respect for human life. Both abolitionists and proponents of the death penalty search for the answers to what is the appropriate penalty for one who murders another.
The Eighth Amendment prohibition of "cruel and unusual punishment" is controlling upon the Supreme Courts analysis of capital punishment. It was Furman v. Georgia ruled that this type of punishment violated the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment due to arbitrary sentencing. States later revamped their statutes to avoid the issues raised in Furman.
Pro-Death Perspective:
Arguments that support the use of death penalty for criminal offenders hinge on deterrence and retribution. The deterrence argument focuses on the notion that executions deter potential offenders from committing similar acts (to aid in the prevention of a future crime).
Have you spoken with someone who said that they have not committed these types of offenses for fear that as a part of their sentence the death penalty would be imposed?
Anti-Death Perspective:
Albert Camus reflecting on the use of the guillotine, state that "there will be no lasting peace either in the heart of individuals or in social customs until death is outlawed." The threat of death does not have any effect on homicide rates.
"Your eye shall not pity; it shall be life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot." Deuteronomy 19:21
Does this bible verse support those in their belief that advocate for the death penalty? Was it 'Daniel Frank' the first executed in the territory called the United States that created this ongoing debate?
The debate over the use and imposition of capital punishment varies over a wide spectrum of beliefs and issues. What cannot be debated is the fact that murder is an unjustified intentional killing. Murder can be committed by an individual acting against our enacted laws and morality as well as a government acting on behalf of its citizenry. State authorized killings and criminal murders both demonstrate a lack of respect for human life. Both abolitionists and proponents of the death penalty search for the answers to what is the appropriate penalty for one who murders another.
The Eighth Amendment prohibition of "cruel and unusual punishment" is controlling upon the Supreme Courts analysis of capital punishment. It was Furman v. Georgia ruled that this type of punishment violated the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment due to arbitrary sentencing. States later revamped their statutes to avoid the issues raised in Furman.
Pro-Death Perspective:
Arguments that support the use of death penalty for criminal offenders hinge on deterrence and retribution. The deterrence argument focuses on the notion that executions deter potential offenders from committing similar acts (to aid in the prevention of a future crime).
Have you spoken with someone who said that they have not committed these types of offenses for fear that as a part of their sentence the death penalty would be imposed?
Anti-Death Perspective:
Albert Camus reflecting on the use of the guillotine, state that "there will be no lasting peace either in the heart of individuals or in social customs until death is outlawed." The threat of death does not have any effect on homicide rates.
Can Autism be linked to Vaccines
What about all of the Childhood Vaccines - ProVaccine/AntiVaccine
An award has been made to a family compensating them for autism symptoms that their child received as a result of a vaccine in a rare situation. Is this what has been rumbling out there for years or is this going to be a unique situation. Is this going to scare parents away from giving their physicians permission to administer those childhood vaccines that most of have received on our own lives? If you are reading this and have received the regular childhood shots they have obviously done something to protect you from serious disease. Is the real issue no vaccines or safer testing by the Government to ensure they are safe?
An award has been made to a family compensating them for autism symptoms that their child received as a result of a vaccine in a rare situation. Is this what has been rumbling out there for years or is this going to be a unique situation. Is this going to scare parents away from giving their physicians permission to administer those childhood vaccines that most of have received on our own lives? If you are reading this and have received the regular childhood shots they have obviously done something to protect you from serious disease. Is the real issue no vaccines or safer testing by the Government to ensure they are safe?
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Connecticut Foreclosure
Some Information on Foreclosures by Sale in Connecticut
If you are dealing with an imminent foreclosure or in the midst of one you should immediately consult with an attorney . Your rights to any equity of redemption may be effected in the event you fail to act on your behalf. What is your equity post-foreclosure sale or transfer - its any money you may be entitled to after the foreclosure goes to judgment then its ultimate disposition through the judicial department.
A foreclosure by sale would be conducted by a committee for sale, an attorney within the judicial district appointed by the Court to conduct the sale. It is that committee which is appointed to foster the highest sale price. The auction would be Ordered for a date certain which is customarily as Saturday at noon. Typically, there will be an inspection period for approximately two hours before the sale. The auction will have been advertised by either a sign erected upon the premises and/or an advertisement take out in the local newspaper for the next two preceding Sunday or other days as Ordered by the Court. For the most part both a sign and newspaper ad with be Ordered in my opinion. On the date of the Sale the committee may utilize the services of a police officer and/or locksmith to further the auction. Liability insurance will be obtained for the date of the sale.
The day of the auction:
If you are still in possession of the property expect that on the date of the auction the committee whose name you should know from the judicial notices and/or sign erected upon the property will arrive on or about ten a.m. or thereabouts. It is you choice to permit potential bidders to inspect that portion of the property which is occupied. Remember, it is in your interests to assist the committee in generating the highest bid.
People who desire to bid would register with the committee and be issued a number. To register you must provide you name, contact information and a bank or certified funds in an amount usually equal to ten percent of the property's drive by appraisal as valued on the date of judgment.
At noon the auction opens, customarily with a faxed bid from the foreclosing plaintiff. Then bidding would be conducted with the numbers issued to the approved bidders previously registered with the committee. The highest bidder would be required to execute a bond for deed essentially a contract to purchase. Beware, the successful bidder will be required to purchase the property within thirty days or as further Ordered by the Court from the date the Court approves the Sale. Please be mindful especially under the new guidelines that banks are imposing for mortgages these days the potential inability for the bank or lending institution to conduct a full appraisal may put your deposit at risk. Failure to close within those thirty days may upon Order of the Court forfeit your deposit - substantial for the most part.
I have been acting as a committee for some time now and have yet to see a piece of property go for a dollar.
If you are dealing with an imminent foreclosure or in the midst of one you should immediately consult with an attorney . Your rights to any equity of redemption may be effected in the event you fail to act on your behalf. What is your equity post-foreclosure sale or transfer - its any money you may be entitled to after the foreclosure goes to judgment then its ultimate disposition through the judicial department.
A foreclosure by sale would be conducted by a committee for sale, an attorney within the judicial district appointed by the Court to conduct the sale. It is that committee which is appointed to foster the highest sale price. The auction would be Ordered for a date certain which is customarily as Saturday at noon. Typically, there will be an inspection period for approximately two hours before the sale. The auction will have been advertised by either a sign erected upon the premises and/or an advertisement take out in the local newspaper for the next two preceding Sunday or other days as Ordered by the Court. For the most part both a sign and newspaper ad with be Ordered in my opinion. On the date of the Sale the committee may utilize the services of a police officer and/or locksmith to further the auction. Liability insurance will be obtained for the date of the sale.
The day of the auction:
If you are still in possession of the property expect that on the date of the auction the committee whose name you should know from the judicial notices and/or sign erected upon the property will arrive on or about ten a.m. or thereabouts. It is you choice to permit potential bidders to inspect that portion of the property which is occupied. Remember, it is in your interests to assist the committee in generating the highest bid.
People who desire to bid would register with the committee and be issued a number. To register you must provide you name, contact information and a bank or certified funds in an amount usually equal to ten percent of the property's drive by appraisal as valued on the date of judgment.
At noon the auction opens, customarily with a faxed bid from the foreclosing plaintiff. Then bidding would be conducted with the numbers issued to the approved bidders previously registered with the committee. The highest bidder would be required to execute a bond for deed essentially a contract to purchase. Beware, the successful bidder will be required to purchase the property within thirty days or as further Ordered by the Court from the date the Court approves the Sale. Please be mindful especially under the new guidelines that banks are imposing for mortgages these days the potential inability for the bank or lending institution to conduct a full appraisal may put your deposit at risk. Failure to close within those thirty days may upon Order of the Court forfeit your deposit - substantial for the most part.
I have been acting as a committee for some time now and have yet to see a piece of property go for a dollar.
Who is going to pay for College?
No Loans for College - Where Will the Money Come from
The economic slow down in this Country has spread to the college loan market. What has been their for families and students going to college are now not going to be available. The rules are tightening - are they going to qualify today let alone semesters from now?
The student loan programs have been suspended in five state as of this date because the moneys not there for them to fund the student loans. Are the schools getting cheaper - I think not - tuition is out of control and now the lenders are pulling out of the Federal Student Loan program because they cannot raise the funds to create the loans. Less selections or products are going to be there to pay those astronomical price tags! Who can pay the interest rate alternatives out there to keep them in school? Should the Federal Government step in to help those family/Students in need of college financing? This country will be at a significant disadvantage in the future if students are turned away because they cannot pay the entrance fee.
The economic slow down in this Country has spread to the college loan market. What has been their for families and students going to college are now not going to be available. The rules are tightening - are they going to qualify today let alone semesters from now?
The student loan programs have been suspended in five state as of this date because the moneys not there for them to fund the student loans. Are the schools getting cheaper - I think not - tuition is out of control and now the lenders are pulling out of the Federal Student Loan program because they cannot raise the funds to create the loans. Less selections or products are going to be there to pay those astronomical price tags! Who can pay the interest rate alternatives out there to keep them in school? Should the Federal Government step in to help those family/Students in need of college financing? This country will be at a significant disadvantage in the future if students are turned away because they cannot pay the entrance fee.
Will Florida and Michigan Delegates be Seated at DNC
Who is really going to decide
Florida and Michigan decided on their own that they want to set the tone for the national primaries. Per the democratic nation committee rules only four states can hold primaries and/or caucuses before February 5, 2008, in spite of these rules Florida and Michigan voted to hold their primaries on January 29, 2008 thus violating the party's rules. The consequence of this action is that their delegates would not be seated at the the DNC in Denver, Colorado this summer or have their votes counted toward the Democratic nominee.
Record number voters turned out - Hillary wins. Obama decided to take his name out of the running and now that the race is so close. Neither Obama or Hillary don't have the number of delegates to win. Now its time they come back and want to the change the rules.
What about fair play and following the rules?
Should they be permitted to be seated/counted? Should they cause taxpayers money to be diverted from other noble causes to have a re-do. All along it was both Florida and Michigan's choice to put themselves and their party in this positions which may create a divide amongst the party. Be careful what you vote for because it can come back and haunt you.
Florida and Michigan decided on their own that they want to set the tone for the national primaries. Per the democratic nation committee rules only four states can hold primaries and/or caucuses before February 5, 2008, in spite of these rules Florida and Michigan voted to hold their primaries on January 29, 2008 thus violating the party's rules. The consequence of this action is that their delegates would not be seated at the the DNC in Denver, Colorado this summer or have their votes counted toward the Democratic nominee.
Record number voters turned out - Hillary wins. Obama decided to take his name out of the running and now that the race is so close. Neither Obama or Hillary don't have the number of delegates to win. Now its time they come back and want to the change the rules.
What about fair play and following the rules?
Should they be permitted to be seated/counted? Should they cause taxpayers money to be diverted from other noble causes to have a re-do. All along it was both Florida and Michigan's choice to put themselves and their party in this positions which may create a divide amongst the party. Be careful what you vote for because it can come back and haunt you.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
The Best Interests of the Minor Child
Guardian Ad Litem versus Attorney for the Child
The role of a Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) is to advocate to the Court for what is in the Best Interests of the Child. The guardian ad litem may form his/her own opinion based upon the independent investigation made during the pendency of the litigation which may include information obtained by others including but not limited to doctors, state agencies, therapist, and teachers. No attorney client privilege exists so the Guardian Ad Litem may testify and be cross examined about the opinion being offered.
The Attorney for the Minor Child (AMC) is to be a zealous advocate for the child and to act as an advisor. The rules of professional conduct state in pertinent parts “a lawyer shall abide by a client’s decision concerning the objectives of representation” Rule 1.2; “render candid advice” Rule 2.1 and “as far as reasonably possible, maintain a normal client-lawyer relationship with the client.” Rule 1.14. The attorney client privilege does apply in this type of appointment.
Some of the factors considers in the “Best Interest” standards are the parenting skills; each parents relationship, both psychological and emotional, ties to the child; compliance with Orders of the Court specifically promoting access; past behavior as it related to parenting skills; recommendations of Family Relations; credibility and either parents coercive behavior involving the child in the litigation.
The child’s preference is important but is never conclusive upon the Court. The consideration that must be determined is if the child is of sufficient age and capable of forming an intelligent preference.
I like to describe the difference between the Guardian Ad Litem and the Attorney for the Minor child as follows: if your child wanted to eat ice cream for breakfast, lunch and dinner – every day – the Guardian would advocate that the best interests are not served by this type of diet while the Attorney for the Child would advocate for chocolate, strawberry or vanilla.
The role of a Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) is to advocate to the Court for what is in the Best Interests of the Child. The guardian ad litem may form his/her own opinion based upon the independent investigation made during the pendency of the litigation which may include information obtained by others including but not limited to doctors, state agencies, therapist, and teachers. No attorney client privilege exists so the Guardian Ad Litem may testify and be cross examined about the opinion being offered.
The Attorney for the Minor Child (AMC) is to be a zealous advocate for the child and to act as an advisor. The rules of professional conduct state in pertinent parts “a lawyer shall abide by a client’s decision concerning the objectives of representation” Rule 1.2; “render candid advice” Rule 2.1 and “as far as reasonably possible, maintain a normal client-lawyer relationship with the client.” Rule 1.14. The attorney client privilege does apply in this type of appointment.
Some of the factors considers in the “Best Interest” standards are the parenting skills; each parents relationship, both psychological and emotional, ties to the child; compliance with Orders of the Court specifically promoting access; past behavior as it related to parenting skills; recommendations of Family Relations; credibility and either parents coercive behavior involving the child in the litigation.
The child’s preference is important but is never conclusive upon the Court. The consideration that must be determined is if the child is of sufficient age and capable of forming an intelligent preference.
I like to describe the difference between the Guardian Ad Litem and the Attorney for the Minor child as follows: if your child wanted to eat ice cream for breakfast, lunch and dinner – every day – the Guardian would advocate that the best interests are not served by this type of diet while the Attorney for the Child would advocate for chocolate, strawberry or vanilla.
Monday, March 3, 2008
The Rights of Parents to Limit Visitation of their Children with Third Parties
Third Party Rights of Access in Connecticut
What has historically been in “the best interest of the child” is no longer the standard: the bar has been raised.
In Troxel.v Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000), the Court recognized that the Washington Statute at issue permitted any third person to subject any parental decision regarding visitation to state review. A parent’s decision regarding their child is “…afforded no presumptive validity or given any weight…The statute places the best interests of the parents’ child solely in the hands of the judge and the judge’s view necessarily prevails. Therefore, the statute provides the state court judge with the authority to disregard the decisions of a fit parent regarding visitation rights of their child when, upon petition by a third party, the Court determines the child’s best interests contrary to the wishes of the fit parent.” Troxel at 565, 566.
The Court criticized the Superior Court decision for contravening the traditional presumption that a fit parent will act in the best interests of his or her child. “In that respect, the court’s presumption failed to provide any protection for Granville’s fundamental constitutional right to make decisions concerning the rearing of her own two daughters.” Troxel at 568.
Despite the suggestion that in an ideal world, parents might always seek to cultivate the bonds between grandparents and their grandchildren, the Court concluded that “[n]eedless to say, however, our world is far from perfect, and in it the decision whether an inter-generational relationship would be beneficial in any specific case is for the parent to make in the first instance. And, if a fit parent’s decision of the kind at issue here becomes subject to judicial review, the court must accord at least some special weight to the parents own determination.” Troxel at 569.
And thus it was held that the standard application to the determination of child/visitation cases regarding third person would no longer be determined by the best interests of the child but rather would be decided on the basis of an otherwise fit parent’s decision as to who, when and how others peoples’ lives may become integrated with their children’s lives, despite “the best interest of the child.”
What has historically been in “the best interest of the child” is no longer the standard: the bar has been raised.
In Troxel.v Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000), the Court recognized that the Washington Statute at issue permitted any third person to subject any parental decision regarding visitation to state review. A parent’s decision regarding their child is “…afforded no presumptive validity or given any weight…The statute places the best interests of the parents’ child solely in the hands of the judge and the judge’s view necessarily prevails. Therefore, the statute provides the state court judge with the authority to disregard the decisions of a fit parent regarding visitation rights of their child when, upon petition by a third party, the Court determines the child’s best interests contrary to the wishes of the fit parent.” Troxel at 565, 566.
The Court criticized the Superior Court decision for contravening the traditional presumption that a fit parent will act in the best interests of his or her child. “In that respect, the court’s presumption failed to provide any protection for Granville’s fundamental constitutional right to make decisions concerning the rearing of her own two daughters.” Troxel at 568.
Despite the suggestion that in an ideal world, parents might always seek to cultivate the bonds between grandparents and their grandchildren, the Court concluded that “[n]eedless to say, however, our world is far from perfect, and in it the decision whether an inter-generational relationship would be beneficial in any specific case is for the parent to make in the first instance. And, if a fit parent’s decision of the kind at issue here becomes subject to judicial review, the court must accord at least some special weight to the parents own determination.” Troxel at 569.
And thus it was held that the standard application to the determination of child/visitation cases regarding third person would no longer be determined by the best interests of the child but rather would be decided on the basis of an otherwise fit parent’s decision as to who, when and how others peoples’ lives may become integrated with their children’s lives, despite “the best interest of the child.”
Saturday, March 1, 2008
Legal Issues Affecting Your Pets in the State of Connecticut
What happens when….
We become incapacitated and can’t care for ourselves let alone our dogs;
Without plans, your affairs are in flux;
Decisions are left to others
What happens when
We die without a will
The laws of intestacy control
May not be what you want
Costs wont be as manageable
Dogs will not be considered differently from the kitchen table
“A dog, for all of its admirable and unique qualities is not a human being and is not treated in the law as such”Texas Court of Civil Appeals
A dog cant own property
A dog cant be a beneficiary in a will
A dog is considered as personal property and gets distributed under the terms of your will or the laws of intestacy
Poor roxy the dog
Thelma left “everything I own to my friend Chester and Roxy my dog.”
Thelma’s niece contested the will and won even though she left a note urging Chester not to let her niece get her hands on her property no matter what it took to stop them.
Court can’t enforce a provision contrary to law
What others have done…
USA Today reports that 27% of Americans have made provisions for their dogs
British singer Dusty Springfield’s will made strict provisions for her cat, Nicholas to be fed imported baby food and her songs to be played at his bedtime
What others have done…
Tobacco heiress Doris Duke left a trust in the amount of $100,000 for her dog
It is reported that Oprah Winfrey’s will mandates that her Cocker Spaniels will live out their lives in luxury.
What can you Do?
Connecticut does not yet recognize “honorary trusts” or bequests to your dog
Leave your dog to someone YOU choose in your will
Leave an amount of money to a specific individual with a specific amount of money for the care of your dog
The Bad news is…
Even though your will is clear, there’s no guarantee your wishes will be carried out
Probate Court wont check to see if your gift of money is being used for the dog
Suggestions
Carry a card in your wallet stating that you have a dog that needs to be cared for
Identify the name, address and phone number of the person who has agreed to take over
Suggestions
Leave the dog and money to the new owner
“If my dog Laila,is alive at my death, I leave her and $5000 to be used for her care to Sam Spade. If Sam is unable to care for Laila, I leave her and the $5000 to Sue Jones.”
Suggestions
Leave the dog to one person, money to another
“I leave my dog Laila, if she is alive at the time of my death to Brian Smith.”
“If my dog Laila is alive at my death, I leave $5000 for her care to Karen Jones. I desire that she give Brian Smith, as long as he has custody of Laila, $100 per month for Laila’s care. I also desire that, in addition, she use the money to pay Laila’s veterinary bills or otherwise reimburse Brian for vet bills he pays”
“Many have forgottenthis truth, but you mustnot forget it.You become responsible foreverfor what you have tamed.”The Little Prince
Prepared by Michael A Fasano
We become incapacitated and can’t care for ourselves let alone our dogs;
Without plans, your affairs are in flux;
Decisions are left to others
What happens when
We die without a will
The laws of intestacy control
May not be what you want
Costs wont be as manageable
Dogs will not be considered differently from the kitchen table
“A dog, for all of its admirable and unique qualities is not a human being and is not treated in the law as such”Texas Court of Civil Appeals
A dog cant own property
A dog cant be a beneficiary in a will
A dog is considered as personal property and gets distributed under the terms of your will or the laws of intestacy
Poor roxy the dog
Thelma left “everything I own to my friend Chester and Roxy my dog.”
Thelma’s niece contested the will and won even though she left a note urging Chester not to let her niece get her hands on her property no matter what it took to stop them.
Court can’t enforce a provision contrary to law
What others have done…
USA Today reports that 27% of Americans have made provisions for their dogs
British singer Dusty Springfield’s will made strict provisions for her cat, Nicholas to be fed imported baby food and her songs to be played at his bedtime
What others have done…
Tobacco heiress Doris Duke left a trust in the amount of $100,000 for her dog
It is reported that Oprah Winfrey’s will mandates that her Cocker Spaniels will live out their lives in luxury.
What can you Do?
Connecticut does not yet recognize “honorary trusts” or bequests to your dog
Leave your dog to someone YOU choose in your will
Leave an amount of money to a specific individual with a specific amount of money for the care of your dog
The Bad news is…
Even though your will is clear, there’s no guarantee your wishes will be carried out
Probate Court wont check to see if your gift of money is being used for the dog
Suggestions
Carry a card in your wallet stating that you have a dog that needs to be cared for
Identify the name, address and phone number of the person who has agreed to take over
Suggestions
Leave the dog and money to the new owner
“If my dog Laila,is alive at my death, I leave her and $5000 to be used for her care to Sam Spade. If Sam is unable to care for Laila, I leave her and the $5000 to Sue Jones.”
Suggestions
Leave the dog to one person, money to another
“I leave my dog Laila, if she is alive at the time of my death to Brian Smith.”
“If my dog Laila is alive at my death, I leave $5000 for her care to Karen Jones. I desire that she give Brian Smith, as long as he has custody of Laila, $100 per month for Laila’s care. I also desire that, in addition, she use the money to pay Laila’s veterinary bills or otherwise reimburse Brian for vet bills he pays”
“Many have forgottenthis truth, but you mustnot forget it.You become responsible foreverfor what you have tamed.”The Little Prince
Prepared by Michael A Fasano
Ask A Connecticut Lawyer A Question
A Connecticut Lawyer willing to answer your questions about the law and its impact on you. Whether real estate, personal injury, family law or just a general question please visit our website at www.duffyandfasano.com and fill in the form and we will contact you to discuss any issues you may be faced with.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Introduction
Visit http://www.duffyandfasano.com/ for information concerning your legal rights in the State of Connecticut. The law offices of Duffy & Fasano have been helping families and individuals in need for over thirty years. At Duffy & Fasano, we represent clients from all walks of life. No matter who you are, you are a welcome client at our firm. We are a small office, offering attentive, personal service. Our attorneys will reply quickly if you need to communicate with them — whether for an emergency or just for a general question about your case. If you have a legal matter that needs to be resolved — whether it's a divorce, a personal injury accident, a business dispute or some other issue — visit us online at http://www.duffyandfasano.com/ or call our office directly at 866-668-9615.
Please use this blog to discuss any issues of concern to you or that may interest you. As lifelong residents of the State of Connecticut we want to assist you in your time of need. This blog will be our forum to address the concerns of our fellow citizens. Times our changing and we all have day to day problems, we hope as time goes by that this site can be of help to you and to provide answers to your questions or a discussion of problems you experience in navagating though the judicial process.
Our geographical areas are including but not limited to:
Connecticut Divorce Lawyer, Connecticut Custody Lawyer, real estate lawyer, real estate attorney, probate lawyer, probate attorney, Connecticut Family Lawyer, Connecticut Divorce Attorney, Connecticut Custody Attorney, Connecticut Family Law Attorney, Cheshire Divorce Lawyer, Cheshire Custody Lawyer, Cheshire Family Law Lawyer, Cheshire Divorce Attorney, Cheshire Custody Attorney, Cheshire Family Law Attorney, Wallingford Divorce Lawyer, Wallingford Custody Lawyer, Wallingford Family Law Lawyer, Wallingford Divorce Attorney, Wallingford Custody Attorney, Wallingford Family Law Attorney, Hamden Divorce Lawyer, Hamden Custody Lawyer, Hamden Family Law Lawyer, Hamden Divorce Attorney, Hamden Custody Attorney, Hamden Family Law Attorney, New Haven Divorce Lawyer, New Haven Custody Lawyer, New Haven Family Law Lawyer, New Haven Divorce Attorney, New Haven Custody Attorney, New Haven Family Law Attorney, North Haven Divorce Lawyer, North Haven Custody Lawyer, North Haven Family Law Lawyer, North Haven Divorce Attorney, North Haven Custody Attorney, North Haven Family Law Attorney, Hartford Divorce Lawyer, Hartford Custody Lawyer, Hartford Family Law Lawyer, Hartford Divorce Attorney, Hartford Custody Attorney, Hartford Family Law Attorney, Fairfield County Divorce Lawyer, Fairfield County Custody Lawyer, Fairfield County Family Law Lawyer, Fairfield County Divorce Attorney, Fairfield County Custody Attorney, Fairfield County Family Law Attorney, Greenwich Divorce Lawyer, Waterbury ct Divorce Lawyer, Waterbury ct divorce attorney, waterbury ct lawyer, waterbury ct attorney, litchfield ct lawyer, litchfield connecticut attorney, lichfield county personal injury, litchfield connecticut attorney, lichfield connecituct personal injury, waterbury connecticut, middlebury lawyer, civil ligitigation, waterbury connecticut real estate, waterbury ct real estate, woodbury connecticut lawyer, goshen ct lawyer, goshen conneciticut attorney, watertown lawyer, watertown attorney,
The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney from our firm for advice regarding your individual situation. We invite you to contact us and welcome your calls, letters and electronic mail. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established.
Please use this blog to discuss any issues of concern to you or that may interest you. As lifelong residents of the State of Connecticut we want to assist you in your time of need. This blog will be our forum to address the concerns of our fellow citizens. Times our changing and we all have day to day problems, we hope as time goes by that this site can be of help to you and to provide answers to your questions or a discussion of problems you experience in navagating though the judicial process.
Our geographical areas are including but not limited to:
Connecticut Divorce Lawyer, Connecticut Custody Lawyer, real estate lawyer, real estate attorney, probate lawyer, probate attorney, Connecticut Family Lawyer, Connecticut Divorce Attorney, Connecticut Custody Attorney, Connecticut Family Law Attorney, Cheshire Divorce Lawyer, Cheshire Custody Lawyer, Cheshire Family Law Lawyer, Cheshire Divorce Attorney, Cheshire Custody Attorney, Cheshire Family Law Attorney, Wallingford Divorce Lawyer, Wallingford Custody Lawyer, Wallingford Family Law Lawyer, Wallingford Divorce Attorney, Wallingford Custody Attorney, Wallingford Family Law Attorney, Hamden Divorce Lawyer, Hamden Custody Lawyer, Hamden Family Law Lawyer, Hamden Divorce Attorney, Hamden Custody Attorney, Hamden Family Law Attorney, New Haven Divorce Lawyer, New Haven Custody Lawyer, New Haven Family Law Lawyer, New Haven Divorce Attorney, New Haven Custody Attorney, New Haven Family Law Attorney, North Haven Divorce Lawyer, North Haven Custody Lawyer, North Haven Family Law Lawyer, North Haven Divorce Attorney, North Haven Custody Attorney, North Haven Family Law Attorney, Hartford Divorce Lawyer, Hartford Custody Lawyer, Hartford Family Law Lawyer, Hartford Divorce Attorney, Hartford Custody Attorney, Hartford Family Law Attorney, Fairfield County Divorce Lawyer, Fairfield County Custody Lawyer, Fairfield County Family Law Lawyer, Fairfield County Divorce Attorney, Fairfield County Custody Attorney, Fairfield County Family Law Attorney, Greenwich Divorce Lawyer, Waterbury ct Divorce Lawyer, Waterbury ct divorce attorney, waterbury ct lawyer, waterbury ct attorney, litchfield ct lawyer, litchfield connecticut attorney, lichfield county personal injury, litchfield connecticut attorney, lichfield connecituct personal injury, waterbury connecticut, middlebury lawyer, civil ligitigation, waterbury connecticut real estate, waterbury ct real estate, woodbury connecticut lawyer, goshen ct lawyer, goshen conneciticut attorney, watertown lawyer, watertown attorney,
The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney from our firm for advice regarding your individual situation. We invite you to contact us and welcome your calls, letters and electronic mail. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
