I found this article interesting I hope you do as well.
NEW YORK (Reuters) – If you plan to show up in court, it may be best to dress up for the occasion.
A federal judge in Brooklyn, New York on Thursday threw out a complaint by a lawyer alleging a constitutional right to wear jeans and a baseball hat in a courtroom.
Todd Bank, whose office is in Kew Gardens, New York, showed up in a Queens housing court in March 2008 while wearing a button-down shirt, blue jeans, socks, shoes and a baseball hat that read "Operation Desert Storm."
Judge Anne Katz told Bank he was dressed inappropriately, and court clerk Jude Albano told him to take the hat off.
Bank sued both, saying his right to free speech and his liberty to dress as he wishes, which he said are guaranteed under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, allowed him to wear the clothing.
Not so, said U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis.
A courtroom is a "staid environment" where a judge may set reasonable limits on litigants' behavior to enforce "commonly shared mores of courtroom civility," he wrote.
He said the case raised "no serious dispute," lamenting that the office of New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo "has now had to expend resources" defending the matter.
The judge added, however: "When he is not in court, plaintiff is free to express the ideas he wishes to express, and to wear the attire he chooses to wear."
Bank did not immediately return requests for comment. He did not allege discrimination on the basis of the hat's content.
The case is Bank v. Katz, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York (Brooklyn), No. 08-1033.
(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel, editing by Dave Zimmerman)
Monday, September 28, 2009
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Stretching every dollar – How changing habits can save money
Posted in:
Lifestyle news
Below you will find an article about changing your spending habits. It is a serious topic and I think it is fitting of some discussion.
We live in a complex world. Responsibilities, needs and expenses confront us daily that our parents and grandparents never experienced. It is very hard for many people to save money, even with the best intentions and most careful spending habits. The rising cost of housing, insurance, medical care and education; and the need for many electronics that did not widely exist 25 years ago – cell phones, home computers and Internet service, 150 channels of cable TV, and many others – are understandably stretching budgets.
While saving money is very hard for the most well-intentioned person and family, here are five tips that may help reduce expenses each month. They are lifestyle habits. Over a year or decade, the impact of these habits can be significant. These are not easy — they are just suggestions:
• What’s in your wallet — only one credit card perhaps! Credit cards allow us to make impulse purchases, encourage us to spend more than we should, and often can incur debt – 15 to 18 percent or much more annually. If possible, carry only one credit card in your wallet for a rainy day or emergency. We all need credit cards (for airline tickets, online items and unavoidable expenses), but those who can reduce frequent and daily use of credit cards may save a lot of money in the long-run. Write a check, use a debit card (where the money comes directly out of a checking account), or pay in cash. (Also, watch out for so-called “deals” on credit cards such as points and free hotel rooms. These may actually encourage you to spend more and the cards can carry annual fees.)
• Pay off your credit card balances. We have all heard this before. Easier said than done! But, these annual fees and debts add up and present a huge burden. If you have debt, develop a plan to pay it off.
• If you own a car, keep it as long as possible. Many autos can last more than 100,000 miles. In some cases, the odometer can roll over twice. Maintenance bills can add up past the 100,000-mile mark, but driving an older reliable car may be more economical than buying a new one — especially when the car is paid off!
• Take your lunch to work! Eat healthier, save gas if you drive at the noon hour, and save money on food.
• Look carefully at repetitive expenses. These are the charges that automatically come each month or year. For example, a gym payment, the purchase of a discount card for a store (which may just encourage people to buy more), and many other expenses that we agree to over time, but perhaps we can live without.
Every person and family has a different financial situation. These habits may not work or be practical for many. However daily, weekly and annual steps can reduce spending and debt and help people save money over the longrun.
This article was originally published in the September 21, 2009 print edition of The Louisiana Weekly newspaper
Be Young
Be Professional
Be Great!
We live in a complex world. Responsibilities, needs and expenses confront us daily that our parents and grandparents never experienced. It is very hard for many people to save money, even with the best intentions and most careful spending habits. The rising cost of housing, insurance, medical care and education; and the need for many electronics that did not widely exist 25 years ago – cell phones, home computers and Internet service, 150 channels of cable TV, and many others – are understandably stretching budgets.
While saving money is very hard for the most well-intentioned person and family, here are five tips that may help reduce expenses each month. They are lifestyle habits. Over a year or decade, the impact of these habits can be significant. These are not easy — they are just suggestions:
• What’s in your wallet — only one credit card perhaps! Credit cards allow us to make impulse purchases, encourage us to spend more than we should, and often can incur debt – 15 to 18 percent or much more annually. If possible, carry only one credit card in your wallet for a rainy day or emergency. We all need credit cards (for airline tickets, online items and unavoidable expenses), but those who can reduce frequent and daily use of credit cards may save a lot of money in the long-run. Write a check, use a debit card (where the money comes directly out of a checking account), or pay in cash. (Also, watch out for so-called “deals” on credit cards such as points and free hotel rooms. These may actually encourage you to spend more and the cards can carry annual fees.)
• Pay off your credit card balances. We have all heard this before. Easier said than done! But, these annual fees and debts add up and present a huge burden. If you have debt, develop a plan to pay it off.
• If you own a car, keep it as long as possible. Many autos can last more than 100,000 miles. In some cases, the odometer can roll over twice. Maintenance bills can add up past the 100,000-mile mark, but driving an older reliable car may be more economical than buying a new one — especially when the car is paid off!
• Take your lunch to work! Eat healthier, save gas if you drive at the noon hour, and save money on food.
• Look carefully at repetitive expenses. These are the charges that automatically come each month or year. For example, a gym payment, the purchase of a discount card for a store (which may just encourage people to buy more), and many other expenses that we agree to over time, but perhaps we can live without.
Every person and family has a different financial situation. These habits may not work or be practical for many. However daily, weekly and annual steps can reduce spending and debt and help people save money over the longrun.
This article was originally published in the September 21, 2009 print edition of The Louisiana Weekly newspaper
Be Young
Be Professional
Be Great!
Thursday, September 17, 2009
"Wicked Fall's Most Flawless Fashion Show" Get your tickets
Posted in:
Events
Hey guys, if you're going to be in the New York area on Halloween check out this fabulous fashion show called Wicked: Falls most flawless fashion show! If you attend this event you will not be disappointed!
Host: Creative Party Designing/KD Couture
Price: General Admission $30, VIP $50
Date: Saturday, October 31, 2009
Time: 6:00pm - 10:00pm
Location: Lighthouse International
Street: 111 East 59th Street
City/Town: New York, NY
Tickets on sale now!!!
For all questions, contact Creative Party Designing at (561) 449-1124 or KD Couture at (718) 431-4705.
If you have an event you would like to see happen, contact Creative Party Designing where you name it and they plan it! There is no job too big or too small. See the info below.
Be Young
Be Professional
Be Great!
Host: Creative Party Designing/KD Couture
Price: General Admission $30, VIP $50
Date: Saturday, October 31, 2009
Time: 6:00pm - 10:00pm
Location: Lighthouse International
Street: 111 East 59th Street
City/Town: New York, NY
Tickets on sale now!!!
For all questions, contact Creative Party Designing at (561) 449-1124 or KD Couture at (718) 431-4705.
If you have an event you would like to see happen, contact Creative Party Designing where you name it and they plan it! There is no job too big or too small. See the info below.
Be Young
Be Professional
Be Great!
More posts coming soon!!!
Posted in:
Announcements
Hello ladies and gents, I first want to apologize about the sudden drop in posts. Let's just say there were a series of events that I've had to deal with which have kept me from divulging important information to all of you. I sincerely apologize and I hope I haven't lost your loyalty. I look forward to getting back in my groove within the next week and I will resume regular posting at that time. Until then, I'll post a few random things that I hope will suffice.
Be Young
Be Professional
Be Great!!
Be Young
Be Professional
Be Great!!
Wednesday, September 09, 2009
On Facebook? FBBE may be planning a visit
Posted in:
Legal News
WARNING: The post is long, but well worth the read!
Watch what you post on your Facebook or MySpace social networking Web sites, because the Florida Board of Bar Examiners is interested in taking a peek — and not as your “friend.”
The FBBE’s Character and Fitness Commission had recommended in its final report that the board consider expanding its current review of personal Web sites during background investigations “as deemed necessary” and determine whether a question should be added to The Florida Bar application to require that all such sites be listed and access granted to the board.
When the Board of Bar Examiners met in July to finalize its response to the commission’s recommendations, it took up the issue and decided to adopt a policy that the investigation of social networking Web sites be conducted on a case-by-case basis.
“In reaching this policy, the board reasoned that if applicants are required to provide access to their social Web sites, they are likely to delete any derogatory material before staff has the opportunity to review it,” the examiners wrote in their response filed with the Florida Supreme Court.
The Board of Bar Examiners did adopt the policy that investigation of social networking Web sites should be conducted for the following bar applicants:
• Applicants who are required to establish rehabilitation under Rule 3-13 “so as to ascertain whether they displayed any malice or ill feeling towards those who were compelled to bring about the proceeding leading to the need to establish rehabilitation;”
• Applicants with a history of substance abuse/dependence “so as to ascertain whether they discussed or posted photographs of any recent substance abuse;”
• Applicants with “significant candor concerns” including not telling the truth on employment applications or resumes;
• Applicants with a history of unlicensed practice of law (UPL) allegations;
• Applicants who have worked as a certified legal intern, reported self-employment in a legal field, or reported employment as an attorney pending admission “to ensure that these applicants are not holding themselves out as attorneys;”
• Applicants who have positively responded to Item 27 of the bar application disclosing “involvement in an organization advocating the overthrow of a government in the United States to find out if they are still involved in any related activities.”
Rejecting the Ban on Felons
On the commission’s hot-button issue of recommending a permanent ban on convicted felons practicing law, the FBBE rejected that recommendation and gave further explanation in its written response. (See story in August 1 Bar News.)
“The current policy (adopted by the board in 1995) provides that bar applicants who are convicted felons should be the subject of additional inquiry due to the seriousness of their past misconduct. The board has pending before the court a proposed rule amendment that would codify the board’s policy in this area.” In re Amendments to the Rules of the Supreme Court Relating to Admissions to the Bar, Case No: SC08-2296.
In its response filed with the court, the board explained why it prefers its current policy over a blanket disqualification of unpardoned convicted felons.
“First, there is the large disparity in criminal conduct that results in a felony conviction. This disparity can be produced by jurisdictional differences in the prosecution of particular crimes. The disparity can also be caused by societal changing views regarding certain illegal acts. Thus, an illegal drug possession charge that resulted in a felony conviction 30 years ago may result today in a misdemeanor charge or pretrial diversion,” the examiners wrote.
They also noted discretion built into the criminal justice system every step of the way — from the law enforcement officers’ initial arrest to prosecutors’ filing of charges or referral to a diversionary program, to judges’ sentencing decisions.
“For example, one law enforcement officer might arrest an individual for misdemeanor resisting arrest without violence, whereas another officer might arrest the same individual for felony battery of an officer,” the board wrote.
“In the latter scenario, the prosecutor might subsequently refer the case to a pretrial diversionary program, or reduce the felony charge to a misdemeanor in the charging document, or reduce a charged felony to a misdemeanor during plea negotiations. Lastly, even if the defendant were to plead guilty to the felony charge, the trial court must decide whether to adjudicate the defendant guilty (resulting in a felony conviction) or to withhold adjudication (resulting in no felony conviction.)”
The board also expressed concern that it is the executive branch that grants pardons and the reasons differ based on the policies of presidents and governors involved and don’t necessarily require a showing of rehabilitation.
The board concluded the admission of convicted felons is a decision that should rest solely with the Florida Supreme Court under art. V, §15 of the Florida Constitution, and the commission’s proposal “would relinquish some of the court’s decision-making authority in the bar admissions area to the chief executive officers of the state and federal governments.”
During the past 14 years, the board’s current policy of evaluating convicted felons firsthand at investigative and/or formal hearings to determine a “clear and convincing demonstration of rehabilitation” has succeeded in protecting the public and safeguarding the judicial system, the examiners concluded.
Even though the board does not support the commission’s call to permanently bar convicted felons, should the Supreme Court wish to take the matter further, it did offer proposed rule amendments and policy modifications that include requiring public formal hearings for all convicted felons.
Article written by By Jan Pudlow Senior Editor @ Floridabar.org
To read the FBBE’s full response to the Character and Fitness Commission’s report, go to www.floridasupremecourt.org.
Watch what you post on your Facebook or MySpace social networking Web sites, because the Florida Board of Bar Examiners is interested in taking a peek — and not as your “friend.”
The FBBE’s Character and Fitness Commission had recommended in its final report that the board consider expanding its current review of personal Web sites during background investigations “as deemed necessary” and determine whether a question should be added to The Florida Bar application to require that all such sites be listed and access granted to the board.
When the Board of Bar Examiners met in July to finalize its response to the commission’s recommendations, it took up the issue and decided to adopt a policy that the investigation of social networking Web sites be conducted on a case-by-case basis.
“In reaching this policy, the board reasoned that if applicants are required to provide access to their social Web sites, they are likely to delete any derogatory material before staff has the opportunity to review it,” the examiners wrote in their response filed with the Florida Supreme Court.
The Board of Bar Examiners did adopt the policy that investigation of social networking Web sites should be conducted for the following bar applicants:
• Applicants who are required to establish rehabilitation under Rule 3-13 “so as to ascertain whether they displayed any malice or ill feeling towards those who were compelled to bring about the proceeding leading to the need to establish rehabilitation;”
• Applicants with a history of substance abuse/dependence “so as to ascertain whether they discussed or posted photographs of any recent substance abuse;”
• Applicants with “significant candor concerns” including not telling the truth on employment applications or resumes;
• Applicants with a history of unlicensed practice of law (UPL) allegations;
• Applicants who have worked as a certified legal intern, reported self-employment in a legal field, or reported employment as an attorney pending admission “to ensure that these applicants are not holding themselves out as attorneys;”
• Applicants who have positively responded to Item 27 of the bar application disclosing “involvement in an organization advocating the overthrow of a government in the United States to find out if they are still involved in any related activities.”
Rejecting the Ban on Felons
On the commission’s hot-button issue of recommending a permanent ban on convicted felons practicing law, the FBBE rejected that recommendation and gave further explanation in its written response. (See story in August 1 Bar News.)
“The current policy (adopted by the board in 1995) provides that bar applicants who are convicted felons should be the subject of additional inquiry due to the seriousness of their past misconduct. The board has pending before the court a proposed rule amendment that would codify the board’s policy in this area.” In re Amendments to the Rules of the Supreme Court Relating to Admissions to the Bar, Case No: SC08-2296.
In its response filed with the court, the board explained why it prefers its current policy over a blanket disqualification of unpardoned convicted felons.
“First, there is the large disparity in criminal conduct that results in a felony conviction. This disparity can be produced by jurisdictional differences in the prosecution of particular crimes. The disparity can also be caused by societal changing views regarding certain illegal acts. Thus, an illegal drug possession charge that resulted in a felony conviction 30 years ago may result today in a misdemeanor charge or pretrial diversion,” the examiners wrote.
They also noted discretion built into the criminal justice system every step of the way — from the law enforcement officers’ initial arrest to prosecutors’ filing of charges or referral to a diversionary program, to judges’ sentencing decisions.
“For example, one law enforcement officer might arrest an individual for misdemeanor resisting arrest without violence, whereas another officer might arrest the same individual for felony battery of an officer,” the board wrote.
“In the latter scenario, the prosecutor might subsequently refer the case to a pretrial diversionary program, or reduce the felony charge to a misdemeanor in the charging document, or reduce a charged felony to a misdemeanor during plea negotiations. Lastly, even if the defendant were to plead guilty to the felony charge, the trial court must decide whether to adjudicate the defendant guilty (resulting in a felony conviction) or to withhold adjudication (resulting in no felony conviction.)”
The board also expressed concern that it is the executive branch that grants pardons and the reasons differ based on the policies of presidents and governors involved and don’t necessarily require a showing of rehabilitation.
The board concluded the admission of convicted felons is a decision that should rest solely with the Florida Supreme Court under art. V, §15 of the Florida Constitution, and the commission’s proposal “would relinquish some of the court’s decision-making authority in the bar admissions area to the chief executive officers of the state and federal governments.”
During the past 14 years, the board’s current policy of evaluating convicted felons firsthand at investigative and/or formal hearings to determine a “clear and convincing demonstration of rehabilitation” has succeeded in protecting the public and safeguarding the judicial system, the examiners concluded.
Even though the board does not support the commission’s call to permanently bar convicted felons, should the Supreme Court wish to take the matter further, it did offer proposed rule amendments and policy modifications that include requiring public formal hearings for all convicted felons.
Article written by By Jan Pudlow Senior Editor @ Floridabar.org
To read the FBBE’s full response to the Character and Fitness Commission’s report, go to www.floridasupremecourt.org.
Thursday, September 03, 2009
Check this out: The 50th law
Posted in:
Events
Here is the flyer for an upcoming event in Washington DC. If you have an event you would like HUSL Today to advertise, please send a flyer and the program information to HUSLToday@gmail.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)