Posts Tagged ‘Job’

Litigation Support Analyst

litigation support analyst
Leap Lays out Growth Plans for Prepaid Wireless Business
SAN DIEGO—-Leap Wireless International, Inc. , a leading provider of innovative and value-driven wireless communications services, today made a series of announcements at its Analyst Day in New York designed to significantly advance its business model as a national value leader and capitalize on the rapid growth of prepaid wireless services.
An Interview With Ray Miles On The History Of Business Appraisal and IBA.m4v

Damon, Topham and Company of Marshfield Announce Financial Planning Services

Catering to individuals and businesses on the South Shore for more than 20 years, Damon, Topham & Company has further diversified their services and created DTC Financial Associates, LLC.

DTC Financial Associates, LLC provides personal financial planning which includes retirement, review of life and health insurance as well as college education financing. They also provide financial planning for small business owners, which includes review of health insurance benefits for employees; wealth management; succession planning and exit strategy consultation.

According to Michael Damon, CPA, “We’re often approached by our accounting and tax clients inquiring about financial planning services. As we are well aware of our clients’ financial and tax status, we are in the position to provide qualified financial planning counsel.â€

Over the years, Damon, Topham & Company has evolved into a full service multi-disciplined firm. In addition to comprehensive accounting, audit and tax services, the company’s division of Business Development Partners assists business owners in identifying quantifiable results which may be achieved such as increased sales and market share and reduction of overhead and operating costs.

Damon, Topham & Company’s division of Advisory Services provides such services as litigation support; computer systems analysis; executive search and recruitment; management advisory services and bank and venture financing services.

To learn more about Damon, Topham & Company, visit their website at

www.damtopcpa.com

About Damon, Topham & Company

Damon, Topham & Company, LLC, Certified Public Accountants and Business Development Advisors. Utilize the “Damon, Topham Advantageâ€- go beyond the traditional services of auditing, accounting and taxation. Damon, Topham & Company provides business valuation, estate, individual and corporate tax planning and savings, financial planning, consulting and financing solutions for you, your business and your family.

Damon, Topham & Company, LLC, is located just off Route 139, 475 School St., Suite 8, Marshfield, MA. For a complimentary evaluation, please contact John T. Topham at (781) 837-1993 or jttopham@damtopcpa.com. Or visit the company’s website at www.damtopcpa.com.

Capital Analysts Incorporated, a Registered Broker Dealer and a Registered Investment Advisor, Member FINRA/SIPC. DTC Financial Associates, LLC and CAI are independent non-affiliated entities.

Insurance Recruiters

insurance recruiters
which is largest insurance recruiter in india?

I have no idea, but they ALL seem to be spamming the yahoo groups.

Life Insurance Mergers Create Management Recruiting Frenzy

Insurance Jobs Market Comment

2009 has been another puzzling year in the general insurance market. Whilst it has largely been spared the turbulence which has affected financial services and banking, there are still many troubling issues affecting both insurers and brokers which have had an inevitable knock-on effect for insurance recruitment.

Insurers keep complaining about rates being too low, but the actions of new entrants and other market share-hungry underwriters means that the soft market seems here to stay for a while yet. In addition, with a weak commercial property market, interest rates likely to stay low for the foreseeable future and stock market returns still looking unpredictable, insurers are finding that investment returns are also under pressure. All the more reason then to focus upon underwriting profit – but claims ratios traditionally come under pressure during a recession. Times for insurers are tough!

One battle which they are starting to get to grips with is reducing distribution costs. The days of broker consolidators earning 40% commission look numbered but there is still much work to be done. Axa and Aviva appear to be spear-heading this fightback but the likes of Towergate and Giles hold a strong position and will not give up their much-needed income easily.

As a result of this, underwriting jobs have been harder to come by than in recent years. However, new entrants to the market such as Arista are creating roles, whilst other forward-focused insurers are seeing this as a great time to strengthen their teams for the inevitable upturn which they hope will be arriving early next year. Good quality commercial underwriters are in still in great demand, particularly those with the ability to trade with brokers, and salary levels are still rising for those who keep an open mind for fresh opportunities.

Brokers have also had a tough year. The soft market has kept their income down and competition remains fierce. However, the concerns of good quality local brokers are nothing compared to those issues facing the consolidators who have borrowed heavily to grow their businesses over the past 5 years. The credit crunch has had a huge effect on these organisations, many of whom are unable to raise fresh funds to continue their expansion, and the re-negotiation of terms for their existing borrowings mean that their debts have become a huge millstone. If they also see their incomes hit by insurers squeezing their commissions then there could be some big names in trouble during 2010.

The good news for brokers looking for alternative career options is that this turbulence has led to many high calibre individuals setting up their own businesses, many of which are proving highly successful as they set themselves up as an attractive alternative to the big boys. Exchange Street is currently acting on behalf of a number of new insurance brokers who have seen initial success lead to a necessity to quickly put together a team and create jobs for experienced commercial account handlers, managers, account executive jobs and technicians.

Insurers and brokers are being even more selective about who they take on, but rest assured that general insurance career opportunities are still out there for good quality insurance professionals! Feel free to get in touch with us at Exchange Street – we have the expertise to guide you through this tricky insurer and broker job market and towards those sectors where you can thrive.

About the Author

Online Marketing Executive – Eden Light

Litigation Analyst

litigation analyst
I am an Accounting major at the University of Maryland. Would Criminal Justice be a good dual degree?

The Criminal Justice degree wouldn’t require me to take any extra classes as I already have a large number of credits as a freshman. The reason I would want to double with this is that I would like to eventually break into forensic accounting years down the line or work in litigation support once I get my CPA. The other degrees I have some interest besides Criminal Justice are Finance, International Business, Economics, or Information Systems, but since I want to be an accountant and not work in IT or as a financial analyst why not do a second degree that is pretty easy to get and is what I am interested in?

If you want to be a forensic accountant, than yes becoming a CJ major would be ideal.

However, if you don’t have any CJ classes under your belt, you will need to take them, no matter how many credits you have as a freshman. Just FYI

Analyst Insight:Morgan Stanley Reiterated OW Rating Of Mosaic Company Following Mine Permit Review

In Re Salomon Analyst Metromedia Litig.: Rebuttable Presumption of Fraud-on-the-market Extended to Analysts

Introduction

In Douglas Millowitz v. Citigroup Global Markets et al (“In Re Salomon Analyst Metromedia Litigationâ€), 544 F.3d 474 (2nd Cir. 2008), the Second Circuit extended the fraud-on-the-market presumption of reliance, first set forth in Basic v. Levinson, 485 U.S. 224 (1988), to analyst reports. The Court also stated that defendants should be afforded the opportunity to rebut that presumption at the class certification stage in an effort to prevent certification. The opinion may make it harder to pursue class actions in some securities fraud cases.

Background

In re Salomon Analyst Metromedia Litigation, 544 F.3d 474 (2nd Cir. 2008),  (“Salomonâ€), the plaintiffs – an alleged class — were investors in Metromedia Fiber Network Inc. (“Metromediaâ€). They claimed that defendants Citigroup, Citicorp USA, Salomon Smith Barney, and Salomon’s research analyst Jack Grubman defrauded buyers and sellers of Metromedia stock through materially false and misleading statements in Grubman’s analyst reports, in violation of section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the SEC Rule 10b-5. Grubman’s reports, which included “Buy†recommendations, were overly optimistic about Metromedia’s potential and touted a $350 million Citicorp credit facility for Metromedia without disclosing problems and delays with the facility.

Plaintiffs alleged that Grubman made the false and misleading statements to attract business for Salomon from Metromedia, which would increase Grubman’s income. As Grubman was an influential analyst, his positive reports were able to drive up share prices.

The Southern District of New York had granted class certification, finding that the proposed class representatives met the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 23(a) requirements of numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy; it also determined that common questions of law or fact among class members predominated over individual class member questions, pursuant to Rule 23(b)(3).

The district court agreed with the plaintiffs that their reliance on the statements could be presumed under the fraud-on-the-market doctrine set forth in Basic v. Levinson, 485 U.S. 224 (1988) (discussed in detail below), and that the doctrine could be applied to analysts as well as issuer statements. The district court rejected the defendants’ argument that plaintiffs had to show materiality of the statements by showing that those statements actually “moved the market†– the district court determined that plaintiffs’ demonstration of a “substantial likelihood†that the analyst reports altered the total mix of information available to the public was sufficient.

The Fraud-on-the-market presumption and its application to analysts

In order to successfully pursue a 10b-5 claim, plaintiffs must prove “(1) a misstatement or omission (2) of a material fact (3) made with scienter (4) upon which the plaintiff relied (5) that proximately caused the plaintiff’s loss.” McDonald v. Alan Bush Brokerage Co., 863 F.2d 809, 814 (11th Cir.1989) (citation omitted). The fraud-on-the-market doctrine holds that when certain conditions are present, the element of reliance (the fourth element listed above) may be presumed.

The fraud-on-the-market presumption was established in the Basic case in recognition of the fact that “[t]he modern securities markets, literally involving millions of shares changing hands daily, differ from the face-to-face transactions contemplated by early fraud cases.†485 U.S. at 243-44. The Basic court held that plaintiffs in a securities fraud action are entitled to a presumption of reliance on the misleading statements where: (1) the security was traded in an open, impersonal, efficient market; (2) the alleged misrepresentations were publicly made; and (3) the misrepresentations were material. Id. at 244-47. The Basic court based this doctrine on the notion that “in an open and developed securities market, the price of a company’s stock is determined by the available material information regarding the company and its business.†Id. at 243.

The Basic court ruling certainly benefitted securities fraud plaintiffs, and purported classes in particular. Since class members have to prove that common questions of fact or law predominate to obtain certification, a presumption of reliance obviates the need to individually query each class member to ascertain a common claim of reliance. The presumed reliance makes it more likely that class certification is appropriate.

In Salomon, the district court held – and the Second Circuit agreed – that the fraud-on-the-market presumption set forth in Basic can be applied to more than merely issuer statements. Both courts rejected defendants’ argument that Basic was not applicable to analysts, noting that nothing in the Basic opinion suggested such a restriction. 544 F.3d at 481. The Second Circuit stated that “the premise of Basic is that, in an efficient market, share prices reflect all publicly available information, and, hence, any material misrepresentations†and therefore it “does not matter, for purposes of establishing entitlement to the presumption, whether the misinformation was transmitted by an issuer, an analyst, or anyone else.†Id. While the court did not go so far as to allow Basic to be applied to all speakers, it confirmed applicability of the doctrine to secondary actors such as analysts. Id. at 484, n.8.

Plaintiffs’ proof of materiality of the misrepresentation

Under the Basic doctrine, the plaintiffs still have to prove that the misrepresentation was “material†in order to establish the presumption of reliance. As noted above, the Salomon defendants argued that plaintiffs had to establish that the misrepresentation “moved the market†– had a measurable impact on the stock price – in order to prove materiality. This argument was rejected by both the district and circuit courts.

However, the Second Circuit set forth a new standard for proof of materiality that leaves open questions and conflict between Circuits. The Second Circuit stated that “plaintiffs must show that the statement is material (a prima facie showing will not suffice).†544 F.3d at 486, n.9. In other words, the Second Circuit would require more than a prima facie showing of materiality, but less than proof that the statement “moved the market.†The Second Circuit did not specify how much or how little evidence would be sufficient to meet this in-between standard, leaving that question open for future litigants.

This new standard articulated by the Second Circuit conflicts with the Fifth Circuit’s opinion in Oscar Private Equity Investments v. Allegiance Telecom Inc., 487 F.3d 261 (5th Cir. 2007). The Oscar court required the plaintiffs to prove “loss causation – that an alleged misstatement ‘actually moved the market’†before they could establish a presumption of reliance at the class certification stage. 487 F.3d at 265. The Oscar court required this level of proof “to tighten the requirements for plaintiffs seeking a presumption of reliance.†Id.

Although the Second Circuit was aware of the Oscar decision when it wrote the Salomon opinion, the Second Circuit did not acknowledge the conflict between its holding and Oscar in its opinion.

Defendants may rebut the presumption at the class certification stage

The fraud-on-the-market presumption is rebuttable. Defendants can rebut the elements that gave rise to the presumption by showing, “for example, that the market price was not affected by the alleged misstatements, other statements in the ‘sea of voices’ of market commentary were responsible for price discrepancies, or particular plaintiffs may not have relied on market price.†544 F.3d at 485. The question before the Second Circuit in Salomon, however, was when defendants can present their rebuttal evidence.

The district court had determined that it could not consider defendants’ rebuttal evidence prior to class certification because that would require the court to weigh merits-related evidence at the class certification stage, which was prohibited under Caridad v. Metro-North Commuter R.R., 191 F.3d 283 (2nd Cir. 1999). However, after the district court issued its opinion and before the appellate briefing, the Second Circuit decided In re Initial Public Offering Sec. Litig., 471 F.3d 24 (2d Cir. 2006), which overruled Caridad on this issue. In re IPO required a district court to make a “definitive assessment†that the Rule 23(b)(3) predominance requirement had been met, necessitating consideration defendants’ rebuttal arguments.

As a result, the court clarified that defendants should be able to present their rebuttal arguments at the class certification stage. As a result, the Second Circuit reversed and remanded the case to give defendants the opportunity to present evidence rebutting the Basic presumption prior to class certification.

Boutique Litigation Firm

boutique litigation firm

Ontario Business Lawyer’s Top Ten Sarah Palin Business Ideas for the Recession

Here is Ontario Business Lawyer Sebastian Gibson’s Top Ten:

1. Become a plumbers and try to ask candidates a question.

 

2. Become a late night talk show host and lampoon the dumb candidate.

 

3. Open a high end boutique and give the Republican Party a sale flyer – ten percent off if you buy $150,000 worth of women’s clothes and accessories.

 

4. Operate a tour guide business to take tourists to the best place in Alaska to see Russia.

 

5. Open a t-shirt shop with Sarah Palin quotes on the t-shirts.

 

6. Geography Tutors R Us.

 

7. Civics Tutors R Us.

 

8. Specialize in constructing bridges to nowhere.

 

9. Designer clothing.

 

10. Sarah Palin lookalikes for county fairs.

 

Now here is everything (well, almost everything) you need to know in business about environmental, international law, election and campaign law, consumer law, class actions, constitutional, internet, publishing, advertising, media, publicity and privacy rights, employment law, estate planning, wills, trusts, water law, agricultural, insurance law, bad faith, psychologist and psychotherapist defense, education law and child accidents.

You can also find all you need to know (well, mostly) in business about personal injury, car accidents, brain damage, wrongful deaths, business, real estate, landlord-tenant, homeowners association law, construction, patents, trademarks, corporations, entertainment law, advertising, copyrights, food and wine, and hotel and restaurant law and litigation by searching for those subjects and adding the words Ontario business lawyer or Ontario business attorney to your search terms and looking for other articles by Sebastian Gibson.

 

You can also learn more about any of these business areas of law and how we can assist you as Ontario business attorneys, or as lawyers in any city, by calling the Law Offices of R. Sebastian Gibson at any of the numbers which can be found on our website at http://www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com  .

 

1. Environmental and Toxic Tort Law in Ontario – With multi-billion dollar energy companies spending more money to confuse the public on the threat posed by global warming than on research into alternative forms of energy, it will take all of us to sort fact from fiction and solve the growing problem of global warming. An additional danger to all of us comes from exposure to toxic materials in our daily lives from tainted food, to contaminated ground water, to dangerous viruses in the public and in hospitals to lead and mercury poisoning. If you experience unusual symptoms that a doctor can’t explain, you may have been exposed to a toxic substance and have a toxic tort claim that should be evaluated by us or another qualified Ontario environmental attorney.

 

2. Ontario International, Shipping and Maritime Law – A Ontario international attorney with years of international legal education and experience such as you’ll find at our Ontario law firm, can provide you with a wealth of practical knowledge and the ability to find answers to your international law questions. It is to your advantage to also have a Ontario international lawyer working in cooperation with foreign counsel in other jurisdictions to ensure that the most cost-effective avenues are pursued to resolve your legal matter. However, many international matters can be resolved with letters between Ontario international lawyers and foreign lawyers, and international mediations and arbitrations can also be utilized. If you have been injured on a ship or an oil rig you have rights under the Jones Act to be compensated for your injuries, medical treatment, past and future wage loss and care.

 

3. Ontario Election and Campaign Finance Law – If you are considering running for political office or have already done so and are facing campaign finance legal issues, the time to hire a Ontario election attorney with election law knowledge is at the first possible opportunity before you get into hot water that can sink your campaign or put your political career into jeopardy.

 

4. Ontario Consumer Law and Class Actions – If you have paid for an item but have not received it, been promised an action or service that has not come to fruition or are considering ordering services or signing any type of agreement, the time to hire a Ontario consumer lawyer is immediately in order to avoid being scammed, or defrauded. A Ontario consumer attorney’s letter drafted forcefully but professionally will obtain the desired result, products or services in a good percentage of cases. Whether you ordered gold bars but did not receive them, were told that your car would be paid off when you traded it in on a new one or were promised that a pool would be completed in your back yard, a Ontario consumer attorney can and should be hired for a modest fee to write a letter on your behalf and demand the required action, products or services. If you think you are just one of many who have been scammed or defrauded in some way, you may have a class action.

 

5. Constitutional, Publishing and Publicity and Privacy Rights, Internet Law, Advertising and Media Law in Ontario – Defamation includes both libel and slander. Anyone in the media or publishing or broadcast world or with a web site is at risk of a lawsuit for claims of defamation or false advertising However, constitutional law questions also arise in civil rights discrimination cases, discrimination in employment and a wide variety of other legal matters. If you have been disenfranchised or your constitutional rights abused in any matter or if you have been accused of abusing the rights of others, contact a Ontario constitutional lawyer as soon as it occurs. If others seek to profit with the use of your name or image you also have a claim for damages.

 

6. Employment Law in Ontario – It may seem silly to think you should hire a Ontario employment attorney whenever you are considering firing an employee, but it has come to that. However, a consultation with a good Ontario employment law firm can provide you with the advice of how to handle your employee relations both immediately and in the future as you either seek to cut costs or get rid of a problematic employee. If you have been sued or threatened with a suit, or are being scammed by an employee, consult a Ontario employment lawyer immediately.

 

7. Ontario Estate Planning, Wills and Trusts – The current estate tax in 2008 affects only people who die with an estate in excess of two million dollars. In 2009, that amount will increase to three and a half million dollars and in 2010, the estate tax is repealed. That’s the good news. If, however, the estate tax repeal is not extended by 2011, the estate tax will kick in again. The worse news is that in 2011, if the estate tax repeal is not extended, the estate tax will kick in at one million dollars. The current federal estate tax rate is a whopping 47 percent. That stays the same in 2009. But other current provisions in the tax code change or end in 2010. In light of this, it is more important than ever to hire a Ontario estate planning lawyer to draft your will and evaluate the need for a living trust to avoid probate fees ensure your estate goes to the beneficiaries you want it to go to. If you don’t have a will or trust at death, the state will determine who gets your estate, but it will usually be your spouse and children, of if you have none, your closest relatives.

 

8. Water, Agricultural and Natural Resource Law in Ontario – It is hoped by American farmers and meat producers that the new Country of Origin Labeling Law taking effect in groceries will cause food shoppers to seek meat and produce from the U.S. over food items from other countries. But it is the water shortage in California that has California farmers faced with dire consequences. In 2008, the California Governor formed a Water Bank to stave off mandatory water rationing, but if California has another dry winter, or more fires that draw upon California’s precious water reserves, or if the state legislature does not address the state’s delta environmental problems and expand the state’s water works, with a bill that has been tied up while the legislators haggled over a budget, rationing across the state could become a reality. If you have a water or agricultural issue, the time to call a Ontario agricultural lawyer with knowledge in this areas is before the issue becomes critical.

 

9. Insurance Law, Bad Faith, Psychologist, Psychiatrist and Psychotherapist Defense in Ontario – As insurance companies feel the pain of the stock market crash and face the reality of the value of their own investments decreasing, we expect to see insurance companies delaying settlements, and flirting with violations of the insurance bad faith statutes. As the public becomes more and more depressed with the sinking stock market, loss of jobs, reduced income and less enjoyment out of life, we also see the likelihood of greater use of psychiatrists, psychologists and psychotherapists. When claims are made against these professionals without justification, our Ontario law firm stands ready to defend them

 

10. Ontario Education Law and Child Accidents – A recent court ruling in California has given temporary relief to parents homeschooling their children. However, we still expect further court rulings to make guidelines that will govern when or under what circumstances homeschooling of children will be permitted in California. Children, as any parent knows, can be injured any time, anywhere. What should not happen is any injury to a child that is the result of the negligence of another. To that end, our Ontario personal injury lawyers championed protection for children and convinced at least one court and encouraged other personal injury attorneys to do the same, to uphold a new tort for negligent endangerment of a child.

 

If you have a legal matter in Ontario, Rancho Cucamonga, Temecula, Murrieta, Riverside, San Bernardino, Moreno Valley, Fontana, Inland Empire, Rialto, Redlands, Hemet, Perris, Colton, San Bernardino County, Highland, Yucaipa, Banning, Riverside County, Big Bear, Lake Arrowhead or anywhere in the Inland Empire, our Ontario law firm has the knowledge and resources to be your Ontario Lawyers and your Ontario Attorneys. Be sure to hire a Coachella Valley law firm with experience in Personal Injury, Car Accidents, Drownings, Brain Damage, Catastrophic Injuries, Wrongful Death, Business, Real Estate and Landlord Tenant Law, Homeowner Association Law, Construction, Trademarks, Patents, Corporations, Entertainment, Sports Law, Marketing, Advertising, Media, and Copyright Law, and who will endeavor to ensure that your rights are properly represented.

 

Additionally, if you have a legal matter which involves Environmental and Toxic Tort Law, Litigation, International, Shipping and Maritime Law, Employment, Election and Campaign Finance Law, Consumer Law and Class Actions, Constitutional, Publishing, Publicity, Privacy Rights, Internet Law, Advertising and Media Law, Food and Wine Law, Hotel and Restaurant Law, Estate Planning, Wills and Trusts, Water, Agricultural and Natural Resource Law, Insurance Law, Bad Faith and Psychiatrist and Psychotherapist Defense, Education Law or a Child Accident in Ontario or anywhere in Southern California, call the Law Offices of R. Sebastian Gibson, or visit our website at http://www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com  and learn how a Ontario attorney from our offices can assist you.

CA Licensed Attorney looking for something other than litigation…?

So I went to law school, earned an LL.M in intellectual property law and passed the California bar exam. I recently tried litigation at a small boutique firm in Los Angeles and I’m miserable. Practicing law is just not what I thought it would be.

I’m still driven but I want to find a career that is more fulfilling and gives me a little more free time. I have a few friends who went the corporate route and make a good living but they do not work the insane soul crushing hours. I think you have to be a certain breed of individual to do litigation, and I don’t think that I’m that type of person.

So what else can I do as a licensed attorney in California?

Are you practicing IP litigation? What about practicing transactional IP law? IP is a world unto itself, but you might not want to work for the solely IP firms, some are sweatshops.

You don’t really explain what you don’t like about practicing law, so it’s hard to know what you would like doing. What did you think it would be, and how is it different? Could it be that particular firm? Do you like the people you work with? (Sometimes that makes all the difference.) Could it be the type of law you’re practicing? (Meaning entertainment, insurance, health care, real estate, bankruptcy, rather than litigation vs transactional.) My dh has practiced several types of law in biglaw firms and and was surprised to find out what type suits him best. He’s very happy. Have you looked at going in-house? The pay tends to be less, but the hours are more 9 to 5. You would likely find more transactional in-house positions than litigation.

Many people I know who went to law school never intended to practice law but went into different types of businesses. But they generally knew what type of business they were interested in when they decided to go to law school, like hotel, sports management, entertainment, banking, restaurant, real estate, etc. What do you like to do, what interests you?

Your law license may be an advantage in seeking employment for some positions, but chances are high you won’t make nearly as much unless it’s a commissioned type position and you’re good at it. Some employers might be concerned you’ll decide to leave to go back to law, or aren’t sure how the skills you learned in law school and by being an attorney, will benefit them. (So figure it out, how would your researching, writing, analytical, negotiating, etc skills benefit each specific employer.) Every other attorney in LA seems to be an aspiring screenwriter/producer. Many attorney recruiters are ex-attorneys, but there isn’t the market for that as there was several years ago when biglaw was hiring anyone. Some ex-attorneys teach high school or college. Sales if you’re a good salesperson. (Probably the most important skill to becoming a highly successful attorney, but too often the big management partners at firms don’t get that the rainmakers should be worshiped, or there is some sort of odd envy going on.)

Yep, you must be a certain type of person to be a litigator. Hard to tell by personality though. My dh is the most non-confrontational person there is, but he’s a biglaw litigation partner. He wins by being a fantastic writer, nice, and a likable person. (My teen son was just listening to something my dh was telling me and his mocking response was Ohhh I just had the best phone call today! Thrilling job, dad. lol But some attorneys really do like their jobs.)

Good luck in your job search. Maybe you can call your law school job office or a headhunter/recruiter to see if they have any ideas for you.

General Patent Licenses Key Cell Phone Patent DTL's personal communications devices (PCD) Suffern, NY —- General Patent Corporation, a leading licensing of patents and enforcement of the company, announced today on behalf of its subsidiary, Digital Technology Licensing LLC, that the mobile-DTL Patent Personal Communications Devices LLC licensed, a mobile phone manufacturers.

Litigation Secretary

litigation secretary

Public School Law & Educational Laws and Policies, Employment Law, Contracts, Due Process, Dr. W.A. Kritsonis

 

William Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Professor

 

Public School Law & Educational Laws and Policies

 

 

 

EMPLOYMENT

 

 

INTRODUCTION

 

          When we speak of employment, we find that the public school system is the largest employer in the state of Texas. The full scope of the employment relationship examines the constitutional concept of due process of law, the different employment arrangements that are available to public schools in Texas, the hiring and firing process, and the legal issues that arise in that context (Walsh, Kemerer, and Maniotis, 2005).

 

          For the purpose of this report, we will present ten cases as they relate to the different employment arrangements found in public education. The findings are intended to be informative and beneficial in terms of “at-will employeesâ€, “Non-Chapter 21 Contractsâ€, “probationary contractsâ€, “term contractsâ€, “continuing contractsâ€, and “third-party independent contractor.â€Â 

 

Case One

 

United States Court of Appeals,

Fifth Circuit.

 

Emilio MONTEZ, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

SOUTH ANTONIO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant-Appellee

No. 87 – 5501

                       

LITIGANTS

 

Plaintiffs-Appellants: Emilio Montez, et. al

 

Defendant-Appellee: SOUTH San Antonio INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT

 

BACKGROUND

 

In 1979 Montez was hired to teach in the Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps program. Montez has never been certified as a teacher by the responsible authorities of the State of Texas. His initial employment was validated on October 15, 1979 when the Texas Education Agency issued him an Emergency Teaching Permit. That permit expired on August 31, 1980 and was never reissued. Montez continued to work until September 1985 when he was notified of the anticipated termination of his employment. After two hearings before the school district authorities, Montez was discharged at the end of the 1985-86 school year.

 

FACTS

 

Emilio Montez appeals a summary judgment rejecting his claims under the Fifth and Fourteenth amendments and 42 U.S.C. series 1983. He alleges wrongful termination by the SAN ANTONIO ISD of his employment as an instructor in the JROTC program. The district court found no genuine issue of material fact and concluded that Montez had not been denied due process as relates to a claimed property interest.

 

The United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, at San Antonio, H. F. Garcia, J., granted summary judgment against instructor. Instructor appealed.

 

DECISION

 

In order to establish due process deprivation of property interest under the Fourteenth Amendment, plaintiff must establish that he had “legitimate claim of entitlement†to that interest. Montez who was hired to teach in the JROTC program was employed under “continuing contracts†after his emergency teaching permit expired.

 

When he was subsequently discharged by the school district, it was determined that he was not “teacherâ€, for purposes of Texas “tenure law†granting “teachers†legitimate claim of entitlement to, and protection under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The instructor never held required permanent teaching certificate, and any contract purporting to give instructor more than that allowed by Texas law was beyond the power of the school district and could not bestow property interest on instructor.

 

Montez contends that, even if his contracts were not valid, the circumstances surrounding his employment gave him property interest in his job because he relied on the words “continuing contractâ€, and he was never notified of the certificate requirement. This contention overlooks the Hornbook rubric that knowledge of the law is presumed.

 

Montez asserts estoppel, but that claim also founders. Estoppel cannot be used to create a contract right where none exists. Further, estoppel may be asserted only rarely against a governmental entity. Nor may Montez advance a claim of deprivation of a liberty interest. He had two hearings before the school authorities prior to his termination. Liberty interests are not implicated.

 

DICTA

 

The Court of Appeals, Politz, Circuit Judge, held that: (1) instructor was not “teacher†for purposes of Texas tenure law granting “teachers†Fourteenth Amendment interest in their jobs; (2) instructor failed to demonstrate facts sufficient to establish that circumstances surrounding his employment gave him “property†interest in his job; (3) instructor could not prevail on estoppel theory; and (4) instructor’s liberty interests were not implicated.

 

IMPLICATIONS

 

Montez’s brief pointedly focuses on what appears to be a gap in the Texas Education Code’s coverage as respects the treatment accorded JROTC instructors. Montez’s complaints should be addressed to the Texas legislature. It is not cognizable as a constitutional or civil rights claim in this forum.

 

 

Case Two

 

LITIGANTS

 

United States District Court, N. D. Texas, Dallas Division.

                             Chris BARBRE (Plaintiff)

                                      V.

GARLAND INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, the Board of Trustees of the Garland Independent School District, Doug Butler, Charles Cooper, Ronnie Rogers, R. E. Dodson, Harry Hill, Jim Kennedy and Darwin Morris, Eli Douglas, Charles Price and W. E. Peters (Defendants)

No. CA 3 – 77 – 0187 – C

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

The plaintiff, Chris Barbre, a former untenured teacher’s aide at Garland Independent School District, brings her main claim under 42 U.S.C. series 1983, and under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, alleging that her employment was not renewed because of her protected First Amendment speech.  The plaintiff also brings procedural due process claims under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, and under 42 U.S.C. series 1981.

 

The individual defendants, all of them officials of the Garland Independent School District, are sued individually and in their official capacities. The plaintiff seeks reinstatement, back wages, actual and exemplary damages and attorney’s fees and costs. In addition, the plaintiff seeks to have “all references to her alleged ‘disloyalty’, termination and non-renewal,†expunged from her employment records.

 

FACTS

 

Former untenured teacher’s aide’s speech at school board meeting was not protected by First Amendment, where nature of aide’s communications related to immediate terms and conditions of her employment, and only tangentially to matters of public concern, aide’s communications raised questions of maintaining either discipline by immediate superiors or harmony among co-workers, aide’s relationship with superior was such that certain forms of public criticism of him by her would seriously undermine effectiveness of working relationship between them, aide’s speech impeded proper performance of her daily duties, and aide could have achieved her purposes in less disruptive ways.

 

DECISION

 

Contention of former teacher’s aide that she was terminated without procedural due process provided no basis for relief. There was no basis to hold that there was any property interest in aide’s employment contract, so as to entitle her to procedural safeguards, because she did not have any type of tenure.

Reasons for termination or non-renewal of a public employee  that are not made public cannot form basis of claim that a due process “liberty†interest has been impaired, so as to entitle public employee to procedural safeguards.

 

A public employee does not have a claim under Fourteenth Amendment denial of a hearing on his non-renewal, when disclosure of his employment file would amount to stigmatization, unless he asserts that report in files is substantially false and thus deprives him of protected liberty interest.

 

After considering all the evidence presented at trial, the pleadings, briefs and oral argument of counsel, the Court concludes that plaintiff fails to establish any violation of the U.S. Constitution or federal statutory law by the School District or its officials. The First Amendment claim, although plausible, does not succeed on the facts of this case, nor on applicable law. Therefore, the Court must deny plaintiff all requested relief.

 

DICTA

 

The District Court, William M. Taylor, J., held that: (1) under circumstances, aide’s speech at school board meeting was not protected by First Amendment, and (2) even if aide’s speech before and during school board meeting was protected by First Amendment, and even though such speech was a motivating factor in her non-renewal, her insubordination, subsequent to board meeting, was a valid and separate explanation for her non-renewal apart from any of her prior expressions.

 

IMPLICATIONS

 

The First Amendment requires striking a balance between interests of teacher, as a citizen, in commenting upon matters of public concern and interest of state, as an employer, in promoting efficiency of public services it performs through its employees. Unless such balance favors state, it should not be permitted to punish a teacher for truthful speech, or for false speech made without malice or reckless disregard of truth.

 

 

   Case Three

 

LITIGANTS

 

United States Court of Appeals,

Fifth Circuit.

James W. Russell, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

EL PASO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT

et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 76-1836

 

BACKGROUND

 

A teacher, the plaintiff, whose employment contract was not renewed, filed this action alleging infringement of constitutionally protected rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. series 1983 (1970). The district court dismissed the case on the pleadings because of the plaintiff’s failure (1) to exhaust his administrative remedies under Texas state law, and (2) to raise a substantial federal question. The United States District Court for the Western District of Texas at El Paso, William S. Sessions, J., dismissed the case on the pleadings and teacher appealed.

 

FACTS

 

     The parties to this appeal differ as to what is the applicable Texas law governing appellant’s employment contract with the El Paso District. Under Section 13.104 of the Texas Education Code (1972), the school board’s decision not to renew Russell’s contract would be “final and nonappealable.†Russell contends that this is the applicable statute. For that to be the case, however, it must be shown that the school board in question had adopted the tenure plan contained in Chapter 13 of the Education Code.  The contract in question was executed on August 24, 1973. It was not until December 13, 1973 that the Board of Trustees of the School District adopted the tenure plan. We see no reason to apply retroactively the terms of the tenure plan to an employment contract already in existence.

    

With regard to the substantiality of the federal question presented by Russell, it is important to note that the contract under which he was employed was for one year. More importantly, this was his first year of employment with the school district.

    

Similarly, there was no impermissible denial of a liberty interest. “Where a person’s good name, reputation, honor or integrity, is at stake because of what the government is doing to him, notice and an opportunity to be heard are essential.†Russell requested, and was given a full and fair hearing on this matter.

 

DECISION

 

Teacher employed for one year did not have a reasonable expectation of reemployment after the first year of employment. The teacher whose employment contract was not renewed and who requested and was given a full and fair hearing sustained no impermissible denial of liberty interest.

 

DICTA

 

The Court of Appeals, Gewin, Circuit Judge, held that terms of tenure plan adopted subsequent to execution of teacher’s contract would not be applied retroactively and adoption of the plan did not render applicable section of Education Code under which board’s decision not to renew teacher’s contract would be final and nonappealable. Teacher was required to exhaust administrative remedies; that teacher employed for one year had no reasonable expectation of reemployment; and that there was no impermissible denial of liberty interest.

 

IMPLICATIONS

 

The federal court is not the appropriate forum in which to review the multitude of personnel decisions that are made daily by public agencies. We must accept the harsh fact that numerous individual mistakes are inevitable in the day-to-day administration of our affairs. The United States Constitution cannot be feasibly construed to require federal judicial review for every such error. In the absence of any claim that the public employer was motivated by a desire to curtail or to penalize the exercise of an employee’s constitutionally protected rights, we must presume that official action was regular, and, if erroneous, can best be corrected in other ways. The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is not a guarantee against incorrect or ill-advised personnel decisions.

 

 

    Case Four

 

LITIGANTS

 

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas,

Corpus Christi.

Reynaldo RUIZ, Appellant,

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

No. 1102

 

BACKGROUND

 

Reynaldo Ruiz was elected Justice of the Peace for Precinct 3, Place 2 in Hidalgo County, Texas, for a second term in November 1974 and has been discharging his duties as Justice of Peace since January 1, 1975. Ruiz has also been employed in a teaching capacity as ‘Coordinator of the Cooperative Part Time Training Program’ for the La Joya Independent School District, a job he has held since 1967. In September of 1975, the Hidalgo County Auditor and Treasurer, upon advice of the County Criminal District Attorney, began withholding the appellant’s pay checks for his services as Justice of Peace.

 

 

FACTS

         

Appeal was taken from an order of the 92nd District Court, Hidalgo County, Paul A. Martineau, J., declaring that the appellant was not qualified to be paid compensation as a justice of the peace while he also maintained employment as a public school teacher.

 

DECISION

 

Provision of Constitution prohibiting any person from holding more than one office of emolument specifically excepts justice of peace from dual emolument  prohibitions, and teacher was an employee rather than an “officerâ€; thus, person employed in teaching capacity for independent school district and who also served as elected justice of  peace was eligible to receive compensation for both positions.

 

DICTA

 

The Court of Civil Appeals, Nye, C. J., held that the constitutional provision prohibiting persons from holding more than one office of emolument specifically excepted from its prohibitions the office of the justice of the peace; and that the separation of powers provision of the Constitution did not prevent appellant from receiving a salary and serving as both a public school teacher and a justice of the peace. Reversed and rendered.

 

IMPLICATIONS

 

Separation of powers provision of the State Constitution did not prevent public school teacher from also serving and receiving salary as justice of peace where such person, as teacher, was not exercising sovereign powers of State, and where there was no evidence that his activities and duties as public school teacher interfered in any way with his constitutional duties as justice of peace.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   Case Five

 

LITIGANTS

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

No. 01- 0557

 

Midland Judicial District Community Supervision and Corrections

Department, Petitioner

v.

Ruthie Ann Jones, Respondent

 

On Petition for Review from the

Court of Appeals for the Eight District of Texas

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

On July 30, 1993, the Midland Judicial District Community Supervision and Corrections Department (CSCD) informed Ruthie Ann Jones that she had been hired as a Pretrial Services Administrative Technician III. At that time she was given a memorandum that stated that she would start work on August 9, 1993. The memorandum also discussed her salary. She would receive a starting monthly gross pay of $1,558.00 in August; $14 would be added to her pay starting 1/1/94; another $13 increase effective 4/1/94; and she would have a monthly gross salary on 9/1/94. The salary figures were contingent upon her future performance evaluations and available county funding.

 

FACTS

 

In December 1993, Jones’ position was eliminated due to budget constraints. Jones filed suit against the CSCD, alleging wrongful termination and breach of employment contract. The trial court granted CSCD’s motion for summary judgment on the ground that Jones was an at-will employee. The court of appeals held that Jones’ employment was for a fixed term, reversed the trial court’s summary judgment, and remanded the case for trial.

 

DECISION

 

For well over a century, the general rule in this State, as in most jurisdictions, has been that absent a specific agreement to the contrary, employment may be terminated by the employer or the employee for good cause, bad cause or no cause at all.

The general statements indicating that Jones’ salary increases were contingent on “future performance evaluations and available county funding†do not indicate CSCD’s intent to be bound not to terminate her employment except under clearly specified circumstances. The court of appeals erred in concluding that the memo constituted a contract of employment for one year. The written form of CSCD’s general statements does not change the fact that they do not unequivocally indicate the required intent.

 

DICTA

 

“The issue in this case is whether the respondent’s employment with the petitioner was for a fixed term or at-will. Because we conclude that there was no fixed term of employment, we reverse the courts of appeal’s judgment and render judgment that the employee take nothing by her claims against the employer.

 

IMPLICATIONS

    

When a contract is made by the employer and the employee, the terms of employment have to be specific and clear and may not be subject to other interpretations in the future by either party.

 

Case Six

 

LITIGANTS

 

United States Court of Appeals,

Eight Circuit.

Frances FISHER, Appellee

v.

James SNYDER et al., Appellants

 

BACKGROUND

 

Mrs. Fisher, a middle-aged divorcee, was employed at the high school in Tyron, Nebraska from 1970 to 1972. Her married son, then 26 years old, lived and taught in the neighboring town of Stapleton, Nebraska. Mrs. Fisher lived alone in a one-bedroom apartment. On several occasions, young ladies, married couples, and young men who were friends of her son, visited Tyron. Because hotel and motel accommodations were generally sparse and unavailable in Tyron, Mrs. Fisher followed the advice of the secretary of the school board and allowed these guests to stay overnight at her apartment. Cliff Rowan, age 26, was a particularly frequent visitor. Rowan’s parents lived in California. He therefore, regularly visited Mrs. Fisher during his school vacation and at other times, and she referred to him as her second son.  In the spring of 1972, Rowan spent about a week in Tyron visiting school classes as a means of fulfilling certain of his college requirements. Mrs. Fisher made arrangements with school administrators for this visitation and it was reported in the local newspaper. Following Rowan’s visit, the school board notified Mrs. Fisher that her contract would not be renewed at the end of 1972 school year. At her request, pursuant to provisions of Nebraska law, the board afforded Mrs. Fisher a hearing relating to the notice of dismissal. Civil right action by school teacher whose contract was terminated because of alleged conduct unbecoming a teacher. The United States District Court for the District of Nebraska, Warren K. Urbom, Chief Judge, ordered reinstatement, and the board members appealed.

 

FACTS

         

Nebraska by statute requires that notice and a hearing be given non-tenured teachers who are to be terminated. The appellees concede that the school board, in dismissing Fisher, complied with the statute, and its judgment, therefore, must be afforded judicial deference “so long as the board does not act unreasonably, arbitrarily, capriciously or unlawfully.â€

However, a high school teacher may successfully argue that his dismissal  was arbitrary and capricious if he can prove that each of the stated reasons  (underlying his dismissal) is trivial, or is unrelated to the educational process or to working relationships within the educational institution or is wholly unsupported by a basis in fact.

         

Thus, while a school board may legitimately inquire into the character and integrity of its teachers, it must be certain that it does not arbitrarily or capriciously dismiss a teacher based on unsupported conclusions drawn from such inquiries.

 

DECISION

 

That middle-aged divorced  high school teacher, who inquired of school board’s secretary and was advised to keep guests in her one bedroom apartment because other accommodations were limited, had overnight guests did not provide basis in fact for inference by school board of rural Nebraska county district that there was strong potential for sexual misconduct. Thus, inference that teacher’s activity was social misbehavior not conducive to maintenance of integrity of school system was arbitrary and capricious and was an impermissible reason for terminating employment.

 

 

 

DICTA

 

The Court of Appeals, Bright, Circuit Judge, held that fact that middle-aged divorced high school teacher, who inquired of school board’s secretary and was advised to keep guests in her one-bedroom apartment because other accommodations were limited, had overnight guests did not provide basis in fact for inference by school board of rural Nebraska county district that there was strong potential for sexual misconduct.

 

Thus, board’s inference that teacher’s activity was social misbehavior not conducive to maintenance of integrity of public school system was arbitrary and capricious and was an impermissible reason for terminating employment. Judgment affirmed.

                  

IMPLICATIONS

 

High school teacher’s  dismissal is arbitrary and capricious if each of stated reasons underlying dismissal is trivial, or is unrelated to educational process or to working relationships within educational institution or is wholly unsupported by a basis in fact.

    

Though school board may legitimately inquire into character and integrity of its teachers, it may not arbitrarily or capriciously dismiss teacher based on unsupported conclusions drawn from such inquiries.

     Case Seven

 

LITIGANTS

 

BOARD OF REGENTS OF STATE COLLEGES ET AL. – Appellant

v.

David ROTH – Appellee

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

408 U.S. 564 (1972)

 

BACKGROUND

In 1968, David Roth was hired for his first teaching job as assistant professor of political science at Wisconsin State University-Oshkosh. He was hired for a fixed term of one academic year. The notice of his faculty appointment specified that his employment would begin on September 1, 1968, and would end on June 30, 1969. Roth completed that term. But he was informed that he would not be rehired for the next academic year.

 

FACTS

David Roth had no tenure rights to continued employment. Under Wisconsin statutory law a state university teacher can acquire tenure as “permanent†employee only after four years of year-to-year employment. Having acquired tenure, a teacher is entitled to continued employment “during efficiency and good behavior.†A relatively new teacher without tenure, however, is under Wisconsin law entitled to nothing beyond his one-year appointment. There are no statutory or administrative standards defining eligibility for reemployment. State law thus clearly leaves the decision whether to rehire a non-tenured teacher for another year to the unfettered discretion of university officials.

         

Roth filed suit in court. He alleged that he was not rehired because of statements he made against the University’s administration and therefore it violated his right to freedom of speech. He also alleged that his right to procedural due process (Fourteenth Amendment) was violated when the University officials failed to give him reasons not to rehire him.

 

DECISION

 

The District Court granted summary judgment for Roth on the procedural issue, ordering the University officials to provide him with reasons and a hearing. The Court of Appeals, with one judge dissenting, affirmed this partial summary judgment. The only question presented to the Supreme Court at this stage of the case is whether Roth had a constitutional right to a statement of reasons and a hearing on the University’s decision not to rehire him for another year. We hold that he did not.

 

The Fourteenth Amendment does not require opportunity for a hearing prior to the non-renewal of a non-tenured state teacher’s contract, unless he can show that the non-renewal deprived him of an interest in “liberty†or that he had “property†interest in continued employment despite the lack of tenure or a formal contract. Here the non-retention of respondent, absent any charges against him or stigma or disability foreclosing other employment, is not tantamount to a deprivation of “liberty,†and the terms of respondent’s employment accorded him no “property†interest protected by procedural due process. The courts below therefore erred in granting summary judgment for the respondent on the procedural due process issue.

 

DICTA

 

“The only question presented to us at this stage in the case is whether the respondent had a constitutional right to a statement of reasons and a hearing on the University’s decision not to rehire him for another year. We hold that he did not.â€

         

“Our analysis of the respondent’s constitutional rights in this case in no way indicates a view that an opportunity for a hearing or a statement of reasons for non-retention would, or would not, be appropriate or wise in public colleges and universities. For it is a written Constitution that we apply. Our role is confined to interpretation of that Constitution.â€

 

“We must conclude that the summary judgment for the respondent should not have been granted, since the respondent has not shown that he was deprived of liberty or property protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The judgment of the Court of Appeals, accordingly, is reversed and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.â€

 

IMPLICATIONS

 

A contract is a property only during the term. In this case, Roth did not have a property right beyond its term. Due process is required during the contract or when the contract becomes the property of the employee.

 

 

     Case Eight

 

LITIGANTS

 

United States Court of Appeals,

Fifth Circuit.

John M. DENNIS, Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

S & S CONSOLIDATED RURAL HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT

et al., Defendants-Appellants

No. 76 – 3803

 

BACKGROUND

 

Suit was brought by the non-tenured public school teacher alleging that manner in which school decided not to renew his contract deprived him of liberty and property without due process in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas at Sherman, William Wayne Justice, J., found that allegations of a drinking problem subjected teacher to “badge of infamy†which violated his liberty interests and ordered administrative hearing, and appeal was taken.

 

In this appeal, S & S contends that the district court erred in holding that the actions of the school board violated any protected liberty interest. Significantly, S & S has not argued that either the March or the June, 1974, hearings afforded Dennis procedural due process, assuming the existence of a protected liberty interest. Neither party challenges the district court’s holding that Dennis had no property interest in continued employment with S & S.

 

FACTS

 

          Appellee John M. Dennis was hired by the Board of Trustees of the Sadler & Southmayd Consolidated Rural High School District (S&S) as a science teacher and high school principal for the 1968-1969 school year. Each year thereafter, through the 1972-1973 school year, S & S voted to renew Dennis’ contract. At the regular school board meeting in February, 1974, however, S & S voted not to renew the one year contract under which Dennis was employed. Although Dennis was given no advance notice of the Board’s February action or the reasons for it, he had previously been involved in several disputes with S & S concerning student discipline. In response to Dennis’ request, the S & S Board of Trustees met publicly in March, 1974, to discuss the non-renewal of Dennis’ contract. Prior to this meeting, Dennis was not given a list of charges against him, the reasons for his non-renewal, or the names of the persons who had made charges against him. At the meeting, the only reason for non-renewal given by the Board as a body was that the action was in “the best interest of the school.†However, individual board members cited their reasons for not renewing Dennis’ contract: “neglected his dutiesâ€; “was too inefficient to continue in his positionâ€; had “a drinking problem.†Dennis denied all allegations and later demanded a hearing before the Board in the hopes of clearing his name.

 The Board granted Dennis a hearing, which was held in public on June 3, 1974 and at which substantially the same allegations were made against Dennis as at the March meeting.

 

DECISION

 

The Court of Appeals, Simpson, Circuit Judge, held that: (1) teacher, who had no property interest in renewal of his contract, was nevertheless entitled to Fourteenth Amendment due process when school board subjected him to badge of infamy in course of refusing to renew his contract, but (2) teacher was only entitled to opportunity to “clear his name†and was not entitled to retention on school payroll or to back pay since his right to due process did not encompass right to continued employment. Affirmed in part, reversed in part.

         

 

 

 

 

DICTA

 

The critical issue raised by this appeal is whether a non-tenured public school teacher with no property interest in the renewal of his teaching contract is entitled to Fourteenth Amendment due process when the school board subjects him to a badge of infamy in the course of refusing to renew his contract. We hold that he is.

 

IMPLICATIONS

 

 

 

     Case Nine

 

LITIGANTS

 

Supreme Court of Texas.

Gary GROUNDS, Petitioner,

v.

TOLAR INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Respondent

 

BACKGROUND

 

Gary Grounds, a teacher and a head football coach with a losing record was fired by the Tolar Independent School District. He brought suit against the District for breach of contract and for an alleged violation of his civil rights. After lengthy litigation, the District recognized that it mistakenly failed to give him timely notice and a hearing before he was fired. After settling the breach of contract suit, the coach decided to litigate the tort action. The trial court found “zero†damages on the tort action and rendered judgment in favor of the District. The Court of Appeals affirmed.      

 

FACTS

 

Petitioner, Gary Grounds, was a teacher and a coach for the Tolar Independent School District (the District) during the 1983-84 school year. In February of 1984, the District notified Grounds that his one-year teaching contract would not be renewed. Grounds’ requests for an explanation of the nonrenewal and for a hearing were denied. Grounds appealed to the Commissioner of Education (the Commissioner) who ordered the District to renew Grounds’ contract for the 1984-85 school year.

 

The District declined to either abide by or appeal the Commissioner’s order. Grounds then sued the District, alleging both breach of his employment contract and violation of his right to procedural due process. Grounds claimed that the due process violation arose not from the District’s failure to renew his 1983-84 contract, but solely from its refusal to provide him with its reasons for nonrenewal of his contract and a hearing. The parties eventually settled the contract claim, expressly reserving the due process claim for judicial determination, including Grounds’ request for damages and attorneys’ fees.

 

After a bench trial, the district court concluded that even if Grounds established a due process violation, he sustained no damages as a result. The trial court, accordingly, rendered judgment that Grounds take nothing. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment but did so because it concluded that the TCNA does not create a property interest in term contract renewal. As a result, the appellate court did not reach Grounds’ complaint that the trial court’s failure to award damages and attorney’s fees was against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence.

 

DECISION

 

Public school teacher whose term contract was not renewed brought action against school district, alleging violation of due process. The 355th District Court, Hood County, Dan B. Grissom, J., held for school district, and teacher appealed. The Court of Appeals, 827 S.W. 2d 10, affirmed and writ of error was sought. The Supreme Court, Cornyn, J., held that school district’s failure to provide reasons for nonrenewal, in violation of term contract Nonrenewal Act, violated teacher’s due process rights. Reversed and remanded.

                  

DICTA

In this case we consider whether the legislature conferred upon public school teachers in Texas a constitutionally protected property interest by virtue of the Term Contract Nonrenewal Act (TCNA). For the reasons set out below, we hold that the legislature did grant teachers a property interest. We, therefore, reverse the court of appeals’ judgment and remand this case to that court for consideration of points of error relating to damages and attorney’s fees not previously addressed.

         

 

IMPLICATIONS

 

Term Contract Nonrenewal Act (TCNA) sufficiently limits school district’s discretion not to renew teacher’s contracts to create property interest in term contract renewal entitled to due process protection, and thus school district’s failure to provide reasons for nonrenewal, in violation of Act, violated teacher’s due process rights.

 

 

    Case Ten

 

LITIGANTS

 

Robert Johnson – Petitioner

v.

HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT – Respondent

 

BACKGROUND AND FACTS

 

Robert Johnson’s continuing contract with Houston Independent School District (HISD) was terminated during the 2000-2001 school year. The reasons for Johnson’s termination were his excessive absences, failure to provide proper lesson plans and grade books.

         

Johnson appealed to the Commissioner of Education. His arguments were that the District’s decision to terminate his contract was not valid because of the lack of substantial evidence. He also argued that the problems regarding his unacceptable lesson plans and grade books could be remediated and the District failed to adopt a standard for excessive absences, when he was referring to his absence on the first day of school without proper notice or excuse.

         

Ample time was given to the petitioner to correct and improve his grading and lesson plans. Because this time frame was given to him, there was no right to remediation, which raised the level of good cause. The Commissioner defined excessive absences as “those absences for which leave under federal and state law or district policy is not properly invoked†which was constituted as good cause for his termination.

                  

                                                 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DECISION

 

Petitioner’s appeal is denied.

                            

DICTA

          .

“Good cause exists for the termination of Petitioner’s continuing contract. Petitioner’s appeal should be denied.â€

 

IMPLICATIONS

 

As a court reporter, where else can I use my skills for a new job?

I am currently a court reporter and want to get out of the field? Does anyone know of another career in which my skills would be needed? I’m thinking maybe a medical transcriptionist or a litigation legal secretary? Does anyone know if I would qualifty?

Get out now – out of the field of Law, while you have the opportunity……………

Jobs in the field of Law are drying up FAST!! This is a SHRINKING vocational field. This is NOT a good field to invest time and/or money in. Many reasons. THE main reason?……..We simply have WAY TOO MANY Legal Professionals – we have a GLUT! (“Legal Professionals” includes, but is not limited to: Attorneys/Lawyers, Paralegals, Legal Assistants, Legal Secretaries, Bailiffs, Court Reporters, etc, etc)

Since there are so few jobs in the field of Law right now, new attorneys/lawyers are having to work “down” (as Paralegals, Legal Assistants, Legal Secretaries, Bailiffs, Court Reporters, etc, etc)

Watch out for the law schools - they will feed you a fairytale. They KNOW the job market/economy is SATURATED. Yet they continue to recruit and churn out even MORE graduates. The root of the problem is that we have way too many law schools than we need (and/or can really use).

Now if you want a JOB with some security, consider and look into the field of HEALTHCARE!

Good luck.

What do men see in foreign brides who can’t speak english well enough to get a job?

Litigation Boutique

litigation boutique

Palm Springs Business Attorney’s Top Ten Sarah Palin You Betcha Ways She’ll Help Deal With the Recession

Here is Palm Springs Business Attorney Sebastian Gibson’s Top Ten:

1. You Betcha, sign a $7 million book deal.

 

2. You Betcha, buy another snow mobile or two.

 

3. You Betcha, buy seven houses to keep up with McCain.

 

4. You Betcha, take over as a television talk show host as soon as this Alaska gig is over.

 

5. You Betcha, replace that Katie Couric and her confusing interview questioning.

 

6. You Betcha, turn those Alaskan consignment stores she used to shop at into high end boutiques.

 

7. You Betcha, spend, spend, spend.

 

8. You Betcha, drill, drill, drill.

 

9. You Betcha, offer to be Barack Obama’s personal shopping assistant.

 

10. You Betcha, open campaign offices for President in 2012.

 

Now here is everything (well, almost everything) you need in business about personal injury, car accidents, brain damage, wrongful deaths, business, real estate, landlord-tenant, homeowners association law, construction, patents, trademarks, corporations, entertainment law, advertising, copyrights, and litigation without making any serious legal missteps.

If you need to know more about business, environmental, international law, election and campaign law, consumer law, class actions, constitutional, internet, publishing, advertising, media, food and wine, hotel and restaurant law, estate planning, wills, trusts, water law, agricultural, insurance law, bad faith, psychologist and psychotherapist defense, education law or child accidents, you can find valuable information by searching for those subjects and adding the words Palm Springs business lawyer or Palm Springs business attorney to your search terms and looking for other articles by Sebastian Gibson.

 

You can also learn more about any of these business areas of law and how we can assist you as Palm Springs business attorneys, or as lawyers in any city, by calling the Law Offices of R. Sebastian Gibson at any of the numbers which can be found on our website at http://www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com .

 

1. Personal Injury, Car Accidents, Drowning Accidents, Brain Damage, Catastrophic Injuries and Wrongful Deaths in Palm Springs – If you’ve had a Palm Springs auto, motorcycle, truck, pedestrian, bicycle, bus, train, airplane or car accident of any kind, get the other driver’s information, take camera or cell phone pictures, call the police, get a report, seek medical treatment immediately, call us or another good Palm Springs personal injury lawyer, follow up with more medical treatment if you are still hurt, report the accident to your insurance agent, file a report with the DMV and don’t talk to anyone else or give a recorded statement until you talk with us. If you’ve lost a loved on in an accident, call us or another good Palm Springs personal injury lawyer immediately. If you’ve been bitten by a dog, get treatment, call animal control and then call us. If you or someone you know has come close to drowning, seek medical treatment immediately as death or serious injury can still occur hours later.

 

2. Palm Springs Business – Put everything in writing and preferably with our help or the help of another good Palm Springs business lawyer. Spend money only as you need to. A Palm Springs business attorney can tell you where to save costs and how to do it without risking liability. Limit your promises to employees and to customers. Buy insurance. Protect your intellectual property at the outset. Don’t disclose your inventions or any trade secrets to anyone without a non-disclosure agreement. Incorporate as soon as you are profitable. Get legal advice for problems or indications of pending lawsuits immediately. Keep all costs, including labor costs, to the bare minimum. Always use confidentiality agreements when disclosing valuable information and be careful what information you agree to receive. Tell customers they must pay in advance or on delivery. Do not agree to bill and be paid at a date after delivery. Otherwise you won’t be paid on a percentage of your products. Be wary of the potential for fraud by customers, business partners and employees.

 

3. Residential and Commercial Real Estate, Landlord Tenant Law, Mortgage Law and Homeowners Association Law in Palm Springs – Use a Palm Springs real estate lawyer who is also a Realtor, or a Realtor who is also a Palm Springs real estate attorney. Don’t buy or lease more than you need. Choose the right location. Choose the right mortgage. Don’t refinance if you think you may need to walk away from a home. Don’t buy more than you can afford. Check out the neighborhood carefully. Get a home inspection and a home warranty. Have a Palm Springs real estate lawyer look over the documents. Homeowner Associations are facing a host of problems stemming from the number of foreclosures. As fees are reduced by vacant homes and condos, projects must be trimmed back or delayed in order to save money. Some homeowner associations, who were already in trouble, may face additional problems in the future and both homeowners and their associations should consult with legal counsel to help resolve how to deal with such issues.

 

4. Construction in Palm Springs – With the construction industry in it’s biggest ever slump, down more than 90% from its peak in many areas, Palm Springs contractors need to shift their focus to energy free homes, apartment construction and to take advantage of contracts likely to be offered for bid under the new administration’s plan to create new jobs rebuilding the country’s infrastructure, construction of roads, bridges, the electrical grid and other utility projects. If you are dealing with contractors yourself, always use licensed contractors and have a Palm Springs construction lawyer look over your contracts. You can also investigate the contractor online to ensure he is licensed and insured and a Palm Springs construction attorney can do an additional investigation at little extra cost. Never pay a contractor the entire sum for a project at the start. Put all agreements in writing, including any changes.

 

5. Palm Springs Patents and Biotechnology – A patent should be applied for, for any new, and non-obvious process, or invention and to any new improvement of an invention at first opportunity. A patent is good for 20 years. Depending upon the complexity, most utility patent applications will cost between $8,000 and $12,000.00. A design patent can be applied for by a Palm Springs patent attorney, for the look of an item and is good for 14 years. A provisional patent can be applied for, good for one year at a cost of half of the usual utility patent cost but is only good for one year. If the inventor does not upgrade the provisional patent into a utility patent application within that period, usually for the cost of the remainder of the corresponding cost of a utility patent, the inventor loses his or her protection. A patent is pending once it has been applied for, and can be licensed, or sold outright. Without a patent, others can make and sell your invention with no compensation to you. Patent searches help the Palm Springs patent lawyer write an application around existing patents and cost an additional sum, usually under $1,000.00. Drawings must also be prepared for the patent application usually for under $500.00. A design patent can be sought for between $1,000 to $1,500 and a European design patent for between $2,000 to $2,500. Accelerated patent applications usually cost an additional 50% of normal patent applications. Foreign patent applications also require additional fees.

 

6. Palm Springs Trademarks – Trademark any original logos, designs, words, phrases, symbols or combinations that you use to identify your products or services as soon as possible. Call a Palm Springs trademark attorney as soon as anyone else’s trademark or service mark is so similar as to cause a likelihood of confusion in the public or if you receive a cease and desist letter from someone else accusing you of infringement. Trademark applications range from between $2,500 if there has not yet been any use of the trademark to $1,500 to apply for a trademark already in use. Therefore, to save money, create some products and advertising materials and apply for the trademark once they are ready to be sold and advertised.

 

7. Palm Springs Corporations – Never incorporate by yourself. Corporations will not protect you from liability if you do not follow corporate formalities correctly. Protect your intellectual property from the start with the help of a Palm Springs corporations attorney. Don’t borrow someone else’s employee handbook or fire problematic employees without legal advice. Don’t get investors without seeing one of our Palm Springs corporate attorneys. Cut costs to the bone. Use extra money to advertise, and sell in new markets. A Palm Springs corporations lawyer can provide you with advice as to which type of corporation or LLC to use for your business.

 

8. Entertainment Law, Sports Law, Marketing, Advertising, Media and Copyrights in Palm Springs – Whether you are a musician, an actor, a model, a writer, an athlete, a broadcaster or connected in any other way to the entertainment industry, contact us or another good Palm Springs entertainment attorney as soon as anyone gives you a contract to sign. Signing a bad contract can end your career before it’s ever begun. As soon as you have written any body of work, have it copyrighted. You can do this quite easily yourself, but if you need assistance or if someone else infringes your copyrighted work, you can then file suit against such a party.

 

9. Palm Springs Litigation – At the first sign that someone may sue you or your business, consult with a Palm Springs litigation attorney. Many times, a lawsuit can be forestalled before it has been filed or the matter resolved with letters between the litigation attorneys. If you are served with a lawsuit, hire a Palm Springs litigation lawyer like one from our firm who specializes in mediations and non-binding arbitrations so your litigation can be resolved at the soonest possible opportunity and limit your exposure to years of lawyer’s fees and costs as your case winds slowly through the courts.

 

10. Employment Law in Palm Springs – It may seem silly to think you should hire a Palm Springs employment attorney whenever you are considering firing an employee, but it has come to that. However, a consultation with a good Palm Springs employment law firm can provide you with the advice of how to handle your employee relations both immediately and in the future as you either seek to cut costs or get rid of a problematic employee. If you have been sued or threatened with a suit, or are being scammed by an employee, consult a Palm Springs employment lawyer immediately.

 

If you have a legal matter in Palm Springs, Palm Desert, Indio, Coachella, Rancho Mirage, La Quinta, Indian Wells, Cathedral City, Desert Hot Springs, Thermal, Yucca Valley, Joshua Tree, Twentynine Palms or anywhere in the Coachella Valley, our Palm Springs law firm has the knowledge and resources to be your Palm Springs Lawyers and your Palm Springs Attorneys. Be sure to hire a Coachella Valley law firm with experience in Personal Injury, Car Accidents, Drownings, Brain Damage, Catastrophic Injuries, Wrongful Death, Business, Real Estate and Landlord Tenant Law, Homeowner Association Law, Construction, Trademarks, Patents, Corporations, Entertainment, Sports Law, Marketing, Advertising, Media, and Copyright Law, and who will endeavor to ensure that your rights are properly represented.

 

Additionally, if you have a legal matter which involves Environmental and Toxic Tort Law, Litigation, International, Shipping and Maritime Law, Employment, Election and Campaign Finance Law, Consumer Law and Class Actions, Constitutional, Publishing, Publicity, Privacy Rights, Internet Law, Advertising and Media Law, Food and Wine Law, Hotel and Restaurant Law, Estate Planning, Wills and Trusts, Water, Agricultural and Natural Resource Law, Insurance Law, Bad Faith and Psychiatrist and Psychotherapist Defense, Education Law or a Child Accident in Palm Springs or anywhere in Southern California, call the Law Offices of R. Sebastian Gibson, or visit our website at http://www.SebastianGibsonLaw.com  and learn how a Palm Springs attorney from our offices can assist you.

Does anyone know a good place to search for jobs for patent attorneys?

I will be taking the patent bar in May (and hopefully passing it) and I would like to get an early start on my job search. I currently handle litigation work for a boutique maritime firm in lower Manhattan. I have a degree in microbiology and worked for Merck for two years after I graduated from undergrad. I’m looking in the New York area (NYC or Long Island). Any help would be greatly appreciated.

I’ve heard that Law Crossing is a good website as a job portal for attorneys. I don’t believe it is specific to patent attorneys, but I believe Law Crossing is fairly comprehensive on all legal jobs.

Litigation Assistant

litigation assistant

Ensuring a Successful Claim With a Motorcycle Accident Litigation Attorney

One of the most feared and tedious process that motorcycle accident claimants are wary of is the outcome of their cases once a court trial ensues. When filing a claim, there is no guarantee that the result of the case would go their way.

Any person claiming for damages will have these worries. For their best interest, they want nothing else than to win their cases without too much hassle and inconvenience.

Litigation is a legal process that can drag on for several months or even years. This could become too much of a burden for the claiming party.

Like any court proceedings, motorcycle litigation requires some degree of your commitment and trust. By hiring a competent and respectable motorcycle accident litigation attorney, you can heave a sigh of relief knowing that your case is in good hands. The only part that you will play in the process is to give your cooperation and support.

A big chunk of motorcycle accident litigations involves procedures that do not require your presence. However, there are three aspects of the process where you need to work hand in hand with your attorney. This includes your cooperation regarding the preparation of responses, deposition and deciding on the issue of settlement.

In general, motorcycle accident attorneys are aware that they need to quickly resolve your problem at the soonest possible time. They would see to it that they make the experience less stressful for you.

There are many reasons why motorcycle accident claims reach the litigation stage. Be reminded, though, that they are not related to the merits of your claim.

• Cases are filed because of the Statute of Limitations

• There is a need for further evaluation of your injuries

• A trial is needed for the other party to assess their case as well as study your claims

• Subpoenas needs to be issued so that the witnesses may be able to give appropriate testimonies

If you are afraid that litigation will make you lose your right to negotiate, your lawyer will make you understand that it will give you more reasons to file a case.

The truth of the matter is; settlement negotiations do not cease even when the trial starts. Both parties negotiate for an out of court settlement prior to the litigation.

Likewise, there are two reasons why most claims are being settled even before the start of trial. First, the other party may not have the budget to continue litigation. Second, the other party may have realized that settlement is more practical than litigation.

It is true that litigation can be stressful and costly. However, if that is the only way to claim what is rightfully yours, then you need to be prepared mentally and physically so that you can make the offenders pay for their wrongdoings.

Our personal injury defenders provide expert legal assistance for motorcycle accident victims in Los Angeles. For a free case evaluation, you may fill out our form found on our website.

MusclePharm Adds Former U.S. Assistant Surgeon General to Its Team as Chief Scientific Director
DENVER–(BUSINESS WIRE)–MusclePharm® Corporation (OTCBB:MSLP), a fast-growing nutritional supplement company with a proprietary formulation used in eight performance products, announced today that the former Assistant Surgeon General Dr. Roscoe M. Moore, Jr. joins MusclePharm as its Chief Scientific Director. “We are honored and excited that Dr. Roscoe M. Moore, Jr. is joining our Company as …