Governor Christie on New Jersey Supreme Court’s Abbott Ruling – 844-292-1318 New Jersey legal aid

May 24, 2011: Governor Christie issued this statement regarding today’s Supreme Court’s Abbott District Ruling.

FULL TRANSCRIPT:

Today’s ruling by the State Supreme Court is disappointing, but not unexpected.

There are several reasons why I believe this decision represents everything that’s wrong with how Trenton has historically operated and everything that I am here fighting to change.

First, as a fundamental principle, I do not believe that it is the role of the State Supreme Court to determine what programs the State should and should not be funding, and to what amount.

The Court should not be dictating how taxpayer dollars are spent and prioritizing certain programs over others. The Supreme Court is not the Legislature; it should not dictate policy, it should not be in the business of discussing specific taxes to be raised and it should not have any business deciding how tax dollars are spent. A number of the members of the current Supreme Court agreed with that very position in today’s decision.

Those responsible for making decisions regarding how money is raised through taxes and how it is spent by government are those elected by the people and ultimately held accountable by the people.

Secondly, I believe the Court’s decision is based on a failed legal and educational theory that incorrectly reasons the key to establishing a thorough and efficient system of education is to throw more money at failing schools.

Let me be clear, I do believe funding education is critically important to New Jersey’s future. Even before today’s Court decision, we increased education aid by 0 million to every school district in this year’s proposed budget.

But, we must also acknowledge that money does not equal quality results. And there is now nearly 30 years of evidence that just throwing money at the problem is not the answer.

We should be getting better results with the taxpayer money we already spend and we aren’t which means changing the educational system goes beyond dollars and cents.

However, as Governor of New Jersey, I realize that regardless of my personal beliefs, I must comply with the New Jersey Constitution as interpreted by the New Jersey Supreme Court. In February, I submitted my budget to the Legislature for review and consideration. That is my constitutional obligation. Now the legislature has until June 30th to fulfill its constitutional obligation to pass a final budget.

In the light of the court’s ruling, it is now up to the Legislature to determine how the State is best able to fund the additional 0 million in aid to the Abbott districts specifically ordered in footnote 23 by the Court’s majority while also meeting the State’s other funding priorities as I proposed them. I have complete confidence that the Legislature understands its unique constitutional obligation to send a balance budget to me by June 30th. I am also confident that the Legislature understands its independent constitutional obligation to comply with the Supreme Court’s order in whatever budget they send to me for my consideration by the June 30th deadline.

I fully expect the Legislature will send me in a timely manner for my review and consideration a constitutionally balanced budget that includes how the Court’s order will be met.

My principles remain the same. New Jersey has some of the highest taxes in America. New Jerseyans are already incredibly overtaxed. Therefore, as I have repeatedly stated, I do not believe raising taxes is the answer. That has not changed.

I stand ready to execute my constitutional duties and consider what the Legislature submits as its final budget to me by June 30th.
Video Rating: / 5

Filing A Case in Small Claims Courts – 844-292-1318 Colorado legal aid

This video describes how to file a case in small claims court. It is brought to you by the Superior Court of California of Contra Costa and Orange Counties. The Legal Aid Society of Orange County hosts the Small Claims Advisory Program for the County of Orange. For more information, please visit www.ocsmallclaims.com or www.legal-aid.com.
Video Rating: / 5

While everyone would love for the relationship between a landlord and a tenant to be amicable, the unfortunate reality is that sometimes landlords must seek to evict tenants in order to maintain a safe and profitable property. Many landlords who are fed up with a tenant but are unaware of the proper legal process run the risk of committing an unlawful eviction, which can expose the landlord to significant liability and possible criminal charges.

An unlawful eviction is any form of eviction that is not performed in accordance with the established legal process. When people think of an unlawful eviction, the most obvious scenario that comes to mind involves the use or threat of physical force with the purpose of making the tenant leave. This can open the landlord up to criminal charges as well as civil liabilities, and like the rest of the examples we will discuss, is an inappropriate way to try to resolve a conflict with a tenant.

A lesser known type of unlawful eviction is when the landlord engages in a course of conduct which attempts to interfere with or disturb the comfort of the tenant in their use of the unit in order to encourage the tenant to leave. Examples of this include cutting off essential services like hot water or electricity in the hope of making the tenant’s stay in the unit unbearable. These types of evictions are known as “constructive evictions” since the tenant is not physically removed, but the tenant’s right to the undisturbed use and enjoyment of the premises has been violated. If the landlord withholds an essential service that they have a legal duty to provide, and thereby make the property uninhabitable, the tenant may terminate the lease and be entitled to seek damages.

An unlawful eviction can also exist when a landlord takes steps or threatens to take steps which would prevent the tenant from occupying the unit or attempting to force them to vacate, such as changing the locks on the tenant’s unit without providing them with a new key. However, this can also include tampering with the locks, removing the tenant’s door or removing their possessions from the unit.

If an unlawful eviction does occur, then the tenant may call the police and bring criminal charges against the landlord. It is also possible that the tenant can seek an order from the Court directing the landlord to allow the tenant to return to the premises. In some cases, the landlord may be liable for up to three times any damages suffered by the tenant.

The only way a landlord may lawfully evict a tenant is by going to court and obtaining a judgment and warrant of eviction to be executed by a local marshal’s office or another authorized enforcement officer.

James G. Dibbini & Associates, P.C. is well versed in the area of landlord and tenant law. If you have any questions about what you need to do as a landlord to secure the legal eviction of a tenant, or if you think you may have been the victim of an unlawful eviction, please visit our web site at www.dibbinilaw.com or contact our office to discuss your situation and schedule a meeting.

Our office also provides legal services in the areas of:
-Cooperative Apartment & Condo Representation
-Property Management Company Support and Representation
-Commercial & Residential Real Estate Closings
-Civil Litigation
-Landlord & Tenant Law
-General Business Law
-DHCR Representation
-Zoning Issues and Variances
-Housing and Building Code Violation Matters
Video Rating: / 5

Justice Denied: The Courts in Crisis? – 844-292-1318 Oregon legal aid

November 30, 2012
Speaker(s): Chief Justice Balmer ; Former Chief Justice De Muniz
What does a healthy state court system look like and how do we sustain one? Chief Justice Tom Balmer and retiring Justice Paul De Muniz will discuss the present and future of Oregon’s state courts. Between them, these speakers represent more than 30 years on the state’s appellate courts and another 30-plus years of private practice and government service. With an eye toward the 2013 legislative session, the justices will discuss the role of the courts and the risks of underfunding, the condition of the physical courts, progress toward electronic filing and record-keeping, court staffing, judicial and staff compensation, and funding for legal aid.

Chief Justice Thomas Balmer was elected by his colleagues as Oregon’s 43rd Chief Justice and began service on May 1, 2012. He was first appointed to the Supreme Court by Governor John Kitzhaber in 2001; he was elected in 2002 and re-elected in 2008. He practiced with the Portland law firm of Ater Wynne LLP and its predecessor firm, Lindsay, Hart, Neil & Weigler, and also served as Managing Partner. Chief Justice Balmer has participated in various international legal programs, including lecturing on judicial ethics in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, under the auspices of the United Nations; working with judges and schools on law-related education in Zagreb, Croatia; and speaking to judges and court administrators through the Russian-American Rule of Law Consortium.

The Honorable Paul J. De Muniz was elected to the Oregon Supreme Court in 2000 and served as the court’s Chief Justice and administrative head of the Oregon Judicial Department from January 2006 to May 2012. Justice De Muniz speaks frequently to both national and international audiences on the importance of maintaining independent state judiciaries, improving state court administration and the need for adequate state court funding. Prior to ascending to the bench, Justice De Muniz was in private practice for 13 years with the Salem, Oregon, law firm of Garrett, Seideman, Hemann, Robertson and De Muniz P.C., where he specialized in complex criminal and civil litigation, as well as appeals. Justice De Muniz’s work has been recognized with a number of state and national awards, including the Oregon Hispanic Bar Association’s Paul J. De Muniz Professionalism Award, and the Edwin J. Peterson Racial Reconcilliation Award.

http://www.cowgirlattorney.com Cowgirl Attorney Karen Thompson tells you how to figure out if you have drunk more than your legal limit of .08 and are at risk for a criminal DUI charge,

Got questions about dealing with a DUI charge? We got answers: http://cowgirlattorney.com

Oregon DUI Video http://cowgirlattorney.com

Twitter: http://twitter.com/#!cowgirlattorney
Video Rating: / 5