Happy Mother’s Day to all! I hope you all have a wonderful day!
In an article in the JD Journal a judge hearing the case regarding a McDonald’s in Dearborn has told an attorney to remove all references to the case from a Facebook page he created, according to The Detroit Free Press. The lawyer, Majed Moughni, has been barred from talking about a settlement reached last month with anyone who could be affected by it. The judge ordered that Moughni’s posts be replaced with copies of the settlement. He also has to forward the contact info and names of people who commented on the case or ‘Liked’ the post.
Attorneys who settled the suit with McDonald’s asked the judge to make sure the site was monitored so as to prevent false statements from getting to the public. The settlement was for $700,000 and it was between McDonald’s and multiple groups from the Dearborn Muslim community.
Moughni did not like the settlement, saying it was a backroom deal. He received at least 1,300 people in support of his claims and filed a legal complaint on January 25.
The complaint from Moughni was dismissed by Judge MacDonald on Thursday, saying that he took part in “deliberative and abusive conduct.” She said that copies of the settlement have to be “prominently placed on the Facebook page wall.” He complied and has not posted anything new on the site since posting the settlement copies.
This report by CBS Evening News, which was reported in April 2012, really opened my eyes. While I knew that the new photocopiers had hard drives, it never occurred to me that it retained all of the information copied or scanned forever. I will be asking when I get back to the office on Monday, if our copier company erases the hard drive before reselling the photocopier when they are returned to them.
One of our fellow paralegals, Chere Estrin, recently posted an interesting article on your weight and how it could be sabotaging your career in the legal field. It is a great article (which you can read in its entirety here) and I am sure that most of us (at least those of us who carry some extra pounds) have wondered about when we have applied for a job, interviewed and then were not hired, if it was because of our weight that lost us the job.
As quoted in Chere’s article:
- “Fat, lazy and unproductive” might be some of the stereotypes that ring true to employers who reject an obese applicant despite a stellar resume. Published last month in the International Journal of Obesity, a new study examined the role anti-fat prejudice plays in workplace hiring practices. The study results showed that obese women received more negative responses on leadership potential, predicted success, likelihood to select, salary, total employment rating and rank order of preference relative to other candidates.
- Fat is one of the last bastions of discrimination with very little done to curb prejudice or intolerance. Being overweight does not mean a person is unmotivated or lazy. Chances are if you made it into in a law firm environment, you are smart, good at your job and ambitious. In fact, because of excess weight, people may even be more driven than others.
While I am not looking for a new job, I am very happy where I am, thank you very much, I am giving this article some great thought. I am lucky to work for employers who did not discriminate when hiring me, despite my extra pounds. I wonder how some of you feel about this article and if you have felt, or have been told outright, that you were not hired/promoted because of your weight. Please feel free to share your thoughts on this.
Wow!! What a crazy, busy week it was at the office! We had two staff members out on the same day, one with a family member ill and the other with a raving toothache. That left us down to two staff members, (me being one of them) to grab the phones, prepare one attorney for trial and the other attorney for mediation. In between the preparation for both attorneys, there were of course other clients who needed assistance and a few opposing counsels with questions as well. Did I mention that I have discovery responses to prepare for review too? Oh yes, it made for a very fun week in this paralegals life.
It made for an interesting end of the week trying to catch up after the busy day too. It’s days like these that I appreciate where I work and the people I work with, always willing to assist and no matter what the task, do it without a thought about how their workload is going to be affected! I would like to give a big THANK YOU to MARY! I could not have done it this week without you!
Don’t get me wrong, I am not complaining, never! I love what I do and I have said this a million times. I wouldn’t trade it for any other career, but when you are in the craziness, and you feel like you are drowning in it, it can sometimes feel like it will never end. It does end, it did end, (at least for this week, lol) and I am happy to have a day to sit back and reflect on the past week and get ready for the next one!
I can’t believe it is 2013 and another year has flown by. This past year has been a busy one, personally and professionally. So much so, that it has kept me from blogging as often as I would like. I am going to change that, or at least give it my best ‘college try’ as they say, in this new year.
I became a great grandmother to a beautiful girl in March 2012, Lexi Jo. She brings laughter and happiness to all of our lives. I am blessed to have her in my life and enjoy watching her grow each day.
My family is healthy now, with my youngest son finally getting the insulin pump for his type 1 diabetes. Seems like we waited for this pump forever. This has helped to maintain his sugar levels and has prevented his having to be in intensive care on a monthly basis. I know he is happy about this and as his mother, I am thrilled that he no longer needs to be hospitalized frequently.
Professionally in 2012, the law office expanded by adding one more person to our cast of characters. She is young, smart and is a fast learner. She seems to be fitting in nicely with all of us. Our receptionist was promoted to assist me and begin using her paralegal skills. I know I am happy as can be with this change, and I know she is as well. I look forward to teaching her all I know and watching her grow in her new position. With these changes of course, come some challenges. Figuring out what job duties change and for whom, is one of the biggest challenges.
I hope that all of my paralegal friends are doing well in this new year and that 2013 brings us all happiness, not only personally, but professionally too. Happy New Year and I look forward to reconnecting with all of you and hopefully connecting with new paralegals as well!
In a strange, yet interesting article posted in the ABAJournal this week, a former California lawyer who gave up his law license more than a decade ago is facing 13 felony charges, accused of assuming a licensed attorney’s identity and practicing under the other lawyer’s name, including making multiple court appearances for clients in San Mateo County Superior Court.
John Hedderman, 52, was released on $50,000 bail after being charged with practicing law without a license and multiple charges of burglary and identity theft, reports the San Mateo County Times.
According to the article, Hedderman was previously convicted on 12 felony counts after passing himself off as another lawyer in Orange County years ago, the newspaper says. Articles published in 2008 in the Orange County Registerand the OC Weekly provide additional details.
In this latest case, Hedderman is accused of taking on the identity of attorney Donald Welch, when representing a client, Ruben Bisceglia, in a criminal case, making three court appearances on his behalf.
The Daily Journal says that Hedderman worked as a paralegal in the law office of the real Donald Welch, a Southern California practitioner.
You just have to wonder how Hedderman thought he would be able to get away with this!
I am always thrilled when someone in the paralegal field reposts one of my blogs, it is good to know that someone is out there reading my blog, other than family and friends of course. Thanks Legaco Express for making me feel appreciated!
Ouch! That has to hurt! Running for a judicial seat and then sanctioned and reported to the State Bar. This just happened to attorney Judy Conard, who practices in Lake County, California.
The First Appellate Court found the appeal to be frivolous and not only sanctioned Ms. Conard $6,000, but issued $15,000 in sanctions against her client as well.
Last October, Theodore Parfet, who lives in Michigan, appealed an order that he pay the attorney fees for Amy Tucker, the Respondent in the Family Law case, incurred while she opposed his motions to modify child custody, visitation and child support, according to the decision, which can be read here.
Ms. Conard said they appealed the amount of attorneys’ fees, which at nearly $80,000 were in excess of what the interim fees were to be. The three appellate justices found “the degree of objective frivolousness and delay is extremely high,” and that “pursuing a meritless appeal of an attorney fee award under the circumstances of this case flies in the face of the very purpose of the Family Code attorney fees statutes.” Further, they found that Conard had a professional responsibility not to pursue a frivolous appeal just because her client instructed her to do so, the justices said Conard violated her duties by facilitating the appeal “and by advancing arguments which exceed the bounds of both common sense and sound advocacy.”
The justices also stated “We join other courts in recognizing that the respondent is not theonly party damaged by a frivolous appeal.” ‘Others with bona fide disputes, as well as the taxpayers, are prejudiced by the wasteful diversion of an appellate court’s limited resources.’ The handling of this appeal has imposed a burden on this court.”