After the remarkable of 17 member honorable bench of Supreme Court of Pakistan. Some players of democracy card join by some opportunists are playing Democracy Card and Ethnic Card.

NRO case was in pending before emergency SC just gave a ruling on that . Most of the criticism is based on speculation and this is being done either deliberately or due to ignorance of the facts.

Some points to think for people who are due to ignorance falling into this propaganda:

-Yes,Musharraf needs to be trialed but who is going to invoke article 6. SC has provided solid grounds for that in 31st July 2009 judgment.

-SC has now called for the list of loan-settlements beneficiaries from banks and it will involve all.

-Karachi and Lahore land mafia cases are being opened.

-Recently Karachi City Government’s acres of land is taken back from Army control by SC.

-PPP has a great chance to bring the khakis to justice as well if they come out of the deals they have made.

-Missing persons case is reopened including Dr. Aafia case and the delay is being done by agencies and so called democratic government.

-Bugti case has been registered and in the courts.

And their numerous other good things which are happening .

Establishment is playing games and they will not stop this but it doesn’t mean we start falling into their trap.

Only thing which will stop them for another MERAI AZIZ HAM WATNON or something similar (which is being planned) is a strong judiciary and a good way to keep judiciary out the equation is to destroy its reputation.

Weaknesses are there and if any one has a problem with any judgment then why don’t they challenge it in the court or at least they should have defended it properly in the court if the whole drama is for NRO .

The criticism over creating a team of judges to supervise accountability cases is baseless as their are examples of similar for terrorism cases but no one criticize that. It’s the job of superior judiciary to see what is happening in lower courts. Another thing it will do is to ensure the proper trial without any delays like it has been the practice which was also criticized by many.

The other thing which is being propagated is why only Swiss cases are opened?

This is not the true picture Swiss cases were especially mentioned because it involves international courts otherwise the judgment says to open all the cases.

We need to slowly move towards a system of social-economic justice without losing our track.

These plutocrats (not democrats) are playing democracy card and ethnic card like khakis play national security card.

For once we need to go for across the board accountability without becoming a prey of illusions created by the players of National Security Card, Democracy Card, Shaheed Card, Ethnic Card, Sectarian or any other Card.

Asbestos is a mineral that is made of tough, elastic fiber and made flexible. Chemical or heat or have no effect on asbestos. It is widely used in many areas. However, this fiber can be easily inhaled or ingested. Exposure to asbestos may be of various diseases such as lung cancer, mesothelioma, pleural mesothelioma and cause cancer of the throat, mouth and throat, gastrointestinal tract and kidneys. Top lawyers have joined with the workers to fightthe safety of workers and against the devastating effects of asbestos.

Several health measures have been taken over by men of the dangers of asbestos involved. Asbestos is not banned, but the laws were made by workers who are exposed to the effects of asbestos. Asbestos lawyers to protect the rights and compensation for individuals affected. Harmful effects of asbestos have created awareness among manyCitizens.

Asbestos lawyers are skilled and qualified team of lawyers, representing the applicant. When examining a complaint, the people need here at the top lawyer handle the case well, because usually it is for companies to tender to be found. These companies may use the tactic to mislead the court or to cover some important information. Given that the legal definitions that include the harmful effects of asbestos-related disease, the patient mayto prove its case with the help of medical reports and conditions of employment with the company in default. Lawyers for asbestos help workers in the recovery of damages for medical expenses, loss of jobs, financial crunches and related sequelae of the disease.

Top Asbestos Lawyers who have developed original strategies, stubborn, and dynamic in the nation to protect their customers. These lawyers do not prepare any case in courtNoise, like a plea bargain with. This extensive preparation and reputation for outstanding classroom actually keep most cases for study and get better results.

Many online sites provide information about asbestos attorneys.

After you create or buy domains, while you’re waiting for someone to pay big bucks to take them off your hands, you can “park” them with a reputable company like SEDO and generate a steady cash flow. SEDO will, for free, set up a web page at your domain’s address, and populate it with advertising links. Every time someone clicks on a link, SEDO pays you.

The variety of domains that can generate several dollars per click is amazing. Domains like CancerDNAtest.com, WhoCanIScrew.com, InsuringYourPets.com, PuntaColonetLawyers.com, SwitchToSnus.com, DarkCircleRemedies.com, PAC10Stats.com, SwitchToSmokeless.com and GoingRougue.com are significant $$ producers. And they’re for sale. Submit your confidential offers to buy any of these domains as a “comment” on this blog.

Mesothelioma is a cancer that occurs primarily due to asbestos and develop in the chest, abdomen, or lungs. This is a rare disease and its symptoms tend to be very late in question. Lodging a complaint Mesothelioma is a lengthy process and then choosing a mesothelioma attorney whom you can trust and have a good relationship is very important. If someone is planning to launch a cause of mesothelioma meet, he mustwith a number of attorneys before the final decision. In general, it is a difficult task to choose a lawyer efficient mesothelioma.

A qualified mesothelioma lawyer can (in places such as bar associations, legal directories will be found (in most public libraries), Yellow Pages, and on the Internet, many companies have) their own websites.

And take a decision, where the names of some mesothelioma attorneys in your area werefound, the process may begin with a description of the legal question for any lawyer and ask if they can cope with the situation. It is advisable to make appointments with two or three different attorneys before the program for final selection.

The initial consultation is the opportunity for the client and the lawyer to know him. After hearing the case, the lawyer in a position for the rights of the customer, control, and its alternative courses of action. TheInitial consultation is the mesothelioma attorney can explain what you can do and how much it will cost. You should not hesitate to ask the lawyer experience in handling previous mesothelioma claims. If the decision was made to hire the attorney, the request can be made on the charge of a written agreement. It 'also important that every lawyer to ask for a list of references for further contacts.

After each initial consultation, someAnalysis is the lawyer, if he listens to customer reports can be done is the right knowledge about asbestos, are able to supply customers with a solid knowledge of alternatives, and if it is able to understand the range of possible outcomes associated for each measurement. More important, they saw the lawyer s' must be reliable.

What skills does a lawyer need in the current climate? Business-development coaching should put more emphasis on listening and doing than talking and telling.

By Jack Downton, The Influence Business

During the boom years, the business skills a law firm partner needs to succeed are not as apparent as when times get tough. When there is so much work around that it jumps into your lap, partners can get away with inadequate skills for driving business to the firm, for encouraging staff and enhancing enthusiasm. However, when the economy plummets and business shrinks, the very skills that should define a partner can no longer be ignored.

Many partners in all types of law firms have not known such difficult times. During their junior years, the business came from their partners, and when the times were good, bringing in business was much easier than it is now. Those who made partnership during the boom years may know little of the severe competition for work and the skills needed to secure clients.

For the most part, before becoming a partner, lawyers only think about their clients. But on transition to partner, they become leaders. And as leaders, the focus of their business changes from delivering work to getting it.

The jump from lawyer to partner is harder than it has been in years. One of the biggest problems facing partners is maintaining their firm’s market share and nurturing the next generation of leaders. In order to drive work to the firm and get the best from those around you, partners, juniors, and support staff all need to know what to do and how to do it. Better development in people leads to better skills at keeping clients and developing client leads.

Winning new business

It is often said that you don’t get a different outcome from continuing to do the same thing. In order to increase business driven to the firm, partners need to ‘get out more’ and pitch to potential clients – and offer existing clients new services.

To be able to spend the time needed on winning business, partners should delegate more of the day-to-day office tasks to other members of staff. This is often difficult for them, as it is hard to let go of the reins. Yet winning business is vital to any organisation, particularly during a downturn. For the most part, firms realise this and may well engage in an exercise to see what they need to do about it. Identifying the gap is relatively easy. Filling it, namely getting people to do what is needed, is another matter.

New staff

Training new staff to a level that you can delegate some of your tasks and responsibilities ensures there is support around when you need to devote time to business development. Partners need to make time to develop young talent, and despite the demands on your time, this will make the job much easier in the long run.

Training new staff doesn’t always have to be demanding on your time. It just takes a little thought and inclusion. When you visit a client, take a young lawyer with you, who will be able to observe and learn. Similarly, whenever you are on the phone to a client, let a trainee lawyer listen in. Make time to answer their questions. It establishes the foundations of a team without any spoon-feeding or micro-management, and leaves you free to devote time to bringing in the business.

People buy people

How can you be seen as someone prospects want to work with rather than the rivals who are equally capable? When people have a choice but all the competition is pretty much the same, what makes you stand out?

People buy people. Technical ability is a given, so trust, honesty, a feeling of respect and being good to work with all go towards legal buyers seeing you as someone they want to work with.

Lawyers need to remember that business pitches are not just an opportunity to sell services, and convince the buyers of your technical merit. Many lawyers miss out on winning new business because their pitches employ the wrong sales techniques and suggest a level of desperation. Businesses are becoming more selective of the firms they hire and competition for business is fierce. Some lawyers react to the pressure by jumping straight into selling and, as a result, they fail to address the individual needs and expectations of their prospective client.

Pitches should be made as simple as possible. Teams frequently try to communicate far too much information to prospects and ‘sell’. This often comes across as desperate. One mistake often made is striking too early in a pitch meeting with a ‘hard sell’: lawyers often pounce at the first sign of interest, when instead they should hold back and listen, and use what they hear to inform their next questions. An excellent guiding principle here is always to be interested before you attempt to be interesting.

Those pitching ought to find out more about what the prospect really wants. The result is a prospect who sees an interested team. The prospect learns, the team pitching learns and the team has built value into their proposition. Price, therefore, becomes less of an issue.

When coaching lawyers, the focus should be on getting them away from ‘telling’ and into ‘asking’. It is , but when they actually do it, they see for themselves how much more powerful it is. When trying to improve how people pitch or scope work, we set up a realistic scenario with an actor as the client, supported by one or two partners. The remaining participants play the legal team. Not only do they learn from a highly realistic situation, but so too do the partners sitting in the client team. They experience, probably for the first time, what it is like to be on the receiving end. After one such session, a partner actually said: “How on earth do we win anything if that’s how our prospective clients see us?”

Pitches aren’t just opportunities to close deals, but a chance to establish relationships. Therefore, the aim is to leave the prospect feeling really good about meeting you – and positive about doing business with you now or in the future.

Creative coaching

Confucius said: “I hear, I know. I see, I remember. I do, I understand.” Yet too much training is focused unevenly, favouring demonstration above participation. In the training that I have done over the years, I have found involving partners in simulations of business pitches to be the best way of giving them the space they need to practice and to highlight those areas they need to focus on.

This is practised surprisingly infrequently. When training and coaching in professional services, there is plenty of telling and not enough doing. Lawyers understand a well-researched and presented argument about what they should do in a particular situation. Getting them to do it for real, under pressure is another matter altogether, because it no longer involves logic, but emotions, and it challenges comfort zones – and here, just knowing what to do is, for the most part, not enough.

I have found the following process (with a professional actor as the other party) really can make an enormous difference to whether lawyers actually do what needs to be done, or just pay lip service and revert to the status quo ante:

· Step 1 – The lawyer tackles the problem cold with no prior guidance from the coach;

· Step 2 – The meeting is evaluated by the lawyer, other party (actor) and facilitator, reinforced by video review. They see, hear and accept what they actually did. We discuss what they did well and what they might do differently next time;

· Step 3 – We introduce new skills – not many, just some techniques and processes to guide them along the route;

· Step 4 – The meeting is run again, this time with the benefit of the evaluation and new skills;

· Step 5 – The meeting is evaluated again, with video. The lawyer sees the skills really work for him or her and has the confidence to use them for real and when under pressure.

The critical thing to remember in any coaching is that you can only change yourself. You cannot change other people. What you can do, though, is change the way other people react to you and you do this by changing your own behaviour. Hence the need to be comfortable with any new skills and make sure the behaviours really work for you.

In a recent ‘Master Class Presentation Skills’ programme with a Clifford Chance partner, which does not make use of an actor, we nevertheless followed this general process. When working with partners in top firms, they need to be comfortable that the process makes sense from the very outset and that the value to them is clear. Seeing for themselves the ‘before’ and ‘after’ video excerpts also convinces that the new skills really work for them. In this case, not only did the partner know what to do but they also had the confidence to do it for real.

Networking

After a long day at the office, it is tempting to simply head straight home. Yet all too often lawyers fail to appreciate good old-fashioned networking – particularly important during a recession.

Networking is an area that many find uncomfortable, so again, it is best addressed in a practical way that also needs to be as realistic as possible. Many trainers pitch one partner against another: one is asked to be himself and the other has to perform an unfamiliar role. Not only is the performance reminiscent of the worst imaginable ‘AmDram’, but as the ‘performer’ is not a behavioural specialist, it is almost impossible for that person to identify and encourage the right behaviours in the other.

A good actor, on the other hand, knows what to look for, and will respond authentically to what he or she gets from the other person.

Again, you can tell someone the principles of what to do, but getting them to do it in a real situation is a different matter. We achieve a lot of success in our programme by getting a partner to experience just this situation. They will be asked to go and introduce themselves to somebody (in reality an actor), and immediately find that they are being talked at and can’t get a word in edgeways. They come quickly to the conclusion that the other person is only interested in himself!

Some work we did with the magic-circle law firm Allen & Overy took just this line. Having explored what each person found uncomfortable, or where they lacked in confidence or in a specific skill, we created situations around those concerns and were then able to work them through in a safe environment. The actor responded solely to the behaviour of the other person, who was, in turn, able to discover what worked best and to try it in a safe environment. The result was a much greater feeling of confidence to make the most of networking opportunities as and when they arose.

When we first start working with people to improve their networking skills, we find there are many common misconceptions about what to do. The most common are:

· Hovering on the edge of a group is the best way to join in. In fact, the best way to get in to a group is to identify who is leading the conversation, make eye contact, smile and move in confidently and say something like: “Do you mind if I join you?” Be ready to contribute to the conversation;

· I should try to be really interesting. In fact, ‘being interesting’ frequently equates to being boring because you are talking about yourself the whole time. Be interested instead. Ask questions, listen well and encourage the other person to do the majority of the talking. In this way, they will feel they have had a good conversation with you and remember you in a positive light.

· I must try to sell my services. Wrong. Get to know the other person a bit as an individual before swinging into business. Here, the ability to get a conversation going is really useful and it helps to have one or two topics you can explore to find common ground. Don’t rush into business. People buy people.

Keeping clients

As well as winning business, partners need to make conscious efforts to retain clients. Do this by communicating as much as possible so they know what you do for them. As well as sending them reports, statements, and of course bills, find excuses to get in touch with them. Perhaps call them up and suggest a seminar they might be interested in, or forward them an article you think they be interested in reading.

One client of ours used to call his contacts in the in-house legal team and suggest he come over for a coffee. It was seldom anything formal but it just meant that he stayed on their radar so that when work was in the office, he was often at the front of their minds. The key thing here is to maintain the contact. The longer you leave it, the more difficult it becomes. It all goes some way to keeping a relationship going with your client, and as the recession continues to squeeze professional-service firms, that is more important than ever.

Jack Downton, a former Colonel in the Royal Marines, is the managing director of The Influence Business Ltd. He can be contacted at: jack.downton@theinfluencebusiness.com

Source http://www.mpmagazine.com/display.asp?articleid=1815E1FF-E4DF-4399-B1D0-DF0D7BD5D9F9

Related articles by Zemanta

• Survey: Law Firms Focused on Expertise That Can Boost Revenues (newswire.ca)
• Los Angeles Lawyers Overcome the Recession and Learn to Become Rainmakers (prweb.com)

International Lawyer Coach Blog

As I prepare to leave for the annual International Bar Association Convention in Madrid, I have been thinking about how (most) law firms still do not fully assess lawyers before hiring them. Most law firms simply rely on candidates’ law …

Create Your 2010 Marketing Plan in ONE month Ten Minutes per Day …

MarketYourLawPractice.com (MYLP) has served as an innovative new web-based marketing tool for lawyers. MYLP replicates ESQCoach Terrie Wheeler’s individual marketing coaching process for lawyers. Today, MYLP is helping lawyers across …

As lawyers who are fans of MU should know,when MU (when it was a listed company) became the target of a highly leveraged buy-out offer by the Glazers, the directors sought legal advice on their duties towards shareholders and MU.

They were advised that directors owe a duty to the company and not its individual shareholders. In many instances, the distinction is not significant, since what is good for the corporation will also benefit its shareholders. Maximising the return to shareholders (or creating “shareholder value”), in many cases, does not conflict with the interests of the company.

But there may be situations where the interests of the company and shareholders may conflict.

The interests of shareholders may lie in realizing a short-term gain on their investment, something which the directors may decide is not the in the interest of the company in the long term. For example, the debts that MU incurred in going private, might have prevented the club from buying the players MU needed to win trophies. It didn’t happen at MU; despite its debts MU has the wagga (dosh) to buy players. But the example of Liverpool FC shows that this fear was reasonable and legitimate.

The interests of majority shareholders may not also be the same as the interests of the company. Controlling shareholders may want the corporation to take certain action that may be in its interest, but not necessarily in the best interests of the corporation. Hedge funds, with a controlling stake, may want the company to pay a high dividend because they (the controlling shareholders) want to maximise the returns to their investors. But the company may need the cash to expand its production lines.

The correct answers to these kinds of issues depend very much on the facts of each situation: something the independent directors of Sin0-Environment are finding out the hard way.

And off we go again, counting down this here blog-site’s top ten video parts of the year:

At some point along the space-time continuum, fair-haired Australian gangler Luke Croker evolved into the bloodthirsty and hard-charging Neanderthal depicted in this heavy section from last summer’s online Deluxe catalog, which shook the internet with an impact along the same lines as the invention of fire or a woolly mammoth careening off a cliff. Watch as Croker sweeps the stringy mane from his eyes like so many sabre-tooth tiger entrails, bludgeoning gaps and ledges with a technical speedball combo a la Anthony Van Engelen or a “Third-Eye Vision” Reese Forbes. He’s got this gift for landing tricks smooth and at speed but not making them look inconsequential. The orange rainbow backside tailslide is particularly fun-looking and wouldn’t it be nice to race around town, backside 180′ing up curbs the hard way.

Many people are of the opinion that army under Kiyani is different than army under Musharraf. I have doubts and disagreements over this statement.

If Kiyani is somewhat different then he needs to come out of that filthy NRO-Musharraf Protection-War against humanity deal.

According to which:
1) PPP and liberal alliance got NRO.
2) Pervaiz Musharraf got protection from article 6 proceedings.

America and Army (Kiyani represented the army) were the brokers of the deal.

The main thing which made this deal possible was the commitment of both army and PPP to fight this war against humanity and peace.

Pak Army/ISI are not fighting against USA and allied forces , they are giving them safe passage for their 95% supplies for Afghanistan(An impression is being given by establishment that operations in tribal areas are not against our tribes but are against CIA backed groups). They are giving protection to their assets in Shamsi, Tarbaila Ghazi etc .Missing persons case is still running and still the facts are not presented to courts by army/agencies.

I can say the change in their behavior is coming when:

1) They decide to come out of this war.
2) Take their support to US and allies forces back.
3) Kiyani invokes army act 1952 against Musharraf for treason.
4) Army decides to leave their forceful control over Pakistan’s economic resources especially land.
5) Generals stop building their image and focus on national security and not on ways of capturing powers and political influence.

Our Quaid had a great visionary mind and we can still learn from what he said:

“I am persuaded to say this because during my talks with one or two very high-ranking officers I discovered that they did not know the implications of the Oath taken by the troops of Pakistan. Of course, an oath is only a matter of form; what are more important are the true spirit and the heart.” – Jinnah at Staff College Quetta 14th June 1948

And what oath they take currently:
[Article 244]

“(In the name of Allah, the most Beneficent, the most Merciful.)
I, ____________, do solemnly swear that I will bear true faith and allegiance to Pakistan and uphold the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan which embodies the will of the people, that I will not engage myself in any political activities whatsoever and that I will honestly and faithfully serve Pakistan in the Pakistan Army (or Navy or Air Force) as required by and under the law.”

If an unlawful command is given then constitution says not to obey it and in the oath our soldiers swear in the name of Allah to uphold the constitution.

The best thing army can do is to become a national army and stop acting like an occupied force which serves the motives of imperialist powers.

It didn’t take long for people to get ahold of Kim Jinwook, Hangeng’s lawyer, because Hangeng kept his phone off. Plus being in China helps him – as long as he hang out around the busier streets of Shanghai, no one will ever recognize him. Ever.  However, it’s been comfirmed that Hangeng did indeed submit the formal paperwork to terminate his contract. As for his activities with Super Junior, it’s unknown. It doesn’t take a brain surgeon though to figure out – if one were to terminate your contract with your group’s company, chances are, they will probably stop with the activities.

In any case, below is the translated version of the phone conversation held between the media and Hangeng’s lawyer.

[*] -It has been heard 2 types of litigation were filed today.
“It is confirmed that 2 litigations have been filed against the exclusive contract to not be valid and to terminate the contract. Simply put, the former says to terminate the exclusive contract and the latter is saying that until the exclusive contract is terminated, and until legal effect of the termination has taken place, (he) will be able to act in accordance of temporary activities at (his) own will.”

[*]-When did Hankyung prepare for this litigation?
“This is hard to answer. When the statement is released, it will be answered.”

[*]-The main point of this litigation is similar to Dong Bang Shin Ki 3 member’s exclusive contract?
“Majority speaking, it is almost similar. Hankyung’s contract is valid for 13 years, there are indeed many unfair clauses, so (he) decided to file the litigation.”

[*]-Has he been contacting the 3 members of DBSK?
“I am not very sure. Hankyung will state his own stand as soon as possible.”

[*]-Has the first date of the trial been decided?
“At the moment, not yet. The full situation has been sorted out properly. DBSK’s sequestration contract has been terminated, and the process of applying it to finishing the statement, takes about 2 months. Hankyung does not want to spend such a long time. DBSK’s situation has mediation in between, and has undergone trial a few times, so the time spent has been pretty long, we hope that Hankyung’s litigation will be solved as soon as possible.”

[*]-Did Hankyung think of continuing activities as part of Super Junior or will he leave the group?”
“That I am not too sure. As for Super Junior’s activities, up till now, there has been no decision made.”

[*]-It has been heard that (he) plans to have solo activities in China?
“I have not heard of that.”

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse declares opponents of fascist healthcare to be birthers, white supremacists, militia members, domestic terrorists, etc.. etc.. etc..

OpenSecrets details his biggest donors.

Law firms, banks, and investment houses.  The leaches of society you like to call lawyers are all over this guy due to the rampant corporate looting sure to accompany the healthcare bill in question.  No mention of tort reform anywhere in its 2000+ pages, all manner of new regulation to litigate against.  The leeches are salivating over it.

Anyone named Sheldon is a fascist tyrant and was born with a silver spoon rammed up his ass.  No god fearing real American would name their boy Sheldon.  Lets get real here.

Speaking of getting real, a few birthers, white supremacists, militia members, and other violent revolutionaries recently turned up in Washington to protest against the fascist actions of our glorious leaders:

Merry Christmas to all our existing and future clients

We also wish to say Happy New year to all our clients and wish them well in all their efforts in the New Year.

It has been another great year for ABP World Group Ltd. because of our clients and we’re hoping for many more.

We are always available via our 24h emergency phone. for more information, please visit our website www.abpworld.com

Skype: abpworld

MSN : abpworld@hotmail.com

With my company, when you’re moved from a temp/seasonal position into a permanent one (either full or part time), you’re eligible for benefits.  However, you only have 31 days to enroll in them from the day you’re converted to that permanent position. 

I was moved from a seasonal position into a permanent one on Oct. 31 or November 1, 2009.  However, I was not informed of this until November 19, 2009.  I tried to enroll on November 30, 2009, but my computer crashed and I coudn’t get the site back up.  On Dec. 5, I asked my HR mananger why I couldn’t enroll.  She responded that I only had until December 1 to enroll.  I asked her why I hadn’t been told sooner, and she said she didn’t know, but why didn’t I enroll right away?  She said she could talk to some people to see if it would be possible to let me enroll anyways.  This past weekend (on either Dec. 18-19), she had talked to someone at Allstate and they said it wasn’t possible. 

I have filed a complaint with my company’s national HR person.  My question lies in the fact should that not provide any results.  Can I take this matter to the state’s department of labor/attorney general/etc., or once I work with my national people and it doesn’t work out, I’m just SOL?

As CNN and others have reported, the marriage between Joh and Kate Gosselin has terminated in divorce, but does that mean the saga is over? Apparently, they have an agreement on custody.  They will have shared physical custody.  Kate will have primary at the marital residence and Jon will see the children on some sort of schedule. 

In Pennsylvania, a claim for custody involves a series of steps that can involve a mediation, followed by a conference, followed by an actual custody trial.  There is no right to trial by jury in Pennsylvania, constitutionally.  Hence, Pennsylvania the legislature can require that certain kinds of cases are always heard non-jury (by a judge), which is precisely the case in matters involving divorce, equitable distribution, custody, and support in Pennsylvania. 

Plus, custody orders are always modifiable, depending upon the best interest of the children.  Does this mean that Jon and Kate should be in court every few months to craft and re-craft their custody agreement to accommodate their changing lifestyles? 

Absolutely not. 

In every case, our firm recommends that the parties avoid court whenever possible, especially in the area of custody.  In order for parents to raise their children in a healthy environment, the parents need to learn to agree to a plan of cooperative management for their children.   This is especially true when parents are separated or divorced.  The courts are not supposed to be a third-party co-manager in daily disputes.  In fact, a judge will be quick to express his or her frustration with your case if it appears that you are seeking judicial intervention before genuinely trying to work out your issue. 

This does not mean you should never utilize the courts to sort out a significant dispute.  Even parties who negotiate a well written custody agreement may later come to find that their lives have changed beyond their control, which may require court intervention or a new agreement.  For example, one party may lose is job through no fault of his own and find that his best opportunity for new employment exists 1500 miles away from the children.  Obviously, this could dramatically impair that parent’s ability to follow a pre-existing agreement.  In this scenario and many others like it, the courthouse doors will remain open to conduct a relocation hearing, to evaluate how custody rights must change.   

There are a variety of other issues that call for judicial intervention, notwithstanding the existence of a well-drafted custody agreement.  For example, consider the issue of legal custody.  Unlike physical custody which involves the number of overnights each parent has with children, legal custody deals with each parents’ respective right to have a say in how the child is raised:  health care, education, religion, and other issues involve a choice by parents.  Here, even with an iron-clad custody agreement about custody, over time, there may be new issues that surface in the child’s life which require mutual input from each parent.  Even happy couples can disagree on these matters.   

So what does all this mean for Jon and Kate?

It means they have a long future ahead of them if they fail to communicate effectively.  The number of children they have, coupled with the public way in which they live their lives, will multiple the range of custody issues they face by eight fold.  For example, the direction of Jon’s career remains uncertain.  He was recently ordered to avoid making public appearances for money because, allegedly, it violates his contract with A&E.  Hence, perhaps even Jon does not know where he’ll be living or working in the future.  As for Kate, it is rumored that she will do her own reality show for A&E (without the kids).  It remains to be seen who will be spending time with these kids, which could impact custody issues.  Plus, the sheer number of kids will trigger issues about how best to care for them.  Again, the parents will need to agree…or go to court. 

For Jon and Kate, the problems have already begun to surface.

It has been reported that Jon objected to Kate doing the future show titled “Kate Plus Eight”  involving Kate and the children (without Jon).  Upon receiving this objection, A&E believed it was left with no choice but to honor Jon’s objection because he has parental rights.  A&E believes that the consent of both parents is needed for A&E to move forward with filming these children in the future.  So, already, we’re seeing a relationship between custodial rights and the respective careers of Jon, Kate, and the real stars of their monstrosity of a TV show:  the “Plus Eight.”  Allegedly, the custody agreement signed between Jon and Kate allows the parent with primary physical custody (Kate) to make decisions about the childrens’ involvement in taping episodes of the show.

Still, assuming that clause exists, it will not trump the “best interest of the children” standard.  Remember, custody agreements are always modifiable.  If one of the children so much as whispers that the show is interfering with his eduction, the show is gone - clause or no clause.  Hopefully, Jon and Kate will re-take control of their lives and come to stand for something other than making money from having outsiders film their childrens’ most precious moments.  Imagine the children growing up, going on dates, and coming to learn that their most personal private moments growing up are located on DVD collection of countless strangers from coast to coast.     

This saga could stop short of a total train wreck, but it will take some dramatic changes on the part of the parents.  First of all, the parents will need to start putting aside some money for the children (if they haven’t already) if it is true that the children have “worked” on the show for now compensation set aside specifically for them.  Plus, the parents will need to select careers that allow them to be parents first.  In short, the parents must learn to put the children first to the point where they become an example of how to make good decisions in the face of great difficulty. 

Unfortunately, for the public, if Jon and Kate make the changes that need to be made, the public may lose interest in them.  So far, the story line has been about seeing kids on TV or reading about the parents’ difficulties in the tabloids. If the children live private lives and the parents focus on just being parents, then the plot line might fizzle out.  So, ironically, if Jon and Kate finally do what they need to do, it may be too late for anyone to learn anything from it.  But at least the children have a chance to learn, and the parents will ultimately spend less time in court.

From the The Library of Congress Daily Digest, Saturday, December 19, 2009 and Sunday, December 20, 2009, approx 9:45, ET Sunday.

Saturday, December 19, 2009

Daily Digest

HIGHLIGHTS

Senate agreed to the motion to concur in the amendment of the House of Representatives to the amendment of the Senate to H.R. 3326, Department of Defense Appropriations Act.

Senate agreed to H.J. Res. 64, Continuing Resolution.

[Page: D1499]  GPO's PDF

Senate

Chamber Action

Routine Proceedings, pages S13471-13555

Measures Passed:

Continuing Resolution: Senate passed H.J. Res. 64, making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2010, clearing the measure for the President.

Page S13477

Measures Considered:

Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act–Agreement:Senate resumed consideration of H.R. 3590, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the first-time homebuyers credit in the case of members of the Armed Forces and certain other Federal employees, taking action on the following amendments proposed thereto:

Page S13477

Pending:
Reid Amendment No. 2786, in the nature of a substitute.

Page S13477

Reid Amendment No. 3276 (to Amendment No. 2786), of a perfecting nature.

Page S13477

Reid Amendment No. 3277 (to Amendment No. 3276), to change the enactment date.

Page S13478

Reid Amendment No. 3278 (to the language proposed to be stricken by Amendment No. 2786), to change the enactment date.

Page S13478

Reid Amendment No. 3279 (to Amendment No. 3278), to change the enactment date.

Page S13478

Reid Motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Finance, with instructions to report back forthwith, with Reid Amendment No. 3280, to change the enactment date.

Page S13478

Reid Amendment No. 3281 (to the instructions (Amendment No. 3280) of the motion to commit), to change the enactment date.

Page S13478

Reid Amendment No. 3282 (to Amendment No. 3281), to change the enactment date.

Page S13478

During consideration of this measure today, Senate took the following action: The motion to proceed to consideration of the bill, and the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to consideration of the bill, were rendered moot.

Page S 13473

A motion was entered to close further debate on Reid Amendment No. 3276 (to Amendment No. 2786) (listed above), and, in accordance with the provisions of Rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, a vote on cloture will occur on Monday, December 21, 2009.

Page S13477

A motion was entered to close further debate on Reid Amendment No. 2786 (listed above), and, in accordance with the provisions of Rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, a vote on cloture will occur on Monday, December 21, 2009.

Page S13477

A motion was entered to close further debate on the bill, and, in accordance with the provisions of Rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, a vote on cloture will occur on Monday, December 21, 2009.

Page S13477

A unanimous-consent-time agreement was reached providing for further consideration of the bill at approximately 1:00 p.m., on Sunday, December 20, 2009, with the time until 1:30 p.m. to be equally divided and controlled between the two Leaders; that beginning at 1:30 p.m., and until 11:30 p.m., there be alternating hour blocks of time, with the Republicans controlling the first hour block; that at 11:30 p.m., Senate then recess until 12:01 a.m., Monday, December 21, 2009; the time until 1:00 a.m. be equally divided and controlled between the two Leaders, or their designees; with the Majority Leader controlling the final 10 minutes prior to 1:00 a.m., and the Republican Leader controlling the 10 minutes immediately prior; that at 1:00 a.m., Senate vote on the motion to invoke cloture on Reid, and other manager’s amendment.

Page S13478D1500

House Messages:

Department of Defense Appropriations Act: By 88 yeas to 10 nays (Vote No. 384), Senate agreed to the motion to concur in the amendment of the House of Representatives to the amendment of the Senate to H.R. 3326, making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, after taking action on the following motions and amendments proposed thereto:
Rejected:

[Page: D1500]  GPO's PDF

Reid motion to concur in the amendment of the House to the amendment of the Senate with Amendment No. 3248 (to the House Amendment to the Senate Amendment), to change the enactment date. (By 63 yeas to 35 nays (Vote No. 382), Senate tabled the motion.)

Page S13476

During consideration of this measure today, Senate also took the following action:
Reid Amendment No. 3252 (to Reid amendment No. 3248), to change the enactment date, fell when Reid motion to concur in the amendment of the House to the amendment of the Senate with Amendment No. 3248 was tabled.

Page S13472

By 63 yeas to 35 nays (Vote No. 383), three-fifths of those Senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in the affirmative, Senate agreed to the motion to waive section 311(a)(2) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and all budget resolutions with respect to Reid motion to concur in the amendment of the House to the amendment of the Senate to the bill. Thus, the point of order raised was rendered moot.

Page S13476

Messages from the House:

Page S13489

Additional Cosponsors:

Page S13490

Amendments Submitted:

Page S13490

Record Votes: Three record votes were taken today. (Total–384)

Page S13476

Adjournment: Senate convened at 6:45 a.m. and adjourned at 5:34 p.m., until 1:00 p.m. on Sunday, December 20, 2009. (For Senate’s program, see the remarks of the Majority Leader in today’s Record on page S13555.)

Committee Meetings

(Committees not listed did not meet)

No committees meetings were filed.

House of Representatives

Chamber Action

Public Bills and Resolutions Introduced: 1 public bill, H.R. 3845; and 2 resolutions, and 2 H. Res. 923-924 were introduced.

Page H15506

Report Filed: A report was filed on Wednesday, December 16, 2009 as follows: H.R. 3845, to extend and modify authorities needed to combat terrorism and protect civil liberties, with an amendment (H. Rept. 111-382, Pt. 1).

Page H15506

Speaker: Read a letter from the Speaker wherein she appointed Representative Edwards (MD) to act as Speaker Pro Tempore for today.

Page H15505

Chaplain: The prayer was offered by the Guest Chaplain, Reverend Gene Hemrick, Washington Theological Union, Washington, DC.

Page H15506

Communication from the Sergeant-at-Arms: The House received a communication from Wilson Livingood, Sergeant-at-Arms, wherein he notified the House that the time previously appointed for the next meeting of the House was to be 6 p.m. on Saturday, December 19, 2009. Pursuant to clause 12(c) of rule I, the Sergeant-at-Arms notified the House that an imminent impairment of the place of reconvening at that time is due to the weather.

Page H15505

Senate Message: Message received from the Senate by the Clerk and subsequently presented to the House today appears on page 15506.

Quorum Calls–Votes: There were no Yea and Nay votes, and there were no Recorded votes. There were no quorum calls.

Adjournment: The House met at 12 noon and at 12:03 p.m. stands in recess until approximately 11:30 a.m. on Wednesday, December 23, 2009.

Committee Meetings

No committee meetings were held.

Joint Meetings

No joint committee meetings were held.

COMMITTEE MEETINGS FOR SUNDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2009

(Committee meetings are open unless otherwise indicated)

Senate

[Page: D1501]  GPO's PDF

No meetings/hearings scheduled.

House
No committee meetings are scheduled.

[Page: D1502]  GPO's PDF

Next Meeting of the SENATE
1:00 p.m., Sunday, December 20  
Senate Chamber

Program for Sunday: Senate will continue consideration of the H.R. 3590, Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act, with alternating hour blocks of time for debate until 11:30 p.m. Senate will then recess until 12:01 a.m., Monday, December 21, 2009, and vote on the motion to invoke cloture on Reid, and other manager’s amendment at 1:00 a.m., on Monday, December 21, 2009.

 http://thomas.loc.gov/j110/j110index1.html

Mesothelioma is a rare form of cancer death, but usually caused by exposure to asbestos or asbestos. The mesothelium is a thin membrane that covers the most important organs, and provides the moisture the organs need to move properly. Lubrication allows organs to move to the distribution of blood to the heart, or the infusion of oxygen into the lungs, or process food properly in the gastrointestinal tract.

There are different types of> Mesothelioma, but it is by far the most common pleural cavity and pulmonary hypertension associated with mesothelioma. As asbestos enters the body through the breath to penetrate the microscopic shards mesothelium of the lungs and lodge in the pleural delicate. The fragments irritate and set in the mesothelium, and over time is likely to develop into mesothelioma. Most cases of this cancer take decades before symptoms begin to appear, but for now occurring are too advanced fortreat.

Other types of mesothelioma is pericardial mesothelioma, which affects the lining around the stomach and have the digestive system, and pericardial mesothelioma, which contains the lining of the bag that touches the heart. Most mesothelioma prognoses are not positive, victims rarely survive more than five years after initial diagnosis, and most succumb between six and 12 months.

Many experts call mesothelioma "silent epidemic", because virtually every person in the United States has been exposed to asbestos at some point. Asbestos is naturally heat and flame resistant, flexible, durable, and has done everything from baby clothes to land on insulating ceramic brake soil. Many of the latest victims of mesothelioma have worked all or military installations, as asbestos was a critical part of shipbuilding and other large manufacturing sector, but> Mesothelioma can affect anyone of any age.

Part of the tragedy of mesothelioma is asbestos that many companies or industries established that refused to recognize the material itself, is dangerous. Cultures around the world knew of asbestos used for thousands of years, and even nations as soon as the Romans, that the persons who died of ore lung diseases. Even in 20 and 21 Century, these companies denied or covered up evidence that their unionProduct not only mesothelioma, but lung cancer and asbestosis, as well.

To address the growing concern for the legacy of asbestos, Senator Arlen Specter proposed a bill that the ability of victims of mesothelioma for legal settlements against the companies or industries that would separate monitor may be liable. The government expects thousands of new cases of mesothelioma and other asbestos-related illnesses in coming years, so that theBill establishes a $ 140 billion the United States, the confidence of the victims or their families be compensated. Presumably, this is the pressure on judges to relieve thousands of complaints but would be very difficult to limit the amount of financial restitution for the companies would owe their victims. Furthermore, it would prohibit many kinds of asbestos suits, and would be extended trial may suffer much more than the expected life of people suffering from this deadly disease.