Attorneysecrets.com Website Review

tips, tricks and insight from a l.a. real estate & business lawyer filed a paternity and child support suit in california against the father living in connecticut.  the trial court denied his  man moved to quash service of summons based on lack of personal jurisdiction. the court of appeal reversed, holding  the man’s knowledge that the mother resided in california and the foreseeability that unprotected se* may lead to birth of a child were insufficient to establish the requisite minimum contacts. the appellate court explained that jurisdiction must be based upon facts showing a “substantial 1, nov. 26, 2018) 2018 cal. app. lexis 1067.)  the father seems to regularly travel to california on business trips, and he and the woman had se* on those trips including a prior pregnancy.  however,  the court dismissed these as insufficient contacts for the paternity issue.  for more salacious details, which may have influenced the court, look here …  continue reading what happens in vegas, stays. 61% of the time trial verdicts are usually the same as a pre-trial settlement offers. in an article by sanford gage, who is a very good mediator, 9,000 california settlement decisions were an*lyzed over 41 years comparing rejected pretrial settlement offers and actual trial results. sixty-one percent of the time, the plaintiffs obtained an award that. was the same or worse than the result the plaintiff would have achieved by accepting the defendant’s pretrial settlement offer. the. defendant decision error was only 24 percent, and where there was insurance, the error rate was only 21 percent. however, defendants are not perfect.  while the average cost of the “decision error” by plaintiffs were $43,100,  defendants suffered an average adverse outcome in the amount of $1.14 million! thus the expected cost of error is more than 20 times greater for the defendant in law school you are taught “if you are a defendant remove the case to the federal court”.  university of connecticut law professors