Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems
It was previously found by a jury that Apple had infringed five Optis wireless standard essential patents. Based on this initial verdict, the jury had awarded $506 million in damages. However, Apple called for a retrial on claims that the jury’s verdict was oversimplified. In an order in April, US District Court Judge Rodney Gilstrap upheld the liability finding but called for a new trial to reset the damages, thus abandoning the initial $506 million award.
Judge Gilstrap said that jurors should have considered fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms when deciding the case. However, the jury did not hear the term “FRAND” during the trial and were not presented with evidence demonstrating how the concept would affect a fair damages award.
Consequently, Apple will now pay $300 million to Optis in damages. However, in a statement to Bloomberg, the tech giant said: "We thank the jury for their time but are disappointed by the verdict and plan to appeal. Optis makes no products and its sole business is to sue companies using patents they accumulate. We will continue to defend against their attempts to extract unreasonable payments for patents they acquire."
Slip and fall accidents can take place at any time and anywhere. In some cases, a slip and fall accident may be caused by a person's own clumsiness or negligence. In other cases, the owner or manager of a property may be responsible for an accident.
If a person injures themselves due to the negligence of a business or homeowner, they will file an insurance claim with the owner’s insurance company. The amount of time it takes to receive a settlement will depend on when the insurance claim is filed, the amount of time it will take for an insurance company to get back to you with an offer, and whether or not you find that offer acceptable.
If you fall at a business or residence, you should look around and see what caused you to take a tumble. Was there anything lying in your path that you could not reasonably be expected to see? Were they performing maintenance and did they put up signs around the area to alert you to this fact? Was there a slippery substance on the floor, that they could have cleaned up in a reasonable amount of time?
You should go to the doctor as soon as you can even if you feel fine. There are some injuries that may take a long time to become apparent. You should save copies of every medical bill you can get, including any physical therapy or massages that you may need. You should also save the receipts for any prescription or non-prescription medicine that you may have taken. You will also need to get a letter from your employer stating the number of hours you have missed from work.
An insurance company in Kansas will have ten days to acknowledge your claim. This will include getting you any necessary paperwork. You should complete the forms as soon as you can because they will have 15 days after receiving those forms to accept or deny your claim.
If they deny your claim, you will want to talk to a personal injury attorney to discuss the possibility of a lawsuit. If they accept your claim, you should speak to an legal expert to find out if the amount of money they have offered you is high enough to accept. If the settlement amount is not high enough, you will want to hire an attorney to negotiate on your behalf. This may take anywhere from days to months.
If you need to file a personal injury lawsuit, you will have two years from the time of the injury to do so in Kansas. Once you file the suit, it can take anywhere from months or years to settle the case. Your attorney and the insurance company will continue to try and come to a fair settlement before going to court. It is only when they cannot come to a fair settlement that your case will go to trial, although this is very rare.
Collecting plenty of evidence and filling out paperwork in a timely fashion will always make your case go more smoothly and more swiftly.
Kyle Bachus, a founding partner of Bachus & Schanker LLC, explains how you can recover damages in a personal injury lawsuit.
A personal injury lawsuit is a significant undertaking. In order to recover financial compensation, you must do the right things. A personal injury lawyer is a trained professional that can represent you throughout the process. Of course, no one chooses to get injured. You’d rather not have the painful injuries, medical bills that are piling up and missed time from work that you can’t afford. However, getting a monetary payment can be what helps you reestablish your life. A personal injury attorney can assist you in taking the necessary steps to recover damages in a personal injury lawsuit.
Understanding how to receive compensation for an injury begins with understanding what a personal injury lawyer is. They are a licensed professional who is trained to file lawsuits on behalf of injured victims. They represent the victim or stand in their place throughout the case. A personal injury lawyer may undertake a variety of tasks, including evaluating the case for a legal strategy, filing court documents, speaking in court and pursuing evidence. They are a trained representative for their client who takes actions on their behalf in order to claim compensation after a personal injury accident.
Personal injury cases come in lots of different forms. Some of the types of personal injury cases that can occur are:
Compensation in personal injury cases may include any of the following that applies:
Personal injury attorneys can make the lawsuit process manageable and headache-free. They can take the lead in order to ensure that your documents are accurate and that they comply with the legal requirements. You’ll never talk to the insurance companies or the defence directly ever again because your attorney handles these conversations on your behalf.
To hire a lawyer for personal injury lawsuits, you contact attorneys from reputable law firms for an initial consultation. They answer all of your questions and explain how they can assist you in the claims process. If you hire the attorney, you sign a letter of understanding outlining how their representation works, so it’s clear for everyone. The goal is to help the client reach an outcome that gives them justice and the compensation that they deserve. With an attorney in hand, you’re ready to take the steps to recover damages in a personal injury lawsuit.
J. Kyle Bachus is one of the founding partners of the Colorado law firm of Bachus & Schanker, LLC. He provides exceptional advocacy and support to clients throughout the state and across the country who have serious, pressing, and complex legal issues. He is committed to the rights and safety of their community and the consumers who make up their community.
A 2020 lawsuit against a McDonald’s franchise based in Oakland, California claimed that managers of the fast-food restaurant had given employees coffee filters and dog diapers in place of proper face masks. The franchise has agreed to improve its safety precautions to protect employees from covid-19 to settle the lawsuit.
In the settlement, the Oakland franchise said it would provide employees with proper masks and gloves, paid sick leave, would maintain social distancing, and would regularly disinfect surfaces and require any employee with covid-19 symptoms to stay at home. On top of these measures, the franchise will also establish a worker safety committee which will require the franchise’s owner and managers to meet with employees each month to discuss how they can continue to maintain a safe workplace. Fight for $15 and the Union involved in the lawsuit said that the worker safety committee would be the first of its kind.
However, the Oakland franchise denied any wrongdoing and it remains unclear as to whether the settlement included a financial element. In a statement, Michael Smith, the Oakland franchise’s operator, said that the restaurant had started to implement the measures detailed in the settlement over a year ago. He went on to say that the franchise will continue to take all necessary steps to ensure that the sites remain as safe as possible.
On Wednesday, amid a surge of covid-19 cases in the country, McDonald’s said it will require all US office workers to be vaccinated.
New Balance also claims that Michael Kors’ Pippin and Olympia trainers evoke the design of its 574 trainers, infringing its trade-dress rights. The brand’s 574 trainers are its best-selling shoe model, with the brand projecting over 7 million sales of the shoe in 2021. A spokesperson for New Balance said that the suit was filed to protect the New Balance brand as well as its iconic “N” trademark and the reputation of its footwear.
In the complaint, New Balance states that it has displayed the letter “N” on its footwear for over four decades and owns federal trademarks covering the logo. The complaint also states that because the brand is known for its collaborations, there is an increased likelihood that consumers will wrongly believe that Michael Kors’ shoes are connected with New Balance.
Last year in Massachusetts, New Balance settled claims that global lifestyle brand Nautica infringed its “N” trademarks.
Law firms Slaughter and May have posted an autumn trainee retention score of 82%, while Clifford Chance has posted an autumn trainee retention score of 70%.
Slaughter and May have confirmed it will retain 37 of its 45 trainees due to qualify next month. 43 of the firm’s trainees decided to go through the application process, with 42 receiving an offer and 37 of these choosing to accept. Slaughter and May’s newly qualified lawyers will begin their careers on a salary of £100k.
Clifford Chance provides approximately 95 training contracts each year. From a qualifying cohort of 53, the firm has reported that 37 would be staying on in permanent roles. Clifford Chance made 42 offers, having received 47 applications. However, the firm’s result is down from its 88% spring score which saw Clifford Chance retain 38 of its 43 final seat trainees.
Following the news that the Ministry of Justice is seeking to increase probate fees for both professional and non-professional applicants in England and Wales, Louise Garrett, Associate at Hunters Law LLP, examines the criticisms that the proposals have received.
The 2019 proposals put forward by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) in respect of probate fees being increased depending on the value of the estate were met with fierce criticism. The headline figures were certainly dramatic with suggestions of fees reaching £6,000 for estates worth over £2,000,000. With this in mind, the recent consultation published by the MoJ might expect a more positive response due to its focus on all users paying the same fee for the same service.
The consultation, published on 8 July, proposes a flat fee of £273 for both professional and individual probate applications, with estates worth less than £5,000 continuing to be exempt. The objective is to remove the unjustified discrepancy between differing fees being charged for the same service. Currently, the fees for individual and professional applicants are £215 and £155 respectively.
The consultation seeks to bring the probate fee structure into alignment with HM Treasury’s Handbook Managing Public Money which states "different groups of customers should not be charged different amounts for a service costing the same". Indeed, with the emergence of a digital service now available for individual and professional applicants alike, the disparity between the costs of processing both types of applications are forced into the spotlight as the service arguably becomes more streamlined.
Criticism of the consultation so far would appear to be more focused on probate fees not being increased at all given the current delays. The Law Society of England and Wales says "plans to hike fees for probate applications are unwelcome particularly when grieving relatives are suffering because the service is still subject to significant delays" and The Telegraph reported over the weekend that "the plan has been criticised by Conservative backbenchers, who argue it penalises grieving relatives for what is already a poor service".
The consultation is open until 23 September 2021 and, subject to its outcome, if the new fee structure is introduced in early 2022, Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) will be under pressure to demonstrate that the probate service has substantially improved.
Probate practitioners will already be aware of the changes that have taken place over the last year or so with it now being a requirement for all applications, where there is a will, to be made online. Optimists might expect the ongoing improvements to the digital service to result in a more efficient application process for both professional and individual applicants. That said, any applicant will need to ensure they follow HMCTS guidance to give themselves the best chance of their matter being processed in a timely manner. For both types of applicant, the value of the estate will need to be reported and if Inheritance Tax (IHT) is due, submit an IHT account to HM Revenue & Customs 20 working days before applying for probate.
Whilst an individual applicant will still need to have the original death certificate or an interim death certificate for the deceased's estate, it is worth noting that the requirement to send a death certificate of any pre-deceased executors has ended for both individual and professional applicants.
Probate practitioners should be aware that improvements are being made to MyHMCTS. Users are being encouraged to check their MyHMCTS dashboard to either submit cases or read the guidance on deleting unsubmitted cases for those that are no longer valid. Any applications that are not submitted before 19 August will not be able to progress and a new application will need to be created.
You can compare the reviews of thousands of restaurants and the star rating of products on Amazon– yet there’s no standard way to compare the services of all UK law firms. Here, Bernadette Bennett, head of legal at Moneypenny shares why reviews are so valuable and how firms must avoid putting the cart before the horse.
To protect and grow client revenues and cater for the shifting demands of legal consumers – firms find themselves needing to put greater focus on the client experience. In a world where ‘shared experiences’ fill the internet – legal firms must acknowledge the power of the customer and their feedback – for the opportunities they create, and the risks they present.
Both the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) and Legal Services Board (LSB) are heavily invested in addressing this issue and looking at ways to empower consumers to engage with the market, help them make informed choices about the quality, cost and accessibility of providers and ensure easier access to legal services.
The drivers for this are almost certainly the shift in the way consumers expect to source a legal professional. The prevalence of digital channels is in part responsible – helped by Covid driving us all online – and we now expect the same level of experience, accessibility and choice from our professional partners, as we do the big brands we buy from. There’s less loyalty, more price sensitivity and greater choice from market disruptors – but limited comparative information on which legal consumers can make informed decisions.
Reviews provide proof. They provide transparency of quality, capability, price and its people. Reviews take some of the ‘unknowns’ out of purchasing decisions and make us feel informed – as if we have the inside track. They help us to compare, make an educated choice and put our trust in that decision. Despite reviews being prevalent across almost every other sector, reticence about their widespread use abounds in law firms. Concerns about the damage negative (and even fake) reviews could have on reputation and revenue, the parity and nature of metrics, the costs involved with review, collation and display as well as the role of regulators and DCTs, are all widely discussed. The move to actively encouraging reviews will represent an important step-change for legal firms. It marks a shift from legal firms being seen as untouchable, to becoming accessible, accountable and client-orientated.
As the LSB and SRA grapple with the specifics of how to support online reviews – it raises a more pertinent question for legal firms. Could they allay their concerns if they started to put greater focus on the customer experience?
Research from Lexis Nexis tells us that 80% of legal firms think their client care is excellent, yet only 40% of clients agree which would suggest that online reviews would not be as favourable as firms think. Legal firms should concern themselves with how they deliver excellent customer care – and importantly, if and when things go wrong, how they provide restitution to deliver the best outcome for everyone. Reviews are merely a record of that experience. To focus solely on those is to put the cart before the horse.
Increasing the likelihood of positive reviews relies on understanding the customer journey – from the first telephone call or email right through to case resolution. By looking at each client touch point in turn, as well as the timescales involved with case management, it is possible to identify where service excels (and you’ll get praise) and where there are problems that might escalate to partner level complaints and bad reviews.
SRA data from 2019/20 shows that delays (18%), failure to advise (13%) and excessive costs (12%) are the main sources of unhappy legal clients. Delays often manifest as waiting too long for a call back, insufficient proactive communication, lack of information and poor message taking – all issues which can be rectified easily when there is an appetite for improvement. Occupying the customers’ shoes will help legal firms to pre-empt the move to online reviews. Service quality is cited as one of the more ‘directly observable’ elements for customers by the LSB, so it will be commented on.
Accessibility is another holy grail the industry is searching for; the challenge is to ensure accessibility is geared to the client, rather than to the firm’s convenience. If clients need increasingly out-of-hours support, firms must follow suit and at present, 30% of firms don't offer call handling outside of the 9-5. No one expects their solicitor to be available 247 – but extended opening hours, out-of hours-message taking and greater use of digital comms channels such as websites, social media and live chat provide an effective way to meet changing expectations around accessibility and availability, and to ‘get ahead’ with improved customer care.
Answering questions is integral to customer care and improving accessibility. Many client questions stem from a lack of understanding or familiarity with the procurement of legal services. Acknowledging this and building it into marketing activities can help to take the ‘scare’ out of buying decisions. FAQs on websites, cost breakdowns, case studies, jargon busters and pop-up live chat windows to answer queries there and then, all achieve this goal and show customers that you are willing to help. If legal firms accept their role in educating and engaging the consumer, they have the potential to deliver much smoother and more positive client journeys.
Although much of the conversation about legal transparency is focused on pricing and quality – it can also be used to refer to brand authenticity and a firm’s willingness to be held to account. Negative reviews are what the industry fears but, when handled properly they needn’t be so damaging. Responding in a friendly human tone (rather than sounding like a formal corporation), showing that you are willing to make restitution and where you need to make improvements can bring balance to poor reviews. I recently spoke to conveyancing consultant and founder of CY Training Works Clare Yates, who summed this issue up perfectly. She said: “Clients have to wear it when they disappoint and be sure to improve on it for next time.”
Reviews are intended to help people make more informed choices and therefore firms to win more work. So what happens when a prospective client acts on a positive review and reaches out – perhaps via email, a live chat function or google click to call? Quite simply, they must be met with an equally positive first impression – something that addressing the customer journey, accessibility, education and transparency will ensure. Anything less fails to capitalise fully on the power of a good review.
Whether the legal industry will proceed with digital comparison tools (DCTs) or a regulator-commissioned model won’t be known for some time yet, but legal firms can and should act now. Those that interrogate their service levels and look at the client experience as a whole, especially how their people communicate and deliver client care, can get ahead and ensure that when reviews happen, they make a positive contribution to business development, revenue growth and brand reputation.
Bernadette Bennett is the head of Moneypenny’s 95-strong legal team, which is one of the leading outsourced communication provider’s largest and most in-demand departments. Bernadette has overseen the onboarding of hundreds of law firms for outsourced switchboard and live chat services in recent years, including 70 of the Top 200 UK law firms. An industry expert, Bernadette’s intimate knowledge means she is able to quickly identify the unique needs of all law firms - from sole practitioners to magic circle firms.
International US law firm Skadden is to take on a 65,000 square foot office in one of London’s newest skyscrapers. The firm is to relocate its 250-strong London team from its current Canary Wharf office to 22 Bishopsgate late next year. The firm has agreed to a 15-year lease which will allow it to occupy the 38-40th floors of the building.
22 Bishopsgate, which was completed in December 2020, contains a restaurant and bar, public viewing gallery, food market, gym, and the city’s first “sky wall” climbing window at 125 metres above ground.
Since the UK government began to lift coronavirus restrictions, AXA IM Alts, the investment management company which developed the London skyscraper, has said it has seen a significant increase in occupier enquiries.
Drunk driving has been an inflammatory issue for decades. Many people have lost their lives in DUI-related driving accidents, but there seem to be few that fully understand the consequences of a DUI conviction. There are about 10,000 DUI-related deaths yearly in the United States. This suggests that there is still a significant number of people who aren’t aware of the long-term effects of a DUI conviction. If more people were aware of how much trouble a DUI conviction would get them into, perhaps they would think twice before driving while intoxicated.
The immediate legal effect arising from a DUI conviction is that the accused will be found in violation of state laws. The penalties that shall be imposed upon the accused can also be aggravated when their negligence causes severe bodily harm or death to other people.
For reference, the mere act of driving a vehicle while intoxicated is already considered a crime. For first time offenders, fines incidental to a DUI conviction range from $400 to $1,000, and jail time ranges between 48 hours to six months, plus a five-year probationary period.
The state can also suspend or revoke your driver’s license depending on the extenuating circumstances of the accident. Some states do offer hardship licenses to violators, but these pseudo-licenses are severely limited in their validity. These licenses allow bearers to drive a vehicle only under certain conditions. For example, a hardship license is only valid when the bearer uses the car to get to work or school. The license will be deemed non-functional if the bearer uses the car for a purpose other than what is agreed upon.
After paying fines, damages, court fees, and lawyer fees, those with a DUI conviction will also have to pay for long-term medical treatment of claimants. A DUI conviction can cost anywhere between $13,000 to $27,000 in total.
A DUI conviction can also hurt your chances of getting a job, and applying for loans and mortgages, which drastically limits your financial options for big purchases. This is because DUI convicts are assumed to be high-risk clients, not just in terms of their ability to repay loans, but also because of the assumption that they are likely to find themselves in another accident. It’s also for this same reason that people who have a DUI conviction will also have higher auto insurance premiums.
Car accidents have adverse psychological effects on most people, especially when there’s a wrongful death involved. This is especially difficult for people who know that they caused the accident. They are very likely to develop post-traumatic disorder, panic attacks, insomnia, and depression. They may also experience a degree of social isolation and guilt, which make it harder to recover from the aforementioned psychological conditions.
A DUI conviction is a serious matter that will have a lasting effect on a person’s quality of life. It’s for this reason that people hire seasoned lawyers like the ones on this DUI Driver Defense Team to help them avoid harsher penalties, even on difficult cases. This should also serve as a reminder that one responsible decision can avert all these problems.
