Problem with "Domestic Violence" Temporary Restraining Orders.........Call Attorney Now!

Much has been said about CALIFORNIA "domestic violence" TROs........but what this attorney believes, is that the current way they are handed out like candy on Halloween and then reissued automatically when requested is simply ridiculous in many cases. Especially if the other spouse is a good, medium, or legendary liar.

Because most of the "DV" TROs are requested by females (against males)--- many judges just rubber stamp them, even when there is no proof of any alleged violence TO BEGIN WITH.



  An ALLEGATION of "domestic violence" is all that is required.  In general, an ALLEGATION of violence does not mean there was any violence, but since the "DV" TROs are not criminal (if you violate the TRO it will be a potential criminal charge) but the TRO itself  will be registered on CLETS  (see fn#1 below)-- it kind of amounts to it being criminal in effect.  "DV" TROs can cause people to NOT be hired in the workplace, even if one was not charged or convicted of any violence in criminal court.  * [see **below, for what could happen IF it is found or believed that you DID violate the "DV" TRO--and charges in criminal court transpire....]

The ALLEGATION alone, if not contested, can have huge, long lasting, completely devastating effects  in any custody issue, period.  Especially if one party has an attorney and the other party does not have an attorney, the one without the attorney may simply give up, and end up losing visitation.

Attorney has seen this happen in many, many cases.  Conversely, attorney has seen parents unjustifiably accused by "DV" TROs, and then end up prevailing, but it can take a long time and a lot of work, especially if one has a vindictive ex spouse or partner.


---> //FN#1 re CLETS:  restraining order coming from the civil courts is the CLETS restraining order. CLETS is an acronym standing for California Law Enforcement Telecommunication System. A CA CLETS order is a restraining order that is issued by a family law judge, lodged in the CLETS database and allows the police to arrest the abuser if the abuser violates that order. 

SO....the best thing to do if accused of any "DV" TRO

 is to immediately get legal help so that you

 don't go down like a sinking ship

 before you even get started.  

The last thing most people need is a "DV" TRO on their record, even if they are not guilty of it--- it carries both a stigma (you beat up people or try to hurt them, etc), that you are not fit to watch or babysit children (age  of kids will matter but especially babies)  and you will be stuck with what is known as supervised visitation which you will likely not be able to afford, or will not want to afford.  Further, the wait list is very long unless you plan to use a private agency which is quite expensive.

IF YOU HAVE HAD A "DV" TRO 

SLAPPED ON YOU, 

CALL ATTORNEY ASAP. 

Waiting Will Harm You.

YOU HAVE ALREADY BEEN CHARGED

 UNDER THE CALIFORNIA

 PENAL CODE,  PC273.6

WITH VIOLATING A "DV" TRO..........

CALL ATTORNEY ASAP

Attorney is A  LITIGATOR,  familiar with representing defendants on DV TRO allegations in criminal court.  

Examples (as seen online...)

• The protective order states that you must not contact your ex-boyfriend, yet you continue to send him e-mails and texts
• The restraining order states that you may not use force or violence upon your wife, yet you grab her and threaten to break her legs if she doesn't seek to have the order terminated
• The protective order states that you may not own or possess any firearms during the length of the order, yet you fail to relinquish your gun to the proper authorities
• The restraining order states that you must stay away from your family home, yet you slash your wife's tires while her car is in the driveway

Defenses

Possible legal defenses apply to a PC 273.6 charge.  Some of these include:

• the judge didn't legally issue the protective order (this only happens infrequently)
• you didn't know about the restraining order (maybe you were never served)
• you didn't intentionally violate the order  (perhaps it was an accidental situation)
• you were falsely accused of violating the protective order  (you have a legendary liar for an ex spouse?)

A new case, June 2016 was published for CA which indicates that no NEW allegations of DV conduct is required in order to "renew" a  DV  TRO. Perez v Torres-Hernandez, First Appellate District CA.

*NOTE:  Most people violate DV orders by doing something dumb or stupid--but most are not extreme in nature--in other words, they don't use weapons to try and kill you or abduct the kids. However, some defendants will make repeated threats via phone, text, computer---which are counted by the courts.  Therefore, sending bad texts, bad emails, and leaving bad notes online (Facebook, etc) is simply stupid.  If you have done this, then basically you need to change your behavior.  In Butte County, even felons are not necessarily being pulled back into prison--or-- jail,  for violating a DV TRO due to the Realignment problem. If you do not know what the Realignment problem is, google it online.

Penalties

If you are convicted of violating a California restraining order, the penalties vary quite a bit depending on

1. Whether it's your first or subsequent violation, and
2. whether the victim suffered a physical injury.

The penalties may include up to three years in the California state prison for a felony, and up to one year in a county jail for a misdemeanor.  In addition, you could face

• court fines and penalties,
• victim restitution for any counseling and/or medical services that the victim reasonably incurred in connection with the offense,
• counseling services, and
• the relinquishment of any firearms and the inability to acquire any new ones for the length of the protective order.

Attorney herein, in the past, had a client that was ALREADY convicted of PC 273.6-- BECAUSE he took a plea and did not go to trial.  Client's ex spouse was (to put it mildly--) a legendary liar. Seriously.

After obtaining the 273.6 plea, the ex wife then subsequently went after another DV TRO for 5 years. (This case is not in Butte County.) 

True to form at the trial, the ex wife's showboating attorney paraded around thinking he was Perry Mason.........just awful...........and sure enough, despite the Judge finding that it was extremely close in his decision, (because he was a new family Law Judge in part) Judge gave the ex wife the new TRO anyway.  All of the false accusations were repeated and re-hashed.  Although Client had no visitation anyway, he slowly did his supervised visitation as per the FCS recommendation.  Even now, which is over a year later, the ex wife is still withholding the kids from the father and she even moved to another city.  If father sticks with it, he can get unsupervised visits, but so far the ex wife has not even complied with the last court order.  This puts a burden on the father to take action and not remain passive.

SO-- if you want or need an attorney that can handle both Family Law issues, and even criminal charges, feel free to call attorney. Attorney does have a track record of recorded wins in cases, this is fact based.

SO-- if you want or need an attorney that can handle both

 Family Law issues,

 and  criminal charges, feel free to call attorney. 

IT  is also possible  to be charged with either cyber-stalking PC 646.9 or Penal Code 653.2 PC indirect cyber-harassment.

Cyber-stalking is the same behavior as ordinary stalking, only committed over the internet or email. In contrast, indirect cyber-harassment consists of posting harmful information about someone on the internet or in an email message, with the intent to incite other people to harass or threaten him/her in person.

Indirect electronic harassment is distinct from “direct electronic harassment” or cyberstalking under Penal Code 646.9 PC. With direct electronic harassment/cyberstalking, the defendant is the one who personally harassed or stalked the victim.³

CA Supreme Court Rule on "Date of Separation" Fixed by Legislature

In 2015, the CA Supreme Court had ruled that "date of separation" means that there must be physical separation of the parties (meaning someone moved out...) With the economy and other factors, spouses (often women)  ---  do not always move out because they may not be able to afford to do so. Thus the financial aspects were not considered so much in the Supreme Court.

The Legislature was apparently bombarded with huge backlash from women's groups and other advocates, including the Family Law Bar; so upon this backlash, the Legislature enacted a new Code Section which pretty much eliminated the Supreme Court ruling. 

Family Code Section 70, when adopted, January 1 2017--- will provide as follows:

(a) “Date of separation” means the date that a complete and final break in the marital relationship has occurred, as evidenced by both of the following:

(1) The spouse has expressed his or her intent to end the marriage to the other spouse.

(2) The conduct of the spouse is consistent with his or her intent to end the marriage.

(b) In determining the date of separation, the court shall take into consideration all relevant evidence.(c) It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this section to abrogate the decisions in In re Marriage of Davis (2015) 61 Cal.4th 846 and In re Marriage of Norviel (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 1152.

As you can see, this makes everything about the parties' supposed intent and their conduct up for grabs, and indeed "the court shall take into consideration all relevant evidence." Although California is supposedly a "no-fault" jurisdiction,  this amendment will CAUSE nearly all behaviors and activities by spouses to be fair game in establishing their intentions about continuing or ending the marriage.

Is there a Simplified Way to Get Divorced?

 Yes. The majority of people usually do NOT qualify for it, and both parties have to waive spousal support.  IF and only IF you have nothing to fight about, then you can just agree to settle your case. 

BE FOREWARNED:  A TOTAL AGREEEMENT IN ANY LONG TERM MARRIAGE SHOULD BE CAREFULLY REVIEWED BY AN ATTORNEY..............ATTORNEY HAS SEEN THESE CASES HAPPEN WHERE IT IS TOO LATE TO CHANGE SUCH AGREEMENT, AND RESULTS IN EXTREMELY DISPARATE RESULTS DUE TO THE AGREEMENT/LENGTH OF TIME BEFORE SOMEONE FIGURED OUT HOW BAD THE AGREEMENT ACTUALLY WAS???

See the Summary Dissolution Section below at ***

[However, we have seen cases where a couple with a house, vested pension and property, and kids-- where one party files the divorce docs, and tells the  other party to not respond because he/she hired a paralegal to draft an agreement and he/she could just sign it as a settlement document.  

Unbeknownst to the second party who was told to sign (and who had not worked outside the home) --- the entire agreement was pretty much worthless as the disclosures were never properly executed, which was just one of the problems, there were far more issues than just that.  Non disclosure is far more prevalent than most people realize.]

*** SUMMARY DISSOLUTION ***

California has a process called summary dissolution. If you qualify for a summary dissolution, you will have less paperwork to file and you will not have to appear in court. You may be eligible for such a process if you and your spouse have agreed in writing to a division of your assets and debts and if the following conditions exist:

• You have been married for five years or less.... and..
   
• You have no children from the relationship.....and....
   
• Neither of you own a home or other real estate......and..........
   
• The value of all community property amounts to less than $25,000, excluding automobiles....and.....
   
• The value of either party's separate property amounts to less than $25,000, excluding automobiles....and....
   
• Your combined debt does not exceed $4,000, except for an auto loan....and............
   
• Both of you waive spousal support.

Both spouses must agree to all of the terms of a summary dissolution. Also, either of you can cancel it for any reason before the dissolution is final. Further information on this simplified procedure may be available at your local court or on the California Courts website (courts.ca.gov).

NOTE:  In over 20 years, we have probably only ever seen 1-2 of these cases that qualify for this type of divorce. IF in fact, the parties actually do qualify for it, it can be done fairly inexpensively.

However, there can be a stipulation between parties from the beginning, but normally the Court will now charge a filing fee down the line, for the responding party,  if the stipulation was done in lieu of a Response being filed (as the Response incurs the first paper filing fee.) the current filing fee for Divorce is $435 so there would be two filing fees, one for each party. This is the case in Sacramento County.

If you do not qualify for summary dissolution--- make sure to consult an attorney as to whether you should engage in law and motion hearings (Request for Orders) in order to obtain help with support and visitation. SHARP in Butte County will help any client that seeks their help--they do not give legal advice, and they will not represent you of course.  They only help people fill out their paperwork, and have tutorials on how to do this.
Sometimes it is dangerous to do this if you have a situation where assets have been hidden, or illegal evidence is being used, or the other party simply has bamboozled you to the point of taking advantage of you. And if one party is a complete liar, then you may need more help than SHARP can provide. Further, if drugs or alcohol or illegal conduct is taking place, we do not recommend using SHARP on those issues because they cannot give any legal advice.

Because attorney herein also does Criminal Law cases, attorney is used to seeing a lot of turmoil overall, so is not usually shocked by most conduct of clients. Attorney does not babysit clients or look down upon any client.  Attorney understands how Family Law often can wreck a family unit, after having seen it over 20+ years.
If you really do need help, call an attorney and shop around for pricing.  Not all attorneys charge or operate in the same exact format.    Attorney also has a high success rate in litigating family law cases, and has done cases in larger cities such as San Diego, Sacramento, San Francisco.Attorney herein is provably the most affordable in the County and will meet any other attorney's quote.

Social Networking Linked to Divorce+More...When a Bitch Really IS a Bitch........

If you are a prude or ultra conservative, our apologies; but this T shirt on the girl wearing it (below) pretty much explains in plain English,  the definition of a bitch, and we don't mean the canine type.

Unfortunately in Family Law litigation--- we do see this from time to time, but certainly not in all cases.  In litigation, we only get so many minutes to argue our motions on the Law and Motion calendar.  While clients at the counsel table do not normally argue (since attorney is doing that) once in awhile, clients are called upon to speak on certain questions. Attorney has seen some women get up and run out of the Courtroom.

 Unknown to most people, Family Law cases CAN create the worst scenarios for many people, where we see Jerry Springer type action, because emotions run high  but Family Law attorneys become used to this.  However, also unknown to most people, is fact that Family law cases pretty much became the reason for the scanners at the entrance to courthouses. Attorneys and Judges have either been shot at, or killed by court participants who are losing their cases. And it is this attorney's belief that most of the defendants that used violence against attorneys and judges, were males who lost in Court---maybe
not all were family law cases, but certainly some of them were in California.

There has been bias against males in Family Law cases for quite some time, However, that has changed somewhat since more dads are seeking joint or shared custody, which is a good thing for the kids.

In what may be of little surprise to avid readers of FacebookCheating.com, a new study found a correlation between social media use and divorce rates in the United States.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101819591

The study, published in the journal Computers in Human Behavior by researchers from Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile and Boston University, compared state-by-state divorce rates to per-capita Facebook accounts. In a separate analysis, they also used data from a 2011-2012 survey that asked individuals about marriage quality and social media use.   

Abstract

This study explores the relationship between using social networks sites (SNS), marriage satisfaction and divorce rates using survey data of married individuals and state-level data from the United States. Results show that using SNS is negatively correlated with marriage quality and happiness, and positively correlated with experiencing a troubled relationship and thinking about divorce. These correlations hold after a variety of economic, demographic, and psychological variables related to marriage well-being are taken into account. 

Further, the findings of this individual-level analysis are consistent with a state-level analysis of the most popular SNS to date: across the U.S., the diffusion of Facebook between 2008 and 2010 is positively correlated with increasing divorce rates during the same time period after controlling for all time-invariant factors of each state (fixed effects), and continues to hold when time-varying economic and socio-demographic factors that might affect divorce rates are also controlled. Possible explanations for these associations are discussed, particularly in the context of pro- and anti-social perspectives towards SNS and Facebook in particular.

Their study found a link between social media use and decreased marriage quality in every model they analyzed. They said their research did not prove that social media might be to blame for troubled marriages, but suggested such a link may be proven in subsequent studies.

-----------------------------------------

Attorney's perspective:  It is a known fact that many people like to use Facebook and some of them cannot live without it. Because FB is a socializing medium, it is not considered a source for much else, except sharing-- often bad sharing.

It is not like people go to a site for Information, or actual learning.......it's more like a free-for-all where people gossip, talk bad about anyone and everyone, play bad games on others and in general, Facebook may have started out as a simplistic sharing platform, but has become more like the scum bucket for those who are not happy.

Because of this trend, and because of "everyone is doing it" mindset, Facebook is NOT in your child's best interest, or in anyone's interest (those who really do have a life outside of the computer.)

It is more likely that people in bad relationships already, simply go online and look for some company. They may go to a singles site (which FB has) or they may use FB because their friends tell them to use it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Legal professionals usually use FB to get dirt on others in a case, and employers use it for finding out the truth about people. Juries get on FB and they are not supposed to be there; no juror is supposed to look up anything online. Judges have gotten in trouble for trying to "friend" participants in lawsuits; attorneys have gotten in trouble for trying to change their clients FB pages and erasing them.  FB is best avoided in total.  There really is no need for it and if you cannot live without it, you may live to regret it down the line, depending on how bad you feel.  In today's world, people no longer understand the word privacy and it seems most people CRAVE both notoriety, attention, and bad behavior. Very sad indeed.

What Type of Attorney do You Really Need? Do You Want to Win? You Don't Care?

Do you have a case where you want to win, or need to win your case?
Do you have the winning facts?  Do you know what law would or would not support your position? Do you want or need an actual litigator for your case?

Hiring an advocate (attorney litigator) is not the same as hiring collaborative attorneys. Also, mediating* a case with only one attorney means ...The mediator helps people talk the issues through, supposedly helping to "settle" the dispute themselves. In this attorney's opinion, it would not be recommended in most cases, because typically the overbearing spouse simply bulldozes the other spouse.

*[Mediation for visitation is not the same thing as mediation of an entire divorce case. Mediation for visitation/custody is required by law when there is no agreement.]


There are many pitfalls that can arise in divorce; many of them involve financial transactions that one spouse had no knowledge of; assets that one spouse did not know about; children that were conceived outside the marriage and spouse never knew other spouse was paying; secret business dealings that was predicated on all cash; illegal actions by one spouse implicating the other spouse who had no knowledge; large debts racked up by one spouse, without the other spouse even knowing such debt existed; one spouse signing the other spouse's name for a credit card, then ruining the other spouse's credit.... NONE of these things, in this attorney's opinion, should be addressed in either mediation or collaborative law scenario.
That is because there was a huge breach of fiduciary duty that has serious consequences to the guilty spouse. That should be done in court since the guilty spouse should have to pay for wrongdoing. (Of course if you are too afraid because your spouse might try and kill you then you better go get help right away.)
                                             

Especially if you have issues in the 3 lines below, which happened BEFORE the case finalized---- you should never hire anyone except an advocate litigator. Aggressive at that. Plus, there are huge time barriers to trying to set aside any of this!

Fraud, Duress
Mistake, Coercion,
Failure to Exchange Declarations (Assets Debts)

We live in a society where people often want what they want, and when clients hire attorneys to get something done, especially in family law, it's often because one SIDE tried to take advantage of the other side.  If you have a family law case where both of you AGREE on everything then of course you don't really need an attorney, except perhaps to create a settlement agreement.

HOWEVER, the vast majority of most divorces and break ups, is because the couple cannot agree on a lot of things, including (just an example....) post judgment orders.........

• How to raise the kids-- too lenient?  too strict?
• How to spend income from employment or inheritance
• How to train kids  to have moral values
• How to get along with other family members that don't live with you
• How to avoid too much tv, too much bad influence, too much Facebook?
• What to do with a lazy spouse that refuses to help out--with anything?
• What to do with spouse that is either dangerous, aggressive, drinks too much
• How to get out of supervised visits?? You have an ex spouse also?
• Spouse drinks, smokes, gambles, does drugs, shops too much? Hoarding?
• Spouse AND kids do nothing but stay on Facebook and phone 24/7?? 
• Your kids are not only lazy, they are spoiled rotten and you blame the spouse?
• Your spouse is bipolar and can't be controlled?

Of all the problems attorney has seen over several decades, the problems around children tend to generate the worst issues, followed by physical harm, financial issues, and alcohol or drug use.

And remarkably, attorney has seen clients REFUSE to take what he/she is entitled to, and then SETTLE a case by using an attorney who ONLY settles cases--- in other words, the attorney is not a litigator. That is absurd.

If you are entitled to something, why would you pay someone to settle a case when you could have settled it without help????   Collaborative law and mediation means if you don't settle the case using whomever you hired, those attorney cannot represent you in court anyway. You THEN have to hire new attorneys!!   While mediation and collaborative may be good for some cases (which means you are settling case by paying people to settle it without court)-- it is essentially negotiation. Judges are not involved. If you work something out and then don't like it later--- what you have is a problem.

              Some of the down sides of  collaborative law (which includes hiring people like accountants and other experts) and makes it costly:

The Expense; Impact of termination and cost of new counsel; No advocacy for one or both parties; directed conversation between parties, power imbalances, difficult issues might remain secret (such as domestic violence, addictions, drugs, gambling, infidelities,etc.); Possible inadequate information collection, potentially less support for views of children.

Basically, in mediation there is no advocate for YOU.  In collaborative law, BOTH sides work on issues, but NO ONE is an advocate for YOUR side.  The collaborative view is to work out issues, not really take sides as an advocate----a true advocate is there to represent YOU, not the spouse.  This is part of the reason that most people in a divorce WANT an advocate, and need a litigator --- because they are being taken advantage of, steamrolled, or being misled or manipulated.

Prop 64 Calif Legalizes Adult Recreational Use of Marijuana

Note: all parents and patients should keep mindful that simply because a new law was passed allowing recreational use of herb for adults, it does not mean that because it is legal that a parent can just do whatever he/she wants without regard for the kids.

Though that should not have to be stated, it is common sense and from this attorney's view generally, many people are lacking in common sense. Getting rid of Obama was a start, since Obama has made people think everyone is entitled to everything. No one is entitled to much in this world. That is a fact. The dumb- down of the USA in past years,  with Trump now pulling in as the winner indicates--- not everyone is stupid. Thank God for small miracles.

https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_64,_Marijuana_Legalization_(2016)
(See site for all references)

Who can use marijuana?  

Proposition 64 legalized the recreational use of marijuana for adults aged 21 years or older. Smoking was permitted in a private home or at a business licensed for on-site marijuana consumption. Smoking remains illegal while driving a vehicle, anywhere smoking tobacco is, and in all public places. Up to 28.5 grams of marijuana and 8 grams of concentrated marijuana are legal to possess. However, possession on the grounds of a school, day care center, or youth center while children are present remains illegal. An individual is permitted to grow up to six plants within a private home, as long as the area is locked and not visible from a public place.^[8]

Who can sell marijuana?

To sell marijuana for recreational use, businesses need to acquire a state license. Local governments can also require them to obtain a local license. Businesses are not be authorized to sell within 600 feet of a school, day care center, or youth center.^[8] The initiative also prevents licenses for large-scale marijuana businesses for five years in order to prevent "unlawful monopoly power."^[13]

Who will regulate marijuana?

The Bureau of Medical Cannabis Regulation was renamed the Bureau of Marijuana Control. It is responsible for regulating and licensing marijuana businesses.^[8]

Counties and municipalities have been empowered to restrict where marijuana businesses could be located. Local governments can also completely ban the sale of marijuana from their jurisdictions.

How will marijuana be taxed?

Proposition 64 created two new excise taxes on marijuana. One is be a cultivation tax of $9.25 per ounce for flowers and $2.75 per ounce for leaves, with exceptions for certain medical marijuana sales and cultivation. The second is a 15 percent tax on the retail price of marijuana. Taxes will be adjusted for inflation starting in 2020.^[1]

Local governments have been authorized to levy taxes on marijuana as well.

Where will revenue be spent?

Revenue from the two taxes will be deposited in a new California Marijuana Tax Fund. First, the revenue will be used to cover costs of administrating and enforcing the measure. Next, it will be distributed to drug research, treatment, and enforcement, including:^[1]

• $2 million per year to the UC San Diego Center for Medical Cannabis Research to study medical marijuana.
• $10 million per year for 11 years for public California universities to research and evaluate the implementation and impact of Proposition 64. Researchers would make policy-change recommendations to the California Legislature and California Governor.
• $3 million annually for five years to the Department of the California Highway Patrol for developing protocols to determine whether a vehicle driver is impaired due to marijuana consumption.
• $10 million, increasing each year by $10 million until settling at $50 million in 2022, for grants to local health departments and community-based nonprofits supporting "job placement, mental health treatment, substance use disorder treatment, system navigation services, legal services to address barriers to reentry, and linkages to medical care for communities disproportionately affected by past federal and state drug policies."

The remaining revenue will be distributed as follows:^[1]

• 60 percent to youth programs, including drug education, prevention, and treatment.
• 20 percent to prevent and alleviate environmental damage from illegal marijuana producers.
• 20 percent to programs designed to reduce driving under the influence of marijuana and a grant program designed to reduce negative impacts on health or safety resulting from the proposition.

What will penalties be?

Individuals under age 18 convicted of marijuana use or possession are required to attend drug education or a counseling program and complete community service. Selling marijuana without a license is punishable by up to six months in a county jail, a fine up to $500, or both.^[8]

With Proposition 64's approval, individuals serving criminal sentences for activities made legal under the measure are eligible for resentencing.

Attorney Can Easily Save You $1,325+ Off Your case- Find Out How!

ATTORNEY IS IN THE BUSINESS OF SOLVING PROBLEMS. 

You have come to the right attorney for your problem here:

                                               Affordability,  Strategy-Oriented,  Winner 

An hourly attorney rate of $250 for 'most' attorneys is fairly standard these days, so we can see why up to 80% of client are representing themselves. The majority of them go to SHARP or comparable.

Attorney can guarantee a reasonable down payment or payment plans. If you absolutely don't need legal help, that's fine. But if you DO--- you don't want the 'wrong' help--- right??

                Affordable service * Friendly Help  * Great Problem Solving* Winning Strategy

If you have a job and somewhat decent credit, or your former spouse does  or you are still married and no dissolution has been filed, then you should call attorney.

We have worked for more than 20 years with clients 

that can afford legal help-- 

they just can't afford to pay $250/hr.

Attorney herein is a down to earth, friendly and helpful person. No pretentiousness, no games, no over the top nonsense.  Attorney is known for not losing cases, simply because  

(1) from the beginning of the case, attorney formulates a plan 

for how to solve your problem  

(2) attorney evaluates the client to use every possible fact in client's favor  (3) attorney uses more facts than client has disclosed  by uncovering things client may not even know

(4) attorney has special help in legal issues who can perform tech testing  

(5) attorney has access to animal husbandry experts for animal cases  (6) attorney has much experience in difficult litigation, such as against B of A, Chase Bk,W Fargo Bk
  (7) attorney acknowledges credit where due if it happens  

(8) attorney researches law for updates 5 days a week  (9) attorney is not afraid to call a spade a spade (10) attorney can check on all Federal Court cases in the USA via Pacer at any given time. And attorney has more than 20+ years in litigation. Nearly all of attorney's work is in litigation.  Attorney will not allow other attorneys to roll over, meaning, attorney is a very staunch defender of client's rights and client's position in litigation.

Quite frankly, attorney can attack any case, even the most difficult, and still
be able to devise a solution.  If case is extremely difficult, it may take
more time, but nothing is impossible.