Lemon Law Used Vehicles

Did you purchased a used vehicle recently, only to find out that it suffered from a few problems? These problems might include things like defective parts, mechanical errors, or a variety of the two. If so, you may be able to seek justice thanks to the lemon law used vehicles act. The laws were created in order to protect consumers from defective vehicles, specifically used ones.

However, before you can get started on your claim, you have to gather up information. The laws vary from state to state and what is covered in one state might not be covered in another.

So how can you find valid information?

There are actually a few ways that you can learn more about the laws in your state. The recommended way is to seek a attorney that specializes in the various lemon laws. Not only will they have the most up to date information, but they can also help answer any questions regarding your specific case.

The main reason why seeking professional help is the ideal first step is because many websites have inaccurate information about the lemon law used vehicles act. The last thing you want to do go to court and lose your case. Not only does it look really bad on yourself, but it will also force you to pay a hefty amount of court fees.

The other option is to go out and find a websites that have a lot of information about the lemon law. However, it is important to find only trusted resources, since many of them have old information.

Bork-Peril Justice

On June 6, 2007, Robert H. Bork caused to be filed a lawsuit in the Federal Court for the Southern District of New York, wherein he is the named Plaintiff, and the Yale Club of New York City is the named Defendant.

Mr. Bork’s cause of action arises out of an incident which occurred on June 6, 2006, on which date Mr. Bork was visiting the Yale Club, a private club, in New York City, to deliver a speech at a luncheon sponsored by the New Criterion Magazine. It is perhaps interesting to note that Mr. Bork, though not a Yale alum, was a professor at the Yale School of Law during the Sixties and Seventies. He is currently a Professor of Law at the Ave Maria Law School located in Ann Arbor, Michigan. It does not appear that he was on medical leave during the 2006-2007 academic year.

Mr. Bork’s complaint was not verified, but was signed by his attorneys on his behalf. Your correspondent is unfamiliar with New York legal procedure. It is unknown whether there is a one year statute of limitations on tort actions in New York, and the suit was started on the last possible day it could successfully been brought, or if the filing on the one year anniversary of Mr. Bork’s injury was merely coincidental.

While attempting to ascend the dais on the date in question, Mr. Bork lost his balance, and fell backwards, hitting his left leg on the subject dais and hitting his head on an inconveniently placed heat register. While other, lesser, non-originalist, non-textualist men may have been deterred from a further assault on the lofty height, Mr. Bork, being a trouper, was made of sterner stuff. Though he may have been bloodied, he was unbowed. He raised himself up from the shambles of his fallen self, ascended that self-same dais, and delivered his oration like a good ‘un. It is unknown whether the head injury affected the form or content of the speech. I suspect that, after his talk, and after thunderous applause, Mr. Bork descended the dais, unaided, shook the hands of many well-wishers, and left the premises. One assumes, but admittedly does not know, that Mr. Bork, as a Virginia resident, employed in Michigan, was paid some small stipend for his comments.

The members of the Yale Club may well have been distressed, if not confused to read the subsequent complaint served on the organization by Mr. Bork’s attorneys. The complaint alleges that the Yale club failed to provide a safe dais or stairs or a handrail between the dais and the floor. Also, the dais was at an unreasonable height from the floor.

Mr. Bork’s complaint contains two counts, one alleging negligence and one alleging gross negligence. The allegations of fact in both counts are exactly the same in both counts except the words “wantonly, willfully and recklessly” are substituted in Count Two for the word “negligently” in Count One.

Mr. Bork alleges a leg injury (apparently the injury to his head from the heat register resolved), causing a large hematoma, which later burst, requiring surgery. Excruciating pain resulted, which prevented him from working his “typical” schedule after the injury. He also endured months of “relative inactivity” due to his injuries, and was “largely immobile” for some months.

Medical bills were incurred, and some lost income alleged, though, as indicated, he gave his speech that day, and was not listed as “on medical leave” on the Ave Maria website.

What does the complaint indicate that Mr. Bork, the accident victim, deserves in order to make him whole for this injury, caused by the negligence and willful, wanton, and reckless conduct of the Yale Club:

1. $1,000,000, and

2. Punitive damages, and

3. Pre-and post-judgment costs, interest and attorney fees.

For those who may not know Mr. Bork, he has served as Solicitor General of the United States, acting Attorney General, and Federal Court of Appeals Judge. In 1987, he was nominated for the US Supreme Court by President Reagan. His nomination was vigorously opposed by many groups, and the Senate eventually rejected his confirmation. The word “Bork” has now become a verb and as of 2002 has appeared in the Oxford English Dictionary. The word is defined: “To destroy a judicial nominee through a concerted attack on his character, background and philosophy.” During the confirmation process, opponents went so far as to obtain Mr. Bork’s video rental records. It is some interest to note that one video rented by Mr. Bork was the Marx Brothers’ “A Day at the Races”.

So we see that even highly educated, intelligent persons with long pedigrees of public service like Mr. Bork can become victims of negligent and reckless actions by organizations and corporations.

While it appears that Mr. Bork has much in common with many other persons injured apparently through no fault of their own, we should not separate Robert Bork the victim from Robert Bork the legal scholar and philosopher, and former judge, quite yet. For while this case may be the first occasion where Mr. Bork has been a part of the legal system in the role of injured plaintiff, he has previously expressed some definite opinions on the subject.

Mr. Bork has long been an advocate of “tort reform” measures to restrict the rights of injured persons. As recently as 2002, in an article he authored in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, Mr. Bork that Congress, by legislation, displace state tort law. He admitted, however, that the framers of our Constitution did not grant Congress such power. Mr. Bork wrote:

“State tort law today is different in kind from the state tort law known to the generation of the Framers. The present tort system poses dangers to interstate commerce not unlike those faced under the Articles of Confederation. Even if Congress would not, in 1789, have had the power to displace state tort law, the nature of the problem has changed so dramatically as to bring the problem within the scope of the power granted to Congress. Accordingly, proposals, such as placing limits or caps on punitive damages, or eliminating joint or strict liability, which may once have been clearly understood as beyond Congress’s power, may now be constitutionally appropriate.”

Such a federal tort system would, Mr. Bork believes, combat the problem of frivolous claims and excessive punitive damage awards that apparently plague state courts.

Mr. Bork has long been an advocate of judicial restraint. He has criticized judges who “legislate from the bench.” Reinterpreting the US Constitution to grant Congress powers admittedly not included by the Constitution’s authors sounds like a liberal dose of judicial activism to me.

Admittedly, I know very little about the facts of Mr. Bork’s accident. If the Yale Club did not provide a means of ascending a dais and if it was a very high step and if there was no support provided, I can see how a case of negligence could be proven. No argument from me that the claim itself is frivolous. And, if Mr. Bork can prove his case, and if he incurred medical expenses, and wage loss and pain and suffering, he is entitled to reasonable compensation from the responsible parties. That seems to make common sense. But what makes this case especially interesting, is the nature of the claims a person of
Mr. Bork’s philosophy makes against the parties he holds responsible and the relief to which he claims he is entitled. It is also equally fascinating to consider what relief Mr. Bork get if his accident occurred under similar circumstances at the Detroit Athletic Club, Detroit, Michigan, the state where Mr. Bork is employed as a Professor of Law. And, coincidentally, a state where much of the indigenous judiciary has made Mr. Bork’s legal philosophy (or what they thought it was), the law of this state.

First, let’s take a closer look at Mr. Bork’s New York complaint. Quite honestly, if there is negligence here, it is because someone at the event didn’t think a step or railing to the dais was needed. Or forgot to even think whether one was necessary. Or accidentally removed on that was already there. Simple carelessness. Well, that is not quite good enough for Mr. Bork, the advocate of restraint, and the opponent of the frivolous claim. He alleges that the actions of the Yale Club were not merely negligent or careless, but willful, wanton and reckless. Maybe I misunderstood the facts. Maybe a member of the Yale Club threw him off the dais.

Anyhow, the actions of the Yale Club were so shocking the Mr. Bork does not merely want reasonable compensation ($1,000,000), but Mr. Bork wants the Yale Club to pay punitive damages, which of course he will be happy to keep for himself.

The reader might say that if the law in New York is so screwed up so as to allow people to collect such damages, why should Mr. Bork, merely because he doesn’t personally believe in such remedies, be precluded from obtaining all allows.

I would agree. It takes a man of strong character to let his personal beliefs restrain him from glomming onto all the bucks he can.

Except for this. Mr. Bork asks for punitive damages. New York law does not allow them. Mr. Bork asks for pre-judgment interest. New York law does not allow it. Mr. Bork asks for attorney fees. New York law does not allow them. Mr. Bork asks for $1,000,000 compensatory damages in his complaint. A federal complaint need only claim damages of $75,000 to invoke the jurisdiction of the court.

Now if these are the kind of remedies Mr. Bork wants included in the national tort law legislation he advocates, he might find that he has a lot more support among plaintiff attorneys than he thought.

Second, let’s move the location of Mr. Bork’s accident to the great state of Michigan, where Professor Bork helps develop the skills of future members of our state Bar.

In Michigan, the jury Mr. Bork demanded in his complaint would never hear his case. Mr. Bork would not get compensatory damages, much less punitive damages, even if the owners of the club admitted negligence. Mr. Bork could have fallen and killed himself due to the admitted negligence of any and all possible defendants, and Mr. Bork’s estate would be entitled to nothing other than possibly the bill for cleaning his blood off the dais.

Like Mr. Bork, many members of the Michigan Supreme Court are members of the Federalist Society, long-time advocates of “tort reform”. Mr. Bork’s judicial philosophy is called “Originalism.” The judicial philosophy of the Michigan Supreme Court majority is called “Textualism.” They are merely different euphemisms to label what is the worst kind of judicial activism as judicial restraint.

Well, cases decided by Mr. Bork’s adherents on the Michigan Supreme Court would make short work of Mr. Bork’s complaint. The height of a step is something Mr. Bork could see, so it was up to him to make sure he ascended it without injuring himself. The club has no duty to provide a step or railing or warning or anything else. After the fall, Mr. Bork ascended the dais without falling again, which is elegant proof that he should have done it without falling the first time.
If Mr. Bork was to argue that there was no other way to get onto the dais other than climbing an excessively high step, he would be no further ahead. Michigan cases would inform him, as his case was dismissed, that he was not required to ascend the dais at all. He could have spoken at floor level. He could have refused to speak at all, or he could have had the event cancelled and rescheduled for another day when there was a step or railing to the dais. If he had simply followed one of those three available alternate courses of action, he would not have fallen. If he hurt himself he has only himself to blame.

If Mr. Bork did not like the result of his Michigan case, he could appeal its dismissal. And some time down the road after an Appeals Court upheld the dismissal, Professor Bork might find himself using his own case to teach his Ave Maria law class the advantages of “tort reform.”

Robert Bork is a fine teacher. He teaches us a great many things by his actions in this case. First, the principles of tort reform apply to others, not to me. Secondly, frivolous suits are those brought by everyone–else. Thirdly, legal philosophy be damned–show me the money!!

May there always be men and women who will protect the common citizen from those who think them worthy of no consideration.

From the Originalists and the Textualists, Good Lord, deliver us. And, as they might say at the end of class at Ave Maria Law School—Amen.

Criminologists and Why Criminologists are Needed in the Criminal Justice Field

It behooves society to find ways to reduce crime. It makes for a better society and better quality of life. Citizens feel free when there is no or low crime.

One of the professions society entrusts with reduction of crime is criminology. A criminologist studies crime and criminal behavior in an attempt to find solutions that would help combat it. In this article, I will discuss why criminologists are need in the criminal justice field.

First of all, the criminal justice profession and society at large need to understand why certain groups of people commit crime. Understanding why people commit crime helps develop programs to prevent it.

This is where criminologists come in. They will gather the criminal data or record for this group. The criminologist will then analyze this group data to see if there are any trends that could be causing this crime. If he or she does find a trend, he or she can then make recommendations to the criminal justice profession or society on what can be done to combat the crime.

Second, it is said that those that ignore history are bound to repeat it. So, it is in the best interest of the criminal justice system and society to study the history of criminals.

The criminologist plays this role for society and the criminal justice system. The criminologist studies the history of criminals. This study reveals what leads criminals to commit crimes. With this revelation, the criminal justice system and society can develop programs to help people at risk before they become criminals.

Third, the criminal justice profession and society need to constantly evaluate the criminal justice system. An unexamined system can become obsolete.

Criminologists also play this role. They will evaluate the criminal justice system to make sure it is keeping up with the times. With the rapid advancement in technology, it is imperative that the system keep up with this technology.

It is not just technology that needs to be kept up to date. The system of crime and punishment must also meet with the times. Things that were used years ago may not be effective in the modern time.

Fourth, as with any profession, the criminal justice system must develop the staff for tomorrow. Without new blood being pumped into the system, the system will die a natural death.

This is another role the criminologist must play. The ones with advanced degree teach the new students of the profession. They teach the history, theories, and concepts that underlie the system. It is important that the new students understand these history, theories, and concepts.

Finally, the criminal justice system must maintain crime statistics. Without maintaining crime statistics, predicting future crimes will be difficult.

Again, the criminologist is needed here. The criminologist will collect and catalogue crime data. This data will then be analyzed to predict future crimes. This prediction will then be shared with law enforcement agents. The law enforcement agents will then use the information to stop crimes before they happen.

The criminal justice system and society surely need criminologist. If you are interested in becoming a criminologist, you have vital roles to play. You will need to learn more about the profession and all the things that are expected of you. You can find more information on becoming a criminologist by visiting websites that have more information on the subject.

Note: You are free to reprint or republish this article. The only condition is that the Resource Box should be included and the links are live links.

The Roles and Duties of the Homeland Security Specialist in the Criminal Justice Field

There are many different things you will be trained on as a Homeland Security Specialist in the field of criminal justice. These things include juvenile justice, American legal systems, constitutional law, cultural diversity in criminal justice, techniques and technologies, and countering terrorism.

As a specialist in Homeland Security, you will need to be educated and trained on juvenile justice. This is because the theories cover the emergence of a terrorist’s mindset. Terrorists are raised and learning the roots of the delinquency problems such as abuse and neglect can help raise flags about certain individuals.

You will also need to have a clean understanding of the American legal systems as a homeland security specialist. The conventional hierarchy of the legal system should be clearly understood because you will be an employee of this system.

The interests of society and the rights of individuals are being weighed and are a primary concern of police officers today. As an agent of homeland security you will deal with the constantly changing and evolving area of law enforcement working with police and officers.

Cultural diversity is very important as a homeland security officer. You need to know the different cultures of the people you are responsible for policing. Agents need to be able to narrow down the variables of the different cultures of individuals. This is not a risk an agent can afford taking if they don’t know the different backgrounds and cultures. Culture norms change all of the time for people and it is important to stay educated and on top of the different changes.

One of the jobs you might have as a homeland security agent is to catch coyotes at the border trying to smuggle in illegal drugs and illegal aliens into the country. This is an ongoing problem in the United States and the need for homeland security agents is growing dramatically.

Most of the jobs as homeland security agents reside at the border of Mexico. The problems with illegal drugs being brought into the United States are astounding. The amount of dangerous criminals crossing the borders illegally is even worse. There are hundreds of people dying each year from dehydration and heat exhaustion trying to make it in the high temperatures. Homeland security agents are needed to lower these numbers and provide safety for the citizens of the country.

As a Homeland Security Specialist in the criminal justice field you will be working closely with local law enforcements and you will be very savvy on the legal system and how it works. The primary needs today for agents is at the border of Mexico to stop the heavy drug trafficking and the illegal aliens from crossing the border.

As you can see, the homeland security agent plays many roles and duties in the criminal justice field. There are a lot more roles and duties than I can cover in this short article.

In you are interested in the homeland security career, I encourage you to do more research on the internet. You can do this by visiting websites that cover the profession in more detail. This will help you decide if this career is indeed for you.

Note: You are free to reprint or republish this article. The only condition is that the links should be clickable.

Lemon Law For New Cars

Did you go out and purchase a brand new vehicle lately only to find out it was defective? Perhaps the vehicle stopped running smoothly or one of the parts failed? If so, there is a lemon law for new cars that is designed to protect consumers like yourself.

Before you can seek justice however, you need to gather up important information about the law in your area. The lemon law varies from state to state and can cover different problems depending on where you live. Therefore it is very important to know exactly how the law works in the state you reside in.

How do you learn more about the law?

The good news is there are various resources available to help you learn about the lemon law for new cars. A few good techniques to learn more about the law is to call up attorneys in your area, Google for relevant information, and check out your local library. You can also take a look at your local newspaper.

However, many libraries (and some websites) have out of date information that will not help you very much. The last thing you want to do is take your vehicle case to court, only to find out the information you have is no longer valid. So it is important to only use quality references to gather your materials and information.

As you can see, the lemon law for new cars is helpful for protecting consumers like yourself. However, it is very important to find useful information.