What Has the Law to Do With a Wedding Invitations List?

One Saturday afternoon I brought my 17-year old nephew to my solicitor’s office. We were attending a wedding dinner that night. I ushered him into my chamber, and he found himself surrounded by voluminous law books, law periodicals and law reports. He cast an amazed look at the amount of papers piling up on my desk – all requiring my urgent and immediate attention. I also had several large cards laying haphazardly on the desk – wedding invitations.

My nephew, who was interested in a career in law, took a book titled ‘Family Law’ and began reading it. Meanwhile I continued my work of drafting a statement of defence to a plaintiff’s statement of claim, preparing an affidavit in reply at the same time. I also looked at some files of divorce cases which were scheduled for hearing at the High Court next month.

After reading for about 20 minutes or so, my nephew stood up and posed me a question: “Uncle, is there a relationship between whom one invites to his wedding and the law?”

“The simple answer to that question is, no, there isn’t. Whom do you invite is not governed by any law, of course. There would be legal chaos if there be a law governing how many guests one could include in one’s wedding invitations. But there may be relationship between whom one invites to one’s wedding and the state of one’s later married life, albeit a fortuitous one. Why do you ask?”

He shrugged, and said,” No particular reason. Just ask for the sake of asking.”

“OK, but you must avoid asking such questions in the future. If you are interested in the law, you are of course encouraged to ask questions – and good questions only. For example, you might want to ask why, in the first place, there are laws governing marriages and divorce.”

His curiosity piqued, my nephew was all ears, as I continued: “In the first place, do you know that a marriage is a contract? That means it entails contractual obligations on the part of the two parties to the marriage, and that’s why there are marriage and divorce laws and regulations.”

“Oh,” came my nephew’s answer, “I didn’t know that. It sounds rather unromantic that a marriage is a contract.” How true.

We spent the rest of the afternoon in my chamber. After my personal introduction to contract law, my nephew became quite interested in the law of contract. I handed him my Guest’s Law of Contract and he began to read it.

That evening, as we mingled with the guests who made the list on the wedding invitations, I couldn’t help reflecting on the question my nephew asked of me in the office earlier. Of course, a marriage (which is always lauded as being made in heaven) is a romantic affair, an occasion for joy and cause for celebration. Who would like to be told that, in the eyes of the law, a marriage, properly formalized, becomes a contract just as much as an ordinary, cold agreement comes into force after all the terms and conditions are fulfilled? Which couple would seek the solicitor’s legal advice on marriage while they are busy preparing the wedding invitations, wedding cakes, wedding reception and the associated paraphernalia? Of course that would be the last thing on their mind.

The Whistleblower Protection Law

It was not until 1986 when a law protecting whistleblowers is made. Congress added an anti-retaliation protection to the then existing False Claims Act.

A whistleblower is a person who tells on something he believes is an illegal act. The employees are the most commonly known whistleblower. They tell on their employers which they suspect is doing or committing an illegal act.

Under the Whistleblower Protection Law, the employee should not be discharged, denoted, suspended, threatened or harassed in any form that discriminates the terms and conditions of his employment because of the legal act done by the employee.

The employee may be of aid in many ways possible on the investigation, testimony and the likes. However there are some constraints under the whistleblower protection law.

Reporting illegal acts that are only within the company is a ground for exemption. But still there may be public policies that could protect the employee from retaliation

If it turns out that an employer didn’t actually break a law, the employee is still entitled to whistle blower protection from retaliation, if he reasonably believed that the employer committed an illegal act.

The whistleblower protection law does not cover employer retaliation for complaints about personal loathe. Office politics is not to be used as a basis for filing a complaint against the employer and use the whistleblower protection for personal gain.

In order for the employee to be protected from employer retaliation, he may the have a suspected desecration of any Federal Law. But the supposed violation should have provisions that the law violated will protect whistleblowers.

The Whistleblower Federal Law, unlike the False Claims Act, allows the whistleblower to file a lawsuit in a federal court. The Federal Whistleblower Law does not permit the whistleblower to go directly to the court.

The individuals concerned are pursued administratively. These individuals concerned could file a complaint or charge to retaliate with or without a lawyer to represent them. However if the case is not resolved immediately, the administrative law judge may then preside over the only evidentiary hearing that may take place.

A whistleblower should not attempt to delay an investigation of the possible legal remedy. To maintain this ruling, the retaliation should then be brought to the attention of an appropriate government official within 30 days, else the complaint could not be pursued.

Most states have some sort of statutory or common law “whistleblower” or anti-retaliation laws. Like the federal whistleblower laws, not every lawyer will know about these laws, especially laws outside their own state.

These states and the District of Columbia have recognized a public policy exception to the “employment at will doctrine”: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

Some states have explicit statutory protections for whistleblowers. These include: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and Washington.

There are also state laws that offer special protections just for their own state or local government employees: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin.

Court Reporter Firms – A Most Valuable Resource For Small Law Firms

It would seem that law firms would have no problem hiring the best court reporters. But that’s often not the case, especially for smaller law firms that don’t have a human resources department. Although smaller firms know what they want in a reporter, finding the time and resources to determine whether a reporter meets their qualifications can prove difficult, and usually results in their using one of two methods to find the right reporters: seeking professional references from other law firms that require litigation services, or seeking reporters through the aid of court reporter firms. While professional referrals can be helpful to finding top rate reporters, seeking a reporter through court reporter firms is usually the better option for two reasons: many reporting firms offer additional litigation services associated with court reporting, and contacting a reporting firm is the best way to choose from the largest number of qualified candidates.

In some cases, court reporter firms that offer additional legal services are contacted to secure these services alone. But the most common reasons that law firms turn to reporting firms is for assistance with depositions reporting, which begins with hiring the right reporter for a company’s type of depositions. In terms of deposition type, the first selection criterion is whether a law firm conducts video or non-video depositions. In today’s legal scene, the assumption that a reporter has experience in video depositions is automatic. But insuring that the experience exists through a reporting agency is the safest bet. The next selection criterion is whether a reporter has experience with a law firm’s case area. For example, a health law firm would be wise to hire a reporter that has training and experience in medical terminology. The third selection criterion is what type of reporting technology is desired, such as digital reporting, voice writing, real time reporting, etc.

The three selection criteria mentioned above are the basic building blocks for choosing the right court reporter. But there’s also a fourth selection criterion that isn’t as straightforward as the rest: determining whether a reporter has the right personality. From a distance, a court reporter’s personality would seem to be one of the last things that determined his or her court reporting ability, as a reporter’s job doesn’t involve interacting with attorneys or deponents during the reporting process. However, there are various instances of poor transcript quality and even emotional reactions from reporters due their previously unnoticed personality flaws. While the majority of reporters are professional enough to handle circumstantial feelings of boredom, bias, unexpected anger, etc., some reporters aren’t as adaptable. To avoid such reporters, reputable court reporter firms evaluate their candidates’ personality in addition to their credentials and work experience.