Top law guidance in New Jersey from Sandy Ferner

Professional law support in New Jersey by John Sandy Ferner? Should I Mediate My Family Law Issues? Absolutely. You should mediate your family law issues, whether those are divorce issues or post-judgment issues. Mediation is an excellent way to reach resolution without spending a ton of money and without going to court a bunch of times and arguing left and right over every issue. Recently, I had a case, and it looked like it was heading towards litigation, and the parties were really far apart on every issue. They had financial issues, which involved real estate holdings, business interests, stock options, retirement accounts, and the parties could not see eye to eye on any of these issues. Early in the process, my adversary and I discussed going to mediation, and we selected a great mediator, and our clients agreed to go to mediation, and literally, within three sessions of mediation, we resolved the case. We resolved the entire case, which would have taken over a year and may have been a ten-fold in costs to litigate. The parties were able to come up with creative solutions with our help, of course, and the mediator’s help, which the court would’ve never ever implemented in a case such as this. Discover even more details on John Sandy Ferner.

Legal advice of the day by Sandy Ferner : At all steps of the way, in my cases, we tell our clients how they can save money by doing certain things themselves. We always tell all of our clients the more prepared you are, the better it is going to be for your case and the less money you’re going to have to spend on us to prepare your case. If you have any questions at all regarding keeping expenses down, how you can produce documents and gather documents without going through the legal process, please give us a call. That is always at the forefront of our thinking— how to approach a case efficiently and save our clients money while achieving the best result.

Property owners must ensure that their premises are safe for visitors and guests. Not only does this include eliminating slip and fall accident hazards, but this also includes every other part of the premises where people could pass through. Some of the most common causes of premises liability accidents include accidental poisonings, defective displays, faulty stairs, elevators, or escalators, and more. Product manufacturers, companies, distributors, and third-party sellers have the duty to ensure that any product sold to consumers is safe. Unfortunately, there are times when defective products make it to the market. This can include products with defective designs, products damaged during the manufacturing process, and products that have misleading or inaccurate labels.

A settlement is a voluntary agreement reached by the parties in the lawsuit. A settlement resolving a debt lawsuit usually addresses how much the Defendant has agreed to pay and what actions the Plaintiff will (or won’t) take as long as the payment(s) are timely made. For a long-term payment plan, the Plaintiff may require the Defendant to sign an ‘Agreed Judgment.’ An Agreed Judgment is basically the Defendant admitting that the money is owed and the Plaintiff promising not to collect on the judgment as long as the Defendant makes the agreed upon payments. Settlements can vary from very simple to very complicated. Legal counsel should be sought before signing a settlement agreement.

Grandparents don’t have independent rights to visit their grandchildren and certainly not independent custody rights to their grandchildren. The only time or the only situation where you might have a grandparent assume custody or be granted guardianship over a grandchild is if both parents in some way aren’t able to care for their children, where there’s drug or alcohol issues or there’s incarceration issues, and they’re really looking to the next of kin to care for those children. Grandparents sometimes come into that.

State v. Anthony Sims, Jr. (A-53-20) (085369): Justice Albin dissented in the Sims’ case because the admission of the defendant’s statement to detectives violated his right against self-incrimination. The final decision by the court held that there is no error in the trial court denying the motion for the defendant to suppress his statement to the police and the plaintiff’s hearsay statements at the pretrial hearing were admissible. The plaintiff’s testimony implicated Sims’ violated his own confrontation rights. Whether or not police officers, prior to interrogation are required to inform an arrestee of the charges that will be filed against them is related to the Miranda rights issue. Sims was not told about the charges he was facing and without knowing the charges the defendant faces, they will not be able to intelligently decide whether to waive their right to self-incrimination. It should not have been difficult for police officers to make him aware of these charges because they justify the defendant’s detention. You can see which direction Justice Albin was going in by his dissenting opinion, to enhance defendants’ Miranda rights.