Most sites on the web are at least faintly familiar with the implementation of legal regulations related to their sites. Most, however, have never heard of the California Catch-22.

Most sites tend to view complying with legal regulations as a somewhat amorphous subject. You know you are supposed to do something, but are not particularly sure why or what to do. This leads to the rather humorous situation where many sites have terms and conditions that are completely inapplicable the what they are doing and also look startlingly similar to terms and conditions found on other sites. One might even imagine a bit of “cut and paste” was going on, but who am I to say!

Much of the confusion is understandable. It comes from the lack of clear legal directives by the federal government. In most areas, you get vague “suggestions” put forth by an impotent FTC.

Interestingly, one state has taken over for the federal government – California. Because the right of privacy is actually mentioned in the constitution of the state, unlike in the federal version, the state has passed numerous laws regulating how sites must handle visitors information from a privacy perspective, sales information, security efforts and so on. Frankly, it is a pretty amazing that a group of state politicians managed to pull it off. There are laws ranging from how a privacy policy must be set up to requirements that you disclose identify theft events to the media. This is why you see major companies issuing press releases about security breaches leading to identify theft.

As a site owner located outside of California, you are probably wondering why you should care about the laws of California. Well, you better be in compliance because California has a unique way of defining what sites the laws apply to. Nearly all of the relevant California legislation contains provisions defining jurisdiction by the visitor, not the site.

So, what does this mean in plain English? You must comply with the laws if you have any customers that are residents of California or from which you obtain certain types of information. If you make a sale to a California resident, you must comply. If you collect the name, email address and so on as part of creating a newsletter mailing list, you must comply!

Given the size of the California population, it is the rare site that never makes a sale or collects information from a California resident. In short, you need to comply with everything from the California Online Privacy Protect Act to the various identify theft prevention and notice regulations. Fail to do so, and it can come back to haunt you when things go wrong.

By: Richard Chapo
Richard A. Chapo is an internet attorney with SanDiegoBusinessLawFirm.com.

Featured as a California Law resource, by California Personal Injury Attorneys - Accident Lawyers, a California personal injury attorney / accident lawyer directory, listing hundreds of links to California personal injury attorney / accident lawyer websites and over 1,500 non website courtesy listings.

Are you interested in politics? If so visit Politics In America - Political Viewpoints

Feeling down or stressed out? Take a break have a few laughs. Visit Legal Humor, a selection of legal, lawyer and attorney jokes, humor and satire.

The information contained in the above post is not intended as a source of legal advice. You should not act upon or rely on information in this or any other post without the advice of competent legal counsel.

Comments: For those of you that would like to comment on this or any other post in this blog, go to the Contact me link on the upper right hand side of this page and send your comment via that link. If your comment is on topic, and even fairly well written, we will post it with the article. If you have a site that you would like to be linked to your comment please supply it and we will include that link.

When a person has been lawfully arrested for a DUI, the Implied Consent provision of the California Vehicle Code mandates that they take a chemical test in order to determine their blood alcohol content (BAC). Although a person may refuse to submit to a chemical test, law enforcement is authorized to take a "forced blood draw." A forced blood draw can be either the incapacitation of a person by law enforcement officers (physically holding him down) or the threat of doing so, while trained medical personnel draw the blood for use in the later prosecution for DUI.

The United States Supreme Court decided the forced blood draw issue in the seminal case of Schmerber v. California, in 1966. This case held that it is permissible for the police to take a warrantless taking of a person's blood for the purpose of chemical testing to determine intoxication, provided that the taking of the sample is done in a medically approved manner, incident to a lawful arrest, and based upon the reasonable belief that the person is intoxicated. If these guidelines are followed, then a forced blood draw does not violate the 4th Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure.

Due to the temporary nature of alcohol in the blood and the relatively short time it takes for it to dissipate (several hours), courts have held it to be unreasonable to mandate a warrant to invade the person's body with a needle in order to extract their blood. The opposing view holds that a forced blood draw is an invasion of privacy, a violation of the right against self-incrimination, and an act of violence.

In California, a forced blood draw is considered a "refusal." A refusal has many repercussions, including fines, jail time, and suspension of driving privileges. Therefore, a forced blood draw may result in both a conviction for DUI plus added penalties. Some police agencies have a tendency to state that the DUI suspect "refused" even when they did not. Some common issues include misunderstandings resulting from language barriers, over-reactive police officers, or the fear of needles (where a breath test is not available).

In order to withhold the forced blood draw results, a suppression motion may be instituted. A suppression motion is a motion usually made before the start of trial, where the court is asked to exclude evidence because it was not gathered in a constitutionally valid way. As mentioned previously in this article, the Supreme Court stated that the proper protocol to be followed in a forced blood draw. If these protocols are not followed, then the DUI defendant may validly claim a violation of his or her 4th Amendment right. Thus, it is not only proper, but mandated, to suppress this evidence. Suppressed evidence may not be considered by the judge or heard by the jury. According the legal principle of "fruit of the poisonous tree," any evidence gained as a result of the unconstitutional evidence must also be suppressed. This is a serious and necessary weapon in the fight for constitutional rights and one of the few safeguards the law offers where a person's rights have been violated.

By: Darren Kavinoky
www.nocuffs.com
Darren Kavinoky is a Los Angeles-based criminal defense lawyer who practices throughout California. He is the Managing Shareholder of The Kavinoky Law Firm, an 11-lawyer criminal defense firm that handles criminal defense matters exclusively.

Featured as a California Law resource, by California Personal Injury Attorneys - Accident Lawyers, a California personal injury attorney / accident lawyer directory, listing hundreds of links to California personal injury attorney / accident lawyer websites and over 1,500 non website courtesy listings.

Are you interested in politics? If so visit Politics In America - Political Viewpoints

Feeling down or stressed out? Take a break have a few laughs. Visit Legal Humor, a selection of legal, lawyer and attorney jokes, humor and satire.

The information contained in the above post is not intended as a source of legal advice. You should not act upon or rely on information in this or any other post without the advice of competent legal counsel.

Comments: For those of you that would like to comment on this or any other post in this blog, go to the Contact me link on the upper right hand side of this page and send your comment via that link. If your comment is on topic, and even fairly well written, we will post it with the article. If you have a site that you would like to be linked to your comment please supply it and we will include that link.

Probate law is an expensive process that can often take a year to complete. The procedure by which assets are divided according to the last will and wishes of the deceased can be quite complicated, and in many cases, vehemently contested.

Probate law primarily concerns the execution, interpretation, and contest of legal wills and estates. A probate court may be known by various names depending on where it is, however, probate law always concerns how a deceased person's estate is handled by his executor or heirs. The word probate describes the process through which a person's final wishes are carried out with regard to who should administer the process, how assets will be sold and divided, and what will happen to any existing estate. The estate is the term used to refer to the legal entity that is comprised of a decedent's assets after they themselves have died. An estate may own property, profit, pay taxes, be sued, and owe debts.

A will is a legal document that exists under civil law. It is considered to be the last, definitive, and dying wish made by a person before their death, and for a will that has been ratified by a court, the legally appointed administrator of this process - the executor - usually either a legal professional or a competent friend or colleague of the deceased, has an obligation to ensure that the decedent's last wishes are carried out to the extent that is practical, legal, and affordable. Under probate law, the executor is entitled to charge the estate a reasonable fee for their services.

A will may include simple instructions for dividing the property of an estate between the children of the deceased, or it may include detailed instructions for using the estate to establish a scholarship committee, or trust. Despite the finality of a will, it is possible to legally contest even a will that has been ratified by a court. If an executor is suspected of mishandling the affairs of an estate, beneficiaries are permitted to request that court ask the executor to account for their actions while administering the will.

When a person who has left a will dies, a named executor is responsible for administering the will. They are under no obligation to agree to this, as it is a time-consuming process that an administrator accepts a considerable deal of personal liability for managing. If the named executor refuses (or one is not named), the duty falls to the most senior beneficiary of the will. Except in emergencies, it usually takes longer than a month to appoint an executor.

All recipients in the will, and all people who would legally be recipients if no will were left must be informed of the death by post, giving them the opportunity to prepare a challenge to the will or appointment of an administrator or executor. Before any division of assets can occur, the deceased's estate must pay all outstanding taxes that were owed at death, or have been incurred by the estate itself. Finally, during probate, all creditors are given an opportunity to come forward in order to be compensated by the estate for any outstanding debts that the deceased carried at debt.

Probate is invariably a costly process, and usually far more time consuming than most people care to tolerate, so methods to avoid probate completely are being increasingly utilized. Some jurisdictions include procedures for streamlining or avoiding the probate process completely to reduce loads on courts and cost to beneficiaries. For example, in the state of California, probate law includes a provision for people whose assets were worth less than $100,000 at the time of their death by which probate can be avoided outright. Similarly, assets conferred to a living trust or jointly held by another person under joint tenancy laws (for instance, a surviving spouse) need not be subject to the probate process.

Probate law is an expensive, drawn out process that often takes up to a year to fully complete. The processes by which a decedent's assets are divided according to their last will and wishes can be quite complicated, and in many cases, vehemently contested. For this reason, anyone with doubts or questions about this area of law would be well advised to book an initial consultation with a firm that specializes in probate law.

By: Andrew Stratton
To avoid the costly probate process, have your questions and concerns addressed. Melcher's Law firm has over 30 years experience in wills, trusts, estate planning, and probate administration. http://www.melcherslawfirm.com.

Featured as a California Law resource, by California Personal Injury Attorneys - Accident Lawyers, a California personal injury attorney / accident lawyer directory, listing hundreds of links to California personal injury attorney / accident lawyer websites and over 1,500 non website courtesy listings.

Are you interested in politics? If so visit Politics In America - Political Viewpoints

Feeling down or stressed out? Take a break have a few laughs. Visit Legal Humor, a selection of legal, lawyer and attorney jokes, humor and satire.

The information contained in the above post is not intended as a source of legal advice. You should not act upon or rely on information in this or any other post without the advice of competent legal counsel.

Comments: For those of you that would like to comment on this or any other post in this blog, go to the Contact me link on the upper right hand side of this page and send your comment via that link. If your comment is on topic, and even fairly well written, we will post it with the article. If you have a site that you would like to be linked to your comment please supply it and we will include that link.

Most often when people think about false imprisonment, they think about people being falsely arrested by the police. Most people don’t know that non-police officers can be liable for false imprisonment under many different circumstances.

The purpose of this article is to give a brief synopsis of the civil tort of false imprisonment in the state of California.

A basic definition of civil false imprisonment is; “a person intentionally holding another person within the bounds of a fixed area, without the consent of the person being held, and without a privilege that would excuse the conduct.”

For instance, let’s say that a man locks a woman in a room without her permission. This would be a classic case of civil false imprisonment.

Another example would be a person holding something of value to another person with the intent to make them stay in a certain place, and without the consent of the person whose valuables are being held.

Civil false imprisonment could also include one person grabbing onto another person without their consent, and holding them so that they cannot leave.

There are many other examples of false imprisonment that I can provide, however, the above examples are meant to give you an idea of what the civil tort of false imprisonment is in the state of California.

One key element of the civil tort of false imprisonment is that the person being held must reasonably believe that they cannot leave. Reasonable is a legal term of art used in the legal world. What reasonable basically means is: what would a reasonable prudent person do or believe under similar circumstances.

Another key element of the tort of false imprisonment is that the person doing the imprisoning, must not have a privilege to do so.

Examples of privileges that would allow a person to hold another person within the bounds of a fixed area are: shopkeepers who are investigating shoplifting at a store; civilians who have witnessed a felony, and place the person who committed a felony under citizen’s arrests; or police officers who have probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed.

As with other intentional torts, victims of false imprisonment are entitled to not only compensatory damages, but they may also recover punitive damages. (Punishment)

Norman Gregory Fernandez, ESQ. Copyright 2006

By: Norman Fernandez
Norman Gregory Fernandez is a California lawyer who handles many types of legal matters. You can reach him through his website at http://www.norman-law.com.

Featured as a California Law resource, by California Personal Injury Attorneys - Accident Lawyers, a California personal injury attorney / accident lawyer directory, listing hundreds of links to California personal injury attorney / accident lawyer websites and over 1,500 non website courtesy listings.

Are you interested in politics? If so visit Politics In America - Political Viewpoints

Feeling down or stressed out? Take a break have a few laughs. Visit Legal Humor, a selection of legal, lawyer and attorney jokes, humor and satire.

The information contained in the above post is not intended as a source of legal advice. You should not act upon or rely on information in this or any other post without the advice of competent legal counsel.

Comments: For those of you that would like to comment on this or any other post in this blog, go to the Contact me link on the upper right hand side of this page and send your comment via that link. If your comment is on topic, and even fairly well written, we will post it with the article. If you have a site that you would like to be linked to your comment please supply it and we will include that link.