Today's Date: Add To Favorites
Immigration Divides Romney and Giuliani
Political and Legal | 2007/08/15 09:32
Mitt Romney accuses former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani of making his city a haven for illegal immigrants. Giuliani denies it, insisting he cracked down on lawlessness of every kind. It's the first real clash between two leading Republican candidates who are vulnerable on immigration, a volatile issue that infuriates Republican conservatives who hold sway over primary elections.

At issue are so-called sanctuary cities, places where city employees are not required to report illegal immigrants to federal authorities. Some, such as San Francisco, have declared themselves sanctuaries or refuges. Others, like New York, have never adopted the "sanctuary" moniker.

New York's policy, issued by Democratic Mayor Ed Koch in 1988, is intended to make illegal immigrants feel that they can report crimes, send their children to school or seek medical treatment without fear of being reported.

An estimated half-million illegal and undocumented immigrants live in New York, and only a fraction are deported each year.

"What's the best thing to do about that?" Giuliani asked in 1996. "Put them in a situation in which they keep children out of school? Put them in a situation in which they don't go to hospitals? Or put them in a situation in which they don't report crimes to the police?"

Giuliani went to court to preserve the policy, suing over a 1996 attempt by Congress to undo the city's protections. He lost, but Mayor Mike Bloomberg later issued a new, broader version of the policy that is still in effect.

In the presidential campaign, Giuliani and Romney are talking tough on immigration, even opposing the bipartisan immigration overhaul backed by President Bush. Yet their records are not necessarily tough. For example:

_Several illegal immigrants worked on Romney's lawn as employees of a lawn care company; Romney said he didn't know the company had hired illegal workers.

_As mayor, Giuliani often spoke positively about illegal immigrants: "If you come here, and you work hard, and you happen to be in an undocumented status, you're one of the people who we want in this city," he told The New York Times in 1994.

_Both Romney and Giuliani spoke favorably of 2006 legislation providing a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants; they opposed a similar bill earlier this year.

Immigration inflames conservatives in early voting states such as Iowa and South Carolina, where some argue that illegal immigrants are straining schools and hospitals, lowering wages or taking jobs from law-abiding citizens.

In Aiken, S.C., on Tuesday, Giuliani repeated a pledge to closely track immigrants with tamperproof identity cards, bolster fencing and law enforcement at the border and deport illegal immigrants who commit crimes.

Giuliani planned to highlight his support for a physical and technological fence with new radio ads beginning Wednesday in New Hampshire and Iowa. His technological fence would be a system of motion detectors, night vision monitors and video cameras.

Romney, inspecting border fencing and checkpoints Monday in San Diego, reiterated his plan to hire more Border Patrol agents, sanction employers who hire illegal immigrants and cut federal dollars for sanctuary cities.

Romney blames "don't tell" policies, and Giuliani's support for them, for luring millions of illegal immigrants to the United States.

"New York City was the poster child for sanctuary cities in the country," Romney said last week in Bettendorf, Iowa.

Giuliani's defense is that he cracked down on all crimes, including illegal immigration. "New York City had the least amount of illegality per capita of any major city in the country, and I brought that change about," he said last week in Colorado Springs, Colo.

And his campaign accused Romney of hypocrisy, pointing out that as governor of Massachusetts, Romney did not try to punish sanctuary cities _ Cambridge, Orleans and Somerville _ in his own state.

"He had three sanctuary cities in his own state," longtime Giuliani aide Randy Mastro said. "The New York City program was very different. We had a system that protected public safety by encouraging aliens to come forward to the authorities to report crimes, and then required authorities to cooperate in the investigation and prosecution of aliens who committed crimes."

Romney says he tried to curtail the problem by deputizing state police to enforce federal immigration laws.

"It was exactly in response to the fact that immigration laws were not being enforced," spokesman Kevin Madden said. "It was also in conjunction with his belief that enforcement has to be a joint state and federal effort."

Bloomberg, who may run for president himself, waded into the dispute this week. Asked Monday about the idea of New York as a sanctuary for illegal immigrants, he said, "Let 'em come."

"I can't think of any laboratory that shows better why you need a stream of immigrants than New York City," he added. "I don't know what to tell anybody. If they don't believe that immigrants add a heck of a lot more than they cost, they just aren't looking at the numbers."



Candidates stop short on same-sex marriage
Political and Legal | 2007/08/10 09:19

Melissa Etheridge confronted Hillary Rodham Clinton about her husband's gay rights record, accusing Bill Clinton of throwing gay and lesbian supporters "under the bus" by pushing for the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy and the Defense of Marriage Act. The Democrats' top three candidates, including Clinton, pledged support for gay rights at the first-ever nationally televised same-sex issues presidential forum - but they and other Democratic candidates attending refused to back gay and lesbian marriages.

Facing successive 15-minute interviews by gay rights advocates in Los Angeles last night, Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards all vowed to battle for gay, lesbian and transgender rights. But they stopped short of endorsing gay marriage - a hot-button culture-war issue that could alienate millions of independents and religious conservatives.

Etheridge, who announced she was a lesbian shortly after Bill Clinton was inaugurated in 1993, expressed bitterness at his inability to pass gay rights measures he promised during the campaign.

"It was a very hopeful time," she said. "But in the years that followed, our hearts were broken, we were thrown under the bus, we were pushed aside. All of those great promises ... were broken."

Clinton, who had been warmly received by the studio audience, seemed surprised by Etheridge's comments.

"Obviously, Melissa, I didn't see it quite the way you describe it," she said. " ... We didn't get as much done as I would have liked, but I believe there was a lot of honest effort going on."

The candidates appeared in the order they accepted the invitation from the LOGO cable network and Human Rights Campaign, with Obama first - and Clinton last.

"This forum is a real measure of how far we've come as a community, but there are many of us in our community who'd like to see the candidates come farther on gay marriage," said Fred Hochberg, dean of the Milano urban policy institute at New School University, one of Clinton's highest-profile gay supporters.

Suffolk Legis. Jon Cooper, a supporter of Obama who attended the forum, echoed those sentiments, saying, "Although I would love them to come out in support of same sex civil marriage, it's not going to happen right now ... "

The forum underscored the gay paradox in the Democratic Party: The candidates support gay rights but are wary of alienating party conservatives and religious blacks in the South.

Earlier this year, Clinton and Obama angered Human Rights Campaign leaders by refusing to immediately and forcefully rebuke a general's claim that homosexuality was "immoral." They later released statements indicating their disagreement.

Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich and former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel were the only Democrats who have expressed support for gay marriage. Sens. Joseph Biden and Christopher Dodd, who oppose same-sex marriage, declined the invitation, as did all Republican candidates, including Rudy Giuliani, who supports some gay rights.

All the Democrats in attendance pledged to back broad new anti-discrimination statutes, want to scrap Bill Clinton's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy for the military, and believe in civil unions that allow same-sex couples the same rights as heterosexual couples.

"I'm going to be more sympathetic not because I'm black, I'm going to be more sympathetic because this is the cause of my life," Obama said.

Panelist Jonathan Capehart challenged Obama on his opposition to gay marriage, saying his position was "old school." Obama used the remark to point out he'd been the first candidate to accept LOGO's invitation. "There's a reason why I was here first," he said.

Etheridge challenged John Edwards on his recent comments suggesting he was opposed to same-sex marriage based on his religious convictions.

"I have heard in the past that you felt uncomfortable among gay people," she said. Edwards denied her assertion but offered an apology for linking gay issues and Christianity.

"I shouldn't have said that," he said. "I believe to my core in equality ... I will not impose my faith belief on the American people."

Gay activists react

"I was thinking 'When will they get it that equal means equal?' Senator Obama was talking about how he wanted to extend all rights of marriage to people through civil union. But laws are defined by marriage. Laws are not defined by civil union. We've learned that through New Jersey."

- David Kilmnick, executive director of Long Island Gay and Lesbian Youth

"I appreciated John Edwards speaking about the homeless teenagers in the L.A. community center. That was something that people didn't talk about yet and it's very important - people getting thrown out of the house because they're gay."

- Lauren Van Kirk, treasurer of the Stonewall Democrats of Suffolk County

"My family comes from the South, so I understand where he's [Obama's] coming from. But between him and Edwards, both of them fall short. They still fall short of calling it marriage. ... Civil union: it's second-class citizenship."

- Sheila Marino-Thomas, data entry worker for Marriage Equality New York, who has been with her partner for 14 years

"It sounded like she [Clinton] was handing the responsibility for moving the ball forward - fighting - and she said 'well, you guys in the human rights campaign are doing the right thing,' as if to say we can't be doing that in the political realm. It's an easier thing to say, rather than saying I'm going to take up that struggle."



Bush signs intelligence surveillance bill
Political and Legal | 2007/08/05 19:38
President Bush on Sunday signed into law an expansion of the government's power to eavesdrop on foreign terror suspects without the need for warrants.

The law, approved by the Senate and the House just before Congress adjourned for its summer break, was deemed a priority by Bush and his chief intelligence officials.

Bush signed the bill into law on Sunday afternoon at his retreat at Camp David, Md.

"When our intelligence professionals have the legal tools to gather information about the intentions of our enemies, America is safer," Bush said. "And when these same legal tools also protect the civil liberties of Americans, then we can have the confidence to know that we can preserve our freedoms while making America safer."

The administration said the measure is needed to speed the National Security Agency's ability to intercept phone calls, e-mails and other communications involving foreign nationals "reasonably believed to be outside the United States."

The law is designed to capture communications that pass through the United States.

Civil liberties groups and many Democrats say it goes too far, possibly enabling the government to wiretap U.S. residents communicating with overseas parties without adequate oversight from courts or Congress.

The new law updates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and it will expire in six months unless Congress renews it. Bush wants deeper, permanent changes.

"We must remember that our work is not done," Bush prodded. "This bill is a temporary, narrowly focused statute to deal with the most immediate shortcomings in the law."



US Senate panel backs FDA tobacco regulation bill
Political and Legal | 2007/08/02 05:36

A Senate committee Wednesday embraced legislation that would for the first time allow federal regulation of cigarettes.

The bill, approved 13-8 by the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, would require the Food and Drug Administration to restrict tobacco advertising, regulate warning labels and remove hazardous ingredients.

The agency also would be given the authority to set standards for products that tobacco companies advertise as "reduced risk" products.

"This is an enormous step forward," said Matt Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. "This could end up being the signature public health action this Congress takes."

The bill has broad bipartisan support in the Senate, where more than 50 senators have signed on as co-sponsors. A similar bill passed the chamber in 2004 but was blocked in the House.

The tobacco legislation was crafted through several years of negotiations led by Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., involving health groups and tobacco giant Philip Morris, which broke from its competitors to endorse FDA regulation.

The bill would allow the FDA to reduce the amount of nicotine in cigarettes, but only Congress could permanently ban them.

The committee adopted an amendment by Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., that would ban clove cigarettes, reversing a controversial decision by Kennedy to allow the FDA to make that decision.

Kennedy, the panel's chairman, said he was responding to several senators who contacted him with concerns that a ban on cloves would not be compliant with World Trade Organization rules. But Kennedy agreed to the ban after several senators objected.

Most cloves are marketed in Asia, and Philip Morris, a unit of New York-based Altria Group Inc. (MO), recently launched a Marlboro cigarette flavored with cloves in Indonesia.

Kennedy said at the meeting that Philip Morris had "nothing to do with our decision" and he supported the clove ban as long as it is WTO compliant.

Philip Morris's competitors are strongly opposed to the overall bill, saying it would lock in Philip Morris's dominant market share. The panel rejected several amendments by Republican Sen. Richard Burr, who represents R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. in his home state of North Carolina. Kennedy said that Burr's amendments would undermine the legislation.

After the hearing, Burr said he would not rule out trying to hold up the bill on the Senate floor.

Enzi, the top Republican on the panel, also opposes the legislation and has objected to Philip Morris's involvement.

"If this bill is good for big tobacco, how can it be good for public health?," Enzi asked after the hearing. "The fact is, it can't. This bill is nothing more than a 'Marlboro Protection Act,' written to keep Philip Morris at the top of the tobacco market."

Enzi has introduced his own bill that would aim to greatly shrink the size of the tobacco market over the next 20 years.




GOP senator wants probe; Spitzer says no
Political and Legal | 2007/07/31 03:27
Gov. Eliot Spitzer said there is no need for a deeper investigation into his aides' roles in a scheme to discredit a lead political rival, something the head of the Senate Investigations Committee called for Monday.

"Given that the attorney general and inspector general have closed their investigations and found no violations of law, the appointment of a special prosecutor is unnecessary," Spitzer spokeswoman Christine Anderson said.

Investigations Committee Chairman George Winner, a Republican senator from Elmira, said naming a special prosecutor was "the bipartisan, responsible way to move forward."

Winner said he was surprised Spitzer "continues to stonewall," adding, "I just think that's unfortunate because this whole thing will continue to fester."

In a report last week, Attorney General Andrew Cuomo found that two top Spitzer aides had, with the help of the State Police, gathered information about Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno's use of state vehicles in New York City and released it to the media. They were attempting to smear Bruno's reputation, the report said. The aides did not break any laws, nor did the GOP senator's use of the helicopter, Cuomo found.

Spitzer, a Democrat, has said repeatedly that he did not know what his staffers had done. He apologized and disciplined two of them.

Monday, Winner said he sent a letter to Spitzer earlier in the day requesting the governor appoint Cuomo as a special prosecutor "with full subpoena power" to investigate the administration's alleged misuse of the State Police.

In the letter, he said such an inquiry could assure the public Spitzer was not involved.

Winner said the special prosecutor could also be someone appointed by Cuomo.

The scandal came to light after Cuomo released his report last week that two of Spitzer's appointees ?Darren Dopp, communications director, and Richard Baum, secretary to the governor ?declined to be interviewed by Cuomo's investigators. Instead, they submitted sworn statements. Baum has said he was not aware of what Dopp, who was placed on unpaid leave indefinitely, and William Howard, deputy homeland security secretary, were doing. Howard has been reassigned to a position outside Spitzer's office.

Last week, the state Ethics Commission announced its own investigation into the matter.

But Winner questioned the commission's independence, noting members are appointed by the governor and the body has limited jurisdiction. Spitzer has made one appointment to the five-member commission and nominated a current member when he was attorney general.

Meanwhile, Anderson said the governor's office has turned over records to the Ethics Commission. She said the records were delivered Friday and are the same e-mails and other documents turned over to the Attorney General's and Inspector General's offices. They include e-mails involving Baum.

The Attorney General's Office declined to comment on Monday's developments. "The findings of our report speak for themselves," said Jeffrey Lerner, a spokesman for Cuomo.

Bruno said in a statement Monday that he was disappointed the governor rejected the call for a special prosecutor.

"In light of this, the Senate will continue to review all options that are available to assure that we get to the truth and to assure that all who were involved in this unfortunate situation are held accountable."



Democrats Urge Perjury Probe of Gonzales
Political and Legal | 2007/07/26 11:27
Senate Democrats called for a perjury investigation against Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on Thursday and subpoenaed top presidential aide Karl Rove in a deepening political and legal clash with the Bush administration. "It has become apparent that the attorney general has provided at a minimum half-truths and misleading statements," four Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee wrote in a letter to Solicitor General Paul Clement.

They dispatched the letter shortly before Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., announced the subpoena of Rove, the president's top political strategist, in remarks on the Senate floor. The White House has claimed executive privilege to block Congress from receiving documents or testimony by current and former presidential aides.

``We have now reached a point where the accumulated evidence shows that political considerations factored into the unprecedented firing of at least nine United States attorneys last year,'' said Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

In response, White House spokesman Tony Fratto said, "Every day congressional Democrats prove that they're more interested in headlines than doing the business Americans want them to do. And Americans are now taking notice that this Congress, under Democratic leadership, is failing to tackle important issues," he said.

Gonzales is at the center of the U.S. attorney controversy, but the call for a perjury probe involved alleged conflicts between testimony he gave the Judiciary Committee in two appearances, one last year and the other this week. The issue revolves around whether there was internal administration dissent over the president's warrantless wiretapping program.

As for the firing of the prosecutors, e-mails released by the Justice Department show Gonzales' aides conferred with Rove on the matter.

Leahy also said he was issuing a subpoena for J. Scott Jennings, a White House political aide. The deadline for him and Rove to comply was set as Aug. 2.

"For over four months, I have exhausted every avenue seeking the voluntary cooperation of Karl Rove and J. Scott Jennings, but to no avail," the Vermont lawmaker said. "They and the White House have stonewalled every request. Indeed, the White House is choosing to withhold documents and is instructing witnesses who are former officials to refuse to answer questions and provide relevant information and documents."

The call for a perjury investigation marked yet another complication for Gonzales, whose fitness to serve has been bluntly criticized by Republicans and Democrats alike.

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, told reporters aboard Air Force One during the day that he "might" raise the issue with the president, who has steadfastly stood by his longtime friend.

And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., told reporters, "I'm convinced that he's not telling the truth," based on conversations with Democrats on the Judiciary Committee.

In a separate letter Thursday to Gonzales, Leahy said he would give the attorney general eight days to correct, clarify or otherwise change his testimony "so that, consistent with your oath, they are the whole truth."

In their letter to Clement, the four senators wrote that Gonzales' testimony last year that there had been no internal dissent over the president's warrantless wiretapping program conflicted with testimony by former Deputy Attorney General James Comey and with Gonzales' own statements this week before the Judiciary Committee.

They also said Gonzales falsely told the panel that he had not talked about the firings with other Justice Department officials. His former White House liaison, Monica Goodling, told the House Judiciary Committee under a grant of immunity that she had an "uncomfortable" conversation with Gonzales in which he outlined his recollection of what happened and asked her for her reaction.

"The attorney general should be held to the highest ethical standards," the senators wrote.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., one of the four lawmakers to sign the letter, was sharply critical of Gonzales. "There's no wiggle room." Schumer said.
It's not misleading. Those are deceiving. Those are lying."

Clement would decide whether to appoint a special prosecutor because Gonzales and outgoing Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty have recused themselves from the investigation that involves them. The Justice Department's No. 3 official, Associate Attorney General William Mercer, is serving only in an acting capacity and therefore does not have the authority to do so.

At issue is what was discussed at a March 10, 2004, congressional briefing. A letter from then-Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte said the briefing concerned the administration's terrorist surveillance program on the eve of its expiration.

But Gonzales, at Tuesday's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, repeatedly testified that the issue at hand was not about the terrorist surveillance program, which allowed the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on suspects in the United States without receiving prior court approval.

Instead, Gonzales said, the emergency meetings on March 10, 2004, focused on an intelligence program that he would not describe. He said the meeting prompted him to go to the bedside of ailing then-Attorney General John Ashcroft to recertify the surveillance program, but he denied pressuring Ashcroft to do so. Ashcroft, recovering from gall bladder surgery, refused.

White House press secretary Tony Snow defended Gonzales on Thursday but would not talk about the subject of the 2004 briefing.

"Unfortunately we get into areas that you cannot discuss openly," Snow said. "It's a very complex issue. But the attorney general was speaking consistently. The president supports him. I think at some point this is going to be something where members are going to have to go behind closed doors and have a fuller discussion of the issues. But I can't go any further than that."



US doubles Bin Laden bounty to 50 million
Political and Legal | 2007/07/13 10:58
The US Senate Friday doubled the bounty on Osama bin Laden to 50 million dollars, reflecting frustration that the Al Qaeda mastermind remains free and rising anxiety over possible future attacks. The vote followed a flurry of reports that the group behind the September 11 strikes in 2001 had rebuilt its safe haven, leadership and capacity to plot terror operations, and was trying to sneak operatives into the United States.

The Senate voted by 87-1 to boost the price on Bin Laden’s head under the State Department Rewards for Justice program, which has already paid out millions of dollars for top US targets, including Saddam Hussein’s sons.

It directs Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice ‘to authorize a reward of 50 million dollars for the capture or death or information leading to the capture or death of Osama bin Laden.’

The bill also addresses frustration among some lawmakers that the Bush administration has still not caught bin Laden, despite launching a massive manhunt after the September 11 attacks, nearly six years go.

It requires the secretaries of state and defence and the director of national intelligence to produce a report to Congress every 90 days on progress towards bringing bin Laden and other terror leaders to justice.

North Dakota Senator Byron Dorgan, who wrote the amendment to a defence policy bill, said ‘it has been six years, and Al Qaeda is now rebuilding its terrorist training camps, along with the Taleban, in a safe harbor.

‘It has been six years and they are reconstituting their ability to attack us,’ he said.

Dorgan warned Al Qaeda ‘remains the greatest threat to the United States, even after these six long years; after two wars ... after trillions of dollars spent on those wars and for homeland security, after the deaths of thousands of our military, and after the wounding of tens of thousands of our military.’ Senators who spoke on the amendment mentioned a leaked draft of a new National Intelligence Estimate, which reportedly warned Al Qaeda had rebuilt a safe haven and leadership structure in Pakistani border areas.

As debate about a possible future attack by Al Qaeda on US territory mounted in Washington, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said this week that he had a ‘gut’ feeling there was a heightened current risk of an attack.

President George W. Bush on Thursday denied reports that the intelligence assessment found Al Qaeda was back to its pre-September 11 strength.

‘There is a perception in the coverage that Al Qaeda may be as strong today as they were prior to September 11th. That’s simply not the case,’ Bush said.

White House deputy spokeswoman Dana Perino said Friday that the new national intelligence estimate was expected to be delivered to Bush within weeks.

The Washington Post reported Thursday that the group had rebuilt itself despite extensive US efforts to destroy the network.

The CIA’s deputy director for intelligence, John Kringen, told a congressional committee on Wednesday that Al Qaeda appears to be ‘fairly well-settled into the safe haven in the ungoverned spaces of Pakistan.’

The Rewards for Justice Program has so far paid out 62 million dollars in bounties leading to top US terror suspects or for the prevention of terror attacks, the State Department says.

Among the top payouts were the 15 million dollars each for Saddam’s son’s Uday and Qusay Hussein, killed by US troops in Iraq in 2003.



[PREV] [1] ..[18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26].. [28] [NEXT]
All
Class Action
Bankruptcy
Biotech
Breaking Legal News
Business
Corporate Governance
Court Watch
Criminal Law
Health Care
Human Rights
Insurance
Intellectual Property
Labor & Employment
Law Center
Law Promo News
Legal Business
Legal Marketing
Litigation
Medical Malpractice
Mergers & Acquisitions
Political and Legal
Politics
Practice Focuses
Securities
Elite Lawyers
Tax
Featured Law Firms
Tort Reform
Venture Business News
World Business News
Law Firm News
Attorneys in the News
Events and Seminars
Environmental
Legal Careers News
Patent Law
Consumer Rights
International
Legal Spotlight
Current Cases
State Class Actions
Federal Class Actions
New Hampshire courts hear 2 ..
PA high court orders countie..
Tight US House races in Cali..
North Carolina Attorney Gene..
Republicans take Senate majo..
What to know about the unpre..
A man who threatened to kill..
Ford cuts 2024 earnings guid..
Kenya’s deputy president pl..
South Korean court acquits f..
Supreme Court grapples with ..
Supreme Court leaves in plac..
Kentucky sheriff accused of ..
New rules regarding election..
North Carolina appeals court..


Class action or a representative action is a form of lawsuit in which a large group of people collectively bring a claim to court and/or in which a class of defendants is being sued. This form of collective lawsuit originated in the United States and is still predominantly a U.S. phenomenon, at least the U.S. variant of it. In the United States federal courts, class actions are governed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule. Since 1938, many states have adopted rules similar to the FRCP. However, some states like California have civil procedure systems which deviate significantly from the federal rules; the California Codes provide for four separate types of class actions. As a result, there are two separate treatises devoted solely to the complex topic of California class actions. Some states, such as Virginia, do not provide for any class actions, while others, such as New York, limit the types of claims that may be brought as class actions. They can construct your law firm a brand new website, lawyer website templates and help you redesign your existing law firm site to secure your place in the internet.
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Lorain Elyria Divorce Lawyer
www.loraindivorceattorney.com
Legal Document Services in Los Angeles, CA
Best Legal Document Preparation
www.tllsg.com
Car Accident Lawyers
Sunnyvale, CA Personal Injury Attorney
www.esrajunglaw.com
East Greenwich Family Law Attorney
Divorce Lawyer - Erica S. Janton
www.jantonfamilylaw.com/about
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
  Law Firm Directory
 
 
 
© ClassActionTimes.com. All rights reserved.

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Class Action Times as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. Affordable Law Firm Web Design