A will contest challenges the validity of the testator’s (will signer) intent and seeks to set aside the document or some of its terms. This article describes some of the grounds to bring a successful challenge.

In California, a will contest begins after a will is submitted to the probate court. An “executor” or “personal representative” will request that the court confirm the validity of the will, and then grant permission to distribute the decedent’s estate according to the document’s terms.

A person that was disinherited, completely omitted, or left a smaller amount than expected, can challenge the will on a number of grounds:

Undue influence. This is perhaps the most common element that can be shown to contest a will. An elder with substantial signs of dementia (long and short term memory loss) can become quite vulnerable to improper suggestions and manipulation. In essence, undue influence means taking advantage of another person’s weaker state of mind.

Coercion. This is another form of wrongful manipulation, and similar to “menace”. It involves using threats or intimidation to badger one’s desires and wishes into submission. Wrongfully imposing one’s own wants onto another.

Fraud. This intentional act requires the abuser to have misrepresented a material fact to the victim. The victim must have relied upon the fact, taken action against (what would otherwise have been) his or her better judgment, and caused damage to himself or another.

Duress. This is similar to taking advantage of another’s weaker state of mind, but generally applies to a psychological problem brought on by a specific set of circumstances (the recent death of a loved one, pending medical emergency, etc.). It involves the exploitation of the victim’s stressful mindset.

Mistake. Often, the testator simply made a mistake. For example, inadvertently forgetting to mention one of her seven children (with whom a loving relationship had always existed). The elder law attorney who drafted the will may have made a mistake and went unnoticed when reviewed by the client.

These are some of the ways that a will contest can occur.

Do you know What is a Irrevocable Trust? If you don’t, you are not the only person. Many people that do not have an understanding of what the meaning of an irrevocable trust is.

Although you may not know the meaning of the word, you have probably heard of trust before. When it comes to trusts there are two kinds. One of them is revocable and the other is irrevocable.

Now to give you a better understanding, it is important to get the gist of what a trust is. A trust involves a legal arrangement that a person makes for the things they own for when they die. This arrangement comes down to a written document, called either Trust agreement, or a Declaration of trust.

The individual who makes the document and bares the estate is the trustor or grantor that is listed. The other individual, who is given rights to the property for someone else, is listed as the trustee. This person has the obligation to protect the assets that are transferred within the trust.

Irrevocable trusts differ slightly than the general definition of a trust. Irrevocable trusts are when the grantor, or trustor no longer has legal control over the assets. This applies even in the case the person is alive.

There is still a trustee involved, who has the responsibility of managing the assets in the best interest for the beneficiary. The trustee should carry out the wishes of the trustor. Additionally, some tax benefits come along with these kinds of trusts.

Inter vivos trusts and living trusts refer to those who set up the trust while they are alive. Testamentary trusts, refer to those who put the information contained in their wills. A lot more information exists, in relation to irrevocable trusts. The best thing to do, is get all the information you can. This way you will know what you are getting yourself into.

Birth Injury lawyers are a dime a dozen. If you are reading this article then chances are you or someone you know are in need of the best Birth injury lawyer or law firm there is.

The key to finding a reputable birth injury lawyer is to do your research. This sounds easy enough but can quickly become daunting.  If you are searching for an attorney on the Internet it is important that you hone in the keywords that you use so that your search results are refined and more closely match your search.

You certainly don’t want a general practice lawyer representing such a critical matter and therefore need to ensure that you don’t waste time looking at all the personal injury lawyers in the net.  You are looking for someone who specializes in birth injuries.

So, when conducting your search make sure that you use keywords that are relevant. And for best results you should insert your city or state first… followed by the keyword “birth injury lawyer” or attorney etc.  This will ensure that you maximize your time and efforts when trying to find the best of the best.

It is recommended that you find at least 3 attorneys that you can call upon.  Some of the things you want to ask are:

• how many cases relevant to yours have they represented
• how many cases have they one
• what are their area’s of expertise
• how long have they been specializing in this area of law

Being diligent and efficient in your search for a birth injury lawyer is critical to ensure you find the very best.

One of the most misunderstood issues online has to do with copyright. Both with e-mail and Web site content copyright issues. For some reason, as with many things online, there is this incorrect perception that anything goes or that the entire online world is “public domain.” Many are finding out the hard way that when it comes to protecting creative collateral; copyright is law. And, copyright laws can and are being enforced online.

No, I am not an attorney. Nor do I play one on T.V. But I can help you avoid potential problems based on guiding clients for over a decade about the issues involved in using other’s work. Hopefully, this effort will help you from finding out the hard way that copyright is alive and well online.

1. “I can right click, save anything online and use it how I wish.” This is a perfect example of just because you can doesn’t mean you do! Those graphics or files were created by someone out there. They legally attained the copyright upon that file’s creation. Without their specific permission to use that file or graphic, you have no right to just take it and use it as you please. There is no exception to this rule. Always ask a site owner before you illegally swipe anything off their site to display on yours.
2. “As long as I note the author’s name, I can use their site’s content on my site.” Although you are being nice and giving credit where credit is due, you still need to ask the author’s permission to post their work on your site. The author may not want their information posted anywhere off their own site or they many not approve of your site as a venue for their information – that is their choice to make not yours. Just because you choose to give credit doesn’t give you permission. Always ask a site owner if you can use their content before you put it on your site.
3. “I can link to graphics on other sites so that they display on my site.” O.K., maybe you didn’t actually download the graphic and put it on your server, but if you are displaying someone’s work on your site without their permission the bottom line is still the same. And, you are using their server’s resources to display their files on your site.
4. “I can display pages from other Web sites within frames on my site.” Many site owners prohibit their site pages from being framed within another site because it gives the impression that the other site created the information. Many times folks innocently do this so they don’t have to send site visitors off their site for information they want to provide. Others do so to precisely give the impression it is content they created. A better option is to link to the information you like and create a new window to open when doing so to ensure your site is still available to your site visitors.
5. “If I only quote a portion of other site’s content and link to them I do not need their permission.” Again, it would behoove you to have permission to do so. Using only portions allows you to possibly give the wrong impression about the author’s overall content and this can be misleading at best. If you want to quote any written work in whole or part you need to ask permission to do so.
6. “If I pay someone to create graphics for my Web site, I own the copyright to those graphics.” Not necessarily. Unless your agreement with the graphic artist explicitly states that upon your payment all of their rights are then transferred to you in whole, you most likely only have exclusive license to use those graphics. In addition, to purchase the full copyright will cost you a much more than simple exclusivity! The fact is that the moment anything is created whether it be written or drawn, the creator owns the copyright – that’s the law. Copyright can only be transferred in a written legally binding agreement signed by the creator of the work stating they are transferring their rights to you. Saying you own it because you paid for it doesn’t make it legal fact.
7. “E-mail is not copyright protected once it is sent.” E-mail is a written work that once created is copyright protected by the author. This means you cannot post publicly an e-mail sent to you privately. You cannot post private e-mails to your site, to message boards or to your blog without the author’s specific permission to do so. Just because an e-mail was sent to you as a private communication does not mean you then own it and can do with it what you like. In addition, e-mail that is posted to a group of people, on a mailing list or Newsgroup does not make the e-mail available for reposting, copying, or any other use – not without the express and written consent of the author.

What’s the bottom line with online copyright?

Courtesy! Don’t assume that you can use, repost or take anything you find online simply because you can. Be a courteous Netizen and always ask first!

If there is any industry who is less out of touch with its customers than the music industry then I defy it be suggested. As if going after die-hard fourteen year-old Coldplay fans wasn’t enough, record companies are now extending their copyright war by taking legal action against websites that offer unsolicited music scores (BBC news). When are the CEO’s of these belligerent organisations going to wake up and realise that you don’t make money suing your customers?

Since the arrival of MP3 files, record company chiefs have been on nothing short of a witch hunt to identify the key perpetrators of their traditionally gargantuan and monopolistic hold over music buyers, fining key offenders of the Copyright Law up to sums of $150,000. Unlike their plans to prosecute websites ‘illegally’ publishing music scores however, the disolusioned Chief Executives and their equally moronic corporate camaraderie of amateur A&R producers haven’t been able to touch offending sites like KaZaa, Grokster and Morpheus for as far as legalese is concerned, these sites are just ‘pipelines’ and the prosecutable offenders are, unfortunately, individuals.

Most industry chiefs would have acknowledged, logically enough, that the sheer number of offenders was too overwhelming on both time and cashflow to address through the courtroom and responded to the problem by trying to provide some alternative platform for distribution to the one their ‘customers’ were currently using, offering features which made them want to pay for it. But the Magnates of Music have never much cared for treating their customers with courtesy, and they weren’t about to start this time round.

What has transpired is a five-plus year spending spree of what can only be described as cringeable management practice, with the net result of most legal campaigns – even richer prosecuting attorneys. In the process, record companies have done little else but whine to anti-trust regulators about how margins are being squeezed and get away with outrageously gargantuan mergers the likes of which would be inconceivable in any other industry.

“Doctor, there is an attorney on the phone to speak with you about…”  Not too many things get your blood pressure up as quickly as that statement!  Regardless of the reason for the call, the normal initial reaction is the fear.

The greatest protection against such fear is knowledge and planning.

The first thing you should know is that, according to a recent analysis by the Harvard School of Public Health, approximately 40% of the medical malpractice suits that are filed in the United States are groundless.  Analysis of many cases indicated that there was no evidence of a medical error being committed or any injury suffered by the patient.

The second, and perhaps most important, factor to know is that many such calls are a fishing expedition by the lawyer.  Presenting a friendly demeanor, the lawyer hopes to gain information that will be beneficial to the client.  This is why you really don’t want to talk to the attorney without preparation and possibly counsel.

Having knowledge of those two facts, you now need to plan what to do when that attorney does call.

Normally your staff fields your calls and they should be instructed to take messages, as opposed to ringing the call through to you.  If possible they should ascertain the reason for the call and, if applicable, the patient under question.

Once you receive the message, you should first review the patient’s chart to determine if there is any possibility of medical malpractice – or patient dissatisfaction.  If you think there is any chance of a claim being made, contact your insurance agent or company immediately and follow their instructions.

If it is necessary to reply to the attorney, one of your staff should return the call and explain that any communication from an attorney must be in writing.  This enables you to begin documentation and seek advice or counsel.  This is particularly helpful if the call is about a colleague.  The attorney may be seeking a free assessment of the case, looking for free expert testimony or even attempting to involve you in the lawsuit.

You are not required to provide any facts, documents or charts, except by the due process of law.  If documents are subpoenaed or you must appear for a deposition, your attorney can shield you from immaterial or incriminating questions.  Your attorney can also evaluate requests for charts or documents that may be unnecessary.

There is one critical mandate.  Do not, under any circumstance, decide to rewrite, revise or clean up any chart entry or patient records. Regardless of how well meaning you might be, any alterations can come back to haunt you in a trial.  Plus, many malpractice carriers will refuse to defend or pay claims for a physician who altered medical records.

Referring back to the opening analysis that 40% of claims are groundless, very few malpractice cases ever go to trial.  Even a request for patient records does not guarantee that you are being sued.  Most cases are dropped by the plaintiff or dismissed by a judge for lack of evidence.  That is why you do not want to react from fear or anger and perhaps create further problems for yourself and your case.