Mesothelioma Lawyers: San Diego

Frederick Schenk

Frederick Schenk, a senior partner of the firm, has been practicing law for over 28 years. In 1996, he was selected by San Diego Magazine as the best asbestos attorney in San Diego and obtained the largest verdict ever against an asbestos manufacturer in the County of San Diego. In 2005, the San Diego Daily Transcript ranked him as one of the Top 10 lawyers in San Diego, and was again recognized as a top lawyer in 2007. Since 2005, he has been honored by being listed in Woodward and White’s “Best Lawyers In America”. In addition to his successful mesothelioma litigation practice, Mr. Schenk has tried and litigated numerous product liability, automobile collision, premises liability, F.E.L.A., maritime, and other serious personal injury cases. He also participated with other partners of Casey Gerry in representing Governor Gray Davis achieving the nation’s largest settlement against the tobacco industry; a settlement on behalf of Californians of over $25 billion. He is a past recipient of the Outstanding Trial Lawyer Award presented by the Consumer Attorneys of San Diego, for having received the largest ever asbestos personal injury verdict in San Diego County.

His unique knowledge in the area of automobile collision litigation was also recognized when he was selected as a consulting editor for Matthew Bender’s Legal Publication, "Pleading and Practice Vol. 8", on Automobiles. In addition, he is co-author of LexisNexis Publishing’s, "California Automobile Collision Handbook," first published in 2000 and updated yearly.

In 1994, Mr. Schenk was elected by his peers to serve as president of the Consumer Attorneys of San Diego. In 2006, he served as the president of the Civil Justice Foundation, a Washington D.C. based non-profit organization which raises money and grants funds to consumer groups that assist people throughout the United States. He was vice president of the 22nd District Agricultural Association (Del Mar Fairgrounds) in 2006, having served on the fair board between 2002-2006.

Between 2000-2002, Mr. Schenk served as president of the Lawrence Family Jewish Community Center of San Diego. Raised in Los Angeles by immigrant parents, Mr. Schenk speaks fluent Hungarian. In his spare time, he likes to travel with his wife Shari and their three children. He is a devoted Padres baseball fan and enjoys playing racquetball.

Read more...

Law Profs Gone Wild! UT’s Bobbitt Slams Milberg in Suita

Law Profs Gone Wild! UT’s Bobbitt Slams Milberg in Suita

Well this is quite weird. I understand the situation, laywers are facing now a days but this is not the right way to express their pain.
Am i right?
YEs i am right.
Now a days i am hearing a lot of lawyers and prof.. of law getting fool and ridiculous hope in future they care about it and the reputation of law :)

Well what so ever here is the brief news
:
:

Can we call this a trend: law professors tucking their grievances not into law review articles, but federal court complaints? (Gosh do we hope so. Law school deans, to any of you who may be reading, we think you should encourage it. Get each of your professors to file one federal lawsuit a semester. Staff the cases with go-getting 3Ls, create marketing material about about your clinical opportunities, and watch your applications soar! Hello, U.S. News!)

Yes, we’re getting ahead of ourselves. But we couldn’t help but notice that shortly after a University of Miami professor sued Above the Law editor David Lat (only to withdraw his suit days later), another academic has taken his gripe to the courthouse door. UT law professor Phillip Bobbitt earlier this week sued the law firm formerly known as Milberg Weiss, now known just as Milberg. Click here for the complaint.

So what’s Bobbitt’s gripe?

Bobbitt claims that in late 2000, he made an investment into a Variable Annuity Life Insurance Company annuity contract as part of a retirement plan. Bobbitt became a class member when Milberg filed a putative class-action lawsuit against VALIC in 2003, alleging that the company sold investors products that already qualified for favorable income tax treatment. This resulted in investors paying additional fees without receiving any additional tax benefit.

In regard to Milberg, Bobbitt claims that after winning class certification, Milberg missed a host of deadlines, which led to a parade of horribles, which ultimately led to the court granting summary judgment on behalf of VALIC.

Reads the complaint:

Defendants’ failure to comply with the Court’s Scheduling Order has cost the individual members of the Class the valuable negotiating leverage provided by a certified class. Just as importantly, the Court’s order put the Defendants on notice that their clients, the absent members of the Underlying Class, were in jeopardy of losing all of their rights against VALIC in connection with the underlying claims due to statute of limitations issues.

The complaint, filed in federal court in Phoenix by lawyers at Lewis and Roca, requests punitive damages against Milberg and a host of Milberg attorneys.

A spokesman for Milberg said the suit “has no merit whatsoever.”

A call to Bobbitt, who’s teaching this term at Columbia, was not immediately returned.

Read more...

Sexual harassment law: Pakistan

Sexual harassment law

While we welcome the new legislation — we should also point out that there ‘is a long way yet to go,’ Sherry Rehman cautioned. –Photo by APP

( I dont care about law but one thing is sure, PPP is living on her, doesnt matter how old is she.
But she is still sexy and ohhh b**bs.You can ask Gilani, current President of Pakistan, about that ;) )

The first step has been taken ‘towards changing the lives of women at the workplace,’ to quote Sherry Rehman, the PPP MNA, former minister for women’s development and architect of the newly enacted law under discussion. This is in the form of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill that was passed by the National Assembly on Wednesday after having been in the works for months. Meticulously drafted, the document enhances the punishment already prescribed under the law for sexual harassment and facilitates effective prosecution by defining ‘harassment’ unequivocally.

These amendments to the PPC and CCP are designed to address the age-old issue women have faced in patriarchal societies — intimidation in public places — that inhibits them from stepping out of their homes. The political will displayed by the present government to improve the status of women is encouraging. Towards the same end, a bill on domestic violence was adopted by the assembly three months ago. Harassment can be tricky to prove legally, especially in an environment that is not too friendly towards women and where men have not been sensitised to issues concerning the dignity of women. Small wonder the existing provisions of the PPC could never be invoked because they were toothless. The effectiveness of the new laws will only be tested when a case is brought before a court of law.

While we welcome the new legislation — to be followed by another bill focusing on sexual harassment in the workplace — we should also point out that there ‘is a long way yet to go,’ as Ms Rehman cautioned. As the moving spirit behind this law, she understands well the long struggle women in Pakistan have had to wage to win empowerment. The main obstacle they have faced is the entrenched social prejudice that relegates women to a subordinate status in public and family life. In the absence of general awareness of women’s rights and the ingrained perception of male superiority, legislation enacted to protect women has not found practical implementation. Very often women themselves are so conditioned that they fail to put up the fight needed to win their rights.

Under the new law, the onus of taking action will rest on women. Will they take the initiative, especially when fears are already being expressed by some men that the law will be misused to ‘settle old scores’? Hence the need of the hour is to educate and conscientise women about their rights so that real and meaningful change is brought to their lives. This calls for a holistic approach with a campaign on several fronts to change existing mindsets.

Read more...

Smoking bans cut heart attack risk: study

Smoking bans cut heart attack risk: study

In my last post i told you about anti smoking law being violated. Yeah thats true, unfortunately nobody is following law.
What is smoking lets talk again. I told you before its a big disease and moreover an addiction.
What is addiction you know about person using drug like "Heroin". How much we hate that person but what he do :( he is addicted same happen with smoker we should care about it this is so serious.
We dont care about our children sooting smoke blah blah blah thats look creepy believe me they are wasting their life.

Here is the example:

SMOKING bans lead to a reduced risk of heart disease and heart attacks for nonsmokers posed by second-hand smoke, researchers reported Thursday.
The study was conducted by the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies and sponsored by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
According to the Associated Press, the surgeon general in 2006 cited “overwhelming scientific evidence” to show that thousands of people die each year from lung and heart disease. “If you have heart disease, you really need to stay away from secondhand smoke. It’s an immediate threat to your life,” said study co-author Dr. Neal Benowitz of the University of California. The Institute of Medicine committee noted “the repeated finding of decreased heart attack rates overall after bans were implemented conclusively demonstrates that smoke-free policies help protect people from the cardiovascular effects of tobacco smoke.”
CDC director Dr. Thomas Frieden said the report showed that smoke free laws reduce the incidence of heart attacks in non-smokers. “But still, most of the country lives in areas that don’t have comprehensive smoke-free laws covering all workplaces, all restaurants and all bars,” he added. The committee studied data from 11 studies on smoking bans in the US, Canada and Europe. They found “remarkable consistency” linking smoking bans to a drop in heart attack rates ranging from 6 percent to 47 percent. “Consistency in the direction of change gave the committee confidence that smoking bans decrease the rate of heart attacks,” the committee said. – RO
“This really communicates the benefits for nonsmokers. Nonsmokers are at risk. It’s always been an important point,” said Dr. Lynn Goldman of Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, who chaired the committee.
“Now we know it’s not only in terms of cancer risk but cardiovascular disease risk.”
“An estimated 80 million American adults have one or more types of cardiovascular disease, and Nearly 3 of 4 U.S. adults have at least one major cardiovascular risk factor,” according to the CDC. – RO


So what you guys thing we should leave smoking its not healthy come on guys now its proven :)

Read more...