Legally Easy is a free source of legal help, news and information from Charley Moore and the legal team at RocketLawyer.com. Rocket Lawyer is the easiest way to make a legal document, find a lawyer and get free legal advice for yourself and your business.
The Toyota Recall and Your Legal Rights
Toyota vehicle owners around the world are concerned about their legal rights as they seek to ensure their Toyota vehicles are safe. Attorney Jamie Sheller argues in a recent post that "Toyota faces big problems in midst of (the) recall." Other experts agree. The Toyota recall will cost Toyota and Toyota dealers a lot, both to repair malfunctioning automobiles as well as the damage to a once strong brand that many associated with top quality.
Some have looked at whether state Lemon Laws might offer some consumer protection against Toyota and Toyota dealers. However, reports like this one regarding the Texas Lemon Law indicate that may be an uphill battle, given that the law calls for consumers to first give dealers an opportunity to repair defects, according to the report. Other state laws may have similar restrictions. We will continue to monitor the lemon law situation for you here.
As with many legal issues, if you think that you are not being treated fairly or that you have suffered personal injury, economic damage or some other loss as a result of the Toyota recall, you should seek the advice of a lawyer.
If you're in the New York City area this week, come see Rocket Lawyer at LegalTech. This year, we're demonstrating our patent-pending Smart Referrals(tm) technology. With Smart Referrals, you can find just the right lawyer for your legal situation. Lawyers tell us about their practice and the types of client matters that they are most prepared to handle. We consider lots of other factors and then help consumers and businesses engage the right lawyer for them.
Hope to see you in NYC! Our exhibit address is #1505!
For most of us, the end of a year means things start to wind down. We can finally catch our breath and survey the old year while planning for a new one. Year end is an excellent time to review your legal situation and make sure that your essential legal documents are up to date and in good order.
It only takes a few minutes to complete yourEasy Legal Check Up™ at Rocket Lawyer. Just answer a few simple questions and you'll get a personalized list of legal documents for yourself and your business.
Tiger Woods is in one of life’s sand traps – a tough situation that millions of families deal with every year. The events surrounding Tiger Woods’ family continue to draw attention to domestic and family legal issues that affect millions of husbands, wives, domestic partners and children. In the case of Tiger and Elin Woods, only they know for certain what happened and how Tiger ended up in this particular metaphorical bunker. Nevertheless, one thing is certain. Tiger decided that the prudent course of action for him was to: 1) hire a lawyer with extensive defense counsel experience; and 2) keep his mouth shut. Elin Woods also seems to be acting in accordance with good counsel to avoid making incriminating statements and to direct inquiries through an attorney.
Especially in domestic legal matters, where family privacy and the welfare of children may be involved, it is important for spouses and parents to act maturely and, often, with the counsel of a good lawyer. Tiger and Elin Woods appear to be doing so and that may be the most wise thing either of them can do now, since nobody can change the past.
The Above the Law blog does a good job of covering the legal side of the Woods’ story.
When you consider entering into a meaningful business transaction, a Letter of Intent is a good idea. A Letter of Intent is a legal document that outlines the important issues, people and organizations involved in the transaction. Often, negotiation of the Letter of Intent can be done primarily by the principals involved in the deal, helping clarify and define what they want sufficiently to save a lot of time and money when the time comes to create the formal contracts.
Thus, having a Letter of Intent drafted before going to the expense of creating what are called "definitive agreements" can be a very smart move.
As the rate of unemployment hits a long time high of 9.8%, will congress provide for additional benefits for 15.1 million unemployed workers heading into the holiday season? Pictured here is Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, who must help address the highest unemployment rate in 26 years.
"Some 52 percent of unemployed people have exhausted state jobless benefits, and some are reaching the end of the makeshift strands of emergency extensions. The House of Representatives has passed a bill that would provide another 13 weeks of benefits, but a similar bill has stalled in the Senate over questions of whether it should only cover people in the hardest-hit states."
Most states now have websites where the unemployed can find information about unemployment benefits and, in many cases, complete an online application for unemployment insurance claims. It typically can take two weeks for benefit payments to start. The initial "waiting week", is not compensated. The second week is usually the time difference between program eligibility and payment of benefits for the first time.
The state unemployment agency certification usually includes having the unemployed person affirm that they are "able and available for work", the amount of any part-time earnings they may be earning, and that they are currently seeking work. Such certifications can typically be completed either by online or by phone call. After processing an application, the state will notify the individual about whether he or she qualifies for an unemployment program and, if so, the amount of unemployment benefits compensation that the person will receive each week. Often, states will require the individual to continually certify that they still meet the requirements for unemployment benefits, week after week.
As healthcare reform continues to dominate the news, now is a good time to look at your legal rights under Medicare, the biggest government program that affects millions of Americans. Pictured here is Attorney Joseph S. Carp, whose practice includes Medicare legal issues.
Medicare is a health insurance program run by the U.S. government. It is a single payer health care system that covers people over the age of 65 and others who meet special status criteria. In our opinion, the websites run by the government, like medicare.gov, can be pretty confusing, so we're working on delivering the simple information and easy tools you need to exercise your healthcare legal rights. Medicare consists of four parts - Part A through Part D.
Medicare Part A (hospital insurance) covers hospital care, limited post-hospital skilled nursing facility care, part-time home health services, and hospice care. If you are 65 years old or over, you can receive Medicare Part A insurance without having to pay a premium if you are currently receiving or eligible to receive but have not yet filed for either Social Security or Railroad Retirement benefits or if you or your spouse had Medicare-covered employment by the government. If you are under 65, you can receive Medicare Part A insurance without having to pay a premium if you have received either Social Security or Railroad Retirement benefits for twenty-four (24) months or if you are a kidney transplant or kidney dialysis patient. If you have been denied a Medicare Part A claim, click here for a Medicare Part A Appeal Denial Form.
Medicare Part B (Supplemental Medical Insurance) covers physician's services, certain outpatient hospital services (including emergency room visits), ambulances, diagnostic tests, laboratory services, certain preventive care services such as mammography and pap smear screening, outpatient therapy services, durable medical equipment and supplies, and home health care services not covered by Part A.
Medicare Part B pays 80% of approved charges for most covered services. The beneficiary is responsible for paying a deductible each calendar year as well as the remaining 20% of the Medicare approved charges. The beneficiary may have to pay additional charges if the doctor providing the care does not agree to Medicare's approved charges. If you have been denied a Medicare Part B claim, click here for a Medicare Part B Appeal Denial Form.
Medicare Part C (Medicare Advantage plans) gives Medicare beneficiaries the option of receiving their Medicare benefits from private health insurance plans.
Medicare Part D (Prescription Drug plans) makes those eligible for Medicare Parts A or B, eligible for certain access to funded prescription drug benefits.
With breaking news of the largest identity theft scam in U.S. history, everyone should take a moment to learn how to protect their credit and good name from ID Theft. The Identity Theft Legal Center is here to help you learn about how to protect your identity with a credit freeze and more.
Think you may be a victim of Identity Theft or Credit Fraud? Here are critical first steps to take to recover, from the Identity Theft Recovery Center:
Follow up with creditors, banks, government, and others. Use Rocket Lawyer's easy interview process to request a Credit Freeze and create the written notices to follow up with whoever you need to resolve your situation.
Here is the news from Reuters:
Three men were indicted on Monday for allegedly stealing more than 130 million credit and debit card numbers in what U.S. authorities said they believe is the largest hacking and identity theft case ever prosecuted.
Albert Gonzalez, a former government informant already in jail in connection with hacking cases, and two unnamed Russians were indicted on charges related to five corporate data breaches from 2006 to 2008.
Card numbers were stolen in those breaches from credit-card processor Heartland Payment Systems and retail chains 7-Eleven Inc and Hannaford Brothers Co, prosecutors said.
The men targeted two other corporations, the U.S. attorney's office in New Jersey said in the statement, without naming those companies.
Heartland Payment Systems and Hannaford Brothers had previously and separately acknowledged the breaches, but the scope of the fraud had not been known.
Authorities also for the first time tied those cases to Gonzalez, who was arrested last year on suspicion of hacking into a restaurant chain's payment system.
Attorneys for Gonzalez were not available for comment.
Text of President's Remarks on Living Wills and Healthcare Reform
Congressman Earl Blumenauer (pictured) is bringing attention to Living Wills in connection with the pending healthcare bill. In fact, speaking to the AARP, President Obama discussed his own Living Will. Here is what he said, according to the Boston Globe (in the town hall Q & A format):
Q I have heard lots of rumors going around about this new plan, and I hope that the people that are going to vote on this is going to read every single page there. I have been told there is a clause in there that everyone that's Medicare age will be visited and told to decide how they wish to die. This bothers me greatly and I'd like for you to promise me that this is not in this bill.
THE PRESIDENT: You know, I guarantee you, first of all, we just don't have enough government workers to send to talk to everybody, to find out how they want to die.
I think that the only thing that may have been proposed in some of the bills -- and I actually think this is a good thing -- is that it makes it easier for people to fill out a living will. Now, Mary, you may be familiar with the principle behind a living will, but it basically is something that my grandmother -- who, you may have heard, recently passed away -- it gave her some control ahead of time, so that she could say, for example, if she had a terminal illness, did she want extraordinary measures even if, for example, her brain waves were no longer functioning; or did she want just to be left alone. That gives her some decision-making power over the process.
The problem is right now most of us don't give direction to our family members and so when we get really badly sick, sadly enough, nobody is there to make the decisions. And then the doctor, who doesn't know what you might have preferred, they're making decisions, in consultation with your kids or your grand kids, and nobody knows what you would have preferred.
So I think the idea there is to simply make sure that a living will process is easier for people -- it doesn't require you to hire a lawyer or to take up a lot of time. But everything is going to be up to you. And if you don't want to fill out a living will, you don't have to. But it's actually a useful tool I think for a lot of families to make sure that if, heaven forbid, you contract a terminal illness, that you are somebody who is able to control this process in a dignified way that is true to your faith and true to how you think that end-of-life process should proceed.
You don't want somebody else making those decisions for you. So I actually think it's a good idea to have a living will. I'd encourage everybody to get one. I have one. Michelle has one. And we hope we don't have to use it for a long time, but I think it's something that is sensible.
But, Mary, I just want to be clear: Nobody is going to be knocking on your door; nobody is going to be telling you you've got to fill one out. And certainly nobody is going to be forcing you to make a set of decisions on end-of-life care based on some bureaucratic law in Washington.
MR. CUTHBERT: Mr. President, she mentioned, not in her question, but in her preview, that she's talking about Section 1232, the infamous page 425, which is being read as mandatory end-of-life care advice and counseling for Medicare. As I read the bill, it's saying that Medicare will, for the first time, cover consultation about end-of-life care, and that they will not pay for such a consultation more than once every five years. This is being read as saying every five years you'll be told how you can die.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, that would be kind of morbid. (Laughter.) I think that the idea in that provision, which may be in the House bill -- keep in mind that we're still having a whole series of negotiations, and if this is something that really bothers people, I suspect that members of Congress might take a second look at it. But understand what the intent is. The intent here is to simply make sure that you've got more information, and that Medicare will pay for it.
So, for example, there are some people who -- they get a terminal illness, and they decide at a certain point they want to get hospice care. But they might not know how to go about talking to a hospice, what does it mean, how does it work. And they don't want to -- we don't want them to have to pay for that out of pocket. So if Medicare is saying you have the option of consulting with somebody about hospice care, and we will reimburse it, that's putting more power, more choice in the hands of the American people, and it strikes me that that's a sensible thing to do.
The end of life counseling elements of healthcare reform look to become more prominent in the ongoing debate. A Living Will (also known as an Advance Healthcare Directive or just Advance Directive) allows anyone to indicate their wishes concerning the withdrawal or withholding of life-sustaining procedures if they are in a terminal condition with no hope of recovery or are permanently unconscious.
Automobile accidents cause of millions of lawsuits, injuries, deaths and tragedy. Years ago, an organization called Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) made a big difference in bringing the dangers of driving under the influence (DUI) to national attention. The resulting crack down on DUI has been credited with saving lives nationwide.
Now, the New York Times is attempting to bring greater attention to the risks of driving while multi-tasking on cell phones and PDAs. On Sunday, the Times commenced a series titled "Driven to Distraction" that chronicles the dangers of cell phone use on the road. As the article notes:
Extensive research shows the dangers of distracted driving. Studies say that drivers using phones are four times as likely to cause a crash as other drivers, and the likelihood that they will crash is equal to that of someone with a .08 percent blood alcohol level, the point at which drivers are generally considered intoxicated. Research also shows that hands-free devices do not eliminate the risks, and may worsen them by suggesting that the behavior is safe.
A 2003 Harvard study estimated that cellphone distractions caused 2,600 traffic deaths every year, and 330,000 accidents that result in moderate or severe injuries.
Further, according to Times reporter Matt Richtel, the U.S. government has even "withheld data on (the) risks of distracted driving:"
In 2003, researchers at a federal agency proposed a long-term study of 10,000 drivers to assess the safety risk posed by cellphone use behind the wheel. They sought the study based on evidence that such multitasking was a serious and growing threat on America’s roadways. But such an ambitious study never happened. And the researchers’ agency, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, decided not to make public hundreds of pages of research and warnings about the use of phones by drivers — in part, officials say, because of concerns about angering Congress.
On Tuesday, the full body of research is being made public for the first time by two consumer advocacy groups, which filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit for the documents. The Center for Auto Safety and Public Citizen provided a copy to The New York Times, which is publishing the documents on its Web site. In interviews, the officials who withheld the research offered their fullest explanation to date.
The former head of the highway safety agency said he was urged to withhold the research to avoid antagonizing members of Congress who had warned the agency to stick to its mission of gathering safety data but not to lobby states.
Critics say that rationale and the failure of the Transportation Department, which oversees the highway agency, to more vigorously pursue distracted driving has cost lives and allowed to blossom a culture of behind-the-wheel multitasking.
“We’re looking at a problem that could be as bad as drunk driving, and the government has covered it up,” said Clarence Ditlow, director of the Center for Auto Safety. The group petitioned for the information after The Los Angeles Times wrote about the research last year. Mother Jones later published additional details.
We are going to continue to follow the Times reporting on cell phones and automobile accidents as well as track automobile accident legal issues.
RocketLawyer.com™ provides information and software only. This site is not
a "lawyer
referral service" and does not provide or participate in any legal representation.
Place a fraud alert on your credit history.
Complete an 
File a 
Follow up with creditors, banks, government, and others.
