In a 2017 Fair Debt Collection Case, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and the Ohio Consumer Sales Practices Act applied to the lawsuit filed by First Resolution Investment Corporation (FRIC). Ohio’s borrowing statute imposes a shorter statute of limitations when the cause of action accrues in a different state with a shorter statute of limitation. Filing a lawsuit in violation of the FDCA is unlawful Ohio debt collection.
This article examines Ohio divorce double dip issues. A double dip occurs when both the value of the business and spousal support represent the same money.
In 2016, the Ohio legislature passed a law that regulates opiate recovery clinics. Ohio regulates opiate recovery clinics because they wanted a doctor to be ultimately responsible for the conduct and care in such facilities.
Ohio Regulates Opiate Recovery Clinics To Require Physician Ownership
Previously, opiate recovery clinics could be owned by people who were not licensed physicians. Now, a facility that provides opiate recovery treatment that includes drug-administered assistance, such as suboxone, must be owned by an Ohio licensed medical doctor. Prior to this law, one had to be a doctor to prescribe drugs to wean people off of their drug addiction. Now, this doctor must also own the clinic in which he or she operates.
Ohio Regulates Opiate Recovery Clinics To Require Specific Licenses
Opiate recovery clinics that administer drugs to treat addiction must obtain a license to do so. Such licensing is called a category III terminal distributor of dangerous drugs license. The license must also have an office-based opioid treatment classification.
Ohio jury selection is part psychology, part hunch. In a few minutes, attorneys must decide if a person could be fair in a particular case. That person could be a very fair person, but may not be able to decide a particular case fairly. On the other hand, another person may usually side with a particular side, but just may do so in a particular situation.
Stereotypes Do Not Work In Ohio Jury Selection
The first rule in jury selection is not to rely on stereotypes. While stereotypes can provide a good starting point, the potential juror needs to be questioned as to his or her particular beliefs and biases. For example, I am Italian and I love Italian food. While I know it may be hard to believe, there might be some Italian person out there that does not like Italian food. Another possibility is that the person has an Italian last name but does not identify as Italian. Perhaps, the Italian culture in that person's family is long gone and replaced by other cultures, or simply the American culture. This also holds true for professions. While many social workers and teachers may tend to be sympathetic to people's feelings and pain, there may be some who are more skeptical. The point is before a lawyer starts assuming he or she has a juror who can explain some Italian cultural or cuisine item to the rest of the jury, make sure the potential juror fits the bill.
Select Ohio Jurors Based On Their Experiences And Beliefs
The second rule is to get right at what drives that person. Get right at the person's experiences and beliefs. Most of the time, an attorney only gets a few questions per juror to determine this. I devote some technical questions to determine someone's intellectual beliefs. Then, I ask some questions about how they feel about certain topics to determine their emotional beliefs. If there is going to be a unique approach to the trial, I may ask the jurors if they have any issues with that approach. For example, I tried a case where we slowed down the security video footage to get a better look at what happened. I simply asked the jury how they felt about instant replay. The jurors who liked it would likely appreciate the value in slowing down the video to examine the events. The jurors who did not like instant replay would likely tune out all the hard work we put into slowing down the video for their benefit.
Select Ohio Jurors With Values Favorable To The Facts Of Your Case
The third rule is ask jury questions that hit on values related to the case, without describing the case they will be hearing.Â The judge may not allow me to ask questions that get too close to the facts of the case, so I usually have to be careful. The judge limits questions like that because he or she does not want me to gather a straw poll on the potential verdict. Would I like to do that? Of course I would. On the other hand, I would not put too much stock in that process anyway, as a simplified version of the facts may not match that juror's view of the facts after hearing the evidence. Different jurors focus on different things. Sometimes, they ask themselves if the Defendant is acting the way he or she should be acting in such a situation. This can be a brutal analysis, as one charged with a crime may be extremely nervous and struggle to get his or her words out, making it look like they are not acting right. Sometimes, this intuitive approach is telling; other times, it is misleading. Yet, jurors bring in their lifetime of experiences and techniques in analyzing people.
Attorney Daniel Gigiano. Experienced. Aggressive. Dedicated.
Attorney Daniel Gigiano was admitted to the practice of law in Illinois in 1993.Â He immediately began practicing as an assistant prosecutor working in a courtroom that focused on major traffic cases, such as DUI and driving under suspension, spending over one year focusing on the many issues in these cases. Attorney Daniel Gigiano then spent the next five years of his government practice working on misdemeanors, felonies, grand jury and preliminary hearings, juvenile delinquency cases, and abuse and neglect cases. In 1999, he was admitted to practice in Ohio. In 2000, he took his experience to a private practice in Wadsworth, Medina County, Ohio. Attorney Gigiano has maintained a practice in Wadsworth since that time.Â During his private practice, he has tried numerous criminal and civil jury trials to verdicts. Call now at 330-336-3330 if you need the services of an experienced Medina County trial attorney in Wadsworth.
Will Ohio lower DUI limit to .05? In March 2017, Utah’ legislature set up the state to become the first state to lower the legal threshold for drinking and driving to .05 blood alcohol concentration. While states are looking to get more aggressive with DUI laws, such efforts can result in problems in the actual application of the law. This articles examines the law and the impracticality of enforcing the law on the street and in the courtroom.
Proposed DUI Law Criticized
Critics have said the bill fails to address the real problem, which are the 77% of alcohol-related traffic deaths in Utah caused by drivers with a blood-alcohol content of 0.15 and above. The proponent of the law said the problem with the 0.08 BAC law is that “it send the message that you can drink up to a certain point and then drive.” The proponent then noted that several foreign countries have a 0.05 limit.
Proposed DUI Law Problems
The field sobriety tests were designed to determine if someone is at a 0.10 BAC or above. When states lowered the limit to 0.08, that already signaled a move away from criminalizing driving under the influence and towards outlawing drinking and driving. A 0.05 BAC limit is simply another step in that direction. Someone at 0.05 could very well pass the field sobriety tests. If the person is not under the influence of alcohol, can that person be arrested? If the person cannot be arrested, the request for a breathalyzer does not occur.
Attorney Daniel Gigiano. Experienced. Aggressive. Dedicated.
Attorney Daniel Gigiano was admitted to the practice of law in Illinois in 1993. He immediately began practicing as an assistant prosecutor working in a courtroom that focused on major traffic cases, such as DUI and driving under suspension, spending over one year focusing on the many issues in these cases. Attorney Daniel Gigiano then spent the next five years of his government practice working on misdemeanors, felonies, grand jury and preliminary hearings, juvenile delinquency cases, and abuse and neglect cases. In 1999, he was admitted to practice in Ohio. In 2000, he took his experience to a private practice in Wadsworth, Medina County, Ohio. Attorney Gigiano has maintained his private practice in Wadsworth since that time. Call now at 330-336-3330 if you need the services of an experienced Medina criminal defense attorney in Wadsworth.
When Ohio public school student searches occur, those Ohio students are protected by the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Fourth Amendment protects people in the United States from unreasonable searches and seizures. Students can be searched if there are reasonable grounds for suspecting the search will turn up evidence that the student has violated or is violating either the law or the rules of the school.
In 2016, the Ninth District Court of Appeals decided that a person under legal guardianship can execute a valid will, ruling on Ohio will changing mental capacity. Even more notable are the reasons: he suffered from schizophrenia, post traumatic stress disorder, had a low IQ and was a frequent drug user. Using traditional analysis, the court determined that he had the capacity to execute a will.
Ohio felony sentencing laws place most Ohio crimes into five classes. These range from the lowest (fifth degree felony) to the highest (first degree felony). This article will focus on the basic sentencing scheme. This article will not discuss specialized Ohio felony sentencing laws, such as the death penalty, life imprisonment, and mandatory additional prison time. Rape and murder are crimes that fall into such specialized Ohio felony sentencing laws.
Many states, including Ohio, criminalize the refusal to submit to alcohol testing after being arrested for DUI. The United States Supreme Court, in ruling mandatory DUI blood tests unconstitutional, imposed severe limits on such state laws.
Individual Rights And Liberties Are More Important Than Getting Tough On Crime
This case sends a message to get tough on crime advocates: citizens' personal liberty cannot be infringed in the name of enforcing criminal laws. The United States was formed on the notion of individual rights and freedoms. The U.S. Supreme Court reminded us of this fact in its decision.
Ohio Supreme Court Declares Repeat OVI Offender Specifications Constitutional
In 2016, the Ohio Supreme Court found the repeat OVI offender specifications constitutional. The accused challenged the Ohio DUI sentencing laws as unconstitutional because they violated equal protection of the law. The Ohio Supreme Court did not agree with that argument.
The Ohio Medicaid Waiver Program funds the services necessary to allow the individual to stay in his or her own home. These programs “waive” Medicaid regulations so individuals can use community-based programs that cost far less than nursing homes and other institutional residential settings. This program addresses the high cost of nursing home care and people's desire to stay in their own homes.
Apple and the FBI have gotten a lot of attention lately on the government’s power to search cell phones. Apple refused to unlock its phones and FBI figured out how to do it by themselves. Long before this battle ensued, the Ohio Supreme Court issued the following decision: Ohio cell phone search requires search warrant.
In 2016, the Ohio Supreme Court issued a ruling that declared that the police cannot search legally parked cars without a warrant. The arrest of an occupant of the vehicle does not, by itself, give the police authority to search legally parked vehicles.