|
|
|
Bradley S. Wallace, Attorney at Law
Firm News/California |
2010/06/03 21:24
|
a href=http://www.accidentsareapain.comBradley S. Wallace/a is a trial attorney and a litigation specialist.nbsp; He focuses his practice exclusively to representing injured people.nbsp; His objective, in every case, is to protect the interests of his clients, fight to obtain the most fair and reasonable result on their behalf, and aggresively pursue every legal avenue to achieve that goal.
Mr. Wallace takes a hands on approach to every case he handles, including all aspects of litigation, such as trial, law and motion practice, court appearances, mediation/settlement conferences, binding arbitrations, depositions, and legal research. He is committed to advocating on behalf of injured victims and commits 100% of his career to this cause.
Mr. Wallace received his undergraduate degree in Political Science from Pepperdine University in 2002.nbsp; He then attended California Western School of Law in San Diego and received his Juris Doctorate degree in 2006.nbsp; While at California Western School of Law, Mr. Wallace earned Dean’s Honors List and was honored by the Moot Court Honors Board as a “Distinguished Advocate.”nbsp; Mr. Wallace also served as a volunteer mediator for the Superior Court for the County of San Diego, resolving disputes in civil cases as well as for incarcerated inmates.
Mr. Wallace has jury trial experience in courthouses all over Los Angeles County.
Mr. Wallace is admitted to practice before all of the courts of the State of California, as well as The United States District Court for the Central District of California. He is a member of the Consumer Attorneys Association of Los Angeles, the Consumer Attorneys of California, and the American Bar Association. He is also a member of the Los Angeles County Bar Association and the San Fernando Valley Bar Association.
strong
Call Us Today For A Free Consultation – (877) 747-2464 or (877) 74-PAIN-4 /strong |
|
|
|
|
|
|
San Diego Immigration Law Firm
Firm News/California |
2010/05/24 09:06
|
McHenry amp; Associates
We are a a href=http://www.sandiego-immigrationlawyer.comSan Diego Immigration Law Firm /aspecializing in deportation defense, family based and employment based immigration. We provide exceptional legal services to all those who wish to live and work in the United States legally. The Law Offices of McHenry amp; Associates limits its practice exclusively to U.S. Immigration Law. Whether you are an individual, family or business, if you are in need of an immigration lawyer in San Diego, call the Law Offices of McHenry amp; Associates to discuss your immigration options.
a href=http://www.sandiego-immigrationlawyer.com target=newfont color=#0000ffImmigration Attorney San Diego/font/a |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kagan's writings suggest her view on judge's role
Headline News |
2010/05/24 09:04
|
| Elena Kagan, a Supreme Court nominee without judicial experience, has suggested in writings and speeches over a quarter-century that when judges make decisions, they must take account of their values and experience and consider politics and policy, rather than act as robotic umpires.pNot since 1972 has a president picked someone for the high court who hasn't been a judge. So what the 50-year-old Kagan has said about judging might be the best indicator of the kind of justice she would be./ppRepublicans have said that because Kagan hasn't left a trail of judicial opinions, they will pore over her records as a Clinton White House aide and academic for any clues. Her speeches and papers from her time as dean of the Harvard Law School and, before that as a law professor and graduate student, are certain to get close attention at her confirmation hearing in late June./ppHer words stand in contrast to the more technical view of judging voiced by Chief Justice John Roberts at his confirmation hearing five years ago. Roberts said he considered himself an umpire merely calling balls and strikes./ppKagan apparently has never directly addressed Roberts' comments. Republicans have held his description of the job as a model of judicial restraint and used it to criticize President Barack Obama for what they call his support of judicial activism — judges imposing their own views on the law./p |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jury convicts man in NJ schoolyard triple slayings
Headline News |
2010/05/24 05:03
|
pThe first defendant to be tried for a triple murder in a schoolyard that shocked New Jersey's largest city into action has been convicted on all counts./ppA jury returned the verdict Monday in state Superior Court in Newark against Rodolfo Godinez (goh-DEE'-nez). He was among six men and boys charged with the August 2007 slayings. The jury deliberated for nearly four hours and found him guilty on all 17 counts./ppThe victims' family members, including several parents, wept quietly as the verdict was read./ppThe three victims each suffered a gunshot wound to the back of the head. A fourth victim survived and testified against Godinez./ppGodinez's attorney had argued his client was at the scene but didn't take part in the attacks. Godinez could face life in prison at sentencing.
/p |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appeals court rules against Bagram detainees
Law Firm News |
2010/05/24 03:04
|
| Detainees at Bagram Air Field in Afghanistan cannot use U.S. courts to challenge their imprisonment the way detainees in Guantanamo Bay have, a federal appeals court ruled Friday in a victory for the Obama administration.pThree appeals court judges said in an unanimous decision that because Afghanistan is a war zone and that the United States in effect has sovereignty over Guantanamo Bay swing the balance against the detainees./ppUnlike Guantanamo Bay, it is undisputed that Bagram, indeed the entire nation of Afghanistan, remains a theater of war, the judges said in turning aside the requests of a Tunisian and two Yemeni prisoners./ppIn the case of Guantanamo Bay detainees, who do have the right to challenge their confinement in U.S. courts, the United States has maintained its total control of the Guantanamo Bay facility for over a century, even in the face of a hostile government, the court noted./p |
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court rules out life sentences for juveniles
Law Center |
2010/05/17 09:25
|
pThe Supreme Court has ruled that teenagers may not be locked up for life without chance of parole if they haven't killed anyone./ppBy a 5-4 vote Monday, the court says the Constitution requires that young people serving life sentences must at least be considered for release./ppThe court ruled in the case of Terrance Graham, who was implicated in armed robberies when he was 16 and 17. Graham, now 22, is in prison in Florida, which holds more than 70 percent of juvenile defendants locked up for life for crimes other than homicide./ppThe state has denied him any chance to later demonstrate that he is fit to rejoin society based solely on a nonhomicide crime that he committed while he was a child in the eyes of the law, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in his majority opinion. This the Eighth Amendment does not permit./ppChief Justice John Roberts agreed with Kennedy and the court's four liberal justices about Graham. But Roberts said he does not believe the ruling should extend to all young offenders who are locked up for crimes other than murder; he was a no vote on the ruling./ppLife sentences with no chance of parole are rare and harsh for juveniles tried as adults and convicted of crimes less serious than killing, although roughly three dozen states allow for the possibility of such prison terms. Just over 100 prison inmates in the United States are serving those terms, according to data compiled by opponents of the sentences./ppThose inmates are in Florida and seven other states — California, Delaware, Iowa, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska and South Carolina — according to a Florida State University study. More than 2,000 other juveniles are serving life without parole for killing someone. Their sentences are not affected by Monday's decision.
/p |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
