Should Cameras Be Kept Out of the Courtroom?

In today’s world, it seems everything is going online, including the courtroom and juries. Now days, it seems that even the courtroom is going electronic. What do the justices have to say about courtrooms now going electronic? Most justices oppose cameras in the courtroom for the following reasons: they create images of justices educating the public about their work with the process of publishing books, appearing on television, or even creating websites. It also deconstructs the mysticism of limited aspects of the courtroom. As the courtroom goes electronic, more and more justices are opposing cameras in the courtroom. There seem to be some concerns where cameras would be a problem in the courtroom. Public access to the Supreme Court would show many contexts of courtrooms which would include congressional hearings. While Americans seem to know less about the Supreme Court than any other institution, the Court wouldn’t be able to decide on political issues, which would make making decisions on the different issues unfamiliar to the public. In the past two branches of government have prepared the public for years by showing access to the courtroom, the main one being C-SPAN, most notably being called “America’s ultimate reality show,” which airs congressional hearings. It contributes to educating the public in three ways: the public gets to see government in action; the public is educated on the issues; and the public is encouraged to exchange ideas for solving its political issues (McElroy). In the state of Missouri, they adopted a policy to adopted the Court Operating Rule 16 that allowed access to broadcast, televise, record, and still photography in eleven judicial courts and appellate courts in Missouri, in September 1992. They revised the rule in October 1994 cameras in all Missouri courtrooms which went into effect on July 1, 1995. Having placed certain guidelines on such issues like advance notice to media, placement of cameras in the courtroom, and restrictions on camera or audio equipment, the state of Missouri recognized that although it is not a constitutional right, but a means of making the judicial process of the courtroom available to all citizens (Missouri). As far as technology has come, it is inevitable that cameras in the courtroom would be allowed in the courtroom. But as long as it is used in a dignified and respectful manner and the justices and judges are granted the authority to “kill” such evidence that would make evidence in a trial too graphic, allowing camera in the courtroom should not be an issue in today’s US courtrooms. References Reference McElroy, L. T. (2012). Cameras at the Supreme Court: A rhetorical analysis. Brigham Young University Law Review, 2012(6), 1837-1899. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1326781925?accountid=158416 Cameras in the Courtroom. www.courts.mo.gov/page.jsp?id=690.

Appellate Process

When it comes to the perils of non-published precedented federal appellate process, is there a danger in the state-created danger doctrine? The rationale for non—precedential opinions has a huge percentage for the norm in the federal appellate process. There are two main functions: dispute settling and lawmaking. When laws make precedent, it announces the law, applies settled law to facts, and includes important discussions or criticism of any settled rules. In a dispute, settled opinions apply only to uncontroversial rules of law to ordinary cases—they usually have no place within the public. Preparing an opinion for publication costs appellate judges time. It devotes less time for eliminating any potential ambiguity to explain any arguments. It can also omit any details explaining the facts because a target audience is assumed to already know the facts. To efficiently dispose appellate dockets is not the sole justification for non-precedential decisions (Sarah, 2006). What are the risks for generating non-precedential opinions? There are doctrinal anomalies that apply unsettled law to new facts. To ensure a judicial decision, it is best to make it uniform, predictable, rule-based, and fair to any similar litigants. Is there an uncertainty about how appellate panels and district courts will treat non-precedential opinions? The risks of producing opinions is inconsistent when precedent is realized and a proliferation of opinions does not bind appellate panels and district court for any risks that are inconsistent with the treatment of non-precedential opinions by the court that is responsible for applying the law. What about any uncertainty for how litigants will treat non-precedential opinions? Appellate opinions do not bind panels or district courts that could risk any inconsistent treatment by litigants who are bound by the law (Sarah, 2006). What is the prevalence of non-published, non-precedential Third Circuit State-Created Danger decisions? The due process liability is frequently invoked in a constitutional theory that is litigated under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The theory to the rule was set forth by the Supreme Court in DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, stating that a state is not constitutionally obligated to protect its citizens from violent acts from private citizens. However, under state-created danger decisions exceptions, state actors may be liable for any private violence when state actors create any risk of privately inflicted harm (Sarah, 2006). Is there a danger between published precedent and “unpublished” non-precedent Third Circuit State-Created Danger opinions? There are four: 1) Inconsistent mental culpability standards; 2) Inconsistent analysis of derivative claims by family members; 3) Inconsistent state action requirements; and 4) Inconsistent municipality liability standards (Sarah, 2006). In Example 1, there is a State of Mind requirement—or a willful disregard or deliberate indifference. For this to happen, there has to be harm that is foreseeable and direct, state actor acted in disregard for the safety of plaintiff, there existed some relationship between state and plaintiff, and state actors used authority to create opportunity that otherwise existed for the third to occur (Sarah, 2006). In Example 2, a State-Created Danger claims by Family Members was brought by the case Solum v. Yerusalim that precluded State-Created Danger claims by a Primary Victim’s Family. The unpredictable application of the non-precedential decision was decided by the Irreconcilable District Court Analysis of Claims by Family Members of Two Murder Victims. In Example 3, the Necessity for Government Immediate Action gave four claims: State-Created Danger Precedent Requires Affirmative State Conduct, Subsequent state-created danger precedent does not require affirmative state conduct, Non-precedential reconciliation of apparent conflict, and practical consequences of doctrinal inconsistency for District Court and litigants (Sarah, 2006). In Example 4, the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Municipal Liability is the Third District Precedent Required Examinations even in the Absence of wrong doing by individual actors, non- precedential municipal liability opinions are rejected by claims against individuals that are to be dispositive of the municipal liability claims, the practical consequences of doctrinal inconsistency for district court and its litigants, and the doctrine that is independent of the Municipal Liability for State-Created Danger is insufficiently settled for any non-precedential action (Sarah, 2006). In conclusion, should there be a State-Created Danger requirement that allows state actors to protect its private citizens? Reference. Sarah, E. R. (2006). The perils of unpublished non-precedential federal appellate opinions: A case study of the substantive due process state-created danger doctrine in one circuit. Washington Law Review, 81(2), 217-278. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/213101047?accountid=35996

Hazardous Waste Regulations

There are two reasons why there are area waste hazardous regulations. The first is that states are given a considerable amount of discretionary authority. The second is that it is a substance that all states must face. As these state actions on area waste hazardous regulation become increasingly important, the numbers of hazardous wastes sites the states have to clean up continues to grow. Most states have an Environmental Protection Innovation (EPI) that gives the state the propensity to protect the environment, and analyze the variations across the states in finding ways to protect the environment. This theoretical framework gives two strands research: literature on state innovations and literature on state environmental regulation. EPI are state-sponsored non-federally mandated programs or policies that protect the environment. The EPI in any hazardous waste regulation does not have a wide range of power and resources that state legislatures have. And they do not possess the power to authorize appropriations. Just like federal laws, state laws leave the option for bureaucratic discretion in implementation in the areas they do not cover. There are several states that have too much discretion, which leads to a greater control on power. For example, in California, the State Water Resources Control Board, the local water agency boards, as well as the water masterboards, have the greatest authority in the state to set policy that protects groundwater. In other states, the state legislature, instead of administrative agencies, play a major role in setting policy for protecting groundwater. Some state agencies have come up with a variety of ways to manage hazardous waste. For example, Minnesota has their Waste Tire Management Program, New York has their Hazardous Waste Reduction Planning Program, and New Jersey has their Case Management Policy. There are also variations in states’ adoptions of EPIs. California, New York, New Jersey, and Minnesota are leaders in hazardous waste EPIs they have adopted. Some states have not yet adopted EPIs in the area of hazardous waste. Some states have adopted policies to reduced hazardous waste while others have just simplified the industry so they are in compliance with existing laws and regulations. The common element is a cooperation with the industry groups, local governments, and private citizens. This is achieved by a provision of technical assistance, teamwork among the state agencies, municipalities, and local businesses. A second common element is pollution prevention. These state-adopted innovations seek to reduce pollution at their source. Hazardous Waste Innovations take some form of waste-reduction programs. The determinants of State Adoptions of EPIs are models developed from the concepts of two research traditions. The first is a regulatory enforcement and the second is innovative research. There are four explanations that lead states to adopt EPIs: the severity of the problem, institutional factors (the commitment of capacity of the states), the strength of relevant interest groups, and the contextual factors (state political climate). In the problem of severity or need, the first indicator is the independent variable that gives the total number of hazardous wastes sites by state. The states that have a large number of hazardous waste sites are Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Michigan, whereas the following states have a low number of hazardous waste sites, Idaho, South Dakota, North Dakota, Maine, and New Hampshire. The chemicals from hazardous waste can have cross-examination effects that seep into groundwater sources. This can cause the problem that is created at point and non-point sources, a second indicator where groundwater contamination is used to assess the severity of problem or need a state faces. The institutional factors for the commitment and capacity faced by each state are an indication each state adopts is mainly based on financial. The indicator each state faces in measuring commitment is the percentage of state expenditures on environmental and protection resources. The ability and capacity of institutional factors are administerial and managerial professional with the bureaucracies, organizational mission and culture, and the belief of administrators that have surpassed important impacts on performance. It is also difficult to measure professionalism on a state in a number of years. One way to measure is by proxy measure, or the number of full-time staff that is employed by the state environmental agency involved in state hazardous waste programs. Interest groups determine the innovation of the states’ adoption and regulation. They help avoid obstacles to pro-environmental legislation and policy. One such issue is the manufacturing and mining industries that oppose policy regulations because they might curtail or impose financial burdens on their activities. The growth of interest groups has led to an increase in opposition that has influenced powerful industry groups. The states’ political climate has also led to liberalism as a powerful relation to pro-environmental regulation on the state level. These environmental concerns are viewed as a penchant that helps regulate the private industry. Several advantages of methodology help to examine each states’ adoption for innovations on hazardous waste reduction. One is the event-history analysis is not a feasible technique which is not easily employed. Each of these reasons lie with the variations adopted by each state. There is also no common agency-adopted innovation that identifies a program’s goal despite the similarities on the kinds of programs adopted. References Sapat, A. (2004). Devolution and innovation: The adoption of state environmental policy innovations by administrative agencies. Public Administration Review, 64(2), 141-151. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/197177072?accountid=158416

Cypress Doctrine

Cy Pres doctrine is a French term that means “as close as possible.” It is used in wills and trusts when a gift is no longer possible to be followed as per the decedent’s wishes. The judge will more than likely use Cy Pres Doctrine to grant a wish as near to the decedent’s wishes as possible. This usually happens in a case of charitable or education organizations that no longer exists at the time of the decedent’s death. If that happens, the judge must decide how to closely fulfill the wishes of the decedent in a more appropriate manner. If the court can invoke Cy Pres Doctrine, it would have to be designated to a specific purpose that was not fulfilled or frustrated, or the settlor had a general, or unrestricted, charitable intent. References Cy Pres Doctrine – Legal Dictionary – The Free Dictionary. http://definitions.uslegal.com/c/cy-pres-doctrine/ Modification of Charitable Trusts—The Cy Pres Doctrine. Nationalparalegal.edu/…/ …

Admissibility of Foreign Search and Seizure

When personnel from the U.S. military is in a foreign country on assignment, they are subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), not to mention, the laws of the country they are on assignment in. In the event that they are ever put under arrest, they must comply with the country’s laws. Being ignorant of a foreign country’s laws in on excuse, the same as if a foreigner was in the United States. When foreign police conduct investigations of a U.S. military personnel, they usually comply with U.S. military law enforcement authorities, however, they may happen to also conduct investigations which can be separate from U.S. law enforcement authorities. Gathering evidence is somewhat similar to the U.S., in that they obtain evidence from suspects and witnesses and perform search and seizures from the suspected physical suspect and forensic evidence. After the foreign police have acquired the evidence, it is admitted to a military court martial or some other military justice proceeding, however it may have different rules which can be different from a U.S. military or civilian justice. U.S. personnel conducting along with foreign investigators determines the admissibility upon which the U.S. plays a role in the evidence found. If U.S. personnel is actively involved, they must be advised of their rights according to Article 31, UCMJ, for suspects who are accused of a criminal offense based on probable cause. All searches must comply with the laws in UCMJ and U.S. Constitutional law that interprets the 4th Amendment. However, if there is no involvement of U.S. personnel, then no rights have to be advised on the suspect. The participation has to be triggered by Article 31 requirements and the 1980 amendment of MRE 305(h)(2). The three examples of participation does not have to include: the mere presence of American authorities, interpretation by American authorities, and any attempts to mitigate damage to property or person. When defining participation, it should include: the escorting of foreign police on U.S. military bases with the presence of U.S. personnel and the accused suspect during any questioning, facilitating any communication with foreign law personnel, having provided a room for foreign law personnel, the involvement of U.S. that triggers an examination, (any knowledge by U.S. personnel that the suspect invoked his rights under foreign law don’t include participation), and if the suspect remains silent and requests an attorney, it may stop foreign law enforcement from interrogating a suspect, but they may attempt to question the suspect later. Any search or seizure performed by military personnel, whether it is led by foreign law enforcement, should still follow the rules according to MRE 311 (c) and the U.S. constitutional law, federal law, the UCMJ, and MRE, in order for any evidence to be admissible at a court martial. MRE 311 (c) may be similar to MRE 305 (h)(2)’s non-participation of presence, interpretation, and mitigating damage of person or property, the participation of American authorities without foreign investigations is usually exempt from U.S. constitutional or statutory laws, but may not always be the case. Such military decisions have been varied from such presence of U.S. authorities when searches and seizures being led by foreign law enforcement have triggered constitutional protection. A Court of Military Appeals did hold that the mere presence of U.S. authority during a foreign search was not enough to invoke constitutional safeguards. However, in 1976, the court reversed the decision by saying that if American personnel were present during a foreign search, it must still satisfy the 4th Amendment. The court revisited the law three years later and reversed the decision back to mere presence before any constitutional protections could be attached to foreign searches. As of now, the law still stands. When foreign law enforcement obtains statements, Article 31 of UCMJ provides more rights than Miranda does to accused service members. A rights advisement of accused military personnel is required at the moment of apprehension that is based on probable cause and cannot be prior to interrogation. Anyone subject to UCMJ cannot be asked to incriminate themselves, and accused suspects do have a right to remain silent, but such statements can be used against them. Any non-compliance with Article 31 of UCMJ is the same as Miranda, but foreign law enforcement may still not be bound by the same rigid constraints as Article 31 or Miranda. Not only do U.S. military personnel have to obey U.S. laws when outside the U.S., in the U.S., foreign laws do also apply and can be enforced by the host country. Military service members who expect Miranda warnings when apprehended by a civilian, city, county, or state police officers, foreign laws about the interrogation of suspects can vary with each country. In Japan, a suspect’s rights to remain silent does apply to preceding questions, but the Japanese National Police may still question a suspect. The tactics used by foreign law interrogations can also vary in other countries as well. In Japan again, they may question a suspect several times over a period of several days, weeks, or even months. During foreign interrogations and the advisement of rights, foreign law enforcement is not required to advise suspects when they are acting alone gathering evidence, according to Article 31 of UCMJ. Also an accused cannot suppress any statements that are based on a lack of advisement of rights. This can be referred to the U.S. federal law jurisprudence when referring to the admissibility of statements by U.S. interrogations of foreign police. A suspect’s statement must be voluntary in order for any evidence to be admissible at a court martial. The court may analyze any statement made in order to see if such statements are in violation of the due process clause of the 5th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, Article 31 that May be in use of coercion, unlawful influence, or unlawful inducement. A voluntary confession should be free from any constraints of the suspect making it. There are four categories when it comes to re-assessing foreign law when foreign law enforcement obtains evidence. The first is involuntary statements that are made after the advisement of rights. The second is the involuntary statements which are made after an advisement of rights which does not comply with foreign law requirements. The third are the voluntary statements which are made after the advisement of rights that complies with foreign law. And the fourth are the voluntary statements which are made after advisement of rights that do not comply with foreign law. U.S. military personnel who are serving in foreign countries must comply with the laws of the country to which they are serving. They must also follow U.S. federal law, the U.S. Constitution, and Article 31 of the UCMJ when it comes to gathering evidence of any accused service member. All evidence that is submitted to the court for admissibility, should be closely examined. As long as the suspect has not been subjected to any brutal maltreatment, current law allows for the admissibility of evidence in a foreign search and seizure. Source Ramer, Jacob A. "Evidence obtained by foreign police: admissibility and the role of foreign law." Air Force Law Review Winter 2012: 207+. Academic OneFile. Web. 27 Sep. 2012.

Lemon Law

Many people buy used cars, the major reason simply because they simply cannot afford a new car. Whatever the case, consumers do frequent used-car lots when purchasing a car. When it comes to buying a used car, how do consumers protect themselves from unscrupulous dealers? There are three challenges when it comes to consumer protection agencies face when purchasing a used car in the used car market: the first is identifying and making information available to consumers. This includes the condition and history of the car so consumers are able to make sound decisions when it comes to purchasing a used car. The second is preventing deception in the financing of car loans. And the third is educating consumers to prevent the possible debt cycles that result in a repossession of the car. When it comes to responsibilities, both federal and state consumer protection agencies share in these responsibilities (Congressional Testimony). The Motor Vehicle Trade Registration Rule, or Used Car Rule, is a disclosure of warranties the helps consumers know what they are buying. Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission and law enforcement also helps educates consumers in deceptive advertising and lending. These agencies get information about the condition and history of the car as well as any warranties and terms that may come with the car. Other information where this can also be found is the databases of state authorities, insurance companies and salvage yards. These agencies provide information on warranties to alert consumers of a mitigating risk to broken or damaged systems (Congressional Testimony). On the other hand, the Vehicle History Information is helpful to warn consumers to cars that have sustained flood damage, been totaled, had their odometers altered, or even been bought back as “lemons.” The National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG) does two things: regulates titles to provide information about the car to show if it has ever been titled as salvage, flood, or rebuilt to show prior damage; and to enforce disclosure on the sellers to reveal any damage history or manufacturer’s repurchase according to the state lemon law. In the past, unscrupulous sellers have been able to find ways to cover up a vehicle’s negative history with cosmetic fixes that would allow them to transport the vehicle across state lines in order for them to get a clean title in another state. Consumers who buy these “vehicles” suffer irreparable harm when they take the vehicle in to make repairs and the value of the car decreases when the real history of the vehicle is made known to them. This also poses safety risks to the consumers who drive these vehicles with damaged electrical or mechanical components (Congressional Testimony). January 29, 2009, the Department of Justice, National Motor Vehicle Title Information System (NMVTIS) gathered information from 36 states, an online computer system of accurate information that gives a vehicle’s titling, odometer history, and damage history. This information comes from auto recyclers, junk yards, salvage yards, and insurance carriers. The National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB) also maintains the same information free to consumers just by accessing the Vehicle Identification Number (VIN). Commercial providers offer the same information to consumers for a fee of around $30 (Congressional Testimony). The Used Car Rule gives information on whether a vehicle has been covered by warranties and the extent of the coverage of the warranties of any costs for repairs. Along with the FTC, it can prohibit sellers from misrepresenting the condition of a vehicle by disclosing if it has been sold with warranties. These disclosures are placed on vehicles to warn consumers of deceptive statements and any spoken promises which would be hard to enforce without a vehicle inspection. Since the Used Care Rule has been in force, there have been more than 80 reports by the Commission from 1985 to 2000 to enforce compliance with the Rule, a number that shows more than $1 million in civilian penalty orders, not to mention the several actions by state agencies to also help enforce the Rule (Congressional Testimony). NAAG and the International Association of Lemon Law Administrators both recommend the Used Car Rule be challenged to require if vehicles purchased under state lemon laws are applicable under state and manufacturer warranties. These agencies would advocate for mandatory disclosures for vehicle history of title branding and whether prior use of a vehicle was used as a rental car, taxi, or other commercial vehicle. If the Commission amends the Rule, it would look at possible unfair prevalent or deceptive acts that can impact consumers, and whether these remedies harm consumers and if the benefits can exceed costs (Congressional Testimony). In the past, sellers have been able to cover up a vehicle’s history, but with the Used Car Rule, consumers can be forewarned about a vehicle’s history upfront and learn about any kind of damage history about the vehicle before they decide to purchase. Both federal and state agencies gather information on used cars to provide consumers with websites to access a vehicle’s history. Reference Congressional Testimony. (2009, March). USED CARS AND CONSUMER PROTECTION:EILEEN HARRINGTON Retrieved from http://elibrary.bigchalk.com.ezp-00rrw.lirn.net

Premarital Agreements and Marriage

When it comes to marriage, nothing is simple, especially if the marriage breaks down and the parties divorce. Now days, divorce can get complicated, with separate and marital property, and custody and visitation of any minor children. Due to such high divorce rates in this country, many couples are choosing to draft premarital agreements as a way to reduce complications in a dissolution as a way to protect their premarital assets and the care and custody of any children prior to the marriage. These premarital agreements, if drafted fairly, can determine how to separate property should the marriage dissolve or retains the rights of the surviving spouse in the event of death of one of the parties. Every state has different rules, is it a good idea for all states to adopt the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act (UPAA) (Ravdin, 2012)? Typically, premarital agreements were used by older spouses who were either widowed or divorced had considerable wealth and/or children. Until the case, Posner v. Posner, 233 So.2d 381 (Fla. 1970), most premarital agreements were usually unenforceable because they gave the courts the illusion that divorces were easy and attainable. See Gross v. Gross, 464 N.E.2d 500 (Ohio 1984). However, premarital agreements have gained popularity and courts will usually consider premarital agreements as long as tye are executed voluntarily and financially fair. (UPAA [section]6; Brown v. Brown, 26 So.3d 1222 (Ala. 2009); Colo. Rev. Stat. [section]14-2-301, et. Seq.) (Ravdin, 2012). Now days, it seems younger couples are entering into marriages with premarital agreements. There are three major reasons why they are having premarital agreements drafted. The first reason is that there may be an inheritance or family business from wealthy parents or grandparents where the prospective bride or groom may become apart of, and they may wish to keep the inheritance or family business in the family should the union end in divorce. Another reason could be that either party may have come from a divorced family and saw what the divorce did to them growing up and wish to seek solutions over how to solve property and custody disputes in the event of a divorce. And, finally, a third reason may be that younger people are delaying marriage in favor of careers that bring them considerable wealth and assets (Ravdin, 2012). In order for a premarital agreement to be valid, it must follow certain guidelines. The party seeking the premarital agreement must give the fiance(e) ample notice soon after the engagement, but before the wedding. Both parties must have the option to obtain counsel who can give legal advice regarding the terms of the premarital agreement. This leaves each party open to negotiations, without having to side with "take-it-or-leave-it" negotiations. Such negotiations must be planned well in advance of the wedding so each party can fully disclose assets and income. In the event that the premarital agreement shows any kind of unfairness, both parties should be open to negotiations where each has the advantage of economic security (Ravdin, 2012). There may be special concerns when it comes to premarital agreements. One is any future children that may come into the marriage and whether the wife and/or husband remains in the home to take care of the household and needs of the children and the husband and/or wife works outside the home. For example, in the case of Lane v. Lane, 202 S.W.3d 577 (Ky. 2006), the husband made a $1 million per year at the time of dissolution, making the premarital agreement financially unfair. The timeline of divorce for younger couples vs. older couples can also be of concern. In Martin v. Farber, 510 A.2d 608 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1986), resulted in leaving nothing to the husband after the wife died after a 40-year marriage (Ravdin, 2012). Still another concern that may occur is when a premarital agreement grossly affects a disadvantaged party after a pre-determined level of unfairness to a party. These situations can occur after a marriage ends in either divorce or death after 20 or 30 years and the party is unable to work, develops health problems, an inflated cash value on a fixed cash payment, or the wealthier spouse loses the business due to business failure or bad investments and is unable to meet the payments agreed upon in the premarital agreement. This happened in the case of Justus v. Justus, 581 N.E.2d 1265 (Ind. Ct. App. 1991), where the husband's failed business did not give him relief from an obligation of making cash payments in the premarital agreements (Ravdin, 2012). When younger couples enter into marriage with a premarital agreement, both party's reserve the right to seek spousal support should the marriage end in divorce. It seems only natural if one party is financially weaker, the weaker spouse should seek spousal support and the wealthier spouse waive the right. The weaker spouse can seek spousal support in two ways: a binding support arbitration claim, or in a limited support waiver. This situation would result until a child is born, or on the anniversary of the marriage. The right to seek spousal support would be reinstated to the weaker spouse in order to give him or her economic security to the spouse who left the work spouse to be the homemaker in the marriage (Ravdin, 2012). Premarital agreements also give each party the right to maintain separate property in the form of an inheritance, while sharing common marital property during the marriage. If, for some reason, a piece of separate property becomes singled out as marital property, such as interest in a business by the other spouse, this item could give the other spouse an equitable distribution claim into retirement benefits of the owner spouse. Even if the wealthier spouse retains the exclusive rights to property or assets in his or her name, the other spouse could have the same rights to the property or assets (Ravdin, 2012). In the event of death between one of the parties, under state law, the survivor spouse retains the rights to any pension plan survivor benefits as well as a share of the deceased spouse's estate as if there were no premarital agreement. Both parties can consider life insurance premiums that can be dependent upon the type of plan each party opts for. Or the parties can consider the "sunset" clause, when marital rights are restored after a certain number of years from either death or divorce as if a premarital agreement never existed. A good premarital agreement will consider the needs and interests of both parties involved in the agreement. A premarital agreement must also have full disclosure of assets and income between the parties. It must also include a schedule of each party's assets and debts, each parties federal and state income tax returns for the current year and any required years, each parties income and expense declaration, and any non-privileged documents in the possession or control of either party or their attorney that is related to negotiations and preparations of the agreements that has not been produced (Ravdin, 2012). After reviewing and researching the material for premarital agreements, it would be in the best interest for all states to adopt the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act (UPAA). In an era where half of all marriages seem to end in divorce, couples entering into marriage where there is considerable wealth and/or children should have the right to draft premarital agreements in order to end disputes such as separate or marital property and the care and custody of children either from previous marriages or children born during the marriage. I am in complete support of all states adopting the UPAA. References Ravdin, L.J. (2012). Premarital Agreements and the Young Couple. American Journal of Family Law. 26(2), 77.

Effective Communication in the Workforce

These days it seems the world is becoming more and more global and it is becoming more and more important to be able to communicate with people from other cultures. Being able to communicate with other team members in a company will benefit the employees as well as management. They will learn what is tolerated and accepted from different team members of those in the different cultures. For instance, Americans and Northern Europeans are more timeline oriented, direct, and results-focused than say, Latin and other minority cultures. These people take a more relationship based approach, according to Grace Kenig, career consultant counselor for laptop website. These people make excellent team members as they help encourage the greater good when it comes to important individual achievement. The most important communication skill when it comes to minorities in a professional relationship is trust. They may take an indirect approach when it comes to problems in the workplace relationships. If they are paired with employees from other cultures who value directness, they may become frustrated. White people in America where management is concerned prefer problems and issues to be brought to them directly. In the Western cultures, time is based on a linear or sequential, or a clock, to base their tasks on. But in other cultures, the clock is not so important when it comes to tasks at work. In America and other Western cultures, rudeness, or walking away from an important meeting, is assumed to be considered unprofessional in the workplace. If we as employees and supervisors understand the differences between cultures of those working on multicultural teams, we can learn to bridge the gap to more effective communication in the workforce. There are several steps employees and management can take when working on multicultural teams. The first is learning how to adjust communication from different cultures, to the different prospective with different backgrounds and experiences. The challenges of choosing a language, like English, can be a problem when it comes to communicating with members who are not fluent in the chosen language and it becomes important to finding ways to prevent problems when communication is stalled and knowing how to identify ways to these cultural misunderstandings and communication failures. Preventing the exchange of ideas with such members make the task exhausting learning how to understand this communication failures. The second is setting norms like learning to adjusting to each team members’ work communication habits. Learning how leaders establish these norms, and knowing when not to use these colloquialisms that are unique to a local region, and avoiding slang in the workplace where meanings may have different meanings to different cultures. These different meanings can make or break a professional relationship, so it is important to know when to use these colloquialisms and when to avoid slang so as not to fracture the professional work relationship and impede the progress of the project or assignment of the team members. The third step is recalibrating norms to adjust any gaps recognized among the different cultures, which non-language fluency brings on stress, and team members using English as a second language may have to work harder at communication and understanding tasks associated with multicultural teams. When team members learn to what is hindering its team members, they are better equipped to cut out the stress of those team members and learn new ways at effective communication that allows each member of the work team to productively make an effort in the project or assignment. Peer-to-peer confidantes allow both management and employees have gain a responsibility to address such issues that arise in multicultural workplace teams. Some cultures are more accustomed to hierarchical communication channels than others who stress less importance on statuses or titles. These team members with a more hierarchical mindset may only talk to their peers rather than to management. Management should such issues when sharing with staff members allows management to understand the team’s needs. When it comes to social capital, employees on multicultural teams should learn to invest time in understanding the work and communication styles of their colleagues and leaders. They should also learn to recognize such frustrations like the perception of gender roles in hierarchical management, and invest time to help team members learn to adjust to new expectations in building the goodwill to better workplace relationships. When it comes to building better professional relationships in the modern day multicultural workplace, it is important to knowing the differences between different cultural for effective communication and learning to adjust to these differences. Learning these steps to more effective communication will make for better professional relationships in the workplace. References Lisa Bigelow, Demand Media. Multicultural Workforce, Teamwork & Communication. http://woman.thenest.com/steps-effective-multicultural-workplace-communication-9891.htm. Retrieved September 4, 2013. Debra Hojberg-Kraft, Demand Media. Steps for Effective Multicultural Workplace Communication. http://smallbusiness.chron.com/multicultural-workforce-teamwork-communication-12523.html . Retrieved September 4, 2013.

Meaning of Gift

A gift is another way to acquire property and transfer ownership that can be either real or personal property. It is usually voluntary for which no consideration is given. This is what distinguishes a gift from a contract. There are three requirements for a gift to be met: 1) it has to be donative intent on the part of the donor to give the gift; 2) delivery of the gift; and 3) acceptance of the donee to accept the gift. Unless these three requirements have been met, no effective gift has been made. An example would be if your uncle says he will give you a new car for your birthday. This is simply a promise unless the car is delivered and you accept the car as a gift. For the courts to challenge whether an object is a gift is to determine if there was donative intent. The courts will examine the language between the donor and the donee, the relationship between the donor and donee as well as the size of the gift in comparison with the size of all his or her other assets. If the gift is a large portion of his or her assets, the courts look closely at the mental capacity of the donor to make sure fraud or duress was not committed. The delivery should be delivered to the donee, either by a third party of the agent of the donee. If the gift is already in possession of the donee, no delivery has been made. Sometimes an object cannot be physically delivered. This is called constructive delivery. This is when a symbolic delivery is made. This does not prove actual possession of the object, just the right to take possession. It is a general term the law holds equivalent to real delivery. An example would be if a grandparent wishes to gift an heirloom ring but the gift is in the safe deposit box at the bank. The grandparent would give the key to the box to the donee along with authorizing the donee access to the box and its contents. Gifts of intangible objects, like stocks, bonds, and certificates, must also be delivered by means of constructive delivery. The final requirement is simply for the donee to accept the gift. The courts generally assume delivery unless there are certain circumstances that indicate otherwise. There are two types of gifts 1) gifts inter vivos--this is a gift made during a lifetime; and 2) gifts causa mortis--this is a death bed gift made in anticipation of death. A gift causa mortis does not become effective until the donor dies and is revoked should the donor recover. It is also revoked if the donee dies before the donor. It is also should meet the three requirements of a gift--donative intent, delivery, and acceptance. The donor should have a last will and testament so that his or her wishes are carried out as his or her wishes. Having a will drawn out will probably cause less confusion and prevent discrepancies as to whether or not possession of such items, like the heirloom ring mentioned above, are indeed a gift. References South-Western Cengage Learning. (2008-2011). Business Law Today: The Essentials. (9th Ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.