|
|
|
McDonnell Law - Social Security Disability Law Office
Law Firm News |
2013/06/25 12:16
|
| At MdDonnell Law, our San Diego Social Security attorney is here to help you get your benefits if you are disabled and an adult and able to work. We can also help if you are a beneficiary of a person entitled to SSDI. If you are a child or an adult who does not qualify for SSDI, we can help you obtain SSI. If you are in pain or cannot function, you must seek medical help and have the doctor document your disability. The Social Security Administration requires documents that prove you are seriously ill and unable to function. If you are seeking SSI, there are strict financial limitations; you must not have income above a certain amount and must not have assets that exceed a set amount. These items can get complicated but We can help you sort through all these things and help you file a claim for the best results. Or we can help you appeal a ruling in which you were denied benefits. Just call a Social Security Lawyer located in San Diego or email and tell us your situation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
McKennon Law Group - Disability Insurance
Law Firm News |
2013/06/22 14:21
|
| Disability insurance law firm, McKennon Law Group are experts at resolving long-term disability insurance claim disputes. The disputes we handle include individuals ad group policies involving the ERISA. Our attorneys have had over 25 years of experience and are the aggressive advocates in the Newport Beach, California area but also known nationally and regionally as the top disability insurance litigation firm. If you are feeling helpless because your insurance company denies your disability claim, contact one of our attorneys today and we can claim the case for you to get successful results. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Ariz. citizenship proof law illegal
Headline Legal News |
2013/06/19 11:04
|
The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states cannot require would-be voters to prove they are U.S. citizens before using a federal registration system designed to make signing up easier.
The justices voted 7-2 to throw out Arizona's voter-approved requirement that prospective voters document their U.S. citizenship in order to use a registration form produced under the federal "Motor Voter" voter registration law.
Federal law "precludes Arizona from requiring a federal form applicant to submit information beyond that required by the form itself," Justice Antonia Scalia wrote for the court's majority.
The court was considering the legality of Arizona's requirement that prospective voters document their U.S. citizenship in order to use a registration form produced under the federal "motor voter" registration law. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, which doesn't require such documentation, trumps Arizona's Proposition 200 passed in 2004. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court says human genes cannot be patented
Legal Business |
2013/06/13 09:23
|
The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that companies cannot patent parts of naturally-occurring human genes, a decision with the potential to profoundly affect the emerging and lucrative medical and biotechnology industries.
The high court's unanimous judgment reverses three decades of patent awards by government officials. It throws out patents held by Salt Lake City-based Myriad Genetics Inc. on an increasingly popular breast cancer test brought into the public eye recently by actress Angelina Jolie's revelation that she had a double mastectomy because of one of the genes involved in this case.
Justice Clarence Thomas, who wrote the court's decision, said that Myriad's assertion — that the DNA it isolated from the body for its proprietary breast and ovarian cancer tests were patentable — had to be dismissed because it violates patent rules. The court has said that laws of nature, natural phenomena and abstract ideas are not patentable.
"We hold that a naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature and not patent eligible merely because it has been isolated," Thomas said.
Patents are the legal protection that gives inventors the right to prevent others from making, using or selling a novel device, process or application. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has been awarding patents on human genes for almost 30 years, but opponents of Myriad Genetics Inc.'s patents on the two genes linked to increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer say such protection should not be given to something that can be found inside the human body.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: $1M coverage for Conn. fire victim families
Legal World News |
2013/06/11 09:03
|
Families suing the operator of a Hartford nursing home where 16 patients died in a 2003 fire suffered a setback Monday, when the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that the home's insurance coverage was $1 million instead of the $10 million claimed by the victims' relatives.
The justices' 3-2 decision reversed a lower court judge's interpretation of Greenwood Health Center's insurance policy in favor of the families. The high court instead found in favor of Boston-based Lexington Insurance Co., a subsidiary of American International Group Inc.
"It just seems completely inadequate," Van Starkweather, an attorney for one victim's family, said about the lower coverage figure. "I'm disappointed. It was a close decision. Three justices went with AIG. Two justices went with the victims."
A lawyer for Lexington Insurance declined to comment Monday.
The fire at Greenwood Health Center on Feb. 26, 2003, broke out after psychiatric patient Leslie Andino set her bed on fire while flicking a cigarette lighter. Officials at the time said it was the 10th deadliest nursing home fire in U.S. history. Andino was charged with 16 counts of arson murder, but was found incompetent to stand trial and committed to a psychiatric hospital.
Relatives of 13 of the 16 victims sued the nursing home's operator for cash damages, saying it failed to adequately supervise Andino. Hartford Superior Court Judge Marshall K. Berger Jr. ruled in 2009 that Greenwood's insurance policy with Lexington provided $250,000 in coverage for each plaintiff and the policy's maximum coverage was $10 million.
But Lexington Insurance appealed Berger's decision, saying that the $10 million was the total coverage for all seven nursing homes run by Greenwood's operator and that each home was insured up to $1 million.
In a decision written by Chief Justice Chase T. Rogers, the Supreme Court's majority found that each plaintiff actually was eligible for up to $500,000 from the insurance policy if they won their lawsuit, but that the policy's total coverage was limited to $1 million.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
