Law Talk

Saturday, we talked about the following (only  a portion of what I’d hoped to cover): 1. Employee eligibility for Unemployment Compensation if the employer shuts down due to Corona Virus; 2. Info for employers and employees regarding Corona virus-related changes in working conditions, such as working from home, what’s optional and what isn’t, etc. The rest of the time was used answering listener calls, including:  unemployment compensation eligibility for part-time employees; tax refund intercepts when the taxpayer has unpaid obligations to the State; unemployment obligations of  a school district to the tutors which it employs;  a landlord-tenant issue (allegations of discrimination of the basis of the number of cars a prospective tenant wishes to park on the premises);  Judicial immunity, and trees on a property line.

This past Saturday, we talked about whether (or not) to use the “Sudden Emergency Doctrine” as a defense when your car rear-ends the car in front of you.  We also responded to a listener email from a waitress/cashier whose employer confiscated the waitstaff tips from the Tip Jar.  We also followed up on a topic we explored on a recent previous show:  Court-ordered Grandparent visitation with grandchildren when the parent(s) themselves oppose it.  Listener calls included a lengthy discussion about trusts, lawyer fees for same, and about “funding” a Trust once it’s created.

We responded to a listener’s previous request with “2 minutes on Trusts.”  We also did a piece about a twist in the law concerning abandoned boats, or those belonging to people who have not paid what they owe for storage, etc.  a listener email led to this topic of greater interest now that (meteorological) spring is already here. The rest of the time was spent dealing with listener calls.  I recall one about suing a contractor for damaging a floor while installing a furnace; and one about suing a lawyer who didn’t finish his assignment.

Atty. Matthew Hallisey of Matthew Hallisey Government Relations, LLC and Attorney Stephen Lattanzio, Principal Attorney at the Connecticut Department of Labor. Steve is an expert on Medical Marijuana in the Workplace.  We covered a lot of the unusual (and unexpected) issues which accompany this topic – issues which affect employers, employees, and prospective employees.  With the disconnect between the Federal Government (which still considers Marijuana of all kinds to be a Schedule 1 Controlled Substance , like Heroin and PCP, for example) and the State laws permitting its usage, there are a lot of issues to watch out for.  And there are now over 40,000 “qualified users” of medical weed in Connecticut alone.  Listener calls included questions about farming hemp and the extent to which the State regulates that; and about medical weed and a CDL truck driving license – which can be a really big issue for a driver and his employer

We returned to one of our most popular topics, Consumer Rights, and in particular, fraud or misconduct by new and used car dealers, repair shops, lenders, etc.  Our guest was Atty. Dan Blinn of Consumer Law Group in Rocky Hill, Ct.   We covered many issues “to watch out for,”  and provided listeners information about what to do if any of these issues “happened” to them.  Numerous listener calls include: a man bought a new car, which-- it turned out-- was really nearly a year old and only had about 2 years left on the 3 year warranty the day he drove it off the dealer’s lot; a lady had problems with a new car lease, especially because she was “over the mileage limit” on her previous lease; someone wanted to know whether it’s better to buy or to lease?

This past LawTalk belonged mostly to the listeners.  Among the calls we handled: A follow-up on a previous show about suing Home Improvement Contractors.  We taught the caller how he can also get attorney’s fees and punitive damages if he prevails at court – and why attorneys in private practice are more interested in representing the homeowner as a result; An inquiry about the liability of stockholders in a closely-held corporation for the acts and omissions of the corporation itself; Copyrighting , and otherwise protecting, the name and songs of a band; An ugly eviction case; with the tenant causing serious damage to the unit just before he was being put out on the street (and why he tried to have the landlord arrested in the process).  Advice given for both landlords and tenants. We also talked about a new decision from a very influential Bankruptcy court in New York regarding the dischargeability in Bankruptcy of Student Loans.  The vast majority of people (including lawyers), believe that such debt is not dischargeable.  This new decision shows that’s not necessarily the case.  If the discharge in that case holds up on appeal, there will be large numbers of Bankruptcy filings by people whose student loans are eating them alive.

Our guest Atty. Elton "Bud" Harvey of the Isaac Law firm Farmington office is a true expert on real estate matters and spends significant time testifying in court as an expert witness in real estate disputes.  We talked about a new law which determines who can conduct real estate closings in Connecticut; about how the particular form of contract your realtor uses for a Purchase and Sales Agreement can save (or cost) you several thousand dollars at the closing; and some other topics, such as how you can end up owning some of your neighbor’s land (or how she can end up owning some of yours…).  We took lots of calls, including questions about adverse possession, out of state real estate owned by a dead parent, conveyance tax issues when selling property, and more.

Our guest was atty. Patrick Tomasiewicz, owner of Fazzano & Tomasiewicz in Hartford.  We spoke about the civil law regarding sexual abuse claims against both institutions and individuals (including the recent extensions of the Statute of Limitations).  We also reviewed the law regarding defamation, with a focus on internet and social media defamation.  Finally, we spoke about the advantages and disadvantages of Connecticut’s unique way to select Jurors in civil matters.  Jury selection for a case in the Federal Court at 450 Main st. might take a couple of hours.  If you take that exact same case and pick a jury in State Court at 95 Washington St (less than a mile away), it may take several days.

In light of the winter season, we did a program on Storm Law, a term we used to describe the legal issues surrounding slip-and-fall personal injury cases involving ice and snow.  We talked about the different requirements for claims concerning municipal (as opposed to private) sidewalks, whether you can still sue if you fell during the storm itself (usually not), and how the concept of contributory negligence affects the injured person’s ability to collect for the injury.   We also warned listeners that they may be liable for a slippery town sidewalk if they own the abutting property (true in some, but not all, towns). Listener calls included a listener who wanted to know who’s liable if a city snowplow pushes snow from the roadway onto a freshly-shoveled sidewalk.

It's our annual Family Law Special.  Guests were Atty. Campbell Barrett of the Hartford office of Pullman and Comley; and Atty. Debra Ruel of Ruel, Ruel, Goings and Britt – also in Hartford.  We discussed alternatives to traditional litigated resolutions, such as mediation or collaborative divorce.  We talked about the major change in alimony which the new tax laws have caused, effective this year, and the actual purposes of alimony (hint: it’s not to punish anyone…).  Listener calls included questions about re-titling securities owned jointly with an uncooperative ex-spouse; using life insurance to guaranty that lifetime alimony payments will be made as intended, and some other stuff I don’t remember.  The time flew by, as usual.

We responded to a couple of listener emails which led to discussions about: Small Claims court: how to save money by using an attorney for only part of the case (“Limited Scope Representation”); and more importantly, how to collect a judgment when you’re successful in your lawsuit (hint:  the Court does NOT help you collect it…); and buying (or buying an interest in) a small business:  important things to watch out for; how to structure the deal to protect yourself; arranging financing; making sure you know what you’re actually buying; complying with regulatory requirements; tax issues, etc. etc.

We were pleased to have as in-studio guests: The Hon. Michelle Seagull, Commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection and Atty. Matthew Hallisey, managing principal at Matthew Hallisey Governmental Affairs, LLC. We discussed what the Department can do to help us consumers, and started off with Home Improvement Contractors.  We never even got to the rest of our agenda (scams, medical marijuana, the state’s Lemon Law regarding motor vehicles) due to the high volume of listener calls.  It was great!  Been a long time since we had that amount of active listener engagement.

We addressed a couple of listener emails: 1. I’m a landlord and I just got a default judgment against a tenant for not paying me rent.  They still won’t leave.  What do I do now? 2. Mom gave my sister her Power of Attorney.  Sis won’t tell any of us what she’s doing with mom’s money.  How can we find out what’s going on? We also rattled on in our Legal Word of the Week segment about this past week’s word:  Contempt.  Civil vs. Criminal; direct vs. indirect; what has to be shown before a court will hold a person in contempt; and what the court’s powers are to compel compliance with its Orders (can you spell “incarceration?"). We had a listener call from a guy who wanted to know if, when a man marries a woman who has lots of debt, he becomes liable for her debts?  The answer is no, unless some court has ordered him to pay them; unless he’s guaranteed them in writing; or unless they were for household necessities for his and her household (this last one is very rare).

A response to a listener email about what happens when one party to a divorce action dies?  Answer:  it depends. The Family Court is usually without jurisdiction to proceed further.  If it comes to enforcing existing financial orders, the surviving spouse can sue the dead person’s Executor in civil court and attempt to collect there.  We talked about a little-known law which allows Connecticut nursing homes to make a claim against the family members of residents in the convalescent home who transferred away assets in an effort to become eligible for Medicaid benefits.  We discussed a recent case where a Farmington nursing home filed suit to recover some $160,000 from the resident’s son – and how the son won at court and got his attorney’s fees paid by the nursing home on top of it! Our Legal Word of the Week was actually a comparison of phrases:  Car crash (or something similarly vivid) vs. motor vehicle accident (or something similarly benign).  We talked about how lawyers carefully select such phrases, and how listeners (either in their own cases or as jurors) should pick up on the usage of such language. Finally: we talked about persons injured In car accidents where there is little evidence of damage to the car in which the person is riding.  We discussed the increasing usage of Biomechanical engineers who testify and thus try to minimize the severity of the injuries in such cases.  And we talked about the Appellate Court’s response:  that only physicians are permitted to offer opinions on the effect of the impact upon a particular person (because we’re all different…).  This continues to be a major, major issue in the Courts with respect to “soft tissue” injuries (whiplash, sprains, strains, etc.).

Basic issues in landlord tenant law – from both the perspective of the landlord and the tenant.  We provided information about how to get self-help materials specifically geared to this topic under Connecticut law – for free.  We also followed up on a listener email about getting her attorney’s fees paid by the tenant in an eviction proceeding.  We introduced a new feature:  “Legal Word of the Week.”  The goal is to de-mystify legal words listeners may encounter.  This week the word was “subrogation.”  The time flew by.  We took a listener call from a previous caller who wanted everyone to know how his lawsuit against 2 dirtbag real estate agents ended up (he won – got damages, punitive damages, and an award of approx.. $60k in attorney’s fees).  He was very proud, and I’m pleased that we were able to encourage him to persist when he called LawTalk last year to seek our thoughts.

We talked about landlord-tenant law since so many empty nesters are downsizing and many Millennials are putting off buying a home in favor of renting, often in “hip” urban areas.  We didn’t get too far into it because I took several listener calls, including the following: Worries about a neighbor’s dead tree endangering the caller’s property; whether Social Security payments are exempt from the reach of one’s creditors; how to deal with after-discovered assets when the decedent’s estate is already closed; and what to do about a discrepancy between one’s birth certificate name and the name one’s mother actually gave her as a newborn.

A follow-up email from the previous week’s program about how to save on legal fees by hiring a lawyer for only a portion of your matter (it’s known formally as “Limited Scope Representation”); Another listener email about what to do when your lawyer refuses to follow your instructions ( even though you’ve paid her a good retainer) because she considers the activities you’re pursuing to be “repugnant;” Reviewing a recent case that teaches us you cannot sue someone for “harassment” (even if their conduct really is harassment); but which also lays out a roadmap for another way to get compensation for being harassed; A Superior Court decision holding that the construction of a back yard treehouse (this was in Greenwich; it was a big mama treehouse) is covered by the Home Improvement Act.  It was a platform to explain the law so that homeowners know how to protect themselves from unscrupulous contractors – and how a contractor can still get paid even if he, in good faith, failed to comply with the technical points of the Home Improvement Act.  In other words, something for everyone – in the LawTalk tradition

Atty. Mark Dubois, former Chief Disciplinary Counsel for the State of Connecticut Judicial Branch (he prosecuted complaints against lawyers) and currently Professor at the University of Connecticut School of Law, talked about a whole slew of lawyer-client issues, hoping to provide helpful info to the lay people in the audience.  Topics included:  how lawyers get paid (and how you as a client can save money on legal fees); the purpose of “retainers;” client confidentiality and attorney-client privilege, and related matters.  Listener calls included questions about getting a Driving Under the Influence conviction pardoned

Our guest Atty. Patrick Tomasiewicz of the Hartford law firm of Fazzano and Tomasiewicz talked about numerous aspects of contemporary criminal law that people often don’t understand fully, such as Victim’s Rights,  Diversionary Programs, Plea Bargaining, Prosecutorial Discretion, and the Sexual Offender Registry.  Listener calls included a man who called in to tell us how the advice we can given him on a previous show about dealing with unauthorized robo-callers and merchants turned out very well for him.  Also, a woman had questions about the tax consequences of a survivor “inheriting” money from a bank account of which she was the joint owner

Topics we visited included a discussion of some new laws which took effect in Connecticut on October 1st, and a listener email about fighting off a Mechanic’s Lien on the title to his home.

Our guest was Atty. Jay Kearns of West Hartford, a nationally-recognized expert on elder law, estate planning, and the like.  We talked about numerous issues related to those topics, specifically including significant changes in the rights of beneficiaries under the new Connecticut Uniform Trust Code, which takes effect on Jan. 1, 2020.  This law is not well-known outside the ranks of people who work in this area every day.  Listener calls included  whether a couple of Seniors living together “without benefit of marriage” were liable for each other’s debts; Why someone would need a will if all their assets are owned jointly with another person, etc.

On this episode, we discussed “listener emails” about updating Powers of Attorney; jury service by hearing-impaired individuals (and the efforts to accommodate their impairment which State Law requires) and the use and misuse of expert witnesses in trials. 

On this episode of Law Talk, we discuss the Connecticut Supreme Court's decision which provides new defenses to foreclosures of residential property; 3 New Hampshire women’s claims that a topless ban which applies only to women is unconstitutional will be presented to the U.S. Supreme Court in October; how the  U.S. Supreme Court may be asked to step in and fix the Electoral College before the 2020 Presidential election; And listener calls include a guy with a complex question about Connecticut’s Family and Medical Leave Act.

We talked about a new Connecticut Supreme Court case involving Freedom of Speech (First Amendment issues and the exception for “true threats”); an interesting issue in Family Law (whether the non-custodial parent can be held in contempt for not exercising court-ordered visitation with the minor kids (visitation was always considered a “privilege,” not an “obligation” until this Appellate Court decision); labor law (“can I get fired for taking a vacation?”); and a Home Improvement Contractor case where the contractor abandoned a $16k job after getting $12k from the owners (by the time the Court finished with him, the Judgment against him totaled $108k).  All in all, a variety of “carefully curated” topics.  Listener calls included how to complain about a car dealer without getting arrested for doing so.

Our guest was Atty. Peter Soulsby, a former prosecutor who is a now a well-regarded criminal defense lawyer. We spoke about aspects of the law that we believe most people are more likely to encounter: DUI, license suspensions, what to do when it’s 2:15 am and you see the blue flashing lights in your rear view mirror, and whether to submit to a breath test. That brought us to per se administrative suspensions at the Motor Vehicle Department (where you lose your license even if you’re acquitted at trial in Superior Court), ignition interlock devices (been drinking? Car won’t start!), Drug recognition enforcement (using “expert” cops), the problems applying the DUI laws to driving while high on weed or other stuff, etc. Lots of very practical and pragmatic information. As Peter said in his very first minute on the air: “If you take a drink, take an Uber…”

Listener Inquiries included: false information given to police by a complainant; a living trust question; penalties for failure to return census forms to the government; the State’s pursuit of a Medicaid recipient’s spouse for repayment; inherited property; title to a house in a specific name with life use; and New York real estate owned by now-deceased mother in California. We also discussed a thing called an “inchoate lien,” how it can screw up a real estate closing, and how to take steps ahead of time to make sure that doesn’t happen.

We answered a listener email about committing fraud by remaining silent; talked about medical malpractice, answered a call from a listener about that topic; and handled other listener calls concerning problems with a Probate Court-appointed estate administrator; lost identification documents, and some other stuff I don’t recall. Ran out of time to discuss the other topics I had prepared. Was gratifying to have people calling again – even on such a nice day.

We discuss when punitive damages (especially in Connecticut) aren’t really so punitive, as well as damages for Bystander Emotional Distress (completing our trilogy of Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress, and now Bystander Emotional Distress. Listener email included answers to: "When my property is damaged, who gets the insurance proceeds, me or the bank holding my mortgage?" and (from a bunch of guys hanging out and watching the Bruins): "Is there really such a thing as a Citizen’s Arrest?"

We visited the real estate world and talked about prepayment penalties on mortgage payoffs and when they’re not legal. We also touched upon joint bank accounts and discussed whose money it really is in those accounts. Additional topics included Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress and its cousin, Negligent infliction of emotional distress; the legal liability of the keeper of domestic animals (excluding dogs); and whether a property owner is liable if a trespasser trips and hurts himself/herself on the property.

We share a NON-POLITICAL primer on the laws governing applications for Asylum in the USA, and discuss changes in the law regarding accommodations to which pregnant workers are now entitled at work; information about a class-action lawsuit affecting payment of servers and waitstaff in Connecticut restaurants; how a North Carolina man got “off the hook” in an animal cruelty criminal prosecution; and a quick walk through the appeals process if the local police chief denies your application for a pistol permit.

We discussed estate planning and probate with our guest, Atty. Lisa Courser from the law firm of Kearns and Kearns. We touched upon Powers of Attorney, Advanced Directives, Wills, Trusts, and some related matters. Listener calls included questions about preventing the State from recouping costs incurred to incarcerate someone when that someone inherits property; the issues flowing from a life use when applying for Medicaid; and ways to deal with excessively long probate estate administrations.

We did our first show on “Weed Law,” aka Cannabis Law. Our guest was Atty. Aaron Romano, a criminal defense lawyer who is a leading expert on the topic and has testified before the State Legislature. We talked about the myths, misconceptions, and hidden traps in the law for people growing, possessing, using, or selling cannabis – along with a critical look at Connecticut’s Medical Marijuana program. It turns out there are a number of serious legal traps for the unwary in the existing law. The show was, in my view, very informative and we were mostly successful in avoiding the political aspects of the issue – per LawTalk normal practice.

LawTalk featured a nationally-recognized Consumer Law expert, Atty. Daniel Blinn of the Consumer Law Group in Rocky Hill, Ct. We spoke extensively about what consumers need to watch out for when dealing with car and truck sellers, lenders, leasing companies, and repair shops. A number of good listener calls, including class actions over vehicle defects, how to find the previous history of a vehicle, why not to rely upon social media reviews of a dealership, the diminished value of a car once damaged in an accident (even if fully repaired), and determining if the interest rate being offered you by the dealership is a good deal or not.

We talked about “constructive discharge,” a part of employment law where, if work demands become intolerable, you may be able to quit and sue the employer (or not). We also talked about a case going to the U.S. Supreme Court where one’s freedom of speech rights collide head-on. With the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s mandate not to register trademarks which are “scandalous, immoral, vulgar,” etc. (Warning: this involves a variation of the F word, which was spelled but not pronounced during the show). We also went over some pitfalls for the unwary with respect to “slip and fall” personal injury cases – and why some municipalities lose these cases even though the law is stacked in their favor (Hartford just got hit for a half-million dollar verdict on a case which it should easily have won…).

We talked about the legal regulation of tattoo parlors and tattoo technicians; real estate auctions, how to use (and protect yourself from) Hubbard Clauses in real estate contracts; the validity of electronic signatures on contracts; what does and does not qualify as constructive discharge from one’s job; and registration requirements for assault rifles. Listener calls included a gun control advocate, a gun rights enthusiast, a question about supplemental benefits for a person receiving Social Security Disability benefits, and an inquiry about irrevocable trusts vs. revocable trusts.

We talked about the use of Animal Trusts to care for pets when the owner is unable to care for them any longer, or dead. We also responded to listener emails about assault as a form of medical malpractice and suing a lawyer for doing a Power of Attorney for a client instead of a will.  Listener calls filled the rest of the show and included questions about evicting relatives from one’s home (landlord-tenant law), the effect of one’s spouse receiving an inheritance during the pendency of a divorce, and whether one can obtain a restraining order against one’s neighbors and their visitors.

Talked about “drone law” and all the ways that drone owners and drone pilots can get in trouble. Had a caller, an independent contractor on a construction job, who wanted to know how he could make the General Contractor pay him the balance he owed him. Also had a woman who’d been in a parking lot auto accident with another woman and was having trouble with the other woman’s insurance carrier.

On this episode, we continued our brief series on buying and selling a small business – with a focus on how to get the money for a buyer to do so. We also talked about a new development in the law regarding damage done by dogs – even if they never make contact with a person or another animal. Hint: If the dog is unleashed, the owner or keeper is going to get the worst of the deal. Listener calls included a call about collecting back wages from a non-profit employer, and a previous caller who wanted to let us know that the advice he got over the air worked “really well,” and that he was grateful for the help. It was gratifying to hear from him!

We talked about legal tips and traps when buying or selling a small business. Listener calls included questions about a Will and Power of Attorney for the caller’s mother, questions about getting money damages in small claims court for emotional distress, and complaints about indifference by the Bristol police (!) to repeated complaints of vandalism and threatening by the caller’s neighbors and their guests.

This LawTalk included discussions about independent contractors getting injured on the jobsite and making Workers Compensation claims; using Secured Indemnity Agreements In real estate conveyancing in order to overcome title defects and get the closing done; and the use and misuse of codicils when changing a will. Listener calls included someone having a problem getting their attorney to speak with them, also a question about how a Secured Indemnity Agreement might allow his stalled real estate purchase to go forward –he was right on point.

How the legal system handles claims of injury and disabling illness. Topics were personal injury law, workers’ compensation claims, and social security disability claims. Guest was Atty. Martin McQuillan of New Britain. Caller inquiries included: Do you have to sue your own insurance company to get underinsured motorist benefits? (answer: sometimes); can your own insurer drop your coverage if you make such a claim? (answer: not legal to do so for that reason, but they’re clever…).

On Saturday, we did our annual Family Law special. Guests were well-known Family Law experts Margaret Bozek and Campbell Barrett. We discussed numerous issues in Family Law, including changes in the taxation of alimony, collaborative divorce, pre-nuptial and post-nuptial agreements ( the latter is a relatively new development in Connecticut law), Grandparent claims for custody or visitation with grandchildren (extremely difficult to obtain under current law), hiring a lawyer for only “a portion” of your case (to save money), and other related topics people caught up in the process need to understand. Listener calls included inquiries about “the man getting, instead of paying, the alimony…”