The two main areas of consumer fraud that will be addressed in this paper are the victimization of consumers by the financial services industry, more commonly referred to as “predatory lending,” and the types of fraud perpetrated on consumers in the sale of insurance. This paper will also discuss both industries attempt at immunity by requiring pre-dispute, binding arbitration.
The American judicial system was first introduced to the concept of antitrust law when the Sherman Antitrust Act was passed in 1890. The Sherman Act was brought to life during a period of American history when our country was suffering from a series of depressions, while businesses were struggling to survive during the post Civil War era. Many large companies were organized for the sole purpose of monopolizing the market and restraining free competition in an effort to increase capital gains. The legislative history of the Sherman Act points to Congress’s intent to make such tactics illegal where the result is an unreasonable restraint on trade.
The high incidence of alcohol-related vehicle accidents has resulted in an equally large number of civil actions being filed in our state and throughout the country. The courts have responded in a proper fashion by holding bars, restaurants, package stores, and the like responsible to injured parties. Due to the catastrophic injuries and deaths resulting from drunk-driving crashes, the national movement to curb drunk driving, the loose practices by many sellers of alcoholic beverages, and the increased awareness by jurors generally, the value of these cases has increased greatly.
A statute of limitations defines the period of time in which one is permitted to bring a lawsuit. In order for a statute of limitations to be constitutional, it must provide plaintiffs reasonable time in which to bring their claim. However, according to a recent Alabama Supreme Court decision, toxic tort victims who do not become ill until several years after they were exposed to a hazardous substance are left with no time in which to bring their claim. As a result, those plaintiffs that suffer from a latent disease are left with no opportunity to seek redress for their personal injuries. The following is an outline of the statute of limitations issue, a summary of the Alabama Supreme Court decision which confirmed the unjust policy, a history of how Alabama law evolved to create the injustice, and finally, the major arguments against the policy. Insert Description of the Document Here
In 1996 Congress passed the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) out of concern that millions of American workers were without health insurance coverage when they changed employers because insurance plans for new employers typically excluded coverage for preexisting conditions. HIPAA seeks to protect workers by allowing health insurance plans to be portable so that workers who changed jobs could keep their existing health insurance. In addition to providing insurance protection for workers, HIPAA regulates the use and disclosure of individually identifiable health care information and it also preempts state law to the extent that a state’s law is contrary to the provisions of HIPAA. This article gives an overview of HIPAA and then focuses primarily on the basic discovery related requirements and issues concerning the HIPAA privacy rules.
Meaningful discovery in the consumer fraud case begins with the initial discovery filed with the complaint, along with deposition notices of those persons that the plaintiff’s attorney wishes to depose once he has received all of his responses to request for production and responses to interrogatories. Every consumer fraud case should have a discovery plan, and that plan must begin with the initial filing of discovery with the complaint. This initial discovery will set the tone of the case, and in particular, it will set the tone of discovery being conducted in the case.
Mastering the rules of evidence, whether in state or federal court, is an essential tool in being an effective advocate for your client. With a standing knowledge of the relevant rules of evidence, you can make effective objections which will dictate the substance, course and outcome of the trial. A form of the Federal Rules of Evidence was adopted by the :$tate·'c):fAla.oama,pJ.1,;~July19;l99;. Alabama's newly adopted Rules of Evidence became effective on 'j,anuafYl,'·l-9.96.'.iIowever, one should not overemphasize the impact of the federal model on the Alabama Rules of Evidence. It is important to note that they are not clones of each other. There are TIU111erOUS instances when it was decided to reject a particular federal principle and abide by the pre-existing Alabama evidence rule. Therefore, in a very real sense, the Alabama Rules of Evidence are not the Federal Rules of Evidence. The following are the major instances in the areas of evidence and objections when rejection or modification of the corresponding federal rule occurred:
There is nothing more important in the litigation of a nursing home case than “internal” documentation generated by the owners and/or management companies responsible for the operation of the nursing home. This internal documentation can lay the framework for the successful prosecution of your case. While the data memorialized in the documentation may vary from nursing home to nursing home, the type of information is typically of the same general nature.
After years of work, meetings with the client, depositions, hearings, countless hours spent reviewing and analyzing the chart, consultation with experts, preparation and presentation of witnesses, you are now on the eve of trial in a nursing home case. You have a great responsibility to the nursing home resident and/or their family, as well as to the nursing home population at large.
Ethics rules represent the mandatory minimum standard of conduct below which no attorney may fall. By contrast, the idea of professionalism represents aspirational standards of conduct that surpass the threshold ethical requirements. The message of professionalism is a combination of competency and diligence, conformance to ethics, civility to others in the legal system and the improving of the legal system. The Preamble to the Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct (“ARPC”) states in pertinent part:


