AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, DNA, DEFALCATION & MIRANDA -- Fisher, King, Bullock & Salinas: Charles Ware's SCOTUS Update (2013) --- 4 CASES

Charles Jerome Ware is a best-selling author, renowned attorney, and constitutional scholar.

(1) Affirmative Action: Fisher v. University of Texas At Austin, Et Al., 570 U.S.___(2013).

The Supreme Court allowed affirmative action to survive in college admission but imposed a tough legal standard, ruling that schools must prove there are "no workable race-neutral alternatives" to achieve diversity on campus.

(2) DNA Collection: Maryland v. King, 569 U.S.__(2013).

The Supreme Court ruled that when law enforcement officers make an arrest supported by probable cause to hold for a serious offense and they bring the suspect to the station to be detained in custody taking and analyzing a cheek swab of the arrestee’s DNA is, like fingerprinting and photographing, a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.

(3) Miranda Warning/Fifth Amendment: Salinas v. Texas, 570 U.S.__(2013).

Petitioner, without being placed in custody or receiving Miranda warnings, voluntarily answered some of a police officer’s questions about a murder, but fell silent when asked whether ballistics testing would match his shotgun to shell casings found at the scene of the crime. At petitioner’s murder trial in Texas state court, and over his objection, the prosecution used his failure to answer the question as evidence of guilt. He was convicted, and both the State Court of Appeals and Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed, rejecting his claim that the prosecution’s use of his silence in its case in chief violated the Fifth Amendment.

Held: The judgment is affirmed.  Salinas should have expressly asserted his 5th Amendment privilege to the officer.

(4) Defalcation: Bullock v. BankChampaign, 569 U.S.__(2013).

The Supreme Court defined the term "defalcation" in the Bankruptcy Code to include a culpable state of mind requirement involving knowledge of, or gross recklessness in respect to, the improper nature of the fiduciary behavior.

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com ("We fight.  You win.")

Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counsellors in the United States. [GQ Magazine, The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Columbia Flier, USA TODAY, The Howard County Sun, The Anniston Star, The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX-TV NEWS, WHUR, WHUT, MPT, BBC, The Wall Street Journal, ABA Journal, et al.]  

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com.  Home website of the best-selling author and attorney Charles Jerome Ware.

Among attorney and author Charles Jerome Ware's best-selling books are:
(1) The Secret Science of Winning Lotteries, Sweepstakes and Contests;
http://amzn.com/1432793888
(2) Understanding the Law: A Primer;
http://amzn.com/1440111456
(3) The Immigration Paradox: 15 Tips for Winning Immigration Cases;
http://amzn.com/1440171920
(4) Legal Consumer Tips and Secrets: Avoiding Debtors' Prison in the United States; and
http://amzn.com/1462051847
(5) Quince (15) Consejos Para Ganar Casos Del Inmigracion.
http://amzn.com/1462068952

"THE SOUTH RISES AGAIN": SCOTUS REJECTS SECTION 4, VOTING RIGHTS ACT OF 1965

This U.S. Supreme Court updated is presented as a public service by the national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counsellors.  www.CharlesJeromeWare.com

The case is Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder, Attorney General, Et Al., 570 U.S.___(2013).

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has rejected a key part of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, i.e. Section 4, the "formula" that is used to determine which jurisdictions are required to secure advance clearance from the U.S. Department of Justice prior to making changes to voting practices.

In a 5-4 decision, SCOTUS said the formula of Section 4 is unconstitutional given advances in voting rights in the covered states. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote the majority opinion.

The current formula requires preclearance for changes to voting practices by nine states, mostly in the South, and parts of seven others. If Congress wants to single out certain states for scrutiny, Roberts said, they must be chosen "on a basis that makes sense in light of current conditions."

"Coverage today is based on decades-old data and eradicated practices," Roberts said. "The formula captures states by reference to literacy tests and low voter registration and turnout in the 1960s and early 1970s. But such tests have been banned nationwide for over 40 years. ... And voter registration and turnout numbers in the covered states have risen dramatically in the years since."

Indeed, Roberts said, by 2009 the racial gap in voter registration and turnout was lower in states originally subjected to preclearance requirements than it was nationwide.

SHELBY COUNTY ALABAMA v. HOLDER, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ET AL., Supreme Court of the United States, Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, No. 12-96, Argued February 27, 2013 - Decided June 25, 2013, 570 U.S.___(2013).

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was enacted to address entrenched racial discrimination in voting, “an insidious and pervasive evil which had been perpetuated in certain parts of our country through unremitting and ingenious defiance of the Constitution.” South Carolina v. Katzenbach, 383 U. S. 301. Section 2 of the Act, which bans any “standard, practice, or procedure” that “results in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen . . . to vote on account of race or color,” 42 U. S. C. §1973(a), applies nationwide, is permanent, and is not at issue in this case. Other sections apply only to some parts of the country.

Section 4 of the Act provides the “coverage formula,” defining the “covered jurisdictions” as States or political subdivisions that maintained tests or devices as prerequisites to voting, and had low voter registration or turnout, in the 1960s and early 1970s. §1973b(b).

In those covered jurisdictions, §5 of the Act provides that no change in voting procedures can take effect until approved by specified federal authorities in Washington, D. C. §1973c(a). Such approval is known as “preclearance.”
  

The coverage formula and preclearance requirement were initially set to expire after five years, but the Act has been reauthorized several times. In 2006, the Act was reauthorized for an additional 25 years, but the coverage formula was not changed. Coverage still turned on whether a jurisdiction had a voting test in the 1960s or 1970s, and had low voter registration or turnout at that time. Shortly after the 2006 reauthorization, a Texas utility district sought to bail out from the Act’s coverage and, in the alternative, challenged the Act’s constitutionality.

 

This Court resolved the challenge on statutory grounds, but expressed serious doubts about the Act’s continued constitutionality. See Northwest Austin Municipal Util. Dist. No. One v. Holder, 557 U. S. 193.

  

Petitioner Shelby County, in the covered jurisdiction of Alabama, sued the Attorney General in Federal District Court in Washington, D. C., seeking a declaratory judgment that sections 4(b) and 5 are facially unconstitutional, as well as a permanent injunction against their enforcement.

 

The District Court upheld the Act, finding that the evidence before Congress in 2006 was sufficient to justify reauthorizing §5 and continuing §4(b)’s coverage formula.

 

The D. C. Circuit affirmed.

 

After surveying the evidence in the record, that court accepted Congress’s conclusion that §2 litigation remained inadequate in the covered jurisdictions to protect the rights of minority voters, that §5 was therefore still necessary, and that the coverage formula continued to pass constitutional muster.

  

Held: Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional; its formula can no longer be used as a basis for subjecting jurisdictions to preclearance. Pp. 9–25.

 

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com ("We fight.  You win.")

Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counsellors in the United States. [GQ Magazine, The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Columbia Flier, USA TODAY, The Howard County Sun, The Anniston Star, The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX-TV NEWS, WHUR, WHUT, MPT, BBC, The Wall Street Journal, ABA Journal, et al.]   

GOOD ATTORNEY SEAL OF APPROVAL ("GASA"): Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counsellors, www.CharlesJeromeWare.com

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com ("We fight.  You win.")

Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counsellors in the United States. [GQ Magazine, The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Columbia Flier, USA TODAY, The Howard County Sun, The Anniston Star, The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX-TV NEWS, WHUR, WHUT, MPT, BBC, The Wall Street Journal, ABA Journal, et al.]   

Among attorney and author Charles Jerome Ware's best-selling books are:

(1) The Secret Science of Winning Lotteries, Sweepstakes and Contests;
http://amzn.com/1432793888
(2) Understanding the Law: A Primer;
http://amzn.com/1440111456
(3) The Immigration Paradox: 15 Tips for Winning Immigration Cases;
http://amzn.com/1440171920
(4) Legal Consumer Tips and Secrets: Avoiding Debtors' Prison in the United States; and
http://amzn.com/1462051847
(5) Quince (15) Consejos Para Ganar Casos Del Inmigracion.
http://amzn.com/1462068952

SCOTUS RULES: FISHER v. UNIV. OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN, ET AL. (A Racial Preferences Case)

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com

This Supreme Court update is presented as a public service by the national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counsellors.

SUMMARY

Today (Monday, June 24, 2013) the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), in the controversial case of Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, et al., 570 U.D.___(2013), permitted affirmative action in college admission to continue but imposed an additional tough legal standard.  The Court essentially ruled that colleges must prove there are "no workable race-neutral alternatives" to affirmative action to achieve diversity on campus.

SYLLABUS

FISHER v. UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN, ET AL., Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 570 U.S.___(2013), No. 11-345, Argued October 10, 2012 - Decided June 24, 2013.

The University of Texas at Austin considers race as one of various factors in its undergraduate admissions process. The University, which is committed to increasing racial minority enrollment, adopted its current program after this Court decided Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U. S. 306, upholding the use of race as one of many “plus factors” in an admissions program that considered the overall individual contribution of each candidate, and decided Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U. S. 244, holding unconstitutional an admissions program that automatically awarded points to applicants from certain racial minorities.

Petitioner, who is Caucasian, was rejected for admission to the University’s 2008 entering class. She sued the University and school officials, alleging that the University’s consideration of race in admissions violated the Equal Protection Clause.

 

The District Court granted summary judgment to the University.

 

Affirming, the Fifth Circuit held that Grutter required courts to give substantial deference to the University, both in the definition of the compelling interest in diversity’s benefits and in deciding whether its specific plan was narrowly tailored to achieve its stated goal. Applying that standard, the court upheld the University’s admissions plan.

Held: Because the Fifth Circuit did not hold the University to the demanding burden of strict scrutiny articulated in Grutter and Regents of Univ. of Cal. v. Bakke, 438 U. S. 265, its decision affirming the District Court’s grant of summary judgment to the University was incorrect. Pp. 5–13.

 

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com ("We fight.  You win.")

Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counsellors in the United States. [GQ Magazine, The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Columbia Flier, USA TODAY, The Howard County Sun, The Anniston Star, The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX-TV NEWS, WHUR, WHUT, MPT, BBC, The Wall Street Journal, ABA Journal, et al.]   

BURGER KING, CAPITOL HILL POLICE, BLACK FARMERS & ATTORNEY CHARLES WARE

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com ("We fight.  You win.")

Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counsellors in the United States. [GQ Magazine, The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Columbia Flier, USA TODAY, The Howard County Sun, The Anniston Star, The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX-TV NEWS, WHUR, WHUT, MPT, BBC, The Wall Street Journal, ABA Journal, et al.]

CHARLES WARE'S THREE (3) FAMOUS CLASS ACTION DISCRIMINATION CASES:

BURGER KING, CAPITOL HILL POLICE, AND BLACK FARMERS

 

Attorney Charles Ware is a founder and principal of the national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counsellors, headquartered in Columbia, Howard County, Maryland.

 

(1) BURGER KING FRANCHISEE CLASS ACTION:

HALL, ET AL. v. BURGER KING CORPORATION
Class Action Suit Filed: October 18, 1988, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Washington, D.C., subsequently transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Miami); Damages Demand: $500 Million; Plaintiffs: Twelve (12) named Plaintiffs (including Ms. Hall); Lead Attorneys for the Plaintiffs: Charles Jerome Ware, Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counsellors; H. Russell Frisby; Franklin M. Lee, Minority Business Enterprise Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc. (MBELDEF, Inc.)
_________________________________________________________________________________

Legal Issues: Antitrust violations and Discrimination alleged against Burger King Corporation by minority franchisees: examples include the relegation of black and other minority franchisees of BKC fast-food franchises to unprofitable locations in poor, urban neighborhoods, and reserving more profitable outlets for whites.

[The New York Times ("Federal Suit Accuses Burger King of Discrimination Against Blacks"), October 18, 1988; Associated Press (AP), 10-18-2012; www.nytimes.com/1988/10/18/US/federal-suit-accuses-burger-king-of-discrimination; The Washington Post, 10/18/2012; Philadelphia Inquirer, October 19, 1988].

 

(2) CAPITOL HILL POLICE CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT:

BLACKMON-MALLOY, et al. v. UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE BOARD, Civil Docket Case # 1:01-cv-02221-EGS-JMF, U.S. District Court for the District of Washington, D.C.; Case Filed: 10/29/2001; Jury Demanded; Damages Demand: $100,000,000.00; Lead Attorney for Plaintiff Class: Charles Jerome Ware, Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counsellors.
_________________________________________________________________________________

Nature of Class Action Suit: Employment discrimination.

Judge Assigned: Judge Emmet G. Sullivan.

Magistrate Assigned: Magistrate John M. Facciola.

"You have, basically, a renegade police department up here, that's been operating under the protection of Congress" - Attorney Charles J. Ware, 10/29/2001.

[The New York Times, The Washington Post, Associated Press].

 

(3) BLACK FARMERS CLASS ACTION CASE:

TIMOTHY PIGFORD, et al. v. ANN VENEMAN, Secretary of the U.S Department of Agriculture, and CECIL BRWEINGTON, et al., v. MIKE JOHANNS, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Civil Class Action Cases Number 97-1978 (PLF) and Number 98-1693 (PLF); Filed: August 28, 1997, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia; Case "Settled and Terminated": April 14, 1999; Motion for Reconsideration filed on February 3rd, 2005 in re the Court's January 2005 Opinion denying a previous motion by a group of Black Farmers to modify the Consent Decree, by Attorney Charles Jerome Ware, Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counsellors.

1. Terms of the Consent Decree

Under the consent decree, an eligible recipient is an African American who (1) farmed or attempted to farm between January 1, 1981, and December 31, 1996, (2) applied to USDA for farm credit or program benefits and believes that he or she was discriminated against by the USDA on the basis of race, and (3) made a complaint against the USDA on or before July 1, 1997. The consent decree set up a system for notice, claims submission, consideration, and review that involved a facilitator, arbitrator, adjudicator, and monitor, all with assigned responsibilities. The funds to pay the costs of the settlement (including legal fees) come from the Judgment Fund operated by the Department of the Treasury, not from USDA accounts or appropriations.

2. Case history

The lawsuit was filed in 1997 by Timothy Pigford, who was joined by 400 additional African-American farmer plaintiffs. Dan Glickman, the Secretary of Agriculture, was the nominal defendant. The allegations were that the USDA treated black farmers unfairly when deciding to allocate price support loans, disaster payments, "farm ownership" loans, and operating loans, and that the USDA had failed to process subsequent complaints about racial discrimination.

After the lawsuit was filed, Pigford requested blanket mediation to cover what was thought to be about 2,000 farmers who may have been discriminated against, but the U.S. Department of Justice opposed the mediation, saying that each case had to be investigated separately. As the case moved toward trial, the presiding judge certified as a class all black farmers who filed discrimination complaints against the USDA between 1983 and 1997.

The Pigford consent decree established a two-track dispute resolution mechanism for those seeking relief.

The most widely used option was called "Track A" which could provide a monetary settlement of $50,000 plus relief in the form of loan forgiveness and offsets of tax liability.

Track A claimants had to present substantial evidence (i.e., a reasonable basis for finding that discrimination happened) that:

• claimant owned or leased, or attempted to own or lease, farm land;
• claimant applied for a specific credit transaction at a USDA county office during the applicable period;
• the loan was denied, provided late, approved for a lesser amount than requested, encumbered by restrictive conditions, or USDA failed to provide appropriate loan service, and such treatment was less favorable than that accorded specifically identified, similarly situated white farmers; and
• the USDA’s treatment of the loan application led to economic damage to the class member.

Alternatively, affected farmers could follow the "Track B" process. Track B claimants had to prove their claims and actual damages by a preponderance of the evidence (i.e., it is more likely than not that their claims are valid). The documentation to support such a claim and the amount of relief are reviewed by a third party arbitrator, who makes a binding decision. The consent decree also provided injunctive relief, primarily in the form of priority consideration for loans and purchases, and technical assistance in filling out forms. Finally, plaintiffs were permitted to withdraw from the class and pursue their individual cases in federal court or through the USDA administrative process.

This settlement was hastily approved on April 14, 1999, by Judge Paul L. Friedman of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

[see, "The Pigford Case: USDA Settlement of a Discrimination Suit by Black Farmers," Congressional Research Service, Tadlock Cowan (January 13, 2009); www.blackfarmercase.com; cnsnews.com/news/article/ "Thousands of Black Farmers File Claims in USDA Discrimination Settlement"; www.washingtonpost.com/02-19-2010/ "U.S. Approves Settlement for Black Farmers"; www.reuters.com/2010-02-18/"Black Farmers Win $1.25 billion in Discrimination Suit"] 

BOOK NOTES-RSLF-CHARLES WARE, Best-Selling Author

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com
"RSLF": Read, Study, Learn, Follow.

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com.  Home website of the best-selling author and attorney Charles Jerome Ware.

Among attorney and author Charles Jerome Ware's best-selling books are:

(1) The Secret Science of Winning Lotteries, Sweepstakes and Contests;
http://amzn.com/1432793888
(2) Understanding the Law: A Primer;
http://amzn.com/1440111456
(3) The Immigration Paradox: 15 Tips for Winning Immigration Cases;
http://amzn.com/1440171920
(4) Legal Consumer Tips and Secrets: Avoiding Debtors' Prison in the United States; and
http://amzn.com/1462051847
(5) Quince (15) Consejos Para Ganar Casos Del Inmigracion.
http://amzn.com/1462068952

BLACK FARMERS UPDATE: By Attorney & Author Charles Jerome Ware, www.CharlesJeromeWare.com

I. RECENT (2013) FARM BILL

Thursday, June 20th, 2013: The U.S. House of Representatives today rejected the proposed $500 billion farm bill [www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/06-20-2013].

II. In Re Black Farmers discrimination litigation settlement.

Congress set aside $1.25 billion for this settlement.  These federal funds are separate from other lawsuits, and may only be used for this specific settlement.

Thursday, June 20th, 2013: The "Ombudsman" for the In Re Black farmers discrimination litigation settlement issued a report on the "progress in implementation" of the settlement, including the following information.

1. Claim forms have been made available to "about 89,057 claimants".
2. Claim forms have been "timely submitted to the Claims Administrator by about 37,925 claimants".
3. Claim forms submitted by class members are "complete".
   [www.inreblackfarmersombudsman.com/ombudsman, P.O. Box 19100, Washington, D.C. 20036/1-866-686-8682]

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com ("We fight.  You win.")

Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counsellors in the United States. [GQ Magazine, The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Columbia Flier, USA TODAY, The Howard County Sun, The Anniston Star, The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX-TV NEWS, WHUR, WHUT, MPT, BBC, The Wall Street Journal, ABA Journal, et al.]

BLACK FARMERS CLASS ACTION CASE:

TIMOTHY PIGFORD, et al. v. ANN VENEMAN, Secretary of the U.S Department of Agriculture, and CECIL BRWEINGTON, et al., v. MIKE JOHANNS, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Civil Class Action Cases Number 97-1978 (PLF) and Number 98-1693 (PLF); Filed: August 28, 1997, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia; Case "Settled and Terminated": April 14, 1999; Motion for Reconsideration filed on February 3rd, 2005 in re the Court's January 2005 Opinion denying a previous motion by a group of Black Farmers to modify the Consent Decree, by Attorney Charles Jerome Ware, Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counsellors.

1. Terms of the Consent Decree

Under the consent decree, an eligible recipient is an African American who (1) farmed or attempted to farm between January 1, 1981, and December 31, 1996, (2) applied to USDA for farm credit or program benefits and believes that he or she was discriminated against by the USDA on the basis of race, and (3) made a complaint against the USDA on or before July 1, 1997. The consent decree set up a system for notice, claims submission, consideration, and review that involved a facilitator, arbitrator, adjudicator, and monitor, all with assigned responsibilities. The funds to pay the costs of the settlement (including legal fees) come from the Judgment Fund operated by the Department of the Treasury, not from USDA accounts or appropriations.

2. Case history

The lawsuit was filed in 1997 by Timothy Pigford, who was joined by 400 additional African-American farmer plaintiffs. Dan Glickman, the Secretary of Agriculture, was the nominal defendant. The allegations were that the USDA treated black farmers unfairly when deciding to allocate price support loans, disaster payments, "farm ownership" loans, and operating loans, and that the USDA had failed to process subsequent complaints about racial discrimination.

After the lawsuit was filed, Pigford requested blanket mediation to cover what was thought to be about 2,000 farmers who may have been discriminated against, but the U.S. Department of Justice opposed the mediation, saying that each case had to be investigated separately. As the case moved toward trial, the presiding judge certified as a class all black farmers who filed discrimination complaints against the USDA between 1983 and 1997.

The Pigford consent decree established a two-track dispute resolution mechanism for those seeking relief.

The most widely used option was called "Track A" which could provide a monetary settlement of $50,000 plus relief in the form of loan forgiveness and offsets of tax liability.

Track A claimants had to present substantial evidence (i.e., a reasonable basis for finding that discrimination happened) that:

• claimant owned or leased, or attempted to own or lease, farm land;
• claimant applied for a specific credit transaction at a USDA county office during the applicable period;
• the loan was denied, provided late, approved for a lesser amount than requested, encumbered by restrictive conditions, or USDA failed to provide appropriate loan service, and such treatment was less favorable than that accorded specifically identified, similarly situated white farmers; and
• the USDA’s treatment of the loan application led to economic damage to the class member.

Alternatively, affected farmers could follow the "Track B" process. Track B claimants had to prove their claims and actual damages by a preponderance of the evidence (i.e., it is more likely than not that their claims are valid). The documentation to support such a claim and the amount of relief are reviewed by a third party arbitrator, who makes a binding decision. The consent decree also provided injunctive relief, primarily in the form of priority consideration for loans and purchases, and technical assistance in filling out forms. Finally, plaintiffs were permitted to withdraw from the class and pursue their individual cases in federal court or through the USDA administrative process.

This settlement was hastily approved on April 14, 1999, by Judge Paul L. Friedman of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

[see, "The Pigford Case: USDA Settlement of a Discrimination Suit by Black Farmers," Congressional Research Service, Tadlock Cowan (January 13, 2009); www.blackfarmercase.com; cnsnews.com/news/article/ "Thousands of Black Farmers File Claims in USDA Discrimination Settlement"; www.washingtonpost.com/02-19-2010/ "U.S. Approves Settlement for Black Farmers"; www.reuters.com/2010-02-18/"Black Farmers Win $1.25 billion in Discrimination Suit"]

GINTHER, LUSTIG LOTTERY FORMULAS: 100% EFFECTIVE

AUTHOR, LAWYER, LOTTERICIAN CHARLES WARE: 100% EFFECTIVE LOTTERY TECHNIQUES

Chapter VII: "How To Create Your Own Winning Lottery Algorithm" (pages 61-90).

A chapter from Dr. Charles J. Ware's best-selling book:

THE SECRET SCIENCE OF WINNING LOTTERIES, SWEEPSTAKES AND CONTESTS: Laws, Strategies, Formulas and Statistics [Paperback]

Sold and shipped by amazon.com and other booksellers.

This amazingly helpful book is a best-seller!

Book Description

Publication Date: July 26, 2012

There is a science of winning lotteries, sweepstakes and contests! When it comes to lotteries, sweepstakes and contests, there are ways to improve your odds or probability of winning. They are discussed in this book, with a lot of detail and some humor. Blind reliance on luck or chance is not necessary to win lotteries, sweepstakes and contests. The "4Ps" of persistence, preparation, poise and a positive mental attitude are necessary to win on a consistent or regular basis. Therefore, just about anyone is capable of winning. Charles Jerome Ware is a noted author and attorney, microeconomist, lotterician, sweepstaker and contester. He is a principal in the national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, Attorneys and Counselors. Dr. Ware is a highly successful and life-long sweepstaker and contester. He is also a successful lotterician who, for several years, has investigated, monitored and researched lotteries throughout the United States and several foreign countries. Dr. Ware is the recipient of numerous awards for his accomplishments in law and other areas. He lives in Columbia, Maryland.

http://amzn.com/1432793888

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com ("We fight.  You win.")

 Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counsellors in the United States. [GQ Magazine, The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Columbia Flier, USA TODAY, The Howard County Sun, The Anniston Star, The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX-TV NEWS, WHUR, WHUT, MPT, BBC, The Wall Street Journal, ABA Journal, et al.]

MARYLAND "PRODUCE THE NOTE!" FORECLOSURE DEFENSE: By Attorney and Author Charles Ware

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com ("We fight.  You win.")

AVOIDING FORECLOSURE: "Chapter Four --- Fifteen (15) Tips", By Attorney and Author Charles Jerome Ware.  100% Effective!

Legal Consumer Tips and Secrets: Avoiding Debtors' Prison in the United States [Hardcover]
Charles Jerome Ware (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: September 20, 2011

If you owe too much money, you can go to prison even though you have not committed a crime. You can also be kicked out of your home and face a myriad of other negative consequences. Even so, the largest religion in the United States continues to be "consumerism"-the deeply held belief that buying goods and services makes us better and happier. Attorney Charles Jerome Ware explores how you can keep spending, maintain your freedom, and stand up for yourself. He shares ways to prevent foreclosure, discourage identity theft and other forms of fraud, avoid debt settlement scams, and rebuild your credit. This insider's guide reveals hundreds of facts to educate and inform the faithful American consumer. Don't be bullied into living like a pauper when you can take reasonable steps to improve your financial position. Changing your life and avoiding pitfalls starts with learning Legal Consumer Tips and Secrets.

Product Details

• Hardcover: 236 pages
• Publisher: iUniverse.com (September 20, 2011)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1462051847
• ISBN-13: 978-1462051847
• Product Dimensions: 5.5 x 0.7 x 8.5 inches
• Shipping Weight: 15.4 ounces

http://amzn.com/1462051820

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com ("We fight.  You win.")

Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counsellors in the United States. [GQ Magazine, The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Columbia Flier, USA TODAY, The Howard County Sun, The Anniston Star, The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX-TV NEWS, WHUR, WHUT, MPT, BBC, The Wall Street Journal, ABA Journal, et al.]

MARYLAND ANTITRUST ADVICE CENTER (MAAC): Featuring Author and Antitrust Attorney Charles Ware

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com

Renowned Attorney and Best-Selling Author Charles Jerome Ware formerly served as an antitrust trial attorney in the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, as First Assistant Director for the U.S. Federal Trade Commission's Bureau of Competition (Antitrust Bureau), and as the Chief Antitrust and Microeconomics Counsel to the Chairman of the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com ("We fight.  You win.")

Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counsellors in the United States. [GQ Magazine, The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Columbia Flier, USA TODAY, The Howard County Sun, The Anniston Star, The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX-TV NEWS, WHUR, WHUT, MPT, BBC, The Wall Street Journal, ABA Journal, et al.]

I. Recent Antitrust Activity in Maryland:

Important Background: Read Attorney Charles Ware's twitter, dated Friday, May 31, 2013, and (2) blog, charlesware.blogspot.com/2013-05-31/"U. of Maryland vs. ACC: $52 Million 'Exit Fee' Case Update by Attorney and Author Charles Ware".

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com (May 30, 2013)

A legal venue battle is raging between the University of Maryland and the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC).

An alleged $52 million "exit fee" is the subject of multiple civil lawsuits between the two institutions.

In November of 2012, the University of Maryland announced it was leaving (exiting) the ACC to join the Big Ten Conference; which immediately prompted a lawsuit by the ACC for enforcement of their alleged $52 million "exit fee" for Maryland's withdrawal from the conference.

The ACC filed their lawsuit against the University of Maryland in North Carolina where the conference is headquartered.  The University of Maryland responded in kind by filing its lawsuit against the ACC in Maryland, stating that the amount of the "Exit fee" was excessive and consequently illegal.

On May 23, 2013, Judge John Paul Davey of the Prince George’s County Circuit Court in Maryland heard each party’s arguments. Counsel for the ACC asked the judge to wait until the lawsuit in North Carolina was at an end before making a determination whether or not to hear the suit in Maryland, which they argued was filed to give the University a home field advantage.

The University of Maryland argued that the two suits are different and based their main arguments primarily under the Maryland Antitrust Act, stating that the ACC’s fee was punitive in nature and would cause injury to the University, its athletics department, and its students. The University, in their complaint, accuses the ACC of aiming “to send a message of deterrence to any other member school that might consider withdrawing from the conference -- any such attempts to do so will be met with harsh penalties.” Furthermore, they claim that the ACC has illegally withheld $3 million of revenue owed to the University – money that the ACC has withheld to apply towards the exit fee.

As for the ACC, it argued, inter alia, that the University’s antitrust claims are unconstitutional because they interfere with the ACC’s ability to engage in interstate commerce and unduly burdens its activities in the other six states in which the ACC operates. The ACC also argued that the University fails to state a significant injury under the Maryland Antitrust Law since “there is nothing anti-competitive about the withdrawal payment… [i]t is merely a method of internal governance used by the ACC.” In sum, the ACC asked Judge Davey to dismiss the suit in Maryland or, alternatively, halt the proceedings in Maryland until there was first a resolution in North Carolina.

Judge Davey’s opinion is still pending. Ultimately, however, it will be just the first ruling in what many fear will be a lengthy legal battle between these two.

[The Washington Post, "No ruling in ACC’s motion for dismissal of Maryland lawsuit", May 23, 2013;  The Washington Post, "Documents from the upcoming ACC-Maryland dismissal hearing", May 20, 2013; web1.judepedia.org/index.php/courtroom weekly]

II. The Maryland Antitrust Act:

The Maryland Antitrust Act ("MAA") was enacted by the General Assembly for the state in 1972.  The purpose or intent of the Act is to complement federal antitrust laws concerning restraints of trade and other anticompetitive conduct [Title 11, §11-201 et seq., Maryland Commercial Law Code].

Private parties and the Maryland state Attorney General may bring actions pursuant to the Act.  Parties who may sue, the relief and limitation period are prescribed under §11-207 and §11-209.

The prevailing plaintiff is entitled to recover reasonable attorney fees, and any action under the Act should be brought within the statutory four years after the cause of action arises [businesslaw.uslegal.com/antitrust/Maryland Antitrust Law].

BOOKMARK-RSLF-CHARLES WARE, Best-Selling Author

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com
"RSLF": Read, Study, Learn, Follow.

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com.  Home website of the best-selling author and attorney Charles Jerome Ware.

Among attorney and author Charles Jerome Ware's best-selling books are:

(1) The Secret Science of Winning Lotteries, Sweepstakes and Contests;
http://amzn.com/1432793888
(2) Understanding the Law: A Primer;
http://amzn.com/1440111456
(3) The Immigration Paradox: 15 Tips for Winning Immigration Cases;
http://amzn.com/1440171920
(4) Legal Consumer Tips and Secrets: Avoiding Debtors' Prison in the United States; and
http://amzn.com/1462051847
(5) Quince (15) Consejos Para Ganar Casos Del Inmigracion.
http://amzn.com/1462068952

"GOD, RELIGION AND THE LAW": Chapter 15, Understanding The Law: A Primer, by Attorney and Author Charles Jerome Ware, www.CharlesJeromeWare.com

Excerpt from Chapter Fifteen, "God, Religion and the Law," of the best-selling book Understanding The Law: A Primer, by Attorney and Author Charles Jerome Ware.

"There is an intrinsic, or natural, antagonism between the right to free speech, a command not to establish a religion, and the prohibition against inhibiting the practice of religion.  The answers to these issues and conflicts are not easy or simple, which is why we have the United States Supreme Court to decide.  This trinity of tensions between the establishment clause, free exercise clause, and free speech clause frequently places the high court in the position of having to choose between competing or colliding values in religion and free speech cases.  The general guide for years now that the Court has theoretically followed has been the concept of neutrality."" (p.164)

UNDERSTANDING THE LAW: A PRIMER: A PRIMER ON THE LAW [Paperback] Charles Ware (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: November 24, 2008

The attorney-client relationship is one of the most important and delicate relationships in all of legaldom (if there is such a word). Lawyers cannot exist without clients. With rare exceptions, clients cannot make it without lawyers. The foundation of the attorney-client relationship is trust. Without the element of trust between the client and the attorney, the relationship simply will not work out. I am reminded of the story about the man who hated to worry about anything and went looking for a surrogate worrier. He approached a lawyer about the issue and said:Potential client: "I would like to retain your services. I'll give a thousand dollars if you will do the worrying for me."Lawyer: "That's fine. I'll do it. Now where's the thousand dollars?"Potential client: "That's your first worry."Trust works both ways in an attorney-client relationship. In order for an attorney to help the client, the attorney needs to know everything about the client's problem or issue. Most clients do not understand that, or simply ignore this point. In any event, few clients abide by it. To encourage clients to speak freely and reveal all to their lawyer concerning their problem or issue, the law grants an absolute attorney-client privilege. Whatever the client tells the lawyer about his or her case is secret and strictly confidential. Only with the client's expressed permission can the attorney reveal this secret and confidential information.

Product Details

• Paperback: 268 pages
• Publisher: iUniverse (November 24, 2008)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1440111456
• ISBN-13: 978-1440111457
• Product Dimensions: 8 x 5 x 0.6 inches
• Shipping Weight: 12.6 ounces

http://amzn.com/1440111456

"BEST LAWYER SERVICES" (BLS) IN AMERICA --- Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counsellors, www.CharlesJeromeWare.com, AABAAC-Rated

The lawyers at the firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys & Counsellors, A National Law Firm, are rated "AABAAC" -- Among America's Best Attorneys and Counsellors.

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com ("We fight.  You win.")

Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counsellors in the United States. [GQ Magazine, The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Columbia Flier, USA TODAY, The Howard County Sun, The Anniston Star, The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX-TV NEWS, WHUR, WHUT, MPT, BBC, The Wall Street Journal, ABA Journal, et al.]

Among attorney and author Charles Jerome Ware's best-selling books are:

(1) The Secret Science of Winning Lotteries, Sweepstakes and Contests;
http://amzn.com/1432793888
(2) Understanding the Law: A Primer;
http://amzn.com/1440111456
(3) The Immigration Paradox: 15 Tips for Winning Immigration Cases;
http://amzn.com/1440171920
(4) Legal Consumer Tips and Secrets: Avoiding Debtors' Prison in the United States; and
http://amzn.com/1462051847
(5) Quince (15) Consejos Para Ganar Casos Del Inmigracion.
http://amzn.com/1462068952

"History repeats itself.  That's one of the things wrong with history." - Clarence Darrow, lawyer.

SPORTS IMMIGRATION UPDATE --- NBA & NHL "GUEST WORKERS": Former IJ, AUTHOR & ATTORNEY CHARLES WARE

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com

Charles Jerome Ware is a best-selling author, renowned attorney, and former United States Immigration Judge ("IJ").

Immigration Visas for Professional Athletes

Those who watched the National Basketball Association ("NBA") or the National Hockey League ("NHL") finals this week saw how dependent the United States is on foreign athlete "guest workers" ["0-1 Visas"].

For example, 27 of the thirty-two Boston Bruins professional hockey players are foreign, leaving just five native-born Americans.  And the San Antonio Spurs professional basketball roster boasts 8 players born in other countries.

Not unusually, more than half the team—18 players—hails from Canada, hockey's world headquarters. Other Bruin players come from across Europe: Mr. Rask, the Finn, has teammates from Latvia, Sweden, Slovakia, Germany, Kazakhstan and the Czech Republic.

Of the opposing Chicago Blackhawks' 27 hockey skaters, 13 are Canadian-born. There are as many Swedish Blackhawks (five) as there are American-born members of the team. Four others come from Eastern Europe.

The number of international athletes in the NBA is also growing—from a handful 20 years ago to a record-tying 84 foreign players on NBA rosters at the start of the current season, nearly one in five players.

The San Antonio Spurs reached the NBA finals with eight foreign players on their 15-man roster, the highest international presence in the league. In addition to Manu Ginóbili, the Spurs roster includes leading scorer Tony Parker, a Belgian-born French citizen, and teammates from France, New Zealand, Australia, Brazil and Canada. The Miami Heat, with one foreign-born player (Canadian center Joel Anthony), come in below the league average of three.

One way to think of these international players is to call them guest workers. Most foreigners playing professional sports in the U.S. are here on O-1 or P-1 visas.

But if athletes faced the same hurdles that scientists or entrepreneurs who require an H1-B visa, there would be far fewer foreign players in our professional leagues.  Teams for one would be required to prove they attempted to hire American professional athletes first. 

With Congress currently debating immigration reform, this intriguing issue is worth keeping an eye on.

[www.usimmigrationlaw.net/visas-athletes.htm; online.wsj.com/article/SB/"Those 'Guest Workers' of the NBA and NHL"; www.kobobooks.com/ebook/Title/book/ "The Immigration Paradox: "Fifteen (15) Tips..."]

The Immigration Paradox - 15 Tips for Winning Immigration Cases
iUniverse, September 2009, http://amzn.com/1440171920

Synopsis
_____________________________________

An Immigration Paradox develops when American immigration policy is subjected to Government benign neglect. Additionally, although frequently used by many in the public, the word “illegal” is technically not recognized as a legal term in American immigration law as it applies to people. Surprised? Read further.

Immigration has always been a controversial, complex, and very important issue historically in American public policy. In fact, the historic and fundamental importance of immigration in American culture, in combination with the increasing controversy and inevitably complexities involving it, has created inevitable the above-referenced immigration paradox.

This book presents an overview of American immigration history, trends, policies and practices, and addresses the “paradox” issue from the perspective of a former United States Immigration Judge. Nothing written in this book is intended or designed in any way to diminish, malign, or disparage any person, group, country, organization, institution, or people.

DEBTORS' PRISON IN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA --- Author and Attorney Charles Ware

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com

Chapter 19: Avoiding Debtors' Prison In The United States (page 177).

From the best-selling book:

Legal Consumer Tips and Secrets: Avoiding Debtors' Prison in the United States [Hardcover]
Charles Jerome Ware (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: September 20, 2011

If you owe too much money, you can go to prison even though you have not committed a crime. You can also be kicked out of your home and face a myriad of other negative consequences. Even so, the largest religion in the United States continues to be "consumerism"-the deeply held belief that buying goods and services makes us better and happier. Attorney Charles Jerome Ware explores how you can keep spending, maintain your freedom, and stand up for yourself. He shares ways to prevent foreclosure, discourage identity theft and other forms of fraud, avoid debt settlement scams, and rebuild your credit. This insider's guide reveals hundreds of facts to educate and inform the faithful American consumer. Don't be bullied into living like a pauper when you can take reasonable steps to improve your financial position. Changing your life and avoiding pitfalls starts with learning Legal Consumer Tips and Secrets.

Product Details

• Hardcover: 236 pages
• Publisher: iUniverse.com (September 20, 2011)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1462051847
• ISBN-13: 978-1462051847
• Product Dimensions: 5.5 x 0.7 x 8.5 inches
• Shipping Weight: 15.4 ounces

http://amzn.com/1462051820

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com ("We fight.  You win.")

 Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counsellors in the United States. [GQ Magazine, The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Columbia Flier, USA TODAY, The Howard County Sun, The Anniston Star, The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX-TV NEWS, WHUR, WHUT, MPT, BBC, The Wall Street Journal, ABA Journal, et al.]

WINNING LOTTERY LEADERSHIP --- 100% EFFECTIVE: Microeconomist, Author and Attorney Charles Jerome Ware

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com

AUTHOR, LAWYER, LOTTERICIAN CHARLES WARE: 100% EFFECTIVE LOTTERY TECHNIQUES

Chapter VII: "How To Create Your Own Winning Lottery Algorithm" (pages 61-90).

A chapter from Dr. Charles J. Ware's best-selling book:

THE SECRET SCIENCE OF WINNING LOTTERIES, SWEEPSTAKES AND CONTESTS: Laws, Strategies, Formulas and Statistics [Paperback]

Sold and shipped by amazon.com and other booksellers.

This amazingly helpful book is a best-seller!

Book Description

Publication Date: July 26, 2012

There is a science of winning lotteries, sweepstakes and contests! When it comes to lotteries, sweepstakes and contests, there are ways to improve your odds or probability of winning. They are discussed in this book, with a lot of detail and some humor. Blind reliance on luck or chance is not necessary to win lotteries, sweepstakes and contests. The "4Ps" of persistence, preparation, poise and a positive mental attitude are necessary to win on a consistent or regular basis. Therefore, just about anyone is capable of winning. Charles Jerome Ware is a noted author and attorney, microeconomist, lotterician, sweepstaker and contester. He is a principal in the national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, Attorneys and Counselors. Dr. Ware is a highly successful and life-long sweepstaker and contester. He is also a successful lotterician who, for several years, has investigated, monitored and researched lotteries throughout the United States and several foreign countries. Dr. Ware is the recipient of numerous awards for his accomplishments in law and other areas. He lives in Columbia, Maryland.

http://amzn.com/1432793888

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com ("We fight.  You win.")

 Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counsellors in the United States. [GQ Magazine, The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Columbia Flier, USA TODAY, The Howard County Sun, The Anniston Star, The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX-TV NEWS, WHUR, WHUT, MPT, BBC, The Wall Street Journal, ABA Journal, et al.]

LOTTERY'S BEST KEPT SECRET: Author and Microeconomist Dr. Charles Ware's Book --- 100% EFFECTIVE

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com

AUTHOR, LAWYER, LOTTERICIAN CHARLES WARE: 100% EFFECTIVE LOTTERY TECHNIQUES

Chapter VII: "How To Create Your Own Winning Lottery Algorithm" (pages 61-90).

A chapter from Dr. Charles J. Ware's best-selling book:

THE SECRET SCIENCE OF WINNING LOTTERIES, SWEEPSTAKES AND CONTESTS: Laws, Strategies, Formulas and Statistics [Paperback]

Sold and shipped by amazon.com and other booksellers.

This amazingly helpful book is a best-seller!

Book Description

Publication Date: July 26, 2012

There is a science of winning lotteries, sweepstakes and contests! When it comes to lotteries, sweepstakes and contests, there are ways to improve your odds or probability of winning. They are discussed in this book, with a lot of detail and some humor. Blind reliance on luck or chance is not necessary to win lotteries, sweepstakes and contests. The "4Ps" of persistence, preparation, poise and a positive mental attitude are necessary to win on a consistent or regular basis. Therefore, just about anyone is capable of winning. Charles Jerome Ware is a noted author and attorney, microeconomist, lotterician, sweepstaker and contester. He is a principal in the national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, Attorneys and Counselors. Dr. Ware is a highly successful and life-long sweepstaker and contester. He is also a successful lotterician who, for several years, has investigated, monitored and researched lotteries throughout the United States and several foreign countries. Dr. Ware is the recipient of numerous awards for his accomplishments in law and other areas. He lives in Columbia, Maryland.

http://amzn.com/1432793888

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com ("We fight.  You win.")

 Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counsellors in the United States. [GQ Magazine, The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Columbia Flier, USA TODAY, The Howard County Sun, The Anniston Star, The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX-TV NEWS, WHUR, WHUT, MPT, BBC, The Wall Street Journal, ABA Journal, et al.]

BULLOCK v. BANKCHAMPAIGN, N.A., 569 U.S.___(2013): SCOTUS REPORT BY ATTORNEY AND AUTHOR CHARLES WARE

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com

"DEFALCATION" AND THE "INNOCENT TRUSTEE": In the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, BULLOCK v. BANKCHAMPAIGN, N.A., 569 U.S.___(2013), No. 11-1518 (May 13, 2013).

Petitioner Rand Bullock's father established a trust for the benefit of his five children (including petitioner), and he made petitioner the (nonprofessional) trustee.  The trust's sole asset was the father's life insurance policy [670 F. 3d1160, 1162 (CA11 2012); App. to Petition for Certiorari 33a].

Petitioner borrowed funds from the trust three times; all borrowed funds were repaid with interest. His siblings obtained a judgment against him in state court for breach of fiduciary duty, though the court found no apparent malicious motive. The court imposed constructive trusts on certain of petitioner’s interests—including his interest in the original trust—in order to secure petitioner’s payment of the judgment, with respondent serving as trustee for all of the trusts. Petitioner filed for bankruptcy.

Respondent opposed discharge of petitioner’s state-court-imposed debts to the trust, and the Bankruptcy Court granted respondent summary judgment, holding that petitioner’s debts were not dischargeable pursuant to 11 U. S. C. §523(a)(4), which provides that an individual cannot obtain a bankruptcy discharge from a debt “for fraud or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity, embezzlement, or larceny.” The Federal District Court and the Eleventh Circuit affirmed. The latter court reasoned that “defalcation requires a known breach of fiduciary duty, such that the conduct can be characterized as objectively reckless.”

Held: The term “defalcation” in the Bankruptcy Code includes a culpable state of mind requirement involving knowledge of, or gross recklessness in respect to, the improper nature of the fiduciary behavior. Pp. 4−9.

SALINAS v. TEXAS: "TO INVOKE THE 5TH, TAKE THE 5TH" --- By Charles Ware

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com

This is a SCOTUS update by Author and Attorney Charles Jerome Ware.

GENOVEVO SALINAS, Petitioner v. TEXAS, 570 U.S.___(2013), Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) On Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, No. 12-246, June 17, 2013:

Without being placed in custody or receiving Miranda warnings, petitioner voluntarily answered the questions of a police officer who was investigating a murder. But petitioner balked when the officer asked whether a ballistics test would show that the shell casings found at the crime scene would match petitioner’s shotgun. Petitioner was subsequently charged with murder, and at trial prosecutors argued that his reaction to the officer’s question suggested that he was guilty. Petitioner claims that this argument violated the Fifth Amendment, which guarantees that “[n]o person . . . shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.”
  

Petitioner’s Fifth Amendment claim fails because he did not expressly invoke the privilege against self-incrimination in response to the officer’s question. It has long been settled that the privilege “generally is not self-executing” and that a witness who desires its protection “ ‘must claim it.’ ” Minnesota v. Murphy, 465 U. S. 420, 425, 427 (1984) (quoting United States v. Monia, 317 U. S. 424, 427 (1943) ). Although “no ritualistic formula is necessary in order to invoke the privilege,” Quinn v. United States, 349 U. S. 155, 164 (1955) , a witness does not do so by simply standing mute. Because petitioner was required to assert the privilege in order to benefit from it, the judgment of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals rejecting petitioner’s Fifth Amendment claim is affirmed.

 

"To invoke 5th, take the 5th" --- Attorney and Author Charles Jerome Ware.

JUSTICE ALITO, joined by THE CHIEF JUSTICE and JUSTICE KENNEDY, concluded that petitioner’s Fifth Amendment claim fails because he did not expressly invoke the privilege in response to the officer's question.  Pp. 3-12.

THOMAS, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which SCALIA, J., joined.  BREYER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which GINSBURG, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ., joined.

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com

The national criminal defense, wrongful death and serious injury law firm of Charles Jerome Ware P.A., Attorneys and Counsellors, is regarded as a leader in the areas of automobile death, criminal defense, personal injury, survivorship, and wrongful death actions in the mid-Atlantic region --- including Maryland, Washington, D.C., Pennsylvania, Delaware, New Jersey and Virginia.

Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counsellors in the United States. [GQ Magazine, The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Columbia Flier, USA TODAY, The Howard County Sun, The Anniston Star, The New York Times, et al.]

The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counsellors, is a premier Civil litigation and Criminal Defense firm headquartered in Maryland and Washington, D.C. We are: "Still working. Still committed. Still here to make a difference."

"DEFALCATION" AND THE "INNOCENT TRUSTEE": Charles Ware's SCOTUS Bankruptcy Update

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com

SCOTUS protects Bankruptcy Discharge For "Innocent" Trustee.

May the Trustee's Personal Debt to the Trust Be Discharged in the Trustee's Bankruptcy?

The U.S. Bankruptcy Code, 11U.S.C §523(a)(4) provides that a personal debt is not dischargeable if the debt had been occasioned by the debtor’s defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity. Courts of appeals had long disagreed about the mental state that must accompany the bankruptcy-related definition of “defalcation,” particularly in the context defalcation by trustees. The U.S. Supreme Court has recently settled the matter in the case of Bullock v. Bank Champaign, N.A., 569 U.S. ___ (2013).

The Court decided in its Opinion on May 13, 2013 that: The term "defalcation" in the Bankruptcy Code includes a culpable state of mind requirement involving knowledge of, or gross recklessness in respect to, the improper nature of the fiduciary behavior.  Pp. 4-9.

SYLLABUS

 

Bullock v. BANK CHAMPAIGN, N.A., No. 11-1518, Argued March 18, 2013 - Decided May 13, 2013, Supreme Court of the United States, Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit [569 U.S.____ (2013)].

 

Petitioner’s father established a trust for the benefit of petitioner and his siblings, and made petitioner the (nonprofessional) trustee. The trust’s sole asset was the father’s life insurance policy. Petitioner borrowed funds from the trust three times; all borrowed funds were repaid with interest. His siblings obtained a judgment against him in state court for breach of fiduciary duty, though the court found no apparent malicious motive. The court imposed constructive trusts on certain of petitioner’s interests—including his interest in the original trust—in order to secure petitioner’s payment of the judgment, with respondent serving as trustee for all of the trusts.

 

Petitioner filed for bankruptcy. Respondent opposed discharge of petitioner’s state-court-imposed debts to the trust, and the Bankruptcy Court granted respondent summary judgment, holding that petitioner’s debts were not dischargeable pursuant to 11 U. S. C. §523(a)(4), which provides that an individual cannot obtain a bankruptcy discharge from a debt “for fraud or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity, embezzlement, or larceny.”

 

 The Federal District Court and the Eleventh Circuit affirmed. The latter court reasoned that “defalcation requires a known breach of fiduciary duty, such that the conduct can be characterized as objectively reckless.”

 

Justice Breyer delivered the opinion of the Court.

  

Section 523(a)(4) of the Federal Bankruptcy Code provides that an individual cannot obtain a bankruptcy discharge from a debt “for fraud or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity, embezzlement, or larceny.” 11 U. S. C. §523(a)(4).

 

We here consider the scope of the term “defalcation.” We hold that it includes a culpable state of mind requirement akin to that which accompanies application of the other terms in the same statutory phrase. We describe that state of mind as one involving knowledge of, or gross recklessness in respect to, the improper nature of the relevant fiduciary behavior.

 

[www.scotusblog.com/05-14-2013/Bullock v. Bank Champaign]

LOTTERY "BOOK OF THE WEEK": 100% EFFECTIVE TECHNIQUES

AUTHOR, LAWYER, LOTTERICIAN CHARLES WARE: 100% EFFECTIVE LOTTERY TECHNIQUES

Chapter VII: "How To Create Your Own Winning Lottery Algorithm" (pages 61-90).

A chapter from Dr. Charles J. Ware's best-selling book:

THE SECRET SCIENCE OF WINNING LOTTERIES, SWEEPSTAKES AND CONTESTS: Laws, Strategies, Formulas and Statistics [Paperback]

Sold and shipped by amazon.com and other booksellers.

This amazingly helpful book is a best-seller!

Book Description

Publication Date: July 26, 2012

There is a science of winning lotteries, sweepstakes and contests! When it comes to lotteries, sweepstakes and contests, there are ways to improve your odds or probability of winning. They are discussed in this book, with a lot of detail and some humor. Blind reliance on luck or chance is not necessary to win lotteries, sweepstakes and contests. The "4Ps" of persistence, preparation, poise and a positive mental attitude are necessary to win on a consistent or regular basis. Therefore, just about anyone is capable of winning. Charles Jerome Ware is a noted author and attorney, microeconomist, lotterician, sweepstaker and contester. He is a principal in the national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, Attorneys and Counselors. Dr. Ware is a highly successful and life-long sweepstaker and contester. He is also a successful lotterician who, for several years, has investigated, monitored and researched lotteries throughout the United States and several foreign countries. Dr. Ware is the recipient of numerous awards for his accomplishments in law and other areas. He lives in Columbia, Maryland.

http://amzn.com/1432793888

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com ("We fight.  You win.")

 Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counsellors in the United States. [GQ Magazine, The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Columbia Flier, USA TODAY, The Howard County Sun, The Anniston Star, The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX-TV NEWS, WHUR, WHUT, MPT, BBC, The Wall Street Journal, ABA Journal, et al.]

A DUIDE BASICA Y SIMPLE PERO EFICAZ PARA GANAR QUE CASO DE INMIGRACION: Por Un Juez de Inmigracion Anterior (IJ)

Amazon Books.  Consejos enspanolas de inmigracion por el juez de inmigracion (IN) Charles Jerome Ware:

CASOS DE INMIGRACIO, EXJUEZ DE INMIGRACION: EN MARYLAND, VIRGINIA Y WASHINGTON, D.C. AREA

LIBRO: QUINCE (15) CONSEJOS PARA GANAR CASOS DE INMIGRACION

Extractos del libro más vendido de inmigración,

“LA PARADOJA DE LA INMIGRACION: Quince (15) Consejos para Ganar Casos de Inmigración”

Por

Abogado Charles Jerome Ware

WWW.CHARLESJEROMEWARE.COM

Ex Juez de Inmigración de Estados Unidos

Charles Ware es un ex Juez de Inmigración de los Estados Unidos. En la actualidad es director de la firma nacional general de Charles Jerome Ware, Abogados y Consejeros. Ha publicado y hablado públicamente numerosas veces sobre diversos temas jurídicos. Sus anteriores libros de mayor venta legal publicados por iUniverse en 2008, y 2009, "comprendiendo la Ley: Un Manual", así como"La Paradoja de la Inmigración", han sido bien recibidos por los lectores. El es un anterior administrador y profesor de derecho de la universidad. Charles Ware ha sido presentado en su propio programa Numero Unode radio de Consejos legales, así comootros numerosos programas de radio y televisión. El vive en Columbia, Maryland con su esposa Fran y su hija Lucinda- Marie.

Charles Ware, desde hace varios años, a sido nombrado constantemente como uno de los "GRANDES ABOGADOS" de America. El es uno de los recipientes originales del "Premio Charles Hamilton Houston para Abogacia Jurídica destacada", y es reconocido nacionalmente por su defensa legal y dela inmigración. El Bufete Nacional de Abogados, Charles Jerome Ware, Abogados y Consejeros, puede ser contactado a través de su página web, WWW.CHARLESJEROMEWARE.COM, y telefono (410-720-6129) en Columbia, Maryland --- entre Washington, D.C y Baltimore, Maryland.

Anteriormente Juez Federal de Derecho Administrativo:

Abogado Principal y Consejero Anti-fideicomiso al Director de la Comisión Federal de Comercio; Fiscal Asistente de E.U.; para Maryland y el Distrito del Este de Virginia; Abogado Litigante Principal de la División de Anti-fideicomiso y la División Criminal del Departamento de Justicia de E.U.; Profesor de la Escuela de Leyes de Boston College y Profesor visitante de Harvard Law School; Vice-presidente Ejecutivo y Asesor General para Saint Paul’s College

FORECLOSURE IN MARYLAND: "Chapter Four --- Fifteen (15) Tips", By Attorney and Author Charles Jerome Ware. 100% Effective!

Legal Consumer Tips and Secrets: Avoiding Debtors' Prison in the United States [Hardcover]
Charles Jerome Ware (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: September 20, 2011

If you owe too much money, you can go to prison even though you have not committed a crime. You can also be kicked out of your home and face a myriad of other negative consequences. Even so, the largest religion in the United States continues to be "consumerism"-the deeply held belief that buying goods and services makes us better and happier. Attorney Charles Jerome Ware explores how you can keep spending, maintain your freedom, and stand up for yourself. He shares ways to prevent foreclosure, discourage identity theft and other forms of fraud, avoid debt settlement scams, and rebuild your credit. This insider's guide reveals hundreds of facts to educate and inform the faithful American consumer. Don't be bullied into living like a pauper when you can take reasonable steps to improve your financial position. Changing your life and avoiding pitfalls starts with learning Legal Consumer Tips and Secrets.

Product Details

• Hardcover: 236 pages
• Publisher: iUniverse.com (September 20, 2011)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1462051847
• ISBN-13: 978-1462051847
• Product Dimensions: 5.5 x 0.7 x 8.5 inches
• Shipping Weight: 15.4 ounces

http://amzn.com/1462051820

WINNING IN MARYLAND: 100% EFFECTIVE LOTTERY

THE SECRET SCIENCE OF WINNING LOTTERIES, SWEEPSTAKES AND CONTESTS: Laws, Strategies, Formulas and Statistics [Paperback]

Sold and shipped by amazon.com and other booksellers.

This amazingly helpful book is a best-seller!

Book Description

Publication Date: July 26, 2012

There is a science of winning lotteries, sweepstakes and contests! When it comes to lotteries, sweepstakes and contests, there are ways to improve your odds or probability of winning. They are discussed in this book, with a lot of detail and some humor. Blind reliance on luck or chance is not necessary to win lotteries, sweepstakes and contests. The "4Ps" of persistence, preparation, poise and a positive mental attitude are necessary to win on a consistent or regular basis. Therefore, just about anyone is capable of winning. Charles Jerome Ware is a noted author and attorney, microeconomist, lotterician, sweepstaker and contester. He is a principal in the national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, Attorneys and Counselors. Dr. Ware is a highly successful and life-long sweepstaker and contester. He is also a successful lotterician who, for several years, has investigated, monitored and researched lotteries throughout the United States and several foreign countries. Dr. Ware is the recipient of numerous awards for his accomplishments in law and other areas. He lives in Columbia, Maryland.

http://amzn.com/1432793888

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com ("We fight.  You win.")

 Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counsellors in the United States. [GQ Magazine, The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Columbia Flier, USA TODAY, The Howard County Sun, The Anniston Star, The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX-TV NEWS, WHUR, WHUT, MPT, BBC, The Wall Street Journal, ABA Journal, et al.]

AVOIDING FORECLOSURE: "Chapter Four --- Fifteen (15) Tips", By Attorney and Author Charles Jerome Ware. 100% Effective!

Legal Consumer Tips and Secrets: Avoiding Debtors' Prison in the United States [Hardcover]
Charles Jerome Ware (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: September 20, 2011

If you owe too much money, you can go to prison even though you have not committed a crime. You can also be kicked out of your home and face a myriad of other negative consequences. Even so, the largest religion in the United States continues to be "consumerism"-the deeply held belief that buying goods and services makes us better and happier. Attorney Charles Jerome Ware explores how you can keep spending, maintain your freedom, and stand up for yourself. He shares ways to prevent foreclosure, discourage identity theft and other forms of fraud, avoid debt settlement scams, and rebuild your credit. This insider's guide reveals hundreds of facts to educate and inform the faithful American consumer. Don't be bullied into living like a pauper when you can take reasonable steps to improve your financial position. Changing your life and avoiding pitfalls starts with learning Legal Consumer Tips and Secrets.

Product Details

• Hardcover: 236 pages
• Publisher: iUniverse.com (September 20, 2011)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1462051847
• ISBN-13: 978-1462051847
• Product Dimensions: 5.5 x 0.7 x 8.5 inches
• Shipping Weight: 15.4 ounces

http://amzn.com/1462051820

HOWARD COUNTY MARYLAND PERSONAL INJURY 101: What to do!

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com

1. If you or a loved one have been injured in an accident, get immediate medical attention and then contact an attorney for advice and consultation in making a claim for damages.

2. After you have retained an attorney, make every effort to help him or her help you.

3. Keep copies of all of the information about your accident, including police reports, medical bills, records about lost wages, and information sent to you by insurance companies. If you need to see your attorney, make an appointment, and be sure to keep all of the appointments that you make. If you move, be sure to give your attorney your new address and telephone number.

4. Once you have hired an attorney, inform the adjuster that you have done so, and give the adjuster your attorney’s name and telephone number. After you have given this information to the adjuster, let your attorney handle all discussions with the adjuster.

5. Remember that the adjuster working for the insurance company of the person who caused the accident is not your friend. The adjuster may make it sound like he or she is trying to help you, but the adjuster’s job is to make sure that you receive as little compensation as possible, or even nothing.

6. Get all the medical treatment you need for your injuries caused by the personal injury accident.

Be sure to keep all of your appointments with your doctors and/or physical therapists. Do everything that they tell you to do, whether it is to take medicine, do exercises, or get some rest. If they ask, tell your doctors or therapists that you have an attorney, but do not feel as though you have to volunteer information about your case or claim. Their focus is your health, and the question of how your legal case is going should not be any concern of theirs.

7. Understandably, family and friends often want to help you out if you have been hurt.

This is great, but if they are giving you advice about your legal case, remember that they are not your attorney. Usually, it is not a good idea to take this inexpert advice—always consult your attorney first.

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com

The national criminal defense, wrongful death and serious injury law firm of Charles Jerome Ware P.A., Attorneys and Counsellors, is regarded as a leader in the areas of automobile death, criminal defense, personal injury, survivorship, and wrongful death actions in the mid-Atlantic region --- including Maryland, Washington, D.C., Pennsylvania, Delaware, New Jersey and Virginia.

Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counsellors in the United States. [GQ Magazine, The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Columbia Flier, USA TODAY, The Howard County Sun, The Anniston Star, The New York Times, et al.]

The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counsellors, is a premier Civil litigation and Criminal Defense firm headquartered in Maryland and Washington, D.C. We are: "Still working. Still committed. Still here to make a difference."

ATTORNEY CHARLES WARE'S SCOTUS UPDATE: Arizona, Et Al. versus Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., Et Al. (Decided June 17th, 2013)

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) today ruled against Arizona's proof-of-citizenship requirements for voting.

[Arizona, Et Al. v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., Et Al.; No. 12-71; Decided June 17th, 2013; Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS); Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit]

In so ruling, the Court held that the federal National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) — or the “motor voter” act — trumps an Arizona law that “requires voter-registration officials to ‘reject’ any application for registration, including a Federal Form, that is not accompanied by documentary evidence of citizenship.”

While the Court notes that Arizona has a right to decide who votes in state elections there, they are able to request changes to the federal registration form, and then challenge the federal government if it fails to incorporate those changes. The Court does not rule on the merits of such a lawsuit by Arizona.

The vote was 7 to 2.

Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the opinion, joined by John Roberts, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor. Anthony Kennedy joined in part, and wrote a concurrence. Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito each wrote dissents.

Citizenship is a requirement to vote in any federal election, and the federal registration form requires people to state, under penalty of perjury, that they are American citizens. States can use their own forms, but they must be equivalent to the federal form.

The Arizona law, known as Proposition 200 and adopted by Arizona voters in 2004, went further than the federal form by requiring applicants to provide proof of citizenship. Arizona has used the law to reject 30,000 voter applications, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.

Challengers to the law argued that it put an extra burden on naturalized citizens. Using a naturalization document as proof would require an applicant to register in person, as opposed to through the mail, because federal law prohibits copying the document.

A federal appeals court said that Arizona had gone too far and essentially rejected the federal form. Arizona said it was not a rejection of the federal form any more than asking for ID at an airport is a rejection of a plane ticket.

The Supreme Court ruling pointed out that Arizona still has an option: It can ask the federal government to include state-specific instructions on the federal form, and go to court if the government says no.

Three other states — Alabama, Georgia and Kansas — have laws almost identical to Arizona’s and joined it in urging the court to uphold the additional requirement for proof of citizenship.

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com

Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counsellors in the United States. [GQ Magazine, The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Columbia Flier, USA TODAY, The Howard County Sun, The Anniston Star, The New York Times, et al.]

[www.washingtonpost.com/06-17-2013; www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/No. 12-71/06-17-2013; www.scotusblog.com/06=17-2013; usnews.nbcnews/news/06-17-2013; www.nytimes.com/06-17-2013/US/Justices Reject Arizona Voting Law]

DR. CHARLES WARE'S BASIC LOTTERY AND SWEEPSTAKES: "Chapter 11---Basic Lottery and Sweepstakes Mathematics and Statistics: A Primer"--- 100% EFFECTIVE!

100% EFFECTIVE LOTTERY WINNING TECHNIQUES

THE SECRET SCIENCE OF WINNING LOTTERIES, SWEEPSTAKES AND CONTESTS: Laws, Strategies, Formulas and Statistics [Paperback]

Sold and shipped by amazon.com and other booksellers.

This amazingly helpful book is a best-seller!

Book Description

Publication Date: July 26, 2012

There is a science of winning lotteries, sweepstakes and contests! When it comes to lotteries, sweepstakes and contests, there are ways to improve your odds or probability of winning. They are discussed in this book, with a lot of detail and some humor. Blind reliance on luck or chance is not necessary to win lotteries, sweepstakes and contests. The "4Ps" of persistence, preparation, poise and a positive mental attitude are necessary to win on a consistent or regular basis. Therefore, just about anyone is capable of winning. Charles Jerome Ware is a noted author and attorney, microeconomist, lotterician, sweepstaker and contester. He is a principal in the national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, Attorneys and Counselors. Dr. Ware is a highly successful and life-long sweepstaker and contester. He is also a successful lotterician who, for several years, has investigated, monitored and researched lotteries throughout the United States and several foreign countries. Dr. Ware is the recipient of numerous awards for his accomplishments in law and other areas. He lives in Columbia, Maryland.

http://amzn.com/1432793888

www.CharlesJeromeWare.com ("We fight.  You win.")

 Attorney Charles Jerome Ware is renowned and consistently ranked among the best attorneys and legal counsellors in the United States. [GQ Magazine, The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun, The Columbia Flier, USA TODAY, The Howard County Sun, The Anniston Star, The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, FOX-TV NEWS, WHUR, WHUT, MPT, BBC, The Wall Street Journal, ABA Journal, et al.]