Maureen Olives

PRESS RELEASE: Today, Project Guardianship in partnership w/ the Weinberg Center for Elder Abuse Prevention released an elder abuse resource guide for legal practitioners involved in guardianship proceedings. The manual, titled "Elder Abuse in Guardianship Cases: A Legal Resource Guide," is part of ongoing efforts to provide more user-friendly and organized tools in response to the growing needs of older adults subject to Article 81 Guardianship. “Our shared goal is to provide resources and strategies so legal professionals can better identify, respond to, and remedy incidences of elder abuse that arise within the context of guardianship,” says Deena Schwartz, Director of NYS Guardianship Initiatives at Project Guardianship, an independent nonprofit agency providing court-appointed guardianship for a largely low-income population of aging adults and people with disabilities and mental illness. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), an estimated 10 percent of people over 60 experience abuse. And in New York, where almost 1 in 5 adults are age 65 and older, that number is even higher. It’s estimated that for every elder abuse incident documented by government agencies, nearly 23 others remain unseen. This resource is intended to address a growing need by providing individuals involved in Article 81 Guardianship a comprehensive overview of the types of abuse experienced by elders as well as up-to-date statutory changes. Over the last ten years the population of New Yorkers aged 65 and increased by more than 31 percent. In fact, older New Yorkers will soon surpass the number of school-aged children in the state. Unfortunately, as the older population increases, so do the number of societal risks. Inadequate health care, lack of affordable housing, poverty, mental health difficulties, and diminished cognitive capacity render many older adults the target of exploitative parties and practices. The hidden nature of elder abuse and exploitation demands that guardians and other advocates remain alert and diligent in their investigation and ongoing monitoring of clients’ financial circumstances and relationships. “We are in a unique position,” says Kimberly George, President and CEO of Project Guardianship. “It’s important that we provide dignified care and work with our partners to develop resources to empower stakeholders and caregivers with the knowledge and skills required to provide the best possible support for those who need it.” Read the full press release here: bit.ly/4e5vq2g Access the manual here: bit.ly/3KtDxYK

18

“In 2019, in response to the ‘#MeToo’ movement, the New Jersey Legislature enacted a law that made any ‘non-disclosure provision’ in an employment contract or settlement agreement unenforceable against the employee, if the provision had ‘the purpose or effect of concealing the details relating to a claim of discrimination, retaliation, or harassment.’ N.J.S.A. § 10:5-12.8(a) (the “Law”). The Law left unanswered whether it applied to “non-disparagement’ provisions that are common in agreements settling employment disputes. On May 7, 2024, the New Jersey Supreme Court answered the question, ruling that regardless of whether labeled as “non-disclosure’ or ‘non-disparagement,’ as per the statute, any ‘provision in any employment contract or settlement agreement which has the purpose or effect of concealing the details relating to a claim of discrimination, retaliation, or harassment” is unenforceable and against public policy. Savage v. Twp. of Neptune, ---- A.3d ----, No. 087229, 2024 WL 2002418, at *7 (N.J. May 7, 2024).” #NonDisparagement #Unenforceable #Settlement #EmploymentContract #Discrimination #Harassment #Retaliation https://lnkd.in/gMtqjmzW

2

Justice Department Files Statement of Interest Supporting Private Parties’ Right to Bring Voting Rights Act Challenge to Robocalls The Justice Department today filed a statement of interest in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire supporting the right of private plaintiffs to bring a lawsuit challenging robocalls as intimidating, threatening or coercive in violation of Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act. This brief is one of several filed by the Justice Department explaining the prohibition against voter intimidation in Section 11(b) and supporting the longstanding principle that private plaintiffs can sue to vindicate important rights protected by the Voting Rights Act. “Voter intimidation, whether carried out in person or by way of robocalls, disinformation campaigns, or other tactics, can stand as a significant barrier for voters seeking to exercise their voice in our democracy,” said Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “Every voter has the fundamental right to cast their ballot free from intimidation, threats and coercion. Since enactment of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, impacted voters, advocacy groups and organizations, have had full ability to turn to the courts to enforce the Act’s ban on voter intimidation across the country. The Justice Department has vigorously enforced this ban and will continue to challenge voter intimidation and defend the right of private citizens and organizations to do the same.” Read more: https://lnkd.in/g6cqEWz8

17

In his latest article for Judicature, Douglas M. Fasciale, associate justice of the New Jersey Supreme Court, opens with the following hypothetical: Imagine that you (a former civil trial judge) and your colleague (a former tax court judge) are on an appellate panel assigned to adjudicate two appeals. One is an appeal from an order entered by a tax court judge dismissing a complaint. The other is an appeal from a judgment entered following a jury trial in a car accident case. All other things being equal, can you envision deferring to your colleague or being particularly solicitous of her views given her prior experience as a tax court judge? Wouldn’t you want the same consideration in the car accident appeal? Through a personal case study based on his 35 years of experience, Justice Fasciale unpacks this hypothetical. He outlines 8 specific benefits of prior trial court experience to the appellate judge, and recommends 5 ways that appellate judges can maintain a trial court perspective that is “current and useful.” More broadly, Justice Fasciale concludes, “The institutional prior judicial experience of each intermediate appellate judge diversifies and strengthens the appellate court and its administration of justice.” Read the full article in Judicature Vol. 107 No. 3 (2024): https://loom.ly/j8dwtuc • • • • • #trialcourts #appellatecourts #attorney #professionaldevelopment #newjersey #jurytrial #casestudy #justice #judgment #civiltrial #diversity #judges #judging #supremecourt #statesupremecourt #administrationofjustice #law #legalessay #jurist

9

🚨 New 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals Decision – Constitutional Law 🚨 On January 18, 2024, the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals decided Madison M. Lara et al. vs. Pennsylvania, overturning restrictions on the ability of 18-to-20-year-olds to carry firearms outside their homes during states of emergency. The court applied the Supreme Court's two-step test from the Bruen decision, emphasizing the Second Amendment's historical context and recognizing young adults' rights for lawful purposes, including self-defense. This ruling is a significant affirmation of the Second Amendment's protections extended to young adults, establishing a precedent on the scope of gun rights for this age group. The Court's analysis rested on interpreting the term "the people" within the amendment and set a historical reference point for the Second Amendment's application based on its public meaning in 1791. Stay informed with regular legal updates from our team of former prosecutors at the Bianchi Law Group. Follow us for insightful commentary and legal analysis on criminal defense, domestic violence, and municipal court cases. Need legal assistance or looking to refer a case? Call us at (862) 315-7929. #FormerProsecutors #CriminalDefense #DomesticViolence #DWI #DUI #NJ #NewJersey No aspect of this advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court of #NewJersey  🛡️ TEAM OF FORMER PROSECUTORS 🛡️ Robert (Bob) Bianchi, Esq. David Bruno, Esq. Danielle Esposito, Esq. Christopher A. Eaton, Esq. Christina Hall, Esq. Maura Lynch Robert Esnes

6

🚨 New BLG Blog Post 🚨 Understanding Presumptions of Imprisonment and Non-Imprisonment in New Jersey 📲https://lnkd.in/eBVXJU-N The New Jersey Criminal Code delineates clear statutory presumptions for imprisonment and non-imprisonment based on the degree of crimes and specific types of offenses. Our latest blog post delves into these crucial distinctions, shedding light on how they influence sentencing decisions post-conviction. It's imperative for anyone facing criminal charges to grasp how these presumptions can impact the outcome of their case. The blog explores the criteria under N.J.S.A. 2C:44-1(d) and N.J.S.A. 2C:44-1(e), highlighting the conditions under which a court may opt for imprisonment or decide against it. With references to case law and statutory provisions, we aim to demystify the complexities surrounding sentencing in New Jersey's legal landscape. Whether it's understanding the "serious injustice" exception or recognizing when probationary sentences are typically imposed, our post offers valuable insights for defendants and their families. Stay informed with regular legal updates from our team of former prosecutors at the Bianchi Law Group. Follow us for insightful commentary and legal analysis on criminal defense, domestic violence, and municipal court cases. 👨‍⚖️ Need legal assistance or looking to refer a case? 📲 Don't hesitate to call us 24/7 at (862) 315-7929. No aspect of this advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court of #NewJersey  🛡️ TEAM OF FORMER PROSECUTORS 🛡️ Robert (Bob) Bianchi, Esq. David Bruno, Esq. Danielle Esposito, Esq. Christopher A. Eaton, Esq. Paul A. Di Lella, Esq. Tricia Howarth Margolis Esq. Christina Hall, Esq. Maura Lynch Robert Esnes Alessandro Amato #FormerProsecutors #CriminalDefense #DomesticViolence #DWI #DUI #NJ #NewJersey

8

1 Comment

🚨The Crumbley Case and Parental Liability New Jersey State Bar Association🚨 The Crumbley Case and Parental Liability Friday, May 3rd 12:00-1:40 ☞ Robert (Bob) Bianchi, Esq. (Former Head Morris County Prosecutor) and Robert B. Hille, Esq. (Certified by the Supreme Court of New Jersey as a Civil Trial Attorney) show how The Crumbley Case was a Landmark Decision in Parental Liability. The #Crumbley Case Outcome The tragic school shooting at Oxford High School in Michigan in December 2021 took a dramatic turn in February and March of 2024 with the convictions of Jennifer and James Crumbley, the parents of the teenage shooter, Ethan Crumbley. This case marks a significant precedent in holding parents legally responsible for their children's access to firearms and potential danger they pose. The Debate Continues Opponents of the Crumbley verdicts express concern that holding parents criminally responsible for their children's actions sets a dangerous precedent. They argue it's difficult to define the line between parental responsibility and criminal culpability. The Crumbley case has undoubtedly opened a new chapter in legal discussions surrounding parental liability. Whether this approach proves effective in deterring future school shootings and gun violence remains to be seen. Event #Agenda This will be a free-flowing discussion. The person named after each heading will lead that particular topic. Introduction – Lisa Chapland Overview of the topic. – Robert Bianchi ·     Includes the “Law and Crime” clip, putting the Crumbley case in context. ·     Discussion of the Michigan statute under which the Crumbleys were convicted. The Verdict – Robert Hille ·     How did involuntary manslaughter apply to the parents? ·     How is this different from holding the parents liable under vicarious liability? ·     What does the holding mean for possible criminal exposure to parents? Novel and unique theory holding the parents responsible for acts of their children. The Ramifications- Robert Bianchi ·     Has the case escalated our ability to go after parents by accusing them of using their children as instruments of a crime? ·     Will parents bear civil liability for their children’s transgressions? ·     Examples: Parents are aware child is a bad driver but let’s them use the car. If the child is in an accident, are the parents liable for a damage? Child has a history of acting out and hits a child or teacher in school. Are the parents liable? ·     Could parents weaponize liability under this new Crumbley theory in a family law dispute? What Do We, as Lawyers, Need to Address with Our Clients? – Robert Bianchi, Robert Hille, Lisa Chapland Need legal assistance or looking to refer a case? Don't hesitate to call us 24/7 at (862) 315-7929 #FormerProsecutors #CriminalDefense #DomesticViolence #DWI #DUI #NJ No aspect of this advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court of #NewJersey

13

1 Comment

Federal cap on human rights damages could act as a license to discriminate. Parkdale Community Legal Services and PSAC are challenging this cap in Federal Court this week. Learn more about the implications of this significant case: https://lnkd.in/e2JuwCrB #HumanRights #JusticeForAll #NelliganLaw"

17

1 Comment

Hey #MassachusettsLawyers, are you keeping up with the technological demands of modern legal practice? In 2024, technology is ubiquitous in our lives and our law practices. We do our work on our laptops, smartphones, and apps using software designed to make our work lives easier. When was the last time you drafted a will from scratch?   The duty of technology competence is more critical than ever for lawyers. The ABA's Model Rule 1.1 mandates that lawyers must understand the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology.  41 states + the District of Columbia has adopted some version of these standards. Massachusetts adopted the ABA's model language in Comment 8 to Mass. R. Prof. C. 1.1 in 2015, emphasizing that technology competence is a crucial aspect of competent lawyering. It's crucial for legal professionals to ensure they are proficient when using all of this technology especially in the areas of law practice technology, electronic filing, e-discovery, and safeguarding client information. Recent disciplinary cases highlight the serious consequences of neglecting this duty. For example, in Matter of Hochman, 31 Mass. Att’y Disc. R. 295 (2015),a Massachusetts lawyer faced a public reprimand for failing to verify the accuracy of bankruptcy documents prepared with commercially available software. This oversight resulted in an unfeasible bankruptcy plan and dismissal of the client’s petition. The lawyer violated Mass. R. Prof. C. 1.1 (competence), 1.2(a) (pursuit of client’s objectives), 1.3 (diligence), and 1.4 (communication). Another Massachusetts example, Admonition No. 20-24, 36 Mass. Att’y Disc. R. 527 (2020), involved a Massachusetts lawyer who represented a client accused of stealing confidential documents from her employer. The client provided flash drives containing the documents, but the lawyer didn’t know how to review them properly and relied on the client’s inaccurate explanations. This led to negligent misrepresentations to opposing counsel and the court, resulting in an admonition for violations of Mass. R. Prof. C. 1.1 (competence) and 1.3 (diligence)​. While a lawyer never wants to be reprimanded by the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers, they also don’t want to be sued by their clients for legal malpractice. An attorney’s lack of technology competence as in the above cases could lead to a malpractice claim from the impacted client. Stay ahead of the curve and protect your practice by continually updating your technology skills. How are you ensuring your technology competence in 2024? Share your thoughts and strategies in the comments below! #LegalTech #Lawyers #TechnologyCompetence #Ethics #LegalPractice #Ediscovery #Cybersecurity #LegalMalpractice #MassachusettsMalpracticeLawyer

1

🌟 Join the ABA Standing Committee on Legal Aid and Indigent Defense for for an engaging discussion on bridging the justice gap through technology 🌱 Digital Divides and Greening Legal Deserts: Lessons from the Four Corners States, June 6, 1-2:30 p.m. EST https://lnkd.in/g86Jjnqg As access to justice increasingly relies on technology, it's crucial to address the disparities in legal services, especially in rural areas where attorneys are scarce. Join our panel of experts as they share insights and lessons from initiatives in the "Four Corners" states (Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah) aimed at narrowing the justice gap using technology. Don't miss this opportunity to learn from the front lines of bridging digital divides and greening legal deserts. Register now to be part of the conversation! #AccessToJustice #LegalTech #JusticeGap #CLE #LegalDeserts

1

Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 93A prohibits "unfair methods of competition" and "unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce." Depending on who's been injured, there are different ways of prosecuting (and defending) the statute. Part III of this PLI Current four-part series on 93A, written by David Thomas and Angela Bunnell, is out now: https://bit.ly/4birzgz

3

With the rise of remote work since the COVID-19 outbreak, courts will be asked to grapple anew with a perennial question: whether state and local antidiscrimination laws apply to workers who are not physically present in the jurisdiction. In New York and New Jersey, the courts have taken different approaches to this important threshold question. Read more here: https://lnkd.in/eAP-BhCn

4

🔍 When filing a personal injury claim in Massachusetts, you may encounter the "assumption of risk" defense. This legal concept can significantly impact your case. At Peck Trial Attorneys, led by John Peck, we are experienced in counteracting such defenses to ensure your rights are protected. We understand the severe impact personal injuries can have, and with decades of collective experience, we’re here to build a strong case for you. For a free consultation, call us at 857-557-7325 or visit us at 77 Franklin Street, Boston. 👉 Click the link to read the full post and learn more about assumption of risk and how it might affect your personal injury claim. https://lnkd.in/eFJu4Ceb #PersonalInjuryLaw #LegalDefense #BostonLaw #PeckTrialAttorneys

2

The Vance Center invites eligible lawyers and firms to express their interest in providing important legal services to help defend media outlets and public interest reporting organizations. Reporters Shield is seeking lawyers and/or law firms with the relevant qualifications, skills, and experience to provide legal services to its clients. Reporters Shield is a membership program that defends investigative and other public interest reporting organizations worldwide from legal threats and claims meant to silence critical voices. Reporters Shield helps reduce the risk of lawsuits through training and funds legal assistance to fight lawsuits meant to intimidate and financially burden reporters (such as strategic lawsuits against public participation, or #SLAPPs). Through this Request for Expressions of Interest, the Vance Center and Reporters Shield invite eligible lawyers to indicate their interest in providing these services. Successful respondents will be placed on a prequalified list of approved lawyers, who may then receive requests for proposals to assist clients. Find more information and application guidelines here: https://lnkd.in/dKdduJYX #pressfreedom #reportersshield The Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project Fundación para la Libertad de Prensa - FLIP Reviewed & Cleared New York City Bar Association Pan African Lawyers Union (Official) International Center for Journalists (ICFJ) International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) International Journalists'​ Network (IJNet) Columbia Global Freedom of Expression

12

The Vance Center invites eligible lawyers and firms to express their interest in providing important legal services to help defend media outlets and public interest reporting organizations. Reporters Shield is seeking lawyers and/or law firms with the relevant qualifications, skills, and experience to provide legal services to its clients. Reporters Shield is a membership program that defends investigative and other public interest reporting organizations worldwide from legal threats and claims meant to silence critical voices. Reporters Shield helps reduce the risk of lawsuits through training and funds legal assistance to fight lawsuits meant to intimidate and financially burden reporters (such as strategic lawsuits against public participation, or #SLAPPs). Through this Request for Expressions of Interest, the Vance Center and Reporters Shield invite eligible lawyers to indicate their interest in providing these services. Successful respondents will be placed on a prequalified list of approved lawyers, who may then receive requests for proposals to assist clients. Find more information and application guidelines here: https://lnkd.in/dKdduJYX #pressfreedom #reportersshield The Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project Fundación para la Libertad de Prensa - FLIP Reviewed & Cleared New York City Bar Association Pan African Lawyers Union (Official) International Center for Journalists (ICFJ) International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) International Journalists'​ Network (IJNet) Columbia Global Freedom of Expression

10