The Legislative History and Inception of Thanksgiving - Happy Thanksgiving!

Have you ever wondered how far the powers of Congress can extend? It is well-known that the Congressional powers are enumerated in several places of U.S. Constitution. However, today I choose to focus on the legislative power of Congress and especially the establishment of Thanksgiving. Let's travel back in time and specifically in 1789.

On September 28th, 1789, the first Federal Congress passed a motion requesting the President of the United States suggest to the nation a day of Thanksgiving. Few days later, on November 26, President George Washington announced officially that day, which was Thursday, as a "Day of Publick Thanksgivin". This was the first time that Thanksgiving was celebrated under the new Constitution. President Abraham Lincoln issued a proclamation in 1863 and stated that Thanksgiving would be regularly commemorated each year on the last Thursday of November.

Until 1941, due to the President Franklin Roosevelt's declaration, Thanksgiving was celebrated differently throughout the nation; part of the country celebrated it the last Thursday in November and the rest of the country the following week. As a result, in 1941 Congress set a fixed-date for the Thanksgiving holiday and established the fourth Thursday in November as our Federal Thanksgiving Day Holiday.

From me:

I wish you a Joyous Holiday filled with Health, Peace, Love, and Prosperity!

As I do not take things for granted and always desire to show my gratitude, please allow me to thank my husband, family, and friends for all their love, support, and appreciation.



When an Attorney should Terminate the Relationship with a Client 

Last Tuesday I was invited at a Hellenic American Bankers Association event in Manhattan at which the distinguished and talented Chairman & CEO of New York Life Ted Mathas gave a remarkable speech about insurances and general entrepreneurial and management issues. I got great pleasure from his speech and leaving the event, his following words were stuck in my mind. During his speech, Mr. Mathas pointed out the three characteristics of building trust between business owners and clients. According to his wise words, building trust with the clients requires: a) not to cheat, b) it’s always personal, and c) every professional should admit his mistakes and fix them.

On my way back home I meditated that all the attorneys are business owners of their reputation either if they are employees of a law firm/office or not; they oversee other people’s lives by striving to unearth ways to protect their clients’ interests and at the same time they struggle to defend their own name and reputation. I take for granted that a professional attorney does not cheat or commit any criminal or fraudulent act. I also concur that it’s always personal to build trust with your clients and it’s not just business. Besides these two meaningful attributes, I underscore at the most the importance of admitting our mistakes as professionals and fix them.

One of the most frequent mistakes of attorneys is when they take on every client who comes calling. This is not the greatest option and most of the times this concludes to challenging attorney - client relationships. Understanding a prospective bad client is a very demanding task and entails many years of experience, so that you can avoid him in advance. It’s not something that the law school teaches us; we learn these things on our own through our experiences and other colleagues’ advice and we keep on educating ourselves day by day.

As attorneys we have to encounter public and this is extremely intricate in our profession because on one hand we cannot predict other people’s thoughts, feelings, and reactions and on the other hand we have to face diverse people and characters. However, all these troubles that we tackle every day of our lives and career give superior importance to us, as administrators of justice, and to our profession. But, how can we avoid a difficult client before starting his representation?

When I was instructor of legal courses, I was always advising my students to say no to a prospective or existing client when the latter didn't fit within their business models. It’s not honest and smart to just only consider how rewarding a case can be. You have to reason if your client is trustworthy and you can cooperate and communicate with him from the beginning of the case until the completion. Not only shall we obey our bar’s professional conduct rules, but also our ethics and integrity should pilot us to the right decision. As your clientele rockets, you should get ready to handle more tricky situations. This is not my rule. It’s the rule of probabilities.

Clients with particular manners and beliefs can lead an attorney’s life to a bad dream if the latter makes the mistake to take them on as clients. My experiences have taught me that every attorney should dismiss clients who a) do not listen attorney’s advice, b) do not collaborate and communicate with the attorney, c) breach the confidentiality, privileges, or any other agreement, d) do not pay the bills and are disloyal e) tell lies or hide the truth from the attorney, f) commit criminal or fraudulent acts, g) are furious and revengeful and solely aim to make other people depressed by hiring an attorney, h) have impractical expectancies and i) have offensive, unacceptable, and abusive demeanor.

My point of view and according to Mr. Mathas’ remarks, as professionals we have to acknowledge our mistakes and resolve them. If you didn’t take a thorough look and consideration before commencing a client’s relationship and representation, which can trigger problems, costs, or waste of time, there is always the point to fire this challenging client in a proper way and concentrate on the clients who respect you and what you have to suggest, and will recognize the value of it. Thus, under these circumstances as an attorney you shall withdraw from representation of a bad client without causing damaging impact on his interests.

One of the best tactics to sustain good relationships with clients is to stay away from the bad clients in the first place. This doesn't unavoidably signify declining cases where the lawyer condemns what the client did. The system of law repeatedly encompasses representing people who have done actually unscrupulous things, and some of those people can truly be excellent clients. As attorneys and business owners of our status, we should weigh the relationships with clients ahead of time and if we are not so confident of how we should deal with a client, we should get the helpful guidance of our mentors and colleagues with many more years of experience than us.

Terrorism: A federal crime with unspeakable casualties

When my father passed away I realized that grief occurs in five stages. First, there is denial, followed by anger. Then comes bargaining and depression. The final stage is the acceptance. I deem that all the people who have lost someone extraordinary and special to them feel in the same way. Especially, if the loss has happened unexpectedly as a result of a tragic terrorist act, the ensuing grief is a life sentence without clemency.

Terrorism is an unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property in order to coerce or intimidate the government or civilian populations in furtherance of political, ideological, religious, and social goals. Except for being a federal crime, terrorism is a global crime, because it causes chaos, fear, and threat of our fundamental human rights and democratic values. Above all, it targets innocent victims.

Fear stimulates and paralyzes the best of us. What we fear the most is the unknown. Chaos cannot be controlled. Once introduced, all order and intention is rendered futile. The upshot of chaos cannot be predicted. The sole assurance it brings is the devastation it leaves on its wake.

The 13-year anniversary of 9/11 is in five days. While I was walking near the Ground Zero last Thursday I was trying to recollect the fear and the chaos which took place after the four coordinated attacks in New York City and Washington, DC in 2001. These terrorist attacks reorganized the whole world. From September 12, 2001 to present we still have to deal with serious health, environmental, economic, and cultural issues. However, we have to focus primarily on the jeopardy of our liberty and security.

Terrorism cannot become extinct. After 9/11 and despite the great security measures which every country had taken to protect its noncombatants, three more severe terrorist attacks occurred and had personally shocked me; the train bombings in Madrid in 2004, the bombings in London in 2005, and the Boston Marathon bombings last year.

In life every action has an equal and opposite reaction. In the end the guilty falls. Cooperation between countries, political will, condemnation and combat against all the forms of terrorism, antiterrorism legislation, and commitment to harmonization of laws can restrict terrorism crimes and protect our humanity and global peace from unscrupulous perpetrators who only seek power through violence.

Besides all these proposed measures, we also have to take personal steps to fight our fears and chaos of the unknown. The most important thing is to show our love, affection, kindness, and gratitude to the persons we cherish, admire, and appreciate. I believe that you all have secrets you keep locked away from the rest of the world. Friendships you pretend, relationships you hide. However, worst of all is the love we never let show; especially to the persons we lost out of the blue and below the belt.

To all the innocent victims

Will I? I will.

File “Adoption”

Last Wednesday I went to the Integrated Domestic Violence (IDV) court in Bronx. IDV court has jurisdiction over criminal, family, and matrimonial disputes for families whose domestic violence is an underlying issue. I was there for eight hours and my mind was filled with many thoughts. I noticed numerous troubled families and plenty of juvenile delinquents. 

In my eyes, a juvenile delinquent is a hopeless and unfortunate kid. According to the NY and Greek law, children at a specific age, who commit an act that would be a crime if committed by an adult, are juvenile delinquents. When I am disappointed, I wake up the next day and say to myself “OK. Today is another day.” My personal view about the juvenile delinquents was formed when I realized that for some people the next day that will come will be the same. 

These children are not the “bad kids”, as someone would easily say. Most of the times, these children have committed the acts for which they have been charged and tried. However, I deem that the appropriate people who should have been put on trial are their irresponsible parents with shallow hearts, who brought them in life and almost always abandoned them from the first day of their life and placed them automatically in the list of “the unlucky kids”. It is really good luck to be raised by a good family, because our experiences shape our character and define our present and future. 
 

Except for the juvenile offenders, I perceived tortured children by their families, which made me so angry and determined to raise my voice in this issue again. They usually say that the things which are free in our life are the most meaningful. Thus, giving love, hope, presence, and future to a child is worthier than anything else in life. Children are the sweetest and most innocent creatures, who only need love and care. Leaving the IDV court, I affirmed my opinion and thought that if the nature deprives me of the privilege to procreate, I will definitely adopt a child, as I would like to offer my love to children who unfairly were placed to an unhappy and unfortunate position. 
 

The legal process of adopting, from application to finalization, can be a lengthy one. It can be a marathon. Sometimes, I get so furious with bureaucracy. According to NY Domestic Relations Law, an adult unmarried person, or an adult married couple together, or any two unmarried adult intimate partners together may adopt another minor person. Under specific circumstances, the adoptive child’s consent is required. Sometimes, parental consent is also needed. The judge examines all the aspects of the adoption, so that the child’s best interests are served. The same standards are also applicable to the public or private adoption in Greece. Moreover, pursuant to the Greek Law there are also age requirements and limitations to adoption. The Greek statistics show that the average time of a child’s adoption from a public institute is five years, which is unbelievable. 

We try to give meaning to our lives. Let’s give meaning to the lives of struggling and helpless children. Let’s help them in any way we can and if God doesn’t give you the privilege to have your own child, take your life in your hands and give happiness and life to a child who only needs love and attention.
 

 Old Bronx Borough Courthouse

"Oh Captain, my Captain" - Being a Professional Lawyer!

Today I want to share with you what I think it means to be a professional lawyer. Feeling sorrow for the great loss of a wonderful person and actor, Robin Williams, I decided to use as a title for my new post one of his quotes from the"Dead Poets Society" movie.

 

Being an attorney is a landmark event in life. It symbols both an end and a beginning. After years of committed studies, diligence and tenacity, law students get their bar license and they start to frequently lead other persons' lives as captains. The foregoing qualities are the characteristics of all virtuous and ethical lawyers.

 

It is a privilege and not a right for us to be a lawyer. The most noteworthy privilege for us is our reputation, which can be lost in every second. Not only should we receive respect from our clients and the general public, but also we should show deference to them.

 

I remember myself when I started practicing law in Greece. I was walking from the subway to my office every day and I couldn't believe how lucky I was. I was able to do the work that I love. I could have done my work pro bono, if I could, because I would enjoy to do that 24/7. 

 

However, at the end of  every journey there are always responsibilities. One of our most important commitments as lawyers is to serve our clients and public ethically, diligently, and competently. A lawyer without ethics is a tabula rasa.

 

From the time that we enter the legal arena, we have to act professionally and be focused on a myriad of values, such as integrity, respect, accountability, accuracy, leadership, activeness, spirit, service before self, pro bono public service, competence, care, sincerity, etc. Based on our values, the public evaluates us and our work. If we lose our professionalism, the world will suffer from the loss of its trust to us.

Being a professional lawyer is a difficult task. As lawyers, we should dedicate ourselves to the service of justice and we should do our best to solve the clients' and the public issues competently and zealously. Thus, our aim must focus on acting as an ethical captain in resolving and facilitating other people's matters.

 

Being rich will not make you happy. Being an outstanding professional will do. The time that an ethical dilemma will come out, take your mentor's advice for your apparently unanswerable problem. Above all, give meaning to little things and you may realize that there are things that really have true merit in life.

U.S. Department of Justice Investigates Johnson & Johnson for Destroying Litigation Documents

Things have gotten so bad for J&J that the U.S. Department of Justice has started to investigate the troubled company for destruction of litigation documents. The tens of thousands of lost documents are substantial to injured women's claims. Johnson &Johnson's troubles are not just limited to the Department of Justice. A nonprofit group, Corporate Action Network, has requested that Attorney General Eric Holder also investigate Johnson & Johnson for crimes of obstructing justice and destroying litigation documents.

In civil trial court, the Honorable Judge Cheryl Eifert in West Virginia issued an Order that Johnson & Johnson had negligently destroyed or lost documents regarding the testing and complications for pelvic mesh implants.Millions of women have received transvaginal mesh implants to repair pelvic organ prolapse or stress urinary incontinence. This happens because of the lack of urethra support, which is often a consequence of damage to pelvic support structures from childbirth. Manufacturers such as Johnson & Johnson, American Medical Systems, Inc. (AMS), Boston Scientific Corp., Coloplast Corp., C.R. Bard, Inc., and multiple others, have been accused of poorly designing and testing these products.

More than 22,000 women have sued Johnson & Johnson for unbearable pain, infections, bleeding, and urinary problems. Victims of pelvic mesh implants allege that Johnson & Johnson executives knew that these implants were defective, but they didn't take any precautions and didn't give any warnings to the consumers. Now, many of these women are disabled with pain and unable of having an active life.

Five Boston Scientific Vaginal Mesh Cases Transferred to Florida
 

On April 11, 2014, Judge Joseph R. Goodwin, who presides over six vaginal mesh multidistrict litigations in West Virginia, ordered the consolidation of five Boston Scientific vaginal mesh lawsuits for trial next September. Originally, these actions were filed in the federal court of Florida. According to the current order, these cases will be transferred back to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The controversial trial will begin on September 29, 2014 and Judge Goodwin will supervise the consolidated cases via intercircuit assignment.

Overall, there are over 11,000 cases filed against Boston Scientific Corporation. In particular, this multidistrict litigation came to light from the use of transvaginal surgical mesh to treat pelvic organ prolapse ("POP") and stress urinary incontinence ("SUI"). The injured plaintiffs assert that the Pinnacle Pelvic Floor Repair Kit ("Pinnacle"), a mesh product of Boston Scientific Corporation and used to treat POP, caused them compensatory and punitive damages because of negligence, manufacturing defects, and failure by the company to warn physicians and consumers about the dangers of its device.

Judge Goodman explained in his Order that the predomination of common issues of law and fact favor the consolidation of the cases into one trial in Florida. Some factors include that the cases involve the same product, the parties are all Florida residents, suffered similar injuries, and underwent their surgeries in that state.