Date: 10/26/2008
Lawsuit seeks to block tough La. lawyer ad rules
By MICHAEL KUNZELMAN
Associated Press Writer
NEW ORLEANS (AP) _ Personal injury attorney Morris Bart has spent millions of dollars to make “one call, that’s all” his familiar refrain for television viewers, but new lawyer advertising rules in Louisiana may ruin the return on his investment.
Catchy phrases and mottos like Bart’s have been seen and heard on televisions across the country, prompting some states to silence what have been called deceptive, misleading ads that have eroded the industry’s reputation.
Louisiana is the latest state to take action, preparing to implement some of the nation’s toughest rules on attorney advertising.
But Bart, one of his competitors and a national consumer advocacy group have sued to block the rules from going into effect Dec. 1, claiming the new limits go too far.
“You can regulate speech that is false, deceptive and misleading, but you can’t regulate taste,” he said. “When you put blanket bans on speech, you’re on dangerous ground.”
The rules prevent Louisiana lawyers from promising “results” or referring to “past successes.” They also can’t use nicknames or mottos that imply an ability to get results. A handbook issued by the Louisiana Bar Association cites “the winning law firm,” ”losing is not an option” and “the cash machine legal clinic” as hypothetical examples that would violate the new rules.
A committee will review the ads’ contents, and attorneys who break the rules could suffer professional sanctions.
Bart’s lawsuit claims the rules also impose a broad ban on the use of client testimonials, actors’ endorsements and re-enactments. Ads also won’t be allowed to portray a judge or jury or compare one lawyer’s services to another.
“They’re definitely one of the most restrictive set of rules for advertising in the country,” said attorney Greg Beck of Public Citizen Inc., the nonprofit group that filed similar suits in New York last year and in Florida this year over lawyer advertising rules.
A federal judge in Syracuse, N.Y., ruled in July 2007 that some of that state’s new restrictions were unconstitutional and blocked New York’s attorney disciplinary authorities from enforcing them. The state is appealing that ruling.
Elsewhere, a committee formed by the Missouri Bar Association earlier this year proposed stricter requirements for disclaimers in lawyer ads. A few years ago in South Carolina, lawyers were told they could no longer to call themselves the “heavy hitter” or the “strong arm” after that state passed stricter ad rules.
In contrast, New Mexico lifted a requirement four years ago that all lawyer ads be screened in advance by a bar association committee.
“There really hasn’t been much consistency from state to state,” said Micah Buchdahl, chairman-elect of the American Bar Association’s law practice management section. Buchdahl said efforts to restrict lawyer ads are typically grass roots movements within the profession and not part of a national campaign led by outside interests.
In 1977, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that lawyer ads are a form of commercial speech entitled to some First Amendment protection, a decision that spawned a proliferation of attorney ads and periodic attempts to rein them in.
The Louisiana Bar Association, which recommended the new rules adopted by the state’s Supreme Court, said the limits are designed to protect consumers and respond to concerns that some ads give the profession a bad reputation.
“We’re not here to arbitrate taste,” said association president Elizabeth Erny Foote. “Our first goal is to protect the public.”
Chief Justice Pascal Calogero Jr., through a court spokesman, wouldn’t comment on the new restrictions. But the court’s 25-page order issuing the rules said they balance “the right of lawyers to truthfully advertise legal services with the need to improve the existing rules in order to protect the public from unethical forms of lawyer advertising.”
One of Bart’s competitors, attorney William Gee III, has run ads featuring actor Robert Vaughn, who starred in the 1960s TV spy series “The Man from U.N.C.L.E.” Gee thinks the new restrictions will prevent him from using the actor as a paid spokesman.
Gee believes the state’s existing rules, which bar “false, misleading or deceptive communications” in advertising, are good enough.
“It’s our position that these rules go far enough in protecting the public,” said Gee, who has been practicing personal-injury and maritime law since 1984.
Bart, whose firm spends more than $5 million annually on ads in seven television markets in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama, claims the rules are part of an anti-consumer movement to shield “big business and corporate America” from costly litigation.
“Big business doesn’t like lawyers like me advertising because we represent consumers and working people that bring claims against big business,” he said.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
www.wis-law.com
Wis. shooting victims sue law enforcement leaders
Date: 10/13/2008 7:36 PM
CRANDON, Wis. (AP) _ The parents of four young people killed by a sheriff’s deputy and the lone survivor of his shooting spree last year claim in a lawsuit that the gunman’s law-enforcement superiors were negligent in supervising him and giving him access to weapons.
The lawsuit filed in Forest County Circuit Court also claims authorities knew Deputy Tyler Peterson, 20, had a history of violence, yet gave him too much decision-making responsibility.
Peterson was also a part-time Crandon policeman, and the lawsuit names Crandon Police Chief John Dennee, Forest County Sheriff Keith Van Cleve and their insurance companies as defendants.
Peterson killed his one-time girlfriend Jordanne Murray and five other people during a party at her home in Crandon on Oct. 7, 2007. Authorities have said Peterson was angered by the idea that Murray was dating someone else.
After breaking down the door, Peterson fired at least 30 shots from an AR-15 assault rifle he was issued as a member of the Forest County Sheriff’s SWAT team. Peterson shot and killed himself hours later after police efforts to get him to surrender failed.
He killed Murray, 18; Bradley Schultz, 20; Lindsey Stahl, 14; Aaron Smith, 20; Lianna Thomas, 18; and Katrina McCorkle, 18. Charlie Neitzel, 21, was shot three times but survived by playing dead.
The parents of Schultz, Stahl, Thomas and McCorkle joined Neitzel in the lawsuit.
According to the lawsuit, Dennee and Van Cleve had been warned that Peterson was a “violent person and a danger,” and they knew that Peterson had abused Murray.
None of the complaints against Peterson were investigated, the lawsuit said, adding that the sheriff and police chief failed to protect the public from the dangers posed by Peterson.
Van Cleve and the city attorney for Crandon did not immediately return telephone messages Monday. The sheriff’s dispatcher who answered a call for the Crandon Police Department said Dennee was not in his office Monday afternoon.
The city of Crandon and Forest County earlier denied the families’ claims seeking more than $5 million in damages. Those decisions opened the door for the civil lawsuit.
The two insurance companies named as defendants in the lawsuit are the League of Wisconsin Municipality Mutual Insurance and Wisconsin County Mutual Insurance Corp.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
CRANDON, Wis. (AP) _ The parents of four young people killed by a sheriff’s deputy and the lone survivor of his shooting spree last year claim in a lawsuit that the gunman’s law-enforcement superiors were negligent in supervising him and giving him access to weapons.
The lawsuit filed in Forest County Circuit Court also claims authorities knew Deputy Tyler Peterson, 20, had a history of violence, yet gave him too much decision-making responsibility.
Peterson was also a part-time Crandon policeman, and the lawsuit names Crandon Police Chief John Dennee, Forest County Sheriff Keith Van Cleve and their insurance companies as defendants.
Peterson killed his one-time girlfriend Jordanne Murray and five other people during a party at her home in Crandon on Oct. 7, 2007. Authorities have said Peterson was angered by the idea that Murray was dating someone else.
After breaking down the door, Peterson fired at least 30 shots from an AR-15 assault rifle he was issued as a member of the Forest County Sheriff’s SWAT team. Peterson shot and killed himself hours later after police efforts to get him to surrender failed.
He killed Murray, 18; Bradley Schultz, 20; Lindsey Stahl, 14; Aaron Smith, 20; Lianna Thomas, 18; and Katrina McCorkle, 18. Charlie Neitzel, 21, was shot three times but survived by playing dead.
The parents of Schultz, Stahl, Thomas and McCorkle joined Neitzel in the lawsuit.
According to the lawsuit, Dennee and Van Cleve had been warned that Peterson was a “violent person and a danger,” and they knew that Peterson had abused Murray.
None of the complaints against Peterson were investigated, the lawsuit said, adding that the sheriff and police chief failed to protect the public from the dangers posed by Peterson.
Van Cleve and the city attorney for Crandon did not immediately return telephone messages Monday. The sheriff’s dispatcher who answered a call for the Crandon Police Department said Dennee was not in his office Monday afternoon.
The city of Crandon and Forest County earlier denied the families’ claims seeking more than $5 million in damages. Those decisions opened the door for the civil lawsuit.
The two insurance companies named as defendants in the lawsuit are the League of Wisconsin Municipality Mutual Insurance and Wisconsin County Mutual Insurance Corp.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Wis. judicial panel: Punish new judge for false ad
Date: 10/8/2008 3:51 AM
By RYAN J. FOLEY
Associated Press Writer
MADISON, Wis. (AP) _ State regulators say a Willie Horton-style campaign ad that suggested the first black member of the Wisconsin Supreme Court freed a child molester played so loose with the truth that the court’s newest member should be disciplined for it.
The Wisconsin Judicial Commission filed a complaint against Justice Michael Gableman on Tuesday, claiming he violated a rule that prohibits judicial candidates from knowingly misrepresenting facts about their opponents.
Gableman was the first challenger to defeat an incumbent justice in 41 years when he knocked off Louis Butler in the April election with 51 percent of the vote. Gableman, 42, joined the court for a 10-year term in August.
During the campaign, Gableman faced intense criticism from independent observers when his campaign ran a television ad that showed a picture of Butler, the state’s first black justice, next to a mug shot of convicted rapist Reuben Lee Mitchell, who is black. A narrator said: “Butler found a loophole. Mitchell went on to molest another child.”
When Butler was a public defender, he represented Mitchell on the appeal of his 1985 conviction for raping an 11-year-old girl.
Butler convinced an appeals court that Mitchell deserved a new trial because certain evidence should not have been allowed. The Supreme Court overturned that decision and Mitchell served his full sentence. After his release on parole in 1992, Mitchell was convicted of raping a 14-year-old girl and sentenced to 40 years in prison.
Gableman knew those facts when he personally approved the ad, the complaint said. Therefore, he knew Butler was not responsible for Mitchell’s release from prison and subsequent criminal behavior as the ad suggested, it said.
“The misrepresentation was made knowingly or with reckless disregard for the truth by Judge Gableman,” the complaint said.
Gableman defended the ad during the campaign as contrasting his background as a prosecutor against Butler’s as a defense lawyer.
His campaign manager, Darrin Schmitz, said in a statement that the complaint has “no basis in fact or in law” and tramples on Gableman’s rights to free speech.
“The Commission chose to ignore the plain language of the ad, which is factual,” he wrote. “Instead, the complaint alleges that the ad contains false statements on the basis of inference and implication. The First Amendment does not allow a claim to be made on that basis.”
He added: “We’re confident that in the end actual judges will apply the law and the matter will be dismissed.”
Seven members of the judicial commission participated in the decision to file the complaint. They were either appointed by the governor or the Supreme Court and include prominent lawyers, businesspeople and an appeals court judge.
Butler, who recently accepted a faculty position at the University of Wisconsin law school, declined comment. “It’s important to let the process work itself through,” he said.
A three-judge panel will now hear the complaint and determine whether it has merit. If it does, the panel will make a recommendation on discipline to Gableman’s colleagues on the Supreme Court, which will make the final decision. Discipline could include a reprimand, suspension or even removal from the bench.
Lawyers across the political spectrum called Gableman’s ad misleading before the election and the liberal-leaning Citizen Action of Wisconsin filed the complaint that prompted the commission investigation.
“What’s most discouraging about this complaint was not only that everyone saw it coming but that the campaign worked,” University of Wisconsin-Madison professor Howard Schweber said.
The ad had echoes of the one featuring Horton, who was serving a life term for murder and was granted a weekend furlough under a program overseen by then-Gov. Michael Dukakis of Massachusetts. Horton escaped to Maryland, where he robbed and raped a woman.
A TV ad in the 1988 presidential campaign associating Dukakis, the Democratic nominee, with the incident hurt him in his race against Republican George H.W. Bush, who won the election.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
By RYAN J. FOLEY
Associated Press Writer
MADISON, Wis. (AP) _ State regulators say a Willie Horton-style campaign ad that suggested the first black member of the Wisconsin Supreme Court freed a child molester played so loose with the truth that the court’s newest member should be disciplined for it.
The Wisconsin Judicial Commission filed a complaint against Justice Michael Gableman on Tuesday, claiming he violated a rule that prohibits judicial candidates from knowingly misrepresenting facts about their opponents.
Gableman was the first challenger to defeat an incumbent justice in 41 years when he knocked off Louis Butler in the April election with 51 percent of the vote. Gableman, 42, joined the court for a 10-year term in August.
During the campaign, Gableman faced intense criticism from independent observers when his campaign ran a television ad that showed a picture of Butler, the state’s first black justice, next to a mug shot of convicted rapist Reuben Lee Mitchell, who is black. A narrator said: “Butler found a loophole. Mitchell went on to molest another child.”
When Butler was a public defender, he represented Mitchell on the appeal of his 1985 conviction for raping an 11-year-old girl.
Butler convinced an appeals court that Mitchell deserved a new trial because certain evidence should not have been allowed. The Supreme Court overturned that decision and Mitchell served his full sentence. After his release on parole in 1992, Mitchell was convicted of raping a 14-year-old girl and sentenced to 40 years in prison.
Gableman knew those facts when he personally approved the ad, the complaint said. Therefore, he knew Butler was not responsible for Mitchell’s release from prison and subsequent criminal behavior as the ad suggested, it said.
“The misrepresentation was made knowingly or with reckless disregard for the truth by Judge Gableman,” the complaint said.
Gableman defended the ad during the campaign as contrasting his background as a prosecutor against Butler’s as a defense lawyer.
His campaign manager, Darrin Schmitz, said in a statement that the complaint has “no basis in fact or in law” and tramples on Gableman’s rights to free speech.
“The Commission chose to ignore the plain language of the ad, which is factual,” he wrote. “Instead, the complaint alleges that the ad contains false statements on the basis of inference and implication. The First Amendment does not allow a claim to be made on that basis.”
He added: “We’re confident that in the end actual judges will apply the law and the matter will be dismissed.”
Seven members of the judicial commission participated in the decision to file the complaint. They were either appointed by the governor or the Supreme Court and include prominent lawyers, businesspeople and an appeals court judge.
Butler, who recently accepted a faculty position at the University of Wisconsin law school, declined comment. “It’s important to let the process work itself through,” he said.
A three-judge panel will now hear the complaint and determine whether it has merit. If it does, the panel will make a recommendation on discipline to Gableman’s colleagues on the Supreme Court, which will make the final decision. Discipline could include a reprimand, suspension or even removal from the bench.
Lawyers across the political spectrum called Gableman’s ad misleading before the election and the liberal-leaning Citizen Action of Wisconsin filed the complaint that prompted the commission investigation.
“What’s most discouraging about this complaint was not only that everyone saw it coming but that the campaign worked,” University of Wisconsin-Madison professor Howard Schweber said.
The ad had echoes of the one featuring Horton, who was serving a life term for murder and was granted a weekend furlough under a program overseen by then-Gov. Michael Dukakis of Massachusetts. Horton escaped to Maryland, where he robbed and raped a woman.
A TV ad in the 1988 presidential campaign associating Dukakis, the Democratic nominee, with the incident hurt him in his race against Republican George H.W. Bush, who won the election.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Atheist group sues Bush over national prayer day
Date: 10/3/2008 9:26 PM
By SCOTT BAUER
Associated Press Writer
MADISON, Wis. (AP) _ The nation’s largest group of atheists and agnostics is suing President Bush, the governor of Wisconsin and other officials over the federal law designating a National Day of Prayer.
The Freedom From Religion Foundation sued Friday in U.S. district court, arguing that the president’s mandated proclamations calling on Americans to pray violates a constitutional ban on government officials endorsing religion.
The day of prayer, held each year on the first Thursday of May, creates a “hostile environment for nonbelievers, who are made to feel as if they are political outsiders,” the lawsuit said.
The national proclamation issued this year asked God’s blessings on our country and called for Americans to observe the day with appropriate programs, ceremonies and activities.
Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle is named in the suit because he is one of 50 governors who issued proclamations calling for the prayer day. The foundation is based in Madison.
Shirley Dobson, chairwoman of the National Day of Prayer Task Force, and White House press secretary Dana Perino also are named.
The foundation has filed numerous lawsuits in recent years, including one rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court last year that attacked President Bush’s faith-based initiative.
The White House and Doyle spokesman Lee Sensenbrenner had no comment on the lawsuit. A message seeking comment from the task force was not returned Friday.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
By SCOTT BAUER
Associated Press Writer
MADISON, Wis. (AP) _ The nation’s largest group of atheists and agnostics is suing President Bush, the governor of Wisconsin and other officials over the federal law designating a National Day of Prayer.
The Freedom From Religion Foundation sued Friday in U.S. district court, arguing that the president’s mandated proclamations calling on Americans to pray violates a constitutional ban on government officials endorsing religion.
The day of prayer, held each year on the first Thursday of May, creates a “hostile environment for nonbelievers, who are made to feel as if they are political outsiders,” the lawsuit said.
The national proclamation issued this year asked God’s blessings on our country and called for Americans to observe the day with appropriate programs, ceremonies and activities.
Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle is named in the suit because he is one of 50 governors who issued proclamations calling for the prayer day. The foundation is based in Madison.
Shirley Dobson, chairwoman of the National Day of Prayer Task Force, and White House press secretary Dana Perino also are named.
The foundation has filed numerous lawsuits in recent years, including one rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court last year that attacked President Bush’s faith-based initiative.
The White House and Doyle spokesman Lee Sensenbrenner had no comment on the lawsuit. A message seeking comment from the task force was not returned Friday.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Who will inherit your retirement account?
Date: 9/26/2008 5:32 PM
By DAVID PITT
AP Business Writer
DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) _ Financial planners say it happens all too frequently: a person dies unexpectedly leaving ex-spouses or relatives they haven’t seen in years large chunks of money because they hadn’t updated their retirement plans or life insurance policies.
It’s a problem that you can try to head off at the pass this open enrollment season. But be aware that for most insurance and retirement accounts, changes can be made any time and do not require you to wait for your annual benefits selection.
It’s important to keep beneficiary designations current because a lot is at stake. Collectively, the amount of money held in retirement accounts in the United States is large and growing.
The Employee Benefit Research Institute said IRA assets grew 12.5 percent to $4.75 trillion in 2007.
Private-sector defined contribution plans including 401(k) accounts held $3.5 trillion, and private-sector defined benefit plans held $2.33 trillion in 2007.
Many people may believe that an updated will is sufficient to take care of any financial issues left behind, but that’s not the case, said Rande Spiegelman, vice president of financial planning at the Schwab Center for Financial Research, a division of Charles Schwab & Co. Inc.
Retirement plan assets and life insurance benefits generally go directly to the named beneficiaries, and those survivors likely will have their money before a will is processed in probate court.
Many people have multiple life insurance policies and retirement funds from different employers and forget to update beneficiaries. So, if you’ve divorced and your first wife is still the beneficiary on a life insurance policy, there could be a problem for other survivors who may be depending on the benefits.
“This is probably not one of those things that’s the top priority for most folks,” Spiegelman said.
He recommends reviewing beneficiary declarations on retirement accounts and insurance policies every two to three years. They also should be reviewed when major life changes occur such as a birth, death of a family member, a divorce or a move to another state.
Some advisers recommend an annual review to keep the policies and accounts as up-to-date as possible.
Accounts that may have beneficiary designations include individual retirement accounts — 401(k), 403(b), or 457. Self-employed accounts such as a Keogh or qualified retirement plan. Credit union plan accounts, disability insurance policies, life insurance policies and annuities also have beneficiary forms. Also think about beneficiaries for accounts at brokerages, he said.
As a practical matter, most married people will name their spouse as the primary beneficiary and their children as contingent beneficiaries if the primary isn’t still living.
Spouses have certain benefits when it comes to inheriting a retirement account. They can roll the money over into their own retirement account or keep it in a separate account and defer taking out any money until they turn 70½ — when they must take required minimum distributions. A spouse also has the option of taking the money out in distributions over his or her lifetime, taking advantage of the tax-deferred status of the account.
It’s important to note that federal law makes your spouse the default beneficiary on the retirement account through your employer such as a 401(k). Someone other than your spouse can be named the beneficiary only if you authorize it and your spouse signs a release form.
For unmarried people, parents, other family members, domestic partners or others close to them may be chosen as beneficiaries.
Failure to name beneficiaries means the money goes into your estate and becomes part of the probate process, which means the cash will be tied up in a court process and some of it will be lost to the expenses of the probate process.
Some people have made the mistake of naming their estate as the beneficiary, which again locks up the assets in court-managed probate.
In a few cases, an individual may want to name a trust as the beneficiary, which places the money in control of a trusted money manager. It’s an option if you believe the beneficiaries of your money may not have the skills to handle it.
Marvin Feldman, president and CEO of the Washington-based Life and Health Insurance Foundation for Education, a nonprofit group formed by insurance companies, said a trust might be important if you decide to leave the money to a minor child.
The trust would be named as the beneficiary of your money and the person you name to manage it, the trustee, would be responsible for distributing funds to your child in the way you establish in the trust documents.
Sometimes trustees are given some flexibility to make distribution decisions as needed but within parameters you establish.
Trusts may also be an option if you’re divorced with minor children and former spouse has custody of the children. A trust would ensure that the money you leave is used to support the child’s needs.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
By DAVID PITT
AP Business Writer
DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) _ Financial planners say it happens all too frequently: a person dies unexpectedly leaving ex-spouses or relatives they haven’t seen in years large chunks of money because they hadn’t updated their retirement plans or life insurance policies.
It’s a problem that you can try to head off at the pass this open enrollment season. But be aware that for most insurance and retirement accounts, changes can be made any time and do not require you to wait for your annual benefits selection.
It’s important to keep beneficiary designations current because a lot is at stake. Collectively, the amount of money held in retirement accounts in the United States is large and growing.
The Employee Benefit Research Institute said IRA assets grew 12.5 percent to $4.75 trillion in 2007.
Private-sector defined contribution plans including 401(k) accounts held $3.5 trillion, and private-sector defined benefit plans held $2.33 trillion in 2007.
Many people may believe that an updated will is sufficient to take care of any financial issues left behind, but that’s not the case, said Rande Spiegelman, vice president of financial planning at the Schwab Center for Financial Research, a division of Charles Schwab & Co. Inc.
Retirement plan assets and life insurance benefits generally go directly to the named beneficiaries, and those survivors likely will have their money before a will is processed in probate court.
Many people have multiple life insurance policies and retirement funds from different employers and forget to update beneficiaries. So, if you’ve divorced and your first wife is still the beneficiary on a life insurance policy, there could be a problem for other survivors who may be depending on the benefits.
“This is probably not one of those things that’s the top priority for most folks,” Spiegelman said.
He recommends reviewing beneficiary declarations on retirement accounts and insurance policies every two to three years. They also should be reviewed when major life changes occur such as a birth, death of a family member, a divorce or a move to another state.
Some advisers recommend an annual review to keep the policies and accounts as up-to-date as possible.
Accounts that may have beneficiary designations include individual retirement accounts — 401(k), 403(b), or 457. Self-employed accounts such as a Keogh or qualified retirement plan. Credit union plan accounts, disability insurance policies, life insurance policies and annuities also have beneficiary forms. Also think about beneficiaries for accounts at brokerages, he said.
As a practical matter, most married people will name their spouse as the primary beneficiary and their children as contingent beneficiaries if the primary isn’t still living.
Spouses have certain benefits when it comes to inheriting a retirement account. They can roll the money over into their own retirement account or keep it in a separate account and defer taking out any money until they turn 70½ — when they must take required minimum distributions. A spouse also has the option of taking the money out in distributions over his or her lifetime, taking advantage of the tax-deferred status of the account.
It’s important to note that federal law makes your spouse the default beneficiary on the retirement account through your employer such as a 401(k). Someone other than your spouse can be named the beneficiary only if you authorize it and your spouse signs a release form.
For unmarried people, parents, other family members, domestic partners or others close to them may be chosen as beneficiaries.
Failure to name beneficiaries means the money goes into your estate and becomes part of the probate process, which means the cash will be tied up in a court process and some of it will be lost to the expenses of the probate process.
Some people have made the mistake of naming their estate as the beneficiary, which again locks up the assets in court-managed probate.
In a few cases, an individual may want to name a trust as the beneficiary, which places the money in control of a trusted money manager. It’s an option if you believe the beneficiaries of your money may not have the skills to handle it.
Marvin Feldman, president and CEO of the Washington-based Life and Health Insurance Foundation for Education, a nonprofit group formed by insurance companies, said a trust might be important if you decide to leave the money to a minor child.
The trust would be named as the beneficiary of your money and the person you name to manage it, the trustee, would be responsible for distributing funds to your child in the way you establish in the trust documents.
Sometimes trustees are given some flexibility to make distribution decisions as needed but within parameters you establish.
Trusts may also be an option if you’re divorced with minor children and former spouse has custody of the children. A trust would ensure that the money you leave is used to support the child’s needs.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Court: Relatives who assist in suicide can inherit
Date: 9/25/2008 5:10 PM
By RYAN J. FOLEY
Associated Press Writer
MADISON, Wis. (AP) _ The wife and daughter of a man who committed suicide can inherit his estate even if they assisted him in the act, a state appeals court ruled Thursday.
State law prohibits anyone who “intentionally kills” another from inheriting from the person, but Wisconsin’s District 4 Court of Appeals said that provision does not apply to those who assist in suicide.
“Providing (the man) with a loaded shotgun did not deprive him of his life: he deprived himself of life by shooting himself with the shotgun,” Judge Margaret Vergeront wrote for the unanimous three-judge panel.
Wisconsin Right to Life, which opposes assisted suicide, said the ruling gives people a financial incentive to help relatives die prematurely.
“It’s a horrendous decision,” said Barbara Lyons, the group’s executive director.
“I think the implications are enormous,” she said.
Boston College law professor Ray Madoff, an expert on inheritance law, said she has never heard of a similar ruling in the nation.
“This is something that people have been curious about where the law would draw the line, and it’s interesting to actually have a case addressing it,” she said.
Edward Schunk, 63, shot himself in 2006 in a cabin on his property while he was terminally ill with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, a form of cancer. He left an estate valued at nearly $500,000.
The court ruled in favor of his wife, Linda, and youngest child, Megan Schunk, now 20, who were granted most of the estate under Schunk’s will.
Schunk’s six older children received little or nothing, according to court records. Five of them challenged the will, arguing that Linda and Megan Schunk took Schunk to the cabin, gave him a loaded shotgun and left even though they knew he was suicidal.
The two acknowledged they took him home from the hospital on a one-day pass but denied assisting his death. They said he had told them he wanted to go turkey hunting.
For the purposes of deciding the dispute, the court assumed the other children’s allegations were true but still ruled in favor of the wife and younger daughter.
Under Wisconsin law, assisting in a suicide is punishable by up to six years in prison. Thursday’s ruling did not address that law, and no one has been charged in Schunk’s death.
Terry Moore, lawyer for Megan Schunk, called the case a “one-in-a-million situation” and said he doubted it would have broad impact. Lawyers for Schunk’s other children did not immediately return phone messages. They could ask the Wisconsin Supreme Court to review the case.
Boston College’s Madoff said courts often struggle with whether someone who kills another should be allowed to inherit their money, she said. It’s an easier question when dealing with murder but more difficult in instances such as drunken driving, self-defense against spousal abuse or assisted suicide, she said.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
By RYAN J. FOLEY
Associated Press Writer
MADISON, Wis. (AP) _ The wife and daughter of a man who committed suicide can inherit his estate even if they assisted him in the act, a state appeals court ruled Thursday.
State law prohibits anyone who “intentionally kills” another from inheriting from the person, but Wisconsin’s District 4 Court of Appeals said that provision does not apply to those who assist in suicide.
“Providing (the man) with a loaded shotgun did not deprive him of his life: he deprived himself of life by shooting himself with the shotgun,” Judge Margaret Vergeront wrote for the unanimous three-judge panel.
Wisconsin Right to Life, which opposes assisted suicide, said the ruling gives people a financial incentive to help relatives die prematurely.
“It’s a horrendous decision,” said Barbara Lyons, the group’s executive director.
“I think the implications are enormous,” she said.
Boston College law professor Ray Madoff, an expert on inheritance law, said she has never heard of a similar ruling in the nation.
“This is something that people have been curious about where the law would draw the line, and it’s interesting to actually have a case addressing it,” she said.
Edward Schunk, 63, shot himself in 2006 in a cabin on his property while he was terminally ill with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, a form of cancer. He left an estate valued at nearly $500,000.
The court ruled in favor of his wife, Linda, and youngest child, Megan Schunk, now 20, who were granted most of the estate under Schunk’s will.
Schunk’s six older children received little or nothing, according to court records. Five of them challenged the will, arguing that Linda and Megan Schunk took Schunk to the cabin, gave him a loaded shotgun and left even though they knew he was suicidal.
The two acknowledged they took him home from the hospital on a one-day pass but denied assisting his death. They said he had told them he wanted to go turkey hunting.
For the purposes of deciding the dispute, the court assumed the other children’s allegations were true but still ruled in favor of the wife and younger daughter.
Under Wisconsin law, assisting in a suicide is punishable by up to six years in prison. Thursday’s ruling did not address that law, and no one has been charged in Schunk’s death.
Terry Moore, lawyer for Megan Schunk, called the case a “one-in-a-million situation” and said he doubted it would have broad impact. Lawyers for Schunk’s other children did not immediately return phone messages. They could ask the Wisconsin Supreme Court to review the case.
Boston College’s Madoff said courts often struggle with whether someone who kills another should be allowed to inherit their money, she said. It’s an easier question when dealing with murder but more difficult in instances such as drunken driving, self-defense against spousal abuse or assisted suicide, she said.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Reduce partisan fight over judges, lawyers urge
Wisconsin got its name in the national news for our Supreme Court race this spring, as one where a good judge got beat by a little known county judge with right wing rhetoric, see the below story. For the local story of the defeat of Justice Louis Butler,Jr. by Michael Gableman click here.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
http://gordonjohnson.com
http://wis-injury.com
http://wis-law.com
©2008 Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
Date: 8/10/2008 12:17 PM
By MARK SHERMAN
Associated Press Writer
NEW YORK (AP) _ The American Bar Association is calling on the next president and Senate to reduce partisan tensions in federal judicial nominations.
The incoming president of the lawyers’ group, H. Thomas Wells Jr. of Birmingham, Ala., said Sunday that he also is enlisting the help of retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor to study threats to fair and impartial state courts.
At the federal level, the White House should create a commission of Democrats and Republicans to recommend nominees for federal appeals courts and the two senators from each state should establish similar panels to evaluate and recommend federal trial judges, the ABA says in a resolution inspired by Wells. The proposal is certain to be adopted at the group’s annual meeting in New York.
The bipartisan panels would help “avoid the times when there have been really rancorous debates in the confirmation process,” Wells said in an interview with The Associated Press.
Nominations from Florida and other states that now use such commissions, Wells said, “almost never have bitter confirmation fights.”
Wells said that by acting ahead of this year’s election, the ABA — often criticized by Republicans for tilting toward the Democrats — will avoid being seen as favoring one party. He said he plans to write to Democrat Barack Obama, Republican John McCain and members of the Senate to urge them to adopt the commission approach.
In recent years, individual senators in both parties have blocked judicial nominees from a vote by the full Senate. Democrats filibustered several of President Bush’s nominees when they controlled the Senate during his first term.
Bush also has failed to consult senators on some of his choices. In one instance, his nominee for an appeals court slot from Virginia was not among the recommendations of the state’s senators, Republican John Warner and Democrat Jim Webb.
The nomination has since been withdrawn and Bush has nominated two other Virginians to fill vacancies on the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals who were among those recommended by the senators. One, former state Supreme Court Justice G. Steven Agee, was unanimously confirmed. The nomination of U.S. District Court Judge Glen Conrad is pending.
At the state level, Wells said his concern was sparked by recent expensive, and in some cases ugly, campaigns and some state legislatures’ refusal to provide enough money for state courts.
O’Connor has spoken out frequently in defense of judicial independence and said judges who must run in partisan elections risk being compromised by the growing amount of campaign cash they must raise.
She will head up a May 2009 summit in Charlotte, N.C., that will explore these issues, Wells said.
In April, a little-known county judge narrowly defeated a Wisconsin Supreme Court justice with a law-and-order message and a barrage of third-party ads in a race that will go down as one of the state’s nastiest.
Liberal and conservative interest groups spent millions of dollars on negative attack ads that blanketed the state’s airwaves for weeks.
The ABA also is part of a push to get the U.S. Supreme Court to take up a case from West Virginia, in which a state high court justice refused to step aside from ruling on a $76.3 million dispute involving a key booster of his 2004 election campaign.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
http://gordonjohnson.com
http://wis-injury.com
http://wis-law.com
©2008 Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
Date: 8/10/2008 12:17 PM
By MARK SHERMAN
Associated Press Writer
NEW YORK (AP) _ The American Bar Association is calling on the next president and Senate to reduce partisan tensions in federal judicial nominations.
The incoming president of the lawyers’ group, H. Thomas Wells Jr. of Birmingham, Ala., said Sunday that he also is enlisting the help of retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor to study threats to fair and impartial state courts.
At the federal level, the White House should create a commission of Democrats and Republicans to recommend nominees for federal appeals courts and the two senators from each state should establish similar panels to evaluate and recommend federal trial judges, the ABA says in a resolution inspired by Wells. The proposal is certain to be adopted at the group’s annual meeting in New York.
The bipartisan panels would help “avoid the times when there have been really rancorous debates in the confirmation process,” Wells said in an interview with The Associated Press.
Nominations from Florida and other states that now use such commissions, Wells said, “almost never have bitter confirmation fights.”
Wells said that by acting ahead of this year’s election, the ABA — often criticized by Republicans for tilting toward the Democrats — will avoid being seen as favoring one party. He said he plans to write to Democrat Barack Obama, Republican John McCain and members of the Senate to urge them to adopt the commission approach.
In recent years, individual senators in both parties have blocked judicial nominees from a vote by the full Senate. Democrats filibustered several of President Bush’s nominees when they controlled the Senate during his first term.
Bush also has failed to consult senators on some of his choices. In one instance, his nominee for an appeals court slot from Virginia was not among the recommendations of the state’s senators, Republican John Warner and Democrat Jim Webb.
The nomination has since been withdrawn and Bush has nominated two other Virginians to fill vacancies on the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals who were among those recommended by the senators. One, former state Supreme Court Justice G. Steven Agee, was unanimously confirmed. The nomination of U.S. District Court Judge Glen Conrad is pending.
At the state level, Wells said his concern was sparked by recent expensive, and in some cases ugly, campaigns and some state legislatures’ refusal to provide enough money for state courts.
O’Connor has spoken out frequently in defense of judicial independence and said judges who must run in partisan elections risk being compromised by the growing amount of campaign cash they must raise.
She will head up a May 2009 summit in Charlotte, N.C., that will explore these issues, Wells said.
In April, a little-known county judge narrowly defeated a Wisconsin Supreme Court justice with a law-and-order message and a barrage of third-party ads in a race that will go down as one of the state’s nastiest.
Liberal and conservative interest groups spent millions of dollars on negative attack ads that blanketed the state’s airwaves for weeks.
The ABA also is part of a push to get the U.S. Supreme Court to take up a case from West Virginia, in which a state high court justice refused to step aside from ruling on a $76.3 million dispute involving a key booster of his 2004 election campaign.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
McCain opposes farm policies popular in Midwest
Date: 8/6/2008 3:06 AM
By MIKE GLOVER
Associated Press Writer
DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) _ Republican presidential candidate John McCain opposes the $300 billion farm bill and subsidies for ethanol, positions that both supporters and opponents say might cost him votes he needs in the upper Midwest this November.
His Democratic rival, Barack Obama, is making a more traditional regional pitch: He favors the farm bill approved by Congress this year and subsidies for the Midwest-based ethanol industry. McCain instead has promised to open new markets abroad for farmers to export their commodities.
In his position papers, McCain opposes farm subsidies only for those with incomes of more than $250,000 and a net worth above $2 million. But he’s gone further on the stump.
“I don’t support agricultural subsidies no matter where they are,” McCain said at a recent appearance in Wisconsin. “The farm bill, $300 billion, is something America simply can’t afford.”
McCain later described the measure, which is very popular throughout the Midwest, as “a $300 billion, bloated, pork-barrel-laden bill” because of subsidies for industries like ethanol.
It’s not a stand that pleases Republican Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa.
“I would not advise him to take that position,” Grassley said. “For sure, he can’t lose Missouri and that’s in the upper Midwest. Could he lose Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin and still be elected president? Yes, but I wouldn’t advise him to have that strategy.”
Grassley, a conservative Republican, and his Senate colleague from Iowa, liberal Democrat Tom Harkin, have achieved enduring success in this state largely by mastering the politics of farm issues. Harkin chairs the Senate Agriculture Committee, which wrote the new farm legislation.
“I don’t see any scenario in which McCain can get to the White House without carrying some upper Midwestern states,” said Harkin, an Obama backer. “I’ve never really understood in all my years why Sen. McCain has gone out of his way to speak against and vote against policies that are important to the upper Midwest.”
There’s a history of close elections in the region. President Bush carried Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, North Dakota and South Dakota in 2004, earning 35 electoral votes. But his Democratic opponent, John Kerry, prevailed in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Illinois, giving him 41 electoral votes.
Veteran GOP strategist Gentry Collins said McCain can defend his record on farm issues, including opposing “corporate welfare” for big operations, but he said there’s more at work.
“The upper Midwest is crucial in this election, and Midwestern voters value authenticity. They value experience,” Collins said. “I don’t think agricultural issues are the only issues Midwestern voters care about. There are some bigger-picture issues, broader issues where he’s strong.”
But on another important issue to Midwesterners, McCain opposed a tax break for developing wind power. Obama supported the tax break.
“We’re employing close to 2,000 people right now in Iowa in the wind energy industry,” Harkin said.
McCain has been most outspoken on ethanol subsidies, and that has Republicans worried in Iowa, the nation’s biggest producer of the fuel. Other top ethanol producers include Illinois, Minnesota, Indiana, Ohio, Wisconsin and Missouri.
“It does challenge him in states like Iowa, the No. 1 ethanol state,” said Bill Northey, Iowa’s Republican agriculture secretary. “It does make it tougher to make the case.”
Drake University political science professor Dennis Goldford said McCain’s problem on farm issues reflects a deeper issue he faces as he’s courted conservative GOP activists, many of whom are deeply suspicious of him.
“He’s essentially reverting to standard Republican supply-side economics,” said Goldford. “That’s where he’s got a problem. He’s got to find his own voice and so far he hasn’t had a voice.”
Iowa Gov. Chet Culver, a Democrat who has campaigned for Obama, said he’s puzzled by McCain’s position. He points to other Republicans who have a different view.
“President Bush and I just had a good conversation about how critically important ethanol is, and how Iowa is positioned so well to lead the nation,” said Culver. “I have no idea why John McCain doesn’t support it. It hurts him in Indiana, and Missouri and Ohio, and it’s not the message right now that any of us want to hear.”
Obama has a modest lead in national polls, but electoral votes will decide the election. Obama is poised to do well on both coasts, while McCain is favored in the South and some parts of the West. That leaves the upper Midwest as a swing battleground.
“The Midwest is crucial in this campaign,” said Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller, a Democrat and an early backer of Obama. “Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin and perhaps Indiana are very important states. McCain is behind, and he’s in danger of falling further behind.”
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
By MIKE GLOVER
Associated Press Writer
DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) _ Republican presidential candidate John McCain opposes the $300 billion farm bill and subsidies for ethanol, positions that both supporters and opponents say might cost him votes he needs in the upper Midwest this November.
His Democratic rival, Barack Obama, is making a more traditional regional pitch: He favors the farm bill approved by Congress this year and subsidies for the Midwest-based ethanol industry. McCain instead has promised to open new markets abroad for farmers to export their commodities.
In his position papers, McCain opposes farm subsidies only for those with incomes of more than $250,000 and a net worth above $2 million. But he’s gone further on the stump.
“I don’t support agricultural subsidies no matter where they are,” McCain said at a recent appearance in Wisconsin. “The farm bill, $300 billion, is something America simply can’t afford.”
McCain later described the measure, which is very popular throughout the Midwest, as “a $300 billion, bloated, pork-barrel-laden bill” because of subsidies for industries like ethanol.
It’s not a stand that pleases Republican Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa.
“I would not advise him to take that position,” Grassley said. “For sure, he can’t lose Missouri and that’s in the upper Midwest. Could he lose Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin and still be elected president? Yes, but I wouldn’t advise him to have that strategy.”
Grassley, a conservative Republican, and his Senate colleague from Iowa, liberal Democrat Tom Harkin, have achieved enduring success in this state largely by mastering the politics of farm issues. Harkin chairs the Senate Agriculture Committee, which wrote the new farm legislation.
“I don’t see any scenario in which McCain can get to the White House without carrying some upper Midwestern states,” said Harkin, an Obama backer. “I’ve never really understood in all my years why Sen. McCain has gone out of his way to speak against and vote against policies that are important to the upper Midwest.”
There’s a history of close elections in the region. President Bush carried Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, North Dakota and South Dakota in 2004, earning 35 electoral votes. But his Democratic opponent, John Kerry, prevailed in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Illinois, giving him 41 electoral votes.
Veteran GOP strategist Gentry Collins said McCain can defend his record on farm issues, including opposing “corporate welfare” for big operations, but he said there’s more at work.
“The upper Midwest is crucial in this election, and Midwestern voters value authenticity. They value experience,” Collins said. “I don’t think agricultural issues are the only issues Midwestern voters care about. There are some bigger-picture issues, broader issues where he’s strong.”
But on another important issue to Midwesterners, McCain opposed a tax break for developing wind power. Obama supported the tax break.
“We’re employing close to 2,000 people right now in Iowa in the wind energy industry,” Harkin said.
McCain has been most outspoken on ethanol subsidies, and that has Republicans worried in Iowa, the nation’s biggest producer of the fuel. Other top ethanol producers include Illinois, Minnesota, Indiana, Ohio, Wisconsin and Missouri.
“It does challenge him in states like Iowa, the No. 1 ethanol state,” said Bill Northey, Iowa’s Republican agriculture secretary. “It does make it tougher to make the case.”
Drake University political science professor Dennis Goldford said McCain’s problem on farm issues reflects a deeper issue he faces as he’s courted conservative GOP activists, many of whom are deeply suspicious of him.
“He’s essentially reverting to standard Republican supply-side economics,” said Goldford. “That’s where he’s got a problem. He’s got to find his own voice and so far he hasn’t had a voice.”
Iowa Gov. Chet Culver, a Democrat who has campaigned for Obama, said he’s puzzled by McCain’s position. He points to other Republicans who have a different view.
“President Bush and I just had a good conversation about how critically important ethanol is, and how Iowa is positioned so well to lead the nation,” said Culver. “I have no idea why John McCain doesn’t support it. It hurts him in Indiana, and Missouri and Ohio, and it’s not the message right now that any of us want to hear.”
Obama has a modest lead in national polls, but electoral votes will decide the election. Obama is poised to do well on both coasts, while McCain is favored in the South and some parts of the West. That leaves the upper Midwest as a swing battleground.
“The Midwest is crucial in this campaign,” said Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller, a Democrat and an early backer of Obama. “Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin and perhaps Indiana are very important states. McCain is behind, and he’s in danger of falling further behind.”
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
3 workers killed in explosion at Wis. paper mill
Our prayers are with the families of those who died Tomahawk as detailed in the below AP story. It is always a tough time to raise these questions, but we are inevitably asked: who is responsible for such explosion and what compensation is available for the victims and their families.
As the explosion occurred at a workplace, it is typically thought that the only remedy available will be under Wisconsin Workers Compensation law. See http://wis-injury.com/workerscomp.html And while that may be the case, if the explosion was caused by the wrongdoing of someone other than the employer or a co-worker at the Packaging Corp. of America, then workers comp may not be the only remedy.
It is critical that a full investigation be done as to what caused the explosion, was it a faulty design or production of the tank that exploded, negligent maintenance by an outside firm of the tank.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
http://wis-injury.com
http://gordonjohnson.com
http://wis-law.com
http://youtube.com/profile?user=braininjuryattorney
1-800-992-9447
©2008 Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
Date: 7/29/2008 8:10 PM
By ROBERT IMRIE
Associated Press Writer
TOMAHAWK, Wis. (AP) _ A storage tank explosion at a northern Wisconsin paper mill Tuesday killed three workers and injured a fourth, the company that owns the mill said.
Packaging Corp. of America said in a news release that the three workers were fatally injured when a tank used to store recycled fiber exploded while they were performing maintenance on top of it.
The injured worker was standing on a platform at a lower level of the tank when it exploded, the company said. The worker’s condition was not immediately released.
The cause of the explosion was not known and is under investigation, the company said.
Company spokesman Ron Zimmerman said up to 10 people were working in the area when the explosion happened in what he described as “a storage tank for pulp.” No fire resulted from the explosion, he said.
Identities of the victims were not being released Tuesday night, Zimmerman said.
Capt. Mike Drury of the nearby Merrill Fire Department said his rescue crew was called to help free the employees about 1:40 p.m. but was called off before it arrived. Emergency workers on the scene used a crane to rescue them, he said.
“There was an explosion and a couple of employees were trapped for a short period of time,” Drury said.
The Lincoln County Sheriff’s Department did not immediately return a telephone message.
The main part of the mill remained in operation Tuesday afternoon. Workers walked out with somber faces.
One man was met by a woman in a car, and they embraced and hugged for nearly a minute. The man talked with her for several minutes and then went back into the administrative office, telling a reporter he couldn’t comment.
A worker leaving the plant said employees had been told not to discuss details of the explosion with reporters, referring questions to Zimmerman, who didn’t immediately respond to a message seeking further information.
Packaging Corp. of America, which makes containerboard and corrugated packaging products, operates four paper mills and 67 corrugated product plants in 26 states. According to the Lake Forest, Ill.-based company’s Web site, it employs 8,350 people nationwide and posted sales of $2.3 billion last year.
The Tomahawk mill has three semi-chemical corrugating machines and produces more than 572 million tons annually, the company said.
___
AP writer Carrie Antlfinger in Milwaukee contributed to this report.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
As the explosion occurred at a workplace, it is typically thought that the only remedy available will be under Wisconsin Workers Compensation law. See http://wis-injury.com/workerscomp.html And while that may be the case, if the explosion was caused by the wrongdoing of someone other than the employer or a co-worker at the Packaging Corp. of America, then workers comp may not be the only remedy.
It is critical that a full investigation be done as to what caused the explosion, was it a faulty design or production of the tank that exploded, negligent maintenance by an outside firm of the tank.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
http://wis-injury.com
http://gordonjohnson.com
http://wis-law.com
http://youtube.com/profile?user=braininjuryattorney
1-800-992-9447
©2008 Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
Date: 7/29/2008 8:10 PM
By ROBERT IMRIE
Associated Press Writer
TOMAHAWK, Wis. (AP) _ A storage tank explosion at a northern Wisconsin paper mill Tuesday killed three workers and injured a fourth, the company that owns the mill said.
Packaging Corp. of America said in a news release that the three workers were fatally injured when a tank used to store recycled fiber exploded while they were performing maintenance on top of it.
The injured worker was standing on a platform at a lower level of the tank when it exploded, the company said. The worker’s condition was not immediately released.
The cause of the explosion was not known and is under investigation, the company said.
Company spokesman Ron Zimmerman said up to 10 people were working in the area when the explosion happened in what he described as “a storage tank for pulp.” No fire resulted from the explosion, he said.
Identities of the victims were not being released Tuesday night, Zimmerman said.
Capt. Mike Drury of the nearby Merrill Fire Department said his rescue crew was called to help free the employees about 1:40 p.m. but was called off before it arrived. Emergency workers on the scene used a crane to rescue them, he said.
“There was an explosion and a couple of employees were trapped for a short period of time,” Drury said.
The Lincoln County Sheriff’s Department did not immediately return a telephone message.
The main part of the mill remained in operation Tuesday afternoon. Workers walked out with somber faces.
One man was met by a woman in a car, and they embraced and hugged for nearly a minute. The man talked with her for several minutes and then went back into the administrative office, telling a reporter he couldn’t comment.
A worker leaving the plant said employees had been told not to discuss details of the explosion with reporters, referring questions to Zimmerman, who didn’t immediately respond to a message seeking further information.
Packaging Corp. of America, which makes containerboard and corrugated packaging products, operates four paper mills and 67 corrugated product plants in 26 states. According to the Lake Forest, Ill.-based company’s Web site, it employs 8,350 people nationwide and posted sales of $2.3 billion last year.
The Tomahawk mill has three semi-chemical corrugating machines and produces more than 572 million tons annually, the company said.
___
AP writer Carrie Antlfinger in Milwaukee contributed to this report.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Who qualifies for mortgage help and how to get it
Date: 7/29/2008 11:02 PM
By DAVE CARPENTER
AP Business Writer
Questions and answers about the Hope for Homeowners Act of 2008, passed by Congress last weekend to try to steer as many as 400,000 struggling homeowners away from foreclosure:
Q: What exactly will the legislation do?
A: It will allow those who qualify to cancel their old mortgage loans and replace them with 30-year fixed-rate loans for up to 90 percent of the home’s current value. The FHA will insure a total of $300 billion of the loans over a three-year period.
But the decision on whether to write such a loan remains up to banks, which would have to be willing to take a loss on the existing loans in exchange for avoiding an often-costly foreclosure.
Q: Who is eligible?
A: Eligible borrowers must have spent more than 31 percent of their monthly incomes on their mortgages as of March 1, 2008. The troubled loan must have originated no later than Jan. 1, 2008, and be on the borrower’s primary residence. And the borrower’s income must be verified.
Q: When does the program start?
A: It takes effect Oct. 1 and runs through September 2011, although the FHA isn’t likely to have it operating at full capacity until next year.
Q: Since lenders can pick and choose which loans to refinance, how can consumers determine if theirs will be selected?
A: Check with the bank or financial company servicing your mortgage, but it may be weeks before they make decisions concerning the new guidelines and assess individual loans.
Even then, keep expectations limited.
“Servicers are going to be reluctant to take the government up on their offer,” predicted Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com. “The earliest they’ll start taking them up on it is early next year. And even then it’s likely to be modest.”
Q: Is there anything a homeowner can do to improve chances of benefiting from the program, such as crunching numbers to make a case for the bank?
A: Not really. The best step is to keep up your payments as best you can.
Q: But doesn’t this provide an incentive to NOT pay your mortgage, if you’re barely keeping ahead of bills and are underwater on your house, so you can qualify?
A: No. If your situation deteriorates enough, the bank may reject any possible new loan.
“Turning yourself into a financial basket case is not going to work,” said Dan Seiver, a finance professor at San Diego State University. “If you turn into a complete deadbeat, the servicer is going to just foreclose and dump it.”
Q: So what should I be doing now besides trying to keep up with payments?
A: Talk to a local credit counselor and call the toll-free hot line of the Hope Now alliance — an industry group trying to coordinate a response to the mortgage crisis — at 1-888-995-HOPE. It is available 24 hours a day to provide mortgage counseling in multiple languages.
Mary Thomason, director of resource development for The Impact Group of Atlanta, a housing counseling group, also suggests tracking expenses and income closely in order to be able to forecast your cash flow for the next six months and give yourself better control of your finances.
Q: If the banks and lenders refuse to write these loans, then what?
A: Public and political pressure may prompt them to participate. If not, and more people continue to lose their homes, Zandi says the next White House administration subject them to additional regulations or investigations if they remain unwilling to take on the risks.
Q: What happens if I’m able to sell my home after I refinance?
A: If you sell during the next five years, you must agree to share 50 percent of any profits from the resale with the government. What’s more, homeowners can only retain equity gains based on a sliding scale. The homeowner would have zero equity from a sale in the first year, with the amount rising 10 percent in each succeeding year and capping at 50 percent from a sale in year five and thereafter.
The equity must be repaid because the maximum amount on the new loans will be capped at 90 percent of the current market value, which automatically gives the previously troubled homeowner 10 percent equity in the home.
Q: Where can consumers find more detailed information about the plan?
A: There is a six-page summary of the housing act at
http://banking.senate.gov/public/_files/HousingandEconomicRecove yAc tSummary.pdf
and the FHA’s Web site at http://www.fha.gov is a place to watch for updated information. The entire 694-page bill is at http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/financialsvcs_dem/hr3221_bi l_t ext.pdf
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
By DAVE CARPENTER
AP Business Writer
Questions and answers about the Hope for Homeowners Act of 2008, passed by Congress last weekend to try to steer as many as 400,000 struggling homeowners away from foreclosure:
Q: What exactly will the legislation do?
A: It will allow those who qualify to cancel their old mortgage loans and replace them with 30-year fixed-rate loans for up to 90 percent of the home’s current value. The FHA will insure a total of $300 billion of the loans over a three-year period.
But the decision on whether to write such a loan remains up to banks, which would have to be willing to take a loss on the existing loans in exchange for avoiding an often-costly foreclosure.
Q: Who is eligible?
A: Eligible borrowers must have spent more than 31 percent of their monthly incomes on their mortgages as of March 1, 2008. The troubled loan must have originated no later than Jan. 1, 2008, and be on the borrower’s primary residence. And the borrower’s income must be verified.
Q: When does the program start?
A: It takes effect Oct. 1 and runs through September 2011, although the FHA isn’t likely to have it operating at full capacity until next year.
Q: Since lenders can pick and choose which loans to refinance, how can consumers determine if theirs will be selected?
A: Check with the bank or financial company servicing your mortgage, but it may be weeks before they make decisions concerning the new guidelines and assess individual loans.
Even then, keep expectations limited.
“Servicers are going to be reluctant to take the government up on their offer,” predicted Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com. “The earliest they’ll start taking them up on it is early next year. And even then it’s likely to be modest.”
Q: Is there anything a homeowner can do to improve chances of benefiting from the program, such as crunching numbers to make a case for the bank?
A: Not really. The best step is to keep up your payments as best you can.
Q: But doesn’t this provide an incentive to NOT pay your mortgage, if you’re barely keeping ahead of bills and are underwater on your house, so you can qualify?
A: No. If your situation deteriorates enough, the bank may reject any possible new loan.
“Turning yourself into a financial basket case is not going to work,” said Dan Seiver, a finance professor at San Diego State University. “If you turn into a complete deadbeat, the servicer is going to just foreclose and dump it.”
Q: So what should I be doing now besides trying to keep up with payments?
A: Talk to a local credit counselor and call the toll-free hot line of the Hope Now alliance — an industry group trying to coordinate a response to the mortgage crisis — at 1-888-995-HOPE. It is available 24 hours a day to provide mortgage counseling in multiple languages.
Mary Thomason, director of resource development for The Impact Group of Atlanta, a housing counseling group, also suggests tracking expenses and income closely in order to be able to forecast your cash flow for the next six months and give yourself better control of your finances.
Q: If the banks and lenders refuse to write these loans, then what?
A: Public and political pressure may prompt them to participate. If not, and more people continue to lose their homes, Zandi says the next White House administration subject them to additional regulations or investigations if they remain unwilling to take on the risks.
Q: What happens if I’m able to sell my home after I refinance?
A: If you sell during the next five years, you must agree to share 50 percent of any profits from the resale with the government. What’s more, homeowners can only retain equity gains based on a sliding scale. The homeowner would have zero equity from a sale in the first year, with the amount rising 10 percent in each succeeding year and capping at 50 percent from a sale in year five and thereafter.
The equity must be repaid because the maximum amount on the new loans will be capped at 90 percent of the current market value, which automatically gives the previously troubled homeowner 10 percent equity in the home.
Q: Where can consumers find more detailed information about the plan?
A: There is a six-page summary of the housing act at
http://banking.senate.gov/public/_files/HousingandEconomicRecove yAc tSummary.pdf
and the FHA’s Web site at http://www.fha.gov is a place to watch for updated information. The entire 694-page bill is at http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/financialsvcs_dem/hr3221_bi l_t ext.pdf
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.