Insurance Claim1

Don't know if you know but I'm married to a most beautiful woman, have kids, have a mortgage, bills to pay, places that I want to go, things I want to do, people I want to annoy. Because of all this, I try not to put myself in situations that are going to get me killed (any time soon).  OK, yes - I work in a stressful environment where, at any time, someone could (and have) just flipped out.  But, besides, that, you don't see me bungee jumping into a hornet's nest just because it's there. This was the thought that was going through my mind the other day when I was reading about some guy that got killed/murdered.  Seems he was standing outside his home at 3am arguing with some drunk guy.  First, if you don't work the night shift, why are you not in bed dreaming about unicorns and rainbows?  Second, if you're going to be outside your home at 3am, have the good sense NOT to argue with drunk people! Seems this guy didn't follow my sense of logic a

Do you know who (or what) you are?  Do you have a name?  An identity?  Are you animal or vegetable?  The thing is that most everyone is someone (or something). Their parents knew they were someone when they were born and the government recognized them as a type of person when they were born (i.e. male or female).  Heck, even the SCOTUS got into the act and says a fetus is human in the third trimester . Yet, even with all this, there is still someone out there who insists on relegating the individual as a non-element. Such was my thinking when I read an article (online, this time) about a hospital who left the identity of a newborn blank .  It was neither male nor female.  Forget the internal plumbing - we're going to call this thing an "it" for (at least) the first 8 years. The (or a) masalah with this is that when you deny a person's natural identity (be it gender or a human), you devalue that person's very existence.  Heck, labeling a human fetus as a &q

The other day I was perusing the Drudge Report and found an article that noted that Steve Curry would not visit the White House if he were invited.  The first thought I had was "Who does this Steve Curry guy think he is?"  I'm guessing he's in starlet mode or is someone who thinks he's more important than he is.  Thing is, while I don't really care about who he is (or who he thinks he is) he did remind me of a person I was talking to a while back. Seems Person wanted to sue a former friend for defamation . For those not in the know, Defamation is an umbrella action that covers both libel (written) and slander (spoken), which is defined as Oral defamation exists when someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another, which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed.  Slander is a civil wrong (tort) and can be the basis for a lawsuit. What happened was former friend told another former friend some juicy gossip that Person was sle

Today, as I was perusing the news feeds, I came across an article about rope.  Well, not rope, per se, but rope as in one group dolling out enough rope for another group to hang it's collective self .   Seems the democratic party has finally realized that spiteful, hateful, angry, foolish, stupid, reckless speech targeted toward the POTUS after losing an election (rather badly, I might add) may cause rank and file people, who don't understand that politicians are a bunch of windbags , may cause said peoples to rise up and try to kill those in authority (i.e. every politician in DC).  Such is the case in law and legal things and it brought to my mind a case that I worked on years back. Once upon a time, there was a Guy.  Guy had a wife and two beautiful children. One day, Guy was flipping through the mail and came across a letter addressed to his wife.  Turns out letter was written by an Admirer of wife.  I won't bore you with the details but after a little snooping,

Years back when I attended Junior High School, I remember taking a Civics class.  Looking back, it was probably the best class I could have taken as it gave me an understanding of how government is supposed to work.  I say "supposed" to because these days it seems that each branch of government is trying to do the work of the other - which can make for no small amount of confusion. This all brings us to our word of the month: SEPARATION OF POWERS .  According to Black's Law Dictionary , SEPARATION OF POWERS is: The division of governmental authority into three branches of government - legislative, executive, and judicial - each with specific duties on which neither of the other branches can encroach.  The doctrine that such a division of governmental authority is the most desirable form of government because it establishes checks and balances designed to protect the people against tyranny. Wait, tyranny?  How might that happen?!?  Well, in today's news, the