Search (877) 728-9653

Carlson Meissner Hart & Hayslett | Legal Blog

Dec  23,  2011
By maryann
'Twas The Night Before Christmas, Legal Version WHEREAS, on or about the night before Christmas, there did occur at a certain  residence (hereinafter known as "the House") a general lack of  stirring by all creatures therein, including, but not limited to, a mouse. A variety of foot apparel, i.e. stockings, we're hung by the chimney with care in said House, in the hope and/or belief that St. Nick a/k/a/  St. Nicholas a/k/a/ Santa Claus (hereinafter "Claus") would be there sometime thereafter. The minors, i.e. the children, of said House, were  nestled all snug in their  beds, wherein visions of confectionery treats, including, but not limited  to, sugar plums, did dance, cavort and otherwise appear in  dreams in their heads. WHEREUPON, Mamma (the party of the first part), and I (the party of the second part), being joint-owners of the House, had retired for a long winters nap. (At such time, the parties were clad in various forms of  headgear, i.e.: kerchief and cap.) When out on the lawn of said House, there arose such a clatter, I sprang from my bed to see what was the matter. The party of the first part sprang from the bed to investigate the cause of the disturbance. THEREAFTER, the party of the first part did observe, with some degree of  wonder and/or disbelief, a miniature sleigh (hereinafter the "Vehicle") being  pulled and/or drawn very rapidly through the air by approximately eight (8)  reindeer. The driver of the Vehicle appeared to be and in fact was, the previously referenced Claus. Said Claus was providing specific direction, instruction and guidance to the  approximately eight (8) reindeer and specifically identified the animal  co-conspirators by name: Dasher, Dancer, Prancer, Vixen, Comet, Cupid, Donner  and Blitzen (hereinafter the "Deer"). (Upon information and belief, it is  further asserted that an additional co-conspirator named Rudolph may have been involved.) The party of the first part witnessed Claus, the Vehicle and the Deer  intentionally and willfully trespass upon the roofs of several residences  located adjacent to and in the vicinity of the House, and noted that the Vehicle  was heavily laden with packages, toys and other items of unknown origin or  nature. Suddenly, without prior invitation or permission, either express or  implied, the Vehicle arrived at the House, and Claus entered said House via the  chimney. Said Claus was clad in a red fur suit, which was partially covered with residue  from the chimney, and he carried a large sack containing a portion of the  aforementioned packages, toys, and other unknown items. He was smoking what  appeared to be tobacco in a small pipe in blatant violation of local ordinances  and health regulations. Claus did not speak, but immediately began to fill the stocking of the minor children, which hung adjacent to the chimney, with toys and other small gifts. Upon completion of such task, Claus  touched the side of his nose and flew, rose and/or ascended up the chimney of  the House to the roof where the Vehicle and Deer waited and/or served as  "lookouts." Claus immediately departed for an unknown destination. However, prior to the departure of the Vehicle, Deer and Claus from said House,  the party of the first part did hear Claus state and/or exclaim: "Merry  Christmas to all and to all a good night!"  
Tags: attorneys-lawyers-blog-clearwater:attorneys; lawyers; blog; clearwater,bradenton:bradenton,clearwater:clearwater,new-port-richey:new port richey,spring-hill:spring hill,tampa-bay:tampa bay,tampa-criminal-defense:Tampa Criminal Defense
Posted in announcements:Announcements,community:Community
publish
65
Feb  21,  2011
By maryann
I had a second job when I got hurt, but my workers' compensation benefits only include the wages from one job. Is that right? Not necessarily. If your second job has workers' compensation coverage then your wages from the second job are also calculated into your average weekly wage if you not able to work at your second job after your injury. If your second job does not have workers' compensation coverage, then those wages are not included. If you have a question as to whether or not your second job should be included in your wages, please contact us to review this information with you.
Tags: attorneys-lawyers-blog-clearwater:attorneys; lawyers; blog; clearwater,bradenton:bradenton,clearwater:clearwater,new-port-richey:new port richey,spring-hill:spring hill,tampa-bay:tampa bay,workers-compensation:workers compensation
Posted in workers-compensation-2:Workers' Compensation
publish
I had a second job when I got hurt, but my workers' compensation benefits only include the wages from one job. Is that right?
51
Feb  15,  2011
By maryann
Terri Cromley, is a partner with the firm of Carlson, Meissner, Hart & Hayslett, is also on the Board of the Manatee County Florida Association of Women Lawyers (FAWL). Terri is currently in training to become a mentor for "Next Step", a local charity that assists children who are aging out of the Foster Care System. As a mentor to these children Terri, and other mentors, will assist the children to assimilate into the real world. As an announcement in the Manatee FAWL Newsletter, states:  Member, Terri Cromley's brother, Tad,  would also like to support this organization.  Tad Cromley will donate $5.00 for everyone who contacts his Allstate agency for a quote for auto and home/renters insurance between now and May 31, 2011.  Additionally, he will donate $1.00 for everyone who friends his Allstate agency on Facebook www.facebook.com/cromleyandassociates.  Donations will max at $500.00.  Please feel free to forward this to any friends/family in the state of Florida.  Mention "Next Step" when you call or when you friend him to be sure to get the donation.  It won't cost you a thing, it may save you money on your insurance and it will benefit a very worthwhile charity.   You can contact Tad at (w) 941-554-4270, (c)941-928-9119, www.cromleyandassociates.com, or tad@cromleyandassociates.com
Tags: attorneys-lawyers-blog-clearwater:attorneys; lawyers; blog; clearwater,bradenton:bradenton,tampa-bay:tampa bay
Posted in announcements:Announcements,community:Community
publish
Next Step is a local charity that assists children who are aging out of the Foster Care System.
50
Feb  11,  2011
By maryann
Noise Ordinance Laws in Question - Anthony Lowery
The LEDGER, Published the following article on Tuesday, February 8, 2011, regarding Mr. Lowery who was represented by attorney, Kevin Hayslett, of Carlson, Meissner, Hart & Hayslett, P.A.
LAKELAND | A judge is considering whether to dismiss a criminal case against a Lakeland street preacher accused of being too loud when delivering the gospel.
Anthony Lowery is charged with violating the city's noise ordinance laws, which carries a maximum of up to 60 days in jail. He was arrested on the morning of May 4, while using a speaker system to preach at the intersection of Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue and Memorial Boulevard. Polk County Judge Robert E. Griffin heard arguments Tuesday in Lowery's case, but did not make a decision about whether to dismiss the charges against him. Assistant State Attorney Jalal Shehadeh said Lowery's preaching wasn't the issue in the case, but whether he was unreasonably loud and violated the city's noise ordinance laws. "It has nothing to do with what Mr. Lowery was actually saying," he said. The city's ordinance on noise disturbances includes amplifying a voice in a manner or to a volume that annoys someone in a residence or business. Lowery's lawyer,J. Kevin Hayslett of Clearwater, argued the Lakeland ordinance is vague and subjective as well as infringes on his client's right to freedom of expression. "The problem here is that there is no significant government interest to quell, quash or stop him from preaching," said Hayslett, who is representing Lowery for free. Lowery had been preaching at the corner for nine years without an arrest until officers one day subjectively determined he was a noise disturbance, Hayslett said. "No decibel readings were taken by the officers ... He was told to stop preaching, if he wouldn't that he would be arrested," Hayslett said. "He told them that he would continue preaching, and he was arrested." Lowery's arrest was unusual in Lakeland. In 2009, more than 2,300 noise complaints in Lakeland resulted in police giving out eight notices to appear in court but they made no arrests. At the time of Lowery's arrest, LPD Sgt. Gary Gross said his refusal to comply with officers' requests to quiet down left them no option but to arrest him. "No decibel readings were taken by the officers ... He was told to stop preaching, if he wouldn't that he would be arrested,"Hayslett said. "He told them that he would continue preaching, and he was arrested." Lowery's arrest was unusual in Lakeland. In 2009, more than 2,300 noise complaints in Lakeland resulted in police giving out eight notices to appear in court but they made no arrests. At the time of Lowery's arrest, LPD Sgt. Gary Gross said his refusal to comply with officers' requests to quiet down left them no option but to arrest him.
Tags: attorneys-lawyers-blog-clearwater:attorneys; lawyers; blog; clearwater,clearwater:clearwater,criminal-defense-attorney:criminal defense attorney,kevin-hayslett:Kevin Hayslett
Posted in criminal-defense:Criminal Defense,kevin-hayslett:Kevin Hayslett
publish
A judge is considering whether to dismiss a criminal case against a Lakeland street preacher accused of being too loud when delivering the gospel. Anthony Lowery is charged with violating the city's noise ordinance, which carries a maximum of up to 60 days in jail.
49
Feb  10,  2011
By admin

 

[stream provider=video flv=x:/carlsonmeissner.podbean.com/mf/web/r4uzwq/LU-ForceableBloodDraws.flv embed=false share=false width=350 height=287 dock=true controlbar=over bandwidth=high autostart=false /] Over the past several weeks, different States around the country have started a new strategy in the way they handle DUI arrests, especially those who are arrested for a DUI and refuse to provide a breath test. Once upon a time, it used to be that the Government was allowed to forcefully take your blood test if they could prove two things. - There was an accident with you as the driver. - There was serious bodily injury or death to another person. With the recently passed new laws things have now changed. Starting with California and in a sweeping move around the country, Law Enforcement can now hold you down against your will and forcefully draw blood from you to analyze it for alcohol content. This is what would happen. 1. Sobriety Checkpoints would be set up sporadically around the country and you just so happens to drive into one of those checkpoints. 2. Law Enforcement meets with you and makes observations to establish probable cause that you have been driving and may be under the influence of alcohol. They ask you to provide a breath sample, and you refuse them. 3. A Judge will be present at that checkpoint, and sign a warrant on-site. This warrant grants Law Enforcement to forcefully extract blood from you. Law enforcement will inform you of the warrant and ask for your cooperation in the blood draw (performed by a licensed medical personnel) if you refuse police can hold you down and have the blood drawn by medical personnel against your will. With the blood that they extract from you, if it shows that there was alcohol present during the analysis, the Government can use this as evidence in a criminal court proceeding to have you prosecuted under the offence of a DUI.

Tags: blood-alcohol-content:blood alcohol content,blood-draws:blood draws,breath-test:breath test,check-points:check points,dui:dui,road-blocks:road blocks,warrants:warrants,your-rights:your rights
Posted in
publish
48
1 2Next
Subscribe by Email