The Law Offices of Robert J. Ross provides personalized legal services to address needs and concerns of our clients. Robert Ross draws upon 30 years of legal experience and his team of legal professionals to counsel and draft documents designed to avoid future conflicts and minimize long-term costs for clients.
We serve clients in the following areas of law:
Contact us for a no-obligation initial consultation.
About a year after a married couple sold their home, the buyers sued them for fraudulent misrepresentation The buyers contended that the sellers had falsely represented that the home had no moisture or water problems, no damage due to Hooding, and no problems with its foundation The sellers, in turn, asked a state court to declare that the carrier on their homeowners insurance policy was obligated to defend and indemnify them against the buyers’ lawsuit.
No commentsHurricane Katrina c1estroyed Merlin’s house in August of 2005 About two weeks before Katrina hit he had missed a deadline to pay a premium to keep his flood insurance policy in effect for 2005 to 2006. After Katrina, the Federal Emergency Management Agency extended a grace period of 90 days for paying premiums to keep policies in force.
No commentsIn 2005, a married couple signed a contract with a builder to purchase a unit in a condominium building that was being developed in a luxury resort community. The contract specified that the condominium would be built within two years, although the contract included a “force majeure” provision that allowed for delays under certain circumstances. The contract also specifically waived the buyers’ right to speculative, punitive, and special damages.
No commentsA section of the federal Internal Revenue Code authorizes estate tax deductions for qualifying interests in family-owned businesses. For the deduction to apply, the value of the interest in the business held by a person at the time of his or her death must exceed 50% of the total value of the person’s adjusted gross estate. This is known as the “50% liquidity test.”
No commentsShortly before he left the employment of a residential treatment center for addicted persons, an employee e-mailed some of his employer’s documents to his and his wife’s personal e-mail accounts. The employee operated two consulting businesses of his own concerning addiction rehabilitation services. The employer’s documents, including its financial statement and the names of past and current patient, at the center, could have been useful to those businesses.
No commentsRecently, the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility, and Disclosure Act of 2009 (the Credit CARD Act) went into effect. Congress saw a pressing need to protect consumers from abusive fees, penalties, interest rate increases, and other unjustified changes in the terms of credit card accounts. A new hike in the penalties for violators of the Act will provide extra incentive for compliance.
No commentsIn a variation on a familiar phrase, a federal trial court effectively has ruled that, in the context of a website posting customers’ reviews of their retail buying experiences, “you can’t blame the message board.”
No commentsAzad and Anoop were friends and frequent golf partners. The friendship was no doubt strained when they became adversaries in litigation arising from an injury to Azad during a golf outing. A shot struck by Anoop hit Azad in the eye, causing a serious injury. There was a factual dispute as to whether, when he saw his wayward shot heading for Azad, Anoop yelled “fore” or some other warning, as golf etiquette would dictate. Anoop said he did call out something, while Azad and another witness said they heard no warning at all.
No commentsA permanently disabled Medicaid recipient residing in a nursing home challenged an informal rule issued by the federal Department of Health and Human Services which requires that, for purposes of determining the benefits due to a Medicaid-eligible individual, states must consider income placed in a Special Needs Trust for that individual’s benefit. (Medicaid provides joint federal and state funding of medical care for individuals who cannot afford to pay their own medical costs.) The challenged rule effectively prevents Medicaid recipients from using Special Needs Trusts to shelter their monthly Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) income from certain Medicaid determinations. In the case before the court, the plaintiff’s legal guardian had created a Special Needs Trust on the plaintiff’s behalf and had been depositing into it the plaintiff’s monthly SSDI benefits, minus some income deductions that were not at issue.
No commentsTheodore entered into an installment contract with a corporate creditor for the purchase of a new automobile. A few years later, he defaulted on his installment payments, and the creditor repossessed the vehicle. Not long after that, Theodore filed for bankruptcy in federal bankruptcy court.
No comments