Large Independent Law Firms

Are you looking for a independent law firm? What are large law firms and how they work? We will let you know the answers in this article.

A law firm is a business entity formed by one or more lawyers to engage in the practice of law. The primary service provided by a law company is to advise clients (individuals or corporations) about their legal rights and responsibilities, and to represent their clients in civil or criminal cases, business transactions and other matters in which legal assistance is sought.

Law firms range widely in size. The smallest firms are sole practitioners (lawyers practicing alone), who form the vast majority of lawyers in nearly all countries.

Large law companies usually have separate litigation and transactional departments. The transactional department advises clients and handles transactional legal work, such as drafting contracts, handling necessary legal applications and filings, and evaluating and ensuring compliance with relevant law; while the litigation department represents clients in court and handle necessary matters (such as discovery and motions filed with the court) throughout the process of litigation.

UK-based firms are the most prestigious and powerful in the world, and dominate the international market for legal services.

In looking for new member firms, legal network like Laworld seeks mid sized, independent firms which are well established in their local jurisdictions. These firms communicate electronically, and cover the main fields of commercial work. Every law organisation has decided a particular.

Any law company/firm can be the member of a law network. There are many legal networks available and they have their own criteria. Join the legal network and your law firm will be recognized globally.

The Other Laws of the Universe

There has been a great deal of publicity about the Law of Attraction and how it can magically create what you want in your life. Although the Law of Attraction is the dominant law in bringing about change, there really is more to getting what you want than just “ask and receive”. The Law of Attraction is only one of the laws in the universe. These laws work in harmony and we would cease to exist without them. Once we understand them we can use them in our everyday lives to our benefit.

There are seven primary Laws of the Universe that maintain flow and order. These laws cannot be changed or broken as they are universal and infinite. Even God must abide by them or chaos would ensue throughout the universe. You can choose to ignore these laws, but they will still impact every aspect of your life.

1. The Law of Mentalism & Perpetual Transmution: Everything you see around you began as a thought. Thought energy is a very potent creative force. Our thoughts always precede our actions. There is no destiny which we did not first conceive mentally. We are given the power to create our thoughts and the power to make decisions that affect every aspect of our lives. Be careful what you think about, you just might get it.

2. The Law of Correspondence & Relativity: All things are relative. Everything and everyone is connected and everything we see and experience is based on our perception. In other words, something we dislike will be greatly appreciated by someone else. Something we don’t do well someone else will do proficiently, and vice versa. When we compare ourselves to someone else it can affect our self esteem. There is no comparison, only perception.

3. The Law of Vibration & Attraction: Everything in the universe vibrates, nothing sits still. It is this vibration that connects us with every living thing. Like attracts like. This is why when you feel sad or depressed you seem to run into people and situations that “make the matter worse”. You attract what you think about. When you feel good about your life you attract other positive people and situations that improve your life experience.

4. The Law of Polarity: Everything has an opposite. There would be no positive without negative. No top without bottom, no up without down. If something bad happens in your life something good always come from it. It may take a while to recognize, but it is there.

5. The Law of Rhythm: Everything is constantly moving to and fro, in and out. When one space is emptied another is filled. You see this rhythm in the tides, the rising and setting of the sun, the cycle of life. Nothing remains the same. You cannot feel good 100% of the time, nor can you feel sad 100% of the time. It is the lows that let us appreciate the highs. You cannot know happiness without sadness. When you are in a down swing you can always change your focus mid-stream and begin the pendulum swinging the other way.

6. The Law of Cause & Effect: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. There is no such thing as chance and nothing happens by accident. Everything that happens in life was caused by another action. This is why when someone hurts you, you don’t need to react by lowering yourself to their standards. They will get what is coming to them. It is commonly referred to as Karma and you can relax knowing it is being taken care of.

7. The Law of Gender: Everything that exists in the universe is either male or female. Each male has an inner female and each female has an inner male. Both are necessary for creation and regeneration in all things whether they be animal, mineral or plant. This law also dictates that all seeds, physical or spiritual, have a gestation period before they manifest. In other words, if you ask God or the universe for something, it cannot be created in an instant. It takes time for all the necessary elements to come together.

When Does One Become a Criminal by Obeying the Law?

Henry David Thoreau presented several radical ideas in his mid-nineteenth century writing “Civil Disobedience”. The work, published under the title “Resistance to Civil Government” puts forth several profound assertions and questions concerning the law, man and the government. One key subject that Thoreau focused on was whether just men should continue to support the government by complacency with no regard to moral reason? Should laws that are unjust be adhered to, or should they be viewed as moot? His ideas seem like common sense to me, yet his clear and practical ideas would be considered a capital offense in some oppressive nations. I believe that Henry David Thoreau’s ideas are sound in theory. Society has been conditioned to accept ever-increasing taxation without contest except for superficial discourse—how far can we, as a society, be pushed, pulled, punched and sucked while remaining complacent? At what point does one become a co-conspirator of oppression by passive acceptance?

Thoreau gave three general responses one may choose from when faced with the question of whether or not to follow unjust laws. He asks if we should blindly follow all that the government asks of us without question, should voice contempt for the law yet still remain within its bounds, or “Shall we transgress them at once” (Thoreau, 144). I believe it is always within the rights of the individual to subvert authority on the matter of adherence to unjust laws. While I do not share Thoreau’s contempt for those who passively oppose, I find that once the scope of injustices instilled by a government as law becomes brutal, all-encompassing, and deaf to reason and redress, by following the law, one becomes a criminal of the higher laws of morality, reason, and nature.

Thoreau holds contempt for those who voice concern for unjust laws yet comply with them. Thoreau reasons that these people view law violators as hurting their cause resulting in their motivation for adherence (Thoreau, 144). When the severity of the injustice merely extends to the fringes of our freedoms and prosperity, I find that it is the fear of repercussions for breaking the law that causes compliance with moderates.

Unjust laws with far-reaching encroachments should be actively challenged. I share a source of inspiration that Thoreau experienced—spending the night in jail. Few things can so rapidly and thoroughly change one’s pace and train of thought. Also sharing in this experience and views concerning laws against reason and parity is Dr. Martin Luther King. In his renowned writing “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” Dr. King elaborates on the philosophy of compliance to unjust laws. King holds that freedoms are never voluntarily surrendered by the ruling and will only come by insistence. Relating to the horrors that oppressed African-Americans suffered, King proclaims, “There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over, and men are no longer willing to be plunged into the abyss of despair” (King). Dr. King lends support to Thoreau’s frustration with the resenting conformer; the practice seems to clearly strike a nerve in both men. On this matter King says,

“I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Councilor or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to ‘order’ than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: ‘I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action’; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a ‘more convenient season.’ Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will”. (King)

It has been incorporated into American law for the ability of the people to invalidate unjust laws through the process of jury nullification. This philosophy is deep-rooted in American policy and by its practice has done more to arrest the development of tyranny than any other American policy. The United States Supreme Court’s first Chief Justice said, “The Jury has a right to judge both the law as well as the fact in controversy” (Jay). The power of the people to void unjust laws is suppressed by the government in its struggle for control.

In the infamous case, U.S. v Dougherty, 473 F.2d 1113, 1139 (1972), the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld the district court’s ruling forbidding the mentioning to the jury that “moral compulsion” or “choice of the lesser evil” “constituted a legal defense” (US v. Dougherty). In Vin Suprynowicz’s “The Undisputed Power of the Jury to Acquit” he quotes AP writer David Kravets who says that under a 1998 California “snitch” policy “judges routinely order jurors to inform the court if a juror is not applying the law during deliberations” (Suprynowicz). Jurors found by the court not to be basing their opinions on the literal interpretation of the law are often replaced by alternates. If this policy becomes suppressed to a level that completely prevents jury nullification then the final barrier to stop unjust laws with ordered legal procedure is lost. The less one has to lose, the less one has to fear. And when one is stepped on, to the point of breaking, along the way, most will come to point where compliance’s benefits yield less than resistance’s.

Once the law becomes brutal and barbaric in its policy or enforcement, enforcers, and those who live within its bounds, become criminals in the eyes of God, moral reason, natural law, and international treaty. “The Justice Trial”, United States of America v. Alstötter et al, one of “The Nuremberg Trials”, highlights this point in the prosecution of judges who issued orders of murderous oppressions in compliance with directives of law issued by Adolph Hitler. The majority of the Nazi judges were found guilty at this trial including Franz Schlegelberger who provided lengthy rationalizations at his trial for his continued service as a Nazi judge even after it became apparent to him the abhorrent reality of Nazi law. Despite Schlegelberger’s somewhat rational pleas, the Military Tribunal found that by deciding his rulings in accordance to Nazi law, despite his preference against Nazi atrocities against humanity, these favorable rulings for the Nazi party in prior court rulings lent credence and support to the resulting depravity that lead the torture and deaths of political dissidents. Consequently, Schlegelberger was found guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity (Nuremberg).

Henry David Thoreau chose to separate himself from the state. He reasoned that it was improper for him to wait for change and to patiently pay homage to unjust laws. He found breaking the most unjust laws were necessary endeavors, resulting in his refusing to comply with the law forbidding assisting fugitive slaves and in his refusal to pay a mandatory tax used to support what he viewed as an unjust war against Mexico. When an unjust law’s effects lead to tyranny and wanton treatment of human rights, it is the duty of just people to actively resist all efforts of such tyranny. The more atrocious a regime, the less compliance it takes for one to become criminal by adhering to the law of such a regime.

© 2005 – David Oppenheimer –Performance Impressions

Works Cited

Jay, John. Jury Rights. 1789. Fully Informed Jury Association of South Carolina. 6 Nov. 2005
Jury Rights – PatriotNetwork.info

King Jr., Dr. Martin Luther. Letter from a Birmingham Jail. 16 Apr. 1963. University of Pennslyvania. 6 Nov. 2005 www.africa.upen.edu

The Nuremberg Trials: The Justice Trial. Ed. Doug
Linder. 1948. University of Missouri-Kansas City
School of Law. 6 Nov. 2005

Suprynowicz, Vin. The Undisputed Power of the Jury to Acquit. 2002. Loompanics. 6 Nov. 2005

[http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Nuremberg/Alstoetter.htm#U.S.A.%20v.%20ALSTOETTER%20ET%20AL%20
(The%20Justice%20Cases):]Suprynowicz,http://www.loompanics.com

Thoreau, Henry David. “Civil Disobedience” Resistance to Civil Government . 1849. A World of Ideas. Ed. Lee A. Jacobus. Boston:Bedford/St. Martins, 2006.

United States v. Dougherty. 1972. Maxwell School of
Syracuse University. 6 Nov. 2005.
U.S. v. Dougherty

Supporting Education Through Mid-Day Meals

Many children in India (belonging to low-income families) find themselves thrown into the real-world battles quite early in life. In a country where Right to Education is a law, as many as 126,66,377 children work in various sectors only to earn their meal for the day. Yet, a change has been brewing steadily where children today are opting education over work.

Every Child Must be Educated

Earlier, many families considered a child to be an additional resource to fetch income to feed the family and to feed the children. This has considerably changed over the years. Thanks to the initiatives and schemes by the Government of India, many children are now encouraged to attend school. Additionally, when the children started to benefit from mid-day meal schemes in schools, they started bringing along their siblings which solved the problem of most parents.

The Changes over the Years

The 1998 National Census of India estimated the total number of children workers, aged 4-15, to be at 12.6 million, out of a total child population of 253 million in 5-14 age group. The 2011 National Census of India found the total number of working children, aged 5-14, to be at 4.35 million, and the total child population to be 259.64 million in that age group. So yes, the numbers have declined but the problem of putting children to school remains to be solved.

A National Policy on Child Labour was formulated in 1987 and ever since, the government has tried to ensure children attend school. One of the more remarkable steps of the government has been the enactment of ‘The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act’ or Right to Education Act also known as RTE. It was enacted on August 4 2009, which describes the modalities of the importance of free and compulsory education for children between 6 and 14 in India under Article 21A of the Indian Constitution. In addition, the government set off to accelerate the various policies about children’s education in its existing system.

One such step was the launching of Mid-Day Meal Scheme in 2004. This scheme has seen several reforms over the years with a view to include all of government schools in the system. The primary objective of Mid-Day Meal Programme is to feed one wholesome meal to children in order to encourage them to come to school. The government has tied up with non-governmental organisations in order to implement MDMS efficiently in schools to reach out to as many children as possible.

Benefits of Mid-Day Meal Programme

Children are now encouraged to attend school and this has so far proved to be a win-win for parents belonging to economically weaker sections. The parents are now realising that they can feed the children by relying on school lunch programmes. The Mid Day Meal Scheme has benefitted the children in more ways than one. Properly-fed children feel more motivated to work hard on their academics, experience an overall physical and mental growth and understand the importance of having ambitions for future.

The impact on the lives of the children has been tremendous ever since the organisations has implemented its Mid-Day Meal Programme. There are stories of hope where children have been benefitted for real in the mission of Food for Education. You can be part of this amazing cause of encouraging children to attend school. Sponsor a child today!