Is That Even Legal?

Send us a textYour mom passes and suddenly women from around the neighborhood are showing up at your dad's door with casseroles. Soon, dad marries one of these "casserole ladies." Fine. But after a few months or short years, she begins to tell dad that YOU are evil and should be disinherited. He acquiesces. Now he has passed, and you and your siblings get nothing, according to his will. Is That Even Legal?Casserole Ladies, AB Splits, Beneficiary Designations and ERISA...it's a recipe for complexity unless you know the right lawyer.  In this episode, guest host and estate planning and trust administration lawyer Sarah Clifford interviews Bob, who's expertise is probate law.So often after death someone in the family is left disappointed or destitute because they didn't understand how the law worked. From a widow who loses half her house, to the children who watch the "casserole lady." get rich while they are left with nothing.  Bob has seen it all, and he has some tips on what you can do to understand and control who gets the dough.

Send us a textWhat happens when the iconic term "superheroes" loses its trademark status? Attorney Taylor Barlow from Davis Miles joins us to uncover the intriguing case of DC and Marvel's once jointly-owned trademark and how it fell into the public domain due to genericide. We explore the dynamic world of trademarks, revealing their role as essential source identifiers beyond just logos and names—extending to scents and sounds, such as Hasbro’s Play-Doh aroma and NBC’s famous chimes. Taylor shares fascinating examples of how trademarks shape brand identity and even touch on the potential for trademarking personal names if used commercially.But the conversation doesn't stop there. We expose the notorious practices of "trademark bullies" like Monster and Apple, who use their financial clout to intimidate smaller businesses through costly legal battles. Hear about the struggles of entrepreneurs when faced with such aggressive tactics, including a revealing UK case against Monster. Taylor offers strategic advice for those caught in similar situations, highlighting the importance of being proactive and considering options like seeking declaratory judgments to fend off corporate giants. Get ready for a compelling discussion on the complexities of trademark law and the strategies entrepreneurs can employ to protect their brand identity.

Send us a textCould you lose $400,000 to a sophisticated email scam? Join us as we uncover the alarming rise of wire fraud in the real estate industry with Angelika Dobler, an experienced litigation and appellate attorney specializing in real estate litigation. Angelica shares a distressing case where a buyer fell victim to a sophisticated scam that led to a massive financial loss. With FBI statistics pointing to a significant surge in these types of crimes, we discuss how scammers spoof email addresses and exploit the quick pace of real estate transactions to deceive unsuspecting buyers and sellers. Learn why the real estate sector is particularly vulnerable and understand the critical need for heightened awareness and preventive measures to protect your investments.Discover actionable best practices for preventing wire fraud from disrupting your real estate transactions. Angelica and I emphasize the importance of due diligence, secure verification methods, and face-to-face conversations. We also delve into the role of secure servers and consistent procedures in safeguarding against fraud. Additionally, we explore the potential for insurance coverage and the immediate steps victims should take to mitigate their losses, such as contacting their bank's fraud department and the FBI. This episode is packed with practical advice and insights that could save you from becoming the next victim of wire fraud. Tune in to protect your hard-earned money and ensure your real estate transactions are secure.

Send us a textCould your lack of estate planning be setting your loved ones up for a legal nightmare? Join us as we unravel the critical importance of having a robust estate plan, featuring insights from top asset protection attorney Ike Devji. Through the heart-wrenching story of Jay Leno and his wife, who suffers from dementia, we highlight the dire consequences of neglecting basic estate planning measures like revocable living trusts and powers of attorney. Our discussion sheds light on the emotional and financial turmoil Leno faced due to inadequate preparation, (he has since been granted conservatorship) emphasizing the essential steps high-net-worth individuals - and most everyone else -  must take to safeguard their families in order to preserve wealth.Do you know that the same types of principles impacting Leno's estate impact you too? Dive into our hypothetical scenario of planning Jay Leno's estate, where we navigate the intricacies of ensuring that his final wishes are honored amid potential family disputes and diminished capacity. We stress the importance of rock-solid legal documentation, from healthcare directives to living wills, and reflect on how Leno's extraordinary career and unique car collection influence his estate planning decisions. Tune in to discover the pivotal steps that can protect your legacy and spare your loved ones from unnecessary legal challenges.

Send us a textUncover the legal maze of adverse possession and residency issues with a spotlight on protecting your property. Bob delves into the distinctions between simply trespassing and taking up residence, stressing the urgency of quick action in tenant-friendly states. We also discuss the peculiar challenges snowbirds face upon returning to their Arizona homes, potentially occupied by squatters. Gain essential insights into preventive measures to safeguard your property during lengthy absences, offering valuable knowledge for both property owners and legal aficionados alike.Curious about the fine line between squatting and trespassing? Discover the intricacies of squatting laws, featuring attorney Bob Sewell, as we humorously tackle Sarah Clifford's playful attempt to "claim" the sixth floor of our office. We dissect how squatting regulations vary across regions, including an intriguing look at a high-profile case involving Gordon Ramsay's London restaurant. Bob highlights the legal obstacles landlords encounter in Arizona, emphasizing the importance of navigating the court system and bypassing self-help measures to resolve these disputes effectively.

Send us a textCan TikTok's data practices be trusted, or are there deeper privacy risks lurking behind its addictive interface? Privacy expert K Royal joins us to dissect the critical question, “Is that even legal?” This episode uncovers the sophisticated algorithms driving TikTok's uncanny content personalization and the significant privacy risks entailed, such as potential keystroke logging and extensive data access. We compare TikTok's practices to other social media giants, exploring why these concerns have led to global governmental crackdowns and what it means for user privacy and data security.We also tackle the contentious issue of banning TikTok in the United States, balancing national security concerns with First Amendment rights. This debate has vital implications for small businesses, artists, and influencers who depend on the platform. Could a comprehensive federal privacy law offer a better solution than an outright ban?  Royal weighs in with her expert insights, underscoring the urgent need for robust legislative action to protect consumer privacy across all media companies.  Listen in for an enlightening discussion that highlights the necessity for Congress to prioritize consumer data security in the digital age.

Send us a textWhat if the future of your career hinged on a single legal clause? Join us as we unpack the complexities of non-compete agreements with attorney Dave Williams, an authority on administrative law and non-compete clauses. Listen to an eye-opening real-world cases that underscore the complex balance between how these agreements can protect businesses and how they also can potentially stifle innovation and competition. With the Federal Trade Commission’s recent move to invalidate non-competes nationwide, affecting 30 million U.S. workers, we question what the long term impact will be on the long-standing balance between safeguarding business interests and fostering a competitive job market.This episode dives deep into not just the legal ramifications but also the human impact of non-competes. We explore how these agreements can either protect or hinder workers, especially in smaller communities where job opportunities are limited. To navigate this shifting landscape, we discuss alternative measures like non-solicitation and non-disclosure agreements, which businesses might find more enforceable. Gain insights on how to strategically protect confidential information and prepare for the possible new FTC rules that could reshape employment contracts forever. Don’t miss this essential conversation that blends legal expertise with practical advice for business owners and employees alike.

Send us a textBob is fascinated by the balance between the need for regulation and the vast growth of the administrative state. We are also fascinated by just how much the political winds impact the law...even though we like to believe it is solid and hard to change.  Look no further than the 88-year-old National Labor Relations Act, and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) which it created. It is now under fire at the Supreme Court.A product of the New Deal, the NLRB has yet to face such a challenge in the modern era, but major companies like SpaceX, Starbucks, and Trader Joe's have marshaled a constitutional challenge to the legitimacy of its composition and enforcement activities, hoping to eventually find a sympathetic ear before the U.S. Supreme Court, currently controlled by a conservative majority. These arguments range from challenges to the board's impartiality to issues concerning the separation of powers doctrine, given the inability to remove board members except “for cause,” to violations of due process and deprivation of the right to trial by jury under the Fifth and Seventh Amendments, respectively. And given the Biden NLRB's aggressive policy and enforcement prerogatives, these arguments have begun to become commonplace defenses against its actions.John Balitis knows the NLRB. He knows what it is like to "walk in" and face an administrative investigation/prosecution/enforcement/judicial and appellate body...ALL IN ONE!His prediction? Somehow the board...which impacts virtually every workplace...is likely going to be a different animal once the Supreme Court rules.  How different?  What does it mean for employers?  Employees?Take a listen now!

Send us a textTHE SUPREME COURT WILL SOON DECIDE: If a social media censures you for your viewpoint - does that violate the First Amendment? If laws tell Social Media companies they must publish your viewpoint...is the company's First Amendment rights violated?We all say we want free speech. But if you own a private company can the government tell you what it can and cannot post?  Are social media companies the public square...common carriers...or...private companies that can choose their own content?That is the question before the Supreme Court. In this episode, Bob talks with Supreme Court scholar Eugene Volokh:Facts of the caseThe State of Texas enacted HB 20 to regulate large social media platforms, such as Facebook, X (formerly known as Twitter), and YouTube. The law purports to prohibit large social media platforms from censoring speech based on the viewpoint of the speaker.NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association filed a lawsuit against the Attorney General of Texas, challenging two provisions of the law as unconstitutional: (1) Section 7, which prohibits viewpoint-based censorship of users’ posts, except for content that incites criminal activity or is unlawful. (2) Section 2, which requires platforms to disclose how they moderate and promote content, publish an "acceptable use policy," and maintain a complaint-and-appeal system for their users.The district court issued a preliminary injunction, holding that Section 7 and Section 2 are facially unconstitutional. The court argued that social media platforms have some level of editorial discretion protected by the First Amendment, and HB 20 interferes with that discretion. On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed, rejecting the idea that large corporations have a “freewheeling” First Amendment right to censor what people say. It reasoned that HB 20 does not regulate the platforms’ speech but protects other people’s speech and regulates the platforms’ conduct.Question:Do Texas HB 20’s provisions prohibiting social media platforms from censoring users’ content and imposing stringent disclosure requirements violate the First Amendment?Our guest:Eugene Volokh teaches First Amendment law and a First Amendment amicus brief clinic at UCLA School of Law, where he has also often taught copyright law, criminal law, tort law, and a seminar on firearms regulation policy.Before coming to UCLA, he clerked for Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the U.S. Supreme Court and for Judge Alex Kozinski on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.Volokh is the author of the textbooks The First Amendment and Related Statutes (6th ed. 2016), and Academic Legal Writing (5th ed. 2013), as well as over 90 law review articles. He is a member of The American Law Institute, a member of the American Heritage Dictionary Usage Panel, and the founder and coauthor of The Volokh Conspiracy, a leading legal blog. His law review articles have been cited by opinions in eight Supreme Court cases and several hundred court opinions in total, as well as several thousand scholarly articles.

Send us a textIn Arizona, the 'Gilbert Goons'  have grabbed headlines - sending fear and concern throughout a traditional suburban community - a case where teens are charged with violently attacking others.When things like this occur, one of the overlooked aspects of the legal system is this: THE LIABILITY OF THE PARENTS.The assets of the parents of the alleged assailants are often highly at risk.  Is That Even Legal?Meet Asset Protection guru Ike Devji. His clients have seven billion dollars under his guiding hand.  In his interview with the incredible Bob Sewell,  Here are some highlights:From the moment you become a parent, your risk profile changes, and it is never too soon to consider asset protection.Often, the children of affluent parents have access to choices and property that can elevate risk for their parents.Parent's should always we aware of their insurance coverages, their business interests and risks and explore legal advice on how to protect their assets.Your child may never cause an accident, join a group of "goons," or otherwise incur large financial risk for your household, but those who are prepared, preserve their wealth, says Ike.

Send us a textThe rules appear uneven. The outcomes seem almost random. But what happens when a doctor, a dentist, a nurse, etc., makes a mistake...or is negligent? Can they practice or do they go to jail?  In this episode, you are going to hear some wild stories... If you are a professional...what do you do? If you are a consumer, how do you protect yourself?Bob explores the razor-thin line between human error and negligence in the healthcare industry with professional license lawyer and industry expert David Williams. We take you on a journey through the complexities of healthcare licensing, where the fate of professionals hinges on the decisions of regulatory bodies. The contrast between an Arizona dentist who maintained his practice despite a history of complaints, and a Tennessee nurse facing severe penalties for a single mistake sets the table for our conversation.We tackle the arduous process healthcare workers endure to obtain and retain their licenses, and the psychological warfare they face under the scrutinizing eyes of licensing boards. Our guests shed light on the self-corrective mechanisms within the industry, revealing the delicate balance between upholding patient safety and supporting the well-being of medical practitioners.What do you do if you are a practitioner and you have a complaint? Make a mistake?  How can consumers protect themselves, report mistakes?Listen now.

Send us a textNo matter what side of the political spectrum you fall. And whether you think the former president should be on the 2024 ballot or not. Tomorrow's Supreme Court consideration of the Insurrection Clause is historic. We could not let it happen without taking a look.In this interview, Bob interviews constitutional expert Ilya Somin, a professor at George Mason University. What follows is an engaging exploration into the 14th Amendment's insurrection clause and its potential repercussions for Donald Trump's political future. As the Supreme Court deliberates, we dissect the amendment's historical roots, established to curtail post-Civil War insurrectionists, and scrutinize its relevance in the wake of the January 6th Capitol siege. The conversation traverses the terrain of past rebellions and posits how the Capitol breach stands in comparison, offering an intricate understanding of the constitutional definitions at play.  We take no side in this fight and the professor's views are his own.Navigating the murky waters of what constitutes presidential support for an insurrection, we scrutinize Trump's actions on the fateful day, incljuding the implications of his response—or lack thereof—to the Capitol breach. The episode peels back the layers of constitutional ambiguity, addressing the complexities of determining engagement in insurrection, and how these gray areas resonate with our democracy's fundamental themes. Through Somin's expert (and, admittedly partisan) lens, we shine a light on the bearing this case could have, considering the unique dynamics of a former president and current political figurehead's eligibility for office.Focusing on the electoral eligibility mechanisms, the dialogue turns to the influential role of Secretaries of State and the judiciary's part in protecting our electoral sanctity. Through historical references like the challenge to Ted Cruz's eligibility, we emphasize the importance of checks and balances within our legal system. The episode wraps with insights into the potential for the highest court to interpret both legal and factual findings, particularly in defining insurrection—and what it means to engage in it. For those drawn to the interplay of law and democracy, this episode is an invitation to witness a deep-dive into one of the most pressing legal debates of our time.

Send us a textCovenant marriage recently made headlines when the new Speaker of the House took his position in Washington, D.C. He has one, and so the media tried to figure out just what it was.They painted covenant marriage as quirky and as weird as they could make it, but the law’s roots are based in a good intention...try to stem the tide of divorces across the land. "No-Fault" divorce laws are blamed by some for the dwindling permanence of what once was one of our most cherished relationships...the institution of marriage. So, "covenant marriages," were invented in some states as a legal way to try to “help” couples stay together, with the state getting involved. If you made marriage covenants, are you in a covenant marriage?  Listen in to find out.As with most laws Bob examines, there are lots of unintended consequences when the government tries to solve something through laws. Divorce law guru and law firm partner Melissa Benson makes her debut on the show to answer the questions. Covenant Marriage: Do you have one? Should you have one? What happens if it blows up?

Send us a textWhen cities lets homeless camps spiral out of control...who are they serving? A constitutional scholar and law professor is suing big cities on the premise of nuisance laws...and he is winning. In one instance, his action cleared a massive homeless encampment in Phoenix, known as "the zone." Listen in as Bob spars with our special guest, constitutional expert and author, Ilan Wurman. We delve headfirst into the legal complexities and human disaster is homelessness and inadvertent implications of old court decisions.Listen as we expose what the court found was a city's negligence in enforcing laws against public camping and sleeping, leading to the unfortunate living conditions of up to a thousand individuals, struggling with issues ranging from drugs and violence to human waste. Discover how public nuisance lawsuits are being used to address the crisis without adding to the criminalization of homelessness.  We are reminded the pervasive role of addiction and mental illness in the homeless scenario.Will we see nuisance lawsuits nationwide?  Gain insights into this ripple effect and the fierce stance of organizations like the ACLU against the removal of homeless camps. We discuss if it's high time for cities to prioritize the well-being of their residents over lawsuit fears. Spoiler alert, it is.This is a cutting edge episode you don't want to miss.

Send us a textIt does not matter what your political position may be or how you vote. No matter your views, you probably feel that there is WAY TOO MUCH CORRUPTION  - those who use taxpayer dollars to enrich themselves.Is That EVEN LEGAL?  Of course not.  The question is, what can be done about it. Can the law curtail corruption?In this episode, join Bob as we reach into the Mississippi Attorney General's race, where one candidate has made fighting public corruption a hallmark of her campaign. We don't endorse candidates, and we certainly offer equal time to Greta Martin's opponent, but Mississippi's high profile case involving the use (or misuse) of $90 million earmarked for needy families - YOUR TAX DOLLARS, was a good exhibit A of what corruption looks like. Brace yourselves as we delve into a shocking tale of corruption that has rocked the state of Mississippi! It's a microcosm of corruption country-wide. Imagine a system where the rule of law is upheld and those in power are held accountable? Is it a fantasy...or can Attorney Generals actually make it happen?Give a listen as we venture into the thorny terrain of prosecution and jurisdiction in Mississippi, probing how concurrent jurisdiction could be employed to prosecute those implicated in this sordid saga. We ponder the potential of unearthing more crimes beyond the $77 million fraud and question why the state's political system has been allowed to operate  seemingly unchecked for so long. Related reading: https://apnews.com/article/mississippi-welfare-scandal-brett-favre-dd447fa50d4e67b963f59de42fe5dc3fhttps://apnews.com/article/sports-legal-proceedings-scandals-brett-favre-mississippi-d0ae88cc6727fd74b4686fb09d9e7dcc

Send us a textJoin us in a deeper exploration as amazing New Mexico Estate Planning lawyer Stephanie Woods and I delve into the convoluted legalities surrounding the true story of Michael Oher, whose life journey inspired the Hollywood blockbuster, 'The Blind Side.' In this episode, we critically examine the peculiar conservatorship held by the Tuohys - his guardians, and the baffling circumstances surrounding his supposed "adoption." Recent developments have emerged post our recording, shedding more light on this complex tale.The narrative takes a new turn as a Tennessee judge recently announced the termination of the conservatorship agreement between Michael Oher and the Memphis couple who had taken him in during his high school years. While this decision marks the end of the conservatorship established in 2004, it opens a Pandora's box of financial disputes which continue to linger. The heart of the matter lies in Oher's claims that the Tuohys had misrepresented the conservatorship as an adoption, leading him to believe in a familial bond that legally, never existed. Further, he alleges that this misrepresentation allowed the Tuohys to control his finances, using his name, image, and likeness for their enrichment.Listen in as we navigate through the legal intricacies of conservatorships, adult adoptions, and the significant implications surrounding solid estate planning. Michael's case underscores the potential financial repercussions when such legal arrangements are not adequately addressed or understood. Despite the termination of the conservatorship, Michael's fight for a thorough accounting and rightful compensation of the finances earned off his name and story forges on, unraveling more questions on the ethical and legal aspects of conservatorships and adult adoptions.

Send us a textEver wondered what happens when a loved one passes away without a will and the repercussions it can have on a family? Join us as we shed light on the little-known term 'intestacy' and unravel the bitter dispute between the sons of music legend Aretha Franklin over her multi-million-dollar estate. Our esteemed host Bob Sewell, plays guest this time and the amazing David Williams is our host. Both are partners in the law firm of Davis Miles. Bob offers his legal expertise on the topic, giving us a firsthand account of how intestacy laws work and the role of the state government in such matters. In the second part of our conversation, we explore the often-underestimated power of mediation in resolving family disputes. Bob shares his rich experiences as a mediator, enlightening us on how this often overlooked tool can be used to not only resolve disputes but also preserve treasured family relationships. We delve into the role of the mediator and why it's better to settle disputes rather than leaving the decision to a judge. Bob's gives a unique perspective on family disputes and how they can be managed while minimizing the emotional trauma they often inflict on relationships. Tune in, as we navigate the intertwining worlds of family, law, and money.

Send us a textFrom the Society of Human Resource Management (SHRM):"Gerald Groff, a former postal worker, sued the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) for failing to accommodate his religious practice. Groff is an evangelical Christian who observes a Sunday Sabbath, meaning he doesn't work on that day. Although the USPS does not deliver mail on Sundays, it does have a contract to deliver packages for Amazon, which includes Sunday deliveries. The USPS sought co-workers to voluntarily cover Groff's Sunday shifts and imposed progressive discipline for his absences. Eventually, Groff resigned."He lost his lawsuit twice, with lower courts ruling that the Postal Service accommodating his Sunday off would cause undue hardship for his employer and co-workers. However, the Supreme Court had a different perspective.Justice Alito wrote: "A hardship that is attributable to employee animosity towards a particular religion, to religion in general, or to the very notion of accommodating religious practice, cannot be considered undue. Bias or hostility towards a religious practice or accommodation cannot supply a defense."Employers, take note: Your bar for religious accommodation may have just been raised significantly.Delve into the intricate world of employment law with our guest, Jennifer Wasserman, an authority in the field, as we dissect landmark decisions and their profound implications for religious accommodation in the workplace. Ever wondered how the 1964 Civil Rights Act is interpreted in the context of religious accommodation? You're about to get the details.In this insightful discussion, Jennifer and your affable, unique host Bob Sewell analyze the Supreme Court case of Groff v. United States Postal Service, revealing the layers of legal expectations for employers. We also highlight the role of seniority systems in shift changes and the concept of 'reasonable accommodation.'

Send us a textIs there a mental health crisis drowning the legal profession? Is there a higher level of depression, anxiety and alcoholism among those licensed to defend our laws and freedom than other areas of the population? If so, does it impact society as a whole?And...what can be done?Our guest, Claire Parsons, an employment attorney and mental health expert. Claire weighs in on the intricate ways attorneys grapple with mental health issues, and the crucial role of self-care. With Claire's expertise, we navigate the powerful tools of mindfulness and compassion, revealing how they can bolster lawyers' capabilities and manage stress whilst dealing with challenging individuals. The conversation takes an even more critical turn as we uncover the silent enemy of isolation and substance abuse that lurks behind many legal professionals' facades. The magnitude of these issues on an individual's mental health is substantial, emphasizing the pressing need for open conversations and support within the legal community and beyond. Because, as our listeners know...the law impacts everyone. As advocates for mental wellness, we bring to you the Surgeon General's guidelines for workplace mental health, underlining the importance of a supportive work environment where employees feel safe to seek help. The power of social support in handling stress is undeniable, so listen and get involved in easing this challenge.

Send us a textWhat if our daily interactions with AI could expose our deepest secrets? Imagine having a conversation with an artificial intelligence system that feels like you're talking to a real person. Join us, Bob Sewell and Mike Carey, as we explore the fascinating and sometimes frightening realm of AI and its potential effects on our privacy and security.We'll also discuss the future of antitrust laws, monopolies, and maintaining fair competition in the marketplace. Plus, we'll touch on the mental health crisis in the legal profession and the urgent need for change. And don't miss our quest to find the surf law expert who can help us navigate the intriguing world of surf law in beach towns across the globe. Remember, we're not offering legal advice, but we're here to help you make sense of this complex world.