One of the most important benefits of filing for bankruptcy is that it will stop collection calls, letters, and other activities by debt collectors. This includes garnishments, lawsuits, and repossessions. When creditors or collectors do not cease collection efforts, consumers may be able to seek additional recourse in court. This article discusses some of the key protections for debtors who are being harassed over bills included in bankruptcy.

Violation of the Automatic Stay

When any person, business, or other entity files the initial petition for bankruptcy, the bankruptcy court judge enters an automatic stay. This is essentially a "safe harbor" for the debtor to catch their breath and prepare for the rest of the bankruptcy case. During the automatic stay, all collection efforts of any kind are prohibited.

The bankruptcy code provides a private cause of action for an individual injured by any willful violation of the automatic stay. The injured individual is entitled to recover "actual damages," including court costs and attorney's fees. An award of actual damages requires a showing of injury or loss stemming from acts in violation of the stay. Some examples of acts that have repeatedly supported an award for actual damages are repossession of a debtor's vehicle, locking a debtor out of a rented property, filing a lawsuit against a debtor, and continued efforts at the collection of debts owed before filing bankruptcy. Punitive damages are awarded when the creditor's collection activities are particularly egregious.

Violation of the Discharge Injunction

The final discharge order entered by the bankruptcy court judge is an injunction that releases the debtor from personal liability for specified debts. The discharge is a permanent injunction or order prohibiting the debtor's creditors from taking any form of collection action on discharged debts, including filing lawsuits, garnishing bank accounts or wages, and other collection efforts with the debtor, such as telephone calls, letters, and personal contacts.

A debtor that is harassed over discharged debts after the entry of the final discharge order can bring a contempt proceeding against the violating creditor. This is an adversary proceeding in the bankruptcy court, either brought as a motion for a contempt order, or an adversary action. The bankruptcy court judge can award an injured individual "actual damages," including court costs and attorney's fees. In appropriate cases, the creditor may be required to pay penalties or sanctions.

Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

In most courts, it is possible for a consumer to assert a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) case, when a creditor attempts to collect a debt that is discharged in bankruptcy. There are many articles about the provisions of the FDCPA, but in general, that federal law prohibits certain collection practices relating to bills that the debtor does not owe. Under the FDCPA, consumers can seek compensatory damages, statutory damages, and attorney fees.

The exception to this is Walls v. Wells Fargo, a federal appellate court opinion from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which applies as binding precedent in California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Alaska, Hawaii and Guam. That case held that the FDCPA was preempted by the bankruptcy code, and that debtors are limited to seeking remedies for violations of the discharge injunction, as discussed above.

By: Justin Baxter
Baxter & Baxter, LLP
Portland, Oregon
(503) 297-9031
http://www.baxterlaw.com

It may seem crazy that toy guns would have legal restrictions, but airguns and other toy rifles are often made to look startlingly realistic. Kids may be confused whether they're picking up their toy or a relative's loaded real rifle lying around the house. Insolent teens may point their toy guns at a police officer in a standoff, prompting them to get shot by real guns. There is a general federal gun law for toys, but the misuse of these weapons has prompted several local municipalities to create legislation of their own.

Under federal gun law, airsoft guns must be manufactured with a 6 mm orange tip at the barrel end. The packaging must inform consumers that tampering with the manufacturer logo or orange tipped barrel could result in penalties. Individuals who use these guns as though they are real firearms -- such as in a robbery or police standoff -- will be charged as if the gun were real. U.S. law stipulates that no one under 18 can purchase an airsoft gun. These laws were put in place to protect law enforcement personnel and teens from misunderstandings, injuries and deaths.

In California, the toy gun law stipulates that manufacturers must put an orange ring around the barrel to distinguish shiny toy guns from real weapons. They must also warn on their packaging that the modification of the guns may result in legal ramifications. This year, on New Year's Day, a retired Sacramento firefighter used a pellet gun to hold up a mini-mart and died in a standoff with the police.

A week later, another man was injured in Rancho Cordova when police responded to a 9-1-1 call and shot at a man holding a gun, which turned out to hold only pellets, not lethal guns ammo. In California, brandishing fake guns as real ones is punishable by a $100 fine for the first offense, $200 for the second offense and is considered a misdemeanor by the third offense.

Not all kids take local gun law edicts seriously, however. In 2006, a Longwood, Florida student painted over the orange tip and threatened students at school with his airgun. The sheriff called to the scene also thought the gun was real and, as a result, shot and killed the student.

Dangerous or not, there is no reason for kids to bring these toy guns to school. Most schools have rules sentencing the child to temporary suspension or even permanent expulsion for bringing airsoft guns on school property. Parents should ensure their kids abide by the laws to protect themselves from harm's way.

By: Mike Selvon
A whole world of information about the gun permit eagerly awaits you from Mike Selvon portal. Visit us for more insider tips on the gun license

You should never sign a release without having it reviewed by your attorney. Once you sign a release for your car accident case it is over. You can not open up again ever. If you are signing a release early on in your case that is for the damage to your car make sure it states for property damage only, but it is best to have your attorney look at it before you sign it. Let me give you an example of the devastating affect the signing of a release early on in your accident case can have.

Marie came in to my office several years ago. She had just been to an orthopedic surgeon who had told her that she was in need of back surgery. She was going to need to have a surgical fusion performed on two discs in her neck to relieve pain in that area and her shoulders that had become unbearable. After we discussed her medical condition and recommended procedures we had a discussion as to what had caused her pain. Marie told me that she had been in an auto accident a year and a half prior. She was rear ended while she was stopped at a traffic light. There was less than a thousand dollars of property damage to Marie's car. She did not feel any pain immediately following the accident. She woke up the next morning and her neck was a little stiff, but she didn't think much about it. She figured it was one of those things that would go away.

When the insurance company came out to take a look at the damage to Marie's car the adjuster took a look at the damage and gave her a check for $833.00 on the spot. The adjuster also asked Marie if she was hurt. She told him that her neck hurt a little but she thought it would go away. The insurance adjuster then offered Marie $1,000.00 for her pain and suffering. Marie needed the money and agreed. She signed some papers and got a check. Now she was in my office wanting to sue the driver that hit her and asking me what we could do about her neck surgery.

Unfortunately, there was nothing I could do for Marie. The papers she had signed were a release. It said for $1,000.00 she was releasing the driver and the insurance company from any responsibility for the accident. Once this was done Marie could never get another dime from them. Her case could not be opened up ever again. Marie did not get a fair and just settlement.

Copyright (c) 2009 Michael Schafer

By: Michael Schafer
Michael A. Schafer is an attorney who concentrates his law practice in personal injury litigation in Louisville, Kentucky. He is the author of "7 Potholes That Can Wreck Your Kentucky Accident Case and "What You Don't Know About Buying Car Insurance Can Hurt You".

There is a practice called Physician self-referral. This is when a physician refers a patient to a medical facility, which he has part ownership, financial interests or investment in. It is thought to be a conflict of interest that a physician will stand to benefit from referring patients to his medical facility for health services. This self-referral practice has a potential to be abused because the physician may over-refer patients for services that may or may not be necessary. That is why; the law was developed to prevent such self-referral practices.

The Stark Law was passed by the federal government to prevent physician self referral and does not allow a physician to refer Medicare or Medicaid patients to facilities that are owned by the physician or a member of the physician's immediate family, unless it is under exception.

Financial relationship is the direct or indirect investment or financial interest in the company or facility that specifically provides designated health services. Compensation arrangements also fall under this category. Therefore a physician cannot refer Medicare or Medicaid patients to a facility that he has financial interests in, otherwise payment can be withheld and not paid.

In the beginning, the law only pertained to physician referrals for clinic lab services. But as the law expanded, when the second version was developed, the Stark law became applicable to a long list of designated health services, which include physical therapy, occupational therapy, radiology, orthotics, outpatient prescription drugs and many more.

The Stark law only involves a referral for various services that is why the definition of referral must be clearly stated for all to understand. Referral is a physician's request for, certifying or recertifying a need, or ordering any designated health service, that is reimbursable by Medicare. This also includes a request for consultation with another physician or any test, procedure or treatment ordered by that other physician. Referral doesn't include services that are personally performed by the referring physician.

There are a few exceptions to the Stark law that fall under, physician services exception, services furnished by an organization of enrollees exception, reserved, academic medical centers exception, implants furnished in an ambulatory surgical center, in-office ancillary services exemption, intra-family rural referrals, eyeglasses and contact lenses following cataract surgery, and Erythropoietin and other dialysis-related drugs exception.

The penalties for violation of the Stark law are severe and include denial of refund, denial of payment, exclusion from the Medicare or Medicaid programs, monetary penalties in a civil court, which can include fines of $15,000 per service violation and $100,000 for each arrangement found to be a scheme for the purpose of ensuring physician referrals.

With the Stark Law in place, health care practitioners must be aware of how it affects them in their billing and treatment of patients covered by Medicare and Medicaid. It is always best, to know and be aware of the Stark law and how it affects your practice.

By: Nitin Chhoda
Nitin Chhoda has a blog at http://www.nitin360.com. Get a free physical therapy marketing system with a DVD, book on physical therapy marketing and over 8 hours of audio at marketing physical therapy and forever change the way you market your clinic.