Things have been really looking up for Teresa Giudice late, but now another tax lien will have her scrambling for money once again. This star of The Real Housewives of New Jersey may never be able to pay off her debts the way that things are going lately. Radar Online shared the details about the new tax lien put on Teresa that has her working to pay something else off again. A Morris County clerk confirmed that the case is still open June 15, 2016, for $219,804.38. Another lien for $243,425.50 was filed against the Giudices on April 29, 2016, and this one is still open as well. These are both against Teresa and Joe Giudice both. The Giudice’s bankruptcy case was reopened earlier this year and at the same time that the first lien was placed. It looks like things are not getting better financially for Teresa and Joe so far. The thing is Teresa Giudice was behind bars for almost a year. She admitted to Andy Cohen that her businesses failed while she was behind bars. Teresa couldn't go out and promote her businesses at all. Plus, she had a lot of bad press to go along with it. She is going to have to find a way to make enough money to pay off all of their debt. Now Joe Giudice is behind bars and he can't help her to work hard and get this paid off. Teresa Giudice is bringing a lot of drama to The Real Housewives of New Jersey now that it is back again. …show more content…
The point that I was trying to make by saying that Chris and I didn’t file a personal fraudulent bankruptcy — besides that being true — was the difference that I had to find out about Teresa’s legal issues and the possibility of her going to jail through a tabloid…that she may or may not have put out herself! Had I put my business in the media and it was as bad as hers and I had never said anything to her, I’m sure she would have asked me about it! If not, I would have felt
Cynthia Adae was taken to Clinton Memorial Hospital on June 28, 2006. She was taken to the hospital with back and chest pain. A doctor concluded that she was at high risk for acute coronary syndrome. She was transferred to the Clinton Memorial hospital emergency room. She reported to have pain for two or three weeks and that the pain started in her back or her chest. The pain sometimes increased with heavy breathing and sometimes radiated down her left arm. Cynthia said she had a high fever of 103 to 104 degrees. When she was in the emergency room her temperature was 99.3, she had a heart rate of 140, but her blood
A well-nourished, well-developed Hispanic female named Anna Garcia standing at 65 inches, 165 pounds and in her late thirties was found dead in her house after her concerned neighbor Doug Greene was suspicions as to why she didn't take her dog out like she did normally, and why the dog was barking constantly for two hours. The police received a call from Greene on August 31st at 9:45 am and arrived at the crime scene at 9:56am.The police found Anna lying face down in the hallway. Authorities observed a pool of blood around her head and some vomit beside her. It was 73 degrees inside Anna’s house, while it was 92 degrees outside. Anna was last seen alive by her former husband, Alex Garcia the night before her death. Investigators measured her rectal temperature, and came to a conclusion that she died at 7:00 am in that same morning. A medical examiner was also called to perform an autopsy to see what really caused Anna's death.
Renee Heikamp, 19, and case worker from the Catholic Children’s Aid Society (CCAS), Angie Martin, were charged with criminal negligence resulting in the 1997 death of newborn baby, Jordan Heikamp. The charges were dropped shortly after Jordan’s death, due to a lack of evidence from the investigation of a 63-day inquest. (CBC, 2001). Renee Heikamp and her baby were residing at the Anduhyaun shelter that services Aboriginal women fleeing abuse during the time of his death. Jordan Heikamp had starved to death, weighing only 4 pounds, 4 ounces less than what he weighed at his pre-mature birth, in May 1997; a photograph shown to witnesses at the inquest revealed the corpse of the baby who was little more than a skeleton.
When conducting research for my project, I came across a website that contained a few primary sources regarding the Salem Witch Trials. One of these primary sources was the photo of a legal document explaining the death warrant and reasons for execution of a woman named Bridget Bishop. Bishop was claimed to be a witch in Salem during the year 1692, and the document explaining her significance involving witchcraft resides in the Peabody Essex Museum in Salem, Massachusetts. My thesis for this primary source is that the judge and jury believed they were seeking justice by executing Bishop, a woman whose death was truthfully based on her differences as a person rather than actual crimes she committed.
Ladies and gentlemen of the Jury. I am here to represent Justin Garcia, to prove the negligence of Jessica Nordeen. The law of negligence says that negligence occurs if an individual does something harmful that a person of ordinary intelligence would not do. In the next few moments,I will prove to the Jury that there was a breach of duty in the case of Garcia v. Nordeen.
The court’s decision based on the treatment of young people in this case emphasizes on the concept of social justice, which means the fair allocation of wealth, resources and opportunity between members in a society. The appellant in this case, Louise Gosselin, was unemployed and under the age of 30. She challenged the Quebec Social Aid Act of 1984 on the basis that it violated section 7 of her security rights, section 15 of her equality rights in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and section 45 of the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. For the purpose of this essay, we shall explore the jurisprudence analysis of section 7 and section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Section 7 states that everyone has the
In July of 2008, one of the biggest crime cases devastated the United States nation-wide. The death of Caylee Anthony, a two year old baby, became the most popular topic in a brief amount of time. Caylee’s mother, Casey Anthony, became the main suspect after the child supposedly was kidnapped and went missing. To this day, the Casey Anthony case shocks me because justice, in my opinion, wasn’t served. I feel as if the criminal conviction system became somewhat corrupted in this case. The entire nation, including the court system, knew that Casey Anthony was behind this criminal act, but yet she escaped all charges. I chose this case not only because it’s debatable, but also to help state the obvious, this case was handled the wrong way. Clearly the legal system was biased, which worked in Casey Anthony’s favor, freeing a murderer.
The Casey Anthony case was one that captured the heart of thousands and made it to the headline of national TV talk shows, newspapers, radio stations and social media networks for months. The root of the case was due to a clash between the parental responsibilities, the expectations that went with being a parent, and the life that Casey Anthony wanted to have. The case was in respect to the discovering the cause of Casey’s two-year-old daughter, Caylee Marie Anthony’s, death; however the emphasis was placed on Casey and her futile lies, which resulted in a public outcry. The purpose of this essay is to delve into the public atmosphere and inquire about why the media and social media collectively attacked the case by uncovering the content of the case, the charges that were laid, and later dismissed, the “performers” of the trial and the publics reaction. It will further discuss how it defies universal ideologies and how the media represents this. The discussion of the complexities of the case and its connotations will incorporate Stuart Hall’s Representation and the Media, Robert Hariman’s Performing the Laws, What is Ideology by Terry Eagleton, The Body of the Condemned by Michael Foucault, and a number of news articles, which will reveal disparate ideas of representation in the media, and the role of the performers of the law and their effect on the understanding of the case.
In 2001 Gwyneth filed a restraining order against Dante Soiu. The outcome of this case was that Dante Soiu was arrested and now has a life prison sentence. He was also declared as "mentally unstable" which gained him a place in a mental institution in California.
According to the John Grisham of “Teresa Lewis didn’t pull the trigger. Why is she on death row” in The Washington Post, there are many mistakes to the murder case of Teresa’s husband and stepson, such as poor defense counsel and Virginia laws. Teresa Lewis was living happily in Danville with her second husband until she had an affair with a man named Matthew Shallenberger. He was thug who had his reputation spread all the way to New York. Lewis and Shallenberger planned to murder her husband for money with Shallenber’s partner named Fuller. Although they managed to murder her husband and stepson, all three were arrested and charged with murder. Without any evidence in 2002, the judge ends up executing Lewis for being the ringleader of the
Some time ago, Gunvalson partnered with someone to launch an alcohol brand. It was tentatively titled, “Vicki's Vodka.” It never went anywhere and there were allegedly some shady dealings between the pair. Things got complicated and the courts were involved. There was a suit filed against her former partner and one against Ayers. According to Radar Online, Vicki Gunvalson received the judgment Brooks Ayers was award from the court. It was a lot of money, probably more money than Ayers has seen in his lifetime.
Media, Law, Ethics and regulation Court ruling in one of the recent cases of Naomi Campbell Case with the Daily Mirror has all the more signified the issue concerning the laws of privacy. Naomi filed two cases, one against MGM Limited and the other against Vanessa Frisbee. The first case involved the periodical Daily Mirror’s two of the articles that relates to the Campbell’s drug addiction and a photograph of her parting a meeting of Narcotics Anonymous. The issue of the case revolves around the law of privacy in UK as Naomi argued that the Daily Mirror had violated the poise in printing her picture and making public some personal and confidential information. It was not that Naomi contended on making public that she was a drug addict, but that the Daily Mirror violated her right of privacy under the Human Rights Act as well as the breach of the Data Protection Act 1998. While the court rejected the claim over the privacy law under the Human Rights Act in lieu that the information that was publicized was not much too confidential, but the second claim regarding the breach of Data Protection Act and the right to privacy under the Human Rights Act, Article 8 of the European (Lubbock, 2003). Convention of Human Rights and freedom of expression under Article 10 concluded that the media was at liberty to put into effect its freedom to "put the record straight". The Court identified that it did not require taking into account whether there was a tort of contravention of confidentiality in English law and concluded that the Human Rights Act had a considerable influence on the UK’s confidentiality law. Thus, from the perception of IT law, maybe, for the most part, the remarkable decision of the Court pertaining to the study of the clai...
If the debtor does not become discharged through the creditors yeush, there is one of two ways to obtain a bankruptcy discharge through halacha. The first way is through liquidation. This is where the debtor hands over all his property, with keeping some exempt property, and this covers his debt to the creditors and he is now free of his obligation to pay them. The second way is through reorganization. The debtor makes a plan to repay his creditors over a number of years, with a minimum payment required for each year. When he has finished with these payments,...
Chapter 7 bankruptcy can wipe out most of ones debts but certainly not all of them. Certain kinds of debt are not covered by the terms of Chapter 7. Some examples of debts that must be paid after filing for bankruptcy would include child support, alimony, income taxes and penalties, student loans, and court ordered damages due to unfair and unrightous acts. Bankruptcy courts handle your financial problems until the case ends. A court assumes control of all ones debts that are owed and all property that is not exempted. A person, trustee, is appointed to be in charge of your debt. The trustee collects property that can be taken and sells it to repay some creditors. That property can be surrendered to the trustee, one may pay the market value of it or one also may choose to trade exempt property with nonexempt property. A small number of people actually lose property when filing bankruptcy. If a person changes their mind about filing for bankruptcy they may ask the court to dismiss the case. At the end of the process the court would discharge most of the debts and one is unable to file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy again for at least another six years.
Are All of My Debts Discharged under law of bankruptcy? No, as stated above, not all of your debts are discharged under law of bankruptcy. In addition, certain types of debts must be paid off before others. Priority debts (those that must be repaid first) include taxes and the administrative expenses of bankruptcy. Often, the only debts that can be paid off are ...