by

It’s been nearly 10 years since every state in the U.S. agreed to alter the legal definition of drunk from 0.15 percent blood-alcohol content to 0.08 percent blood-alcohol content.

Now, federal officials are urging another reduction, this time down to 0.05 percent BAC.Our Gary DUI injury lawyers are in full support of this proposal, which was made recently by the National Transportation Safety Board as one of 20 recommendations to reduce the death toll on U.S. highways.

Every year, some 10,000 people are killed in drunk driving crashes. That’s about one-third of the total number of people who die on our nation’s roads.

The board indicated that it has tried other measures in recent years to drive down those rates, but with little success. Other efforts have included bolstering law enforcement initiatives and funneling money into public advocacy and awareness campaigns. And yet, the number of DUI deaths has hovered around 10,000 since 1995. In the last 30 years, we’re talking some 440,000 lives lost.

The board predicts that lowering the legal alcohol limit will save somewhere between 500 and 800 lives each year. The reason it isn’t higher is that the majority of drunk driving deaths are caused by individuals who have BACs that are well above 0.08 percent. This has been a point of contention for opponents of the measure. However, what the opposition is failing to consider is that in addition to the number of lives saved – each of which is precious – we will be also significantly reducing the number of injuries. Not everyone involved in a DUI crash dies. Many survive, but they may suffer lifelong, debilitating injuries that require surgeries, intensive treatments, rehabilitation and medication for chronic pain and other disabilities.

Lowering the threshold is also not an obscene intrusion. First of all, 100 other countries in the world have already adopted the 0.05 percent rate, including most of Europe. Secondly, consider that the average, 180-pound male will usually not hit the 0.08 percent limit until he’s had about four drinks in a little over an hour. By contrast, under the new limit, he would only be able to indulge in two or three. So this argument that someone couldn’t have a glass of wine with dinner simply doesn’t hold water.

Research has shown that the majority of drivers are going to experience a decline in both visual and cognitive functions once their BAC tops 0.05 percent.

It’s also an important measure in light of the recent ruling handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled against police with regard to warrantless blood draws in DUI cases. In that case, Missouri v. McNeely, the court found that in order to take a blood sample from a suspected drunk driver, an officer would first have to obtain a warrant from a judge. Because alcohol dissipates quickly from a person’s system, every minute may be valuable to the case. If we are going to bolster the protections for drunk drivers, we should also do the same for their victims.

The NTSB’s recommendations, however, won’t automatically become law. It’s an independent agency that is influential on matters of public safety, but it will require the support of Congress and state legislators to actually implement such a measure.
Continue reading

by

A recent report from the Associated Press contends that 1 out of every 20 patients who enter a hospital will pick up an infection they didn’t have before they arrived.The rates are higher for those who undergo surgery or some form of intensive treatment requiring intravenous lines.

Our medical malpractice attorneys know that while some hospitals and hospital staffers place reducing infections high on the priority list, many still aren’t doing enough to prevent hospital-acquired illnesses. We’re not talking a simple cough or cold. We’re talking bloodstream infections or superbug viruses that can lead to serious illness and even death.

Bloodstream infections, introduced primarily through intravenous catheters used to deliver nutrition, fluids or medication, account for about 15 percent of all hospital-acquired infections and account for 30 percent of the approximately 100,000 yearly hospital-related deaths. Even for those who do survive such an infection, recovery usually means weeks or months of intensive treatment and brutal side effects.

For a long time, physicians and hospital administrators considered these type of infections, known as central line infections, to be a simply unavoidable risk for those receiving intensive care treatment. However, there has been research showing that infections rates can be reduced to nearly zero by rigorously following a checklist that involves simple sanitary procedures. The proof of this is in the 13 percent of reporting hospitals in the country that have zero central line infection rates. (This is only 138 of 1,068 hospitals that report their infection rates to state authorities; Indiana has no hospitals on that list.)

But this isn’t the only problem. Bacterial and viral “suberbugs” have been gaining intense coverage as of late, for the fact that hospitals are having a difficult time purging their facilities of hard-to-fight germs.

Many hospitals have turned to state-of-the-art approaches to help fight these type of infections, including robots that emit hydrogen peroxide vapors or ultraviolet light. They’re also purchasing antimicrobial linens, wall paint and curtains and providing call buttons, IV polls and bed rails that are made from germ-resistant copper.

The benefits of all of this are debatable, though those making the effort are to be commended. However, all of this may be in no small part due to the fact that insurance companies and in some cases even Medicare are declining to pay bills for treatment of hospital-acquired infections. That doesn’t mean patients won’t be treated, but it means the hospital becomes responsible for those bills. So suddenly, instead of financially benefiting when patients are forced to stay in treatment longer than intended, hospitals will be losing money. That gives them a real incentive to fight back aggressively.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimate that hospital-acquired infections result in an additional $30 billion each year in U.S. medical costs.

In addition to central line infections, another bug that is receiving a lot of attention recently is C-diff. This diarrhea-causing infection has been linked to some 14,000 deaths each year, according to the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology. While this is easier to treat than some other types of hospital infections, like MRSA, it’s tough to clean away on hospital surfaces. Those facilities that aren’t meeting the minimal standards for sanitation have seen a major spike in C-diff cases.
Continue reading

by

Our Hammond divorce lawyers have become familiar with an advocacy group that is essentially seeking to make divorces in this country more difficult to obtain.

Citing the negative impacts of divorce and the damage that it can cause to children, the Coalition for Divorce Reform has pushed for legislation – most recently in Georgia and North Carolina – that would increase divorce waiting periods, mandate family counseling and eliminate laws that require divorcing couples to live apart.While not every element of these measures is necessarily bad, and in fact could benefit some families, our divorce attorneys worry that such provisions don’t take into account situations where a quick resolution is not only desirable, but necessary.

A perfect example would be in a case of domestic violence or other abuse. Of course, the North Carolina legislation allowed for exceptions to the waiting period and counseling requirement in cases of physical abuse, but that assumes the victim was one of those who actually called and reported it to police. Most don’t. And it also doesn’t account for verbal and emotional abuse, which can be equally damaging.

Another example would be one in which there has been infidelity. In these cases, even when it’s painful, people often know from the very beginning that, “It’s over,” and there is no point in dragging it out.

In a lot of divorces, the marriage has not been working for some time. Both spouses and even the children may be fully aware, and even accepting of it. Making the process take longer ends up benefiting no one, and simply makes it harder for everyone to move on.

In Georgia, House Bill 684 would not apply to couples who were childless. It would apply only to those with at least one child more than six months shy of their 17th birthday or couples who are expecting. In those cases, parents would be mandated to participate in eight-hour parenting classes and counseling sessions. The measure would also lengthen the waiting time for a divorce.

Exceptions would be made in certain cases, such as when the couple has been living apart for five years or more, or when one partner is serving a prison sentence.

However, these measures don’t account for the fact that every divorce – just like every marriage – is a bit different, and that what works for one family may be harmful to another. Forcing people to try to work it out first isn’t the answer. We have to trust that if an adult has decided to walk away from a marriage, he or she must have a good reason for doing so. And even if they do not, it is their prerogative. They will still have to abide by the laws governing child support and other financial obligations. But beyond that, we should not be using legislation to force people to repair emotional bonds.

In Indiana, assuming at least one spouse meets the residency requirement, there is a 60-day waiting period after the divorce is filed before the proceedings can continue and the divorce can be finalized.

Of course, many divorces end up taking longer than that anyway because there are often many ties to be untangled in the course of a separation.

Making couples wait any longer is not only unnecessary, it’s unfair.
Continue reading

by

A recent story in London’s The Telegraph detailed how the rise of internet dating had resulted in a 40 percent spike in 2012 in the number of international child custody cases in Britain.Our Gary child custody lawyers have noted this phenomenon as well, though more commonly with regard to interstate disputes.

Internet dating has allowed people who might never have otherwise met or come in contact to form deep connections over long distances. However, people often retain their connections to home, even if they end up later moving to be with their new spouse.

If things don’t work out, one spouse or the other will often return to where he or she has a support system.

But it should be no surprise that different states have different laws when it comes to almost everything about divorce and child custody.

Families in these situations often find themselves grappling with the added frustration of working out complicated and costly visitations and shared parenting arrangements. Even those divorced couples who consider themselves fairly amicable can find themselves at a breaking point when trying to hammer out these issues long-distance and often without the benefit of face-to-face communication.

So how are these disputes resolved?

A lot of it will depend on which state is given jurisdiction in the matter.

For an answer to how that process works, we look to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act, which was drafted in 1997 and has since been adopted by 49 states, as well as the District of Columbia, the U.S. Virgin Islands and Guam. (The only state that has yet to adopt the measure is Massachusetts.) The 1997 legislation replaces any prior legislation, which was found to be inconsistent with the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act with regard to determination of initial child custody.

Part of the reason this legislation was enacted was because courts were finding that parents were willing to move their child around from state-to-state if it appeared the custody case were not going in their favor. They would then file again in a different state, where they hoped to find a more sympathetic ear. They were often successful.

But this was not fair to the child, nor the other parent or the court system, which was being bogged down with these cases.

In interstate custody battles, the child’s home state will be the one that will be allowed to exercise jurisdiction in the child custody case.

So if a mother files her petition for custody in Indiana, where the child lives at the time of the petition, any other state is going to lack jurisdiction to handle that same case. Let’s say that same mother and child move to Ohio, and then she files her petition within less than six months of that move. The home state is still going to be considered Indiana, and she will have to file her petition here, or else wait six months or more.

Because of the UCCJA, this will be true pretty much regardless of where you move in the U.S.

In one case, for example, both spouses lived in Texas for a number of years until the mother moved to Washington State. She filed her child custody petition there five months later, but it was denied because she hadn’t lived there at least six months. The father then filed his custody petition more than six months after his wife and child had moved to Washington. The court ruled that Texas would not be considered the home state of the child at that point, because he hadn’t lived in Texas for six consecutive months prior to the petition.

As you can see, timing may be critical in these cases, which is why the sooner you meet with a child custody lawyer, the more strategic you can be in planning your petition and/or response.

It’s also worth noting that the state can deny jurisdiction if one parent or the other has acted unjustly. Some examples might be domestic violence, concealing the whereabouts of a child/parental kidnapping, violating an existing court order or lying in sworn declarations.

Now let’s say it turns out there is no home state for the child. He or she has lived on a military base or has moved around a great deal in the last several years. In these cases, the court will be charged with determining the state that will be the most convenient for all parties involved. Some of the things that might be considered would be location of medical and school records, witnesses, documents, child protective services investigative reports and how familiar each court may be with the issues and facts in the pending case.
Continue reading

by

Underride accidents are a type of accident that occurs only with large trucks. Our Highland truck accident attorneys have discussed the dangers of underride accidents in the past, in response to an Indiana Tractor Trailer accident in which a 56-year-old Indiana man sustained injuries after his car wedged underneath a tractor trailer.

Unfortunately, this accident was not an isolated incident and underride accidents are a far-too-common occurrence in Indiana and throughout the United States.The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has, in the past, made recommendations to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) intended to reduce the number of underride wrecks or even to eliminate them entirely. Unfortunately, NHTSA has not made the recommended changes to regulations fpr trailers and large trucks. Now, even as the prior problems have not been corrected, IIHS has released a new alert indicating that recent crash tests have raised the possibility of additional underride accident risks.

IIHS Concerned About Underride Accidents
Underride accidents happen when a car gets wedged underneath a large truck or tractor-trailer. Obviously, when this occurs, the top of the car can get crushed and serious injuries can be suffered including injury to the head and neck.

Preventing these type of accidents should be a top priority and there are regulations in place designed to prevent cars from being pushed underneath trucks. For example, the majority of semitrailers are required to have underride guards installed. These guards consist of steel bars that hang down from the back of trucks and stop cars from going underneath.

IIHS’s past criticism of the regulations related to underride prevention center around the fact that the guards are often not strong enough and not large enough. Because the bars were not sufficient to stop cars from sliding underneath, IIHS made recommendations to NHTSA suggesting that the regulations quality of the guards be improved. IIHS also requested that NHTSA expand the types of large trucks the regulations apply to by making it mandatory for more trucks to have guards. For example, dump trucks aren’t currently required to have these underride prevention bars and IIHS has suggested that they should be required to come into compliance.

Unfortunately, NHTSA has not yet passed tougher regulations. And now, IIHS crash tests reveal a high risk of underride accidents when a passenger car hits the back side of a truck. The bars, in other words, prevent the car from slipping underneath the truck if the car hits the center rear. But when a car strikes the side, on the other hand, there is no protection to prevent an underride accident. Since cars often hit from the side if they are trying to swerve out of the way to avoid a crash, this is a serious problem.

In light of the new crash test information from IIHS, hopefully NHTSA will be prompted to take action both to address the past concerns and to address the new safety risk revealed by the recent IIHS crash tests.
Continue reading

by

This might be the most memorable time of your teen’s life. We’re talking about prom and graduation season. While one of the best times, it can also be one of the most dangerous. That’s why officials with Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) are here to help parents and guardians to address these risks with the young drivers in their family.Our Highland accident lawyers understand that reasonable judgment is one of the first things to go when we consume alcohol. If you’ve seen someone drink, then you’ve probably seen it firsthand. Our teens are on top of this list. They’re more likely to get into fights, they’re more likely to have unprotected sex and they’re more likely to drive drunk or to get into the car with a drunk driver.

According to USA TODAY, motor vehicle accidents are the number one cause of death among U.S. teens ages 16 to 19. They may not be old enough to drink legally, but that doesn’t mean that they can’t get their hands on it and it definitely doesn’t mean that they won’t drink. Make sure they know the dangers associated with alcohol before they’re put into that position.

To help to get this conversation started, use PowerTalk 21 day. That’s a day, April 21st, that was dedicated as the national day for parents to talk to teens about alcohol. It was created by officials with MADD to jump start the conversation. It all goes along with Alcohol Awareness Month, which takes place throughout the entire month of April.

It’s a pretty serious situation. As a matter of fact teenagers are more likely to drink in excess than any other age group. They’re more likely to have both blackouts and brownouts. A blackout is when your brain completely stops recording new memories, so forget about prom night. A brownout is when you have lapses in your memory.

When you pair these memory loses with alcohol’s influence on bad decisions, you’ve got a recipe for disaster.

To help your teen, make sure you talk with them about the risks associated with drinking and driving. This scenario kills more than 10,000 people annually. And these are accidents that can be prevented — completely. Make sure you’re talking with your teen about the different choices they have as a responsible adult. Talk with the about scenarios that they might be presented with and practice with them the safe and responsible ways to deal with those situations.

Make sure your teen feels comfortable calling you if they need a ride home. There may come the time in their life when their peers are drinking and driving, and you want them to feel comfortable enough to call you for help. You want to offer a helping hand, not scold them for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

It’s also a good idea for you to talk to parents of kids with whom your teen spends time. Make sure everyone in the circle is one the same page.
Continue reading

by

Lawmakers in Florida are wrestling with the question of whether to do away with permanent alimony payments in the state, limiting the circumstances under which former spouses could obtain financial support – separate from what is provided to the children – in a divorce decree.Supporters call alimony a “life sentence,” though the measure is staunchly opposed by the Family Law Section of the Florida Bar Association.

Here in Indiana, our Highland divorce lawyers are well aware that divorcees don’t have the option of alimony, in the traditional sense.

What we do have is spousal support, which is also referred to as spousal maintenance. Simply put, it is a means by which one spouse may collect monetary payments from another. The goal of spousal maintenance payments is to aid the lower-earning spouse in maintaining a “reasonable” standard of living, and further to become self-sufficient both during and after a divorce.

So far, it may sound like any other alimony system. However, the courts are greatly limited in terms of deciding who is eligible for support payments. There are only three circumstances under which the court is allowed to award spousal maintenance payments. Those are:

  1. A finding by the court that one spouse is mentally or physically incapacitated in such a way that it materially impacts that spouse’s ability to be self-sufficient. In these cases, the spousal support has the propensity to continue for the length of the incapacity. The court could choose to alter the order at a later date.
  2. The court makes a determination that one spouse doesn’t have enough property, even after the division of marital property, in order to provide for his or her needs AND that spouse has custody of a child who suffers a mental or physical disability that makes it impossible for that spouse to work. In these cases, the judge can order support payments for any length of time that the judge deems appropriate or necessary.
  3. Lastly, a judge can award support payments for up to three years if it is determined that, after weighing each spouse’s education, earning capacity, and the interruption of education or career to care for children, that an order of support is appropriate. Consideration must be given to how long the supported spouse will need in order to be adequately retrained and obtain work. This is called rehabilitative support. Three years is the maximum amount of time that this type of support can be offered.

Although these parameters are quite strict, there is no ceiling or even any specific guidelines for how much support may be awarded. That means it will be up to the judge to factor in the kind of lifestyle these individuals had, whether the the supported spouse might be able to work and earn money even while retraining, whether there would be any significant tax consequences, as well as a number of other considerations.

It’s important to note that if the supported spouse remarries or dies, those payments will end automatically.

Otherwise, it can be pretty tough to get one of these orders altered once they are in place. Usually a chance would require dramatically-changed circumstances. For example, if the paying spouse loses his job and has no ability to pay, or if the supported spouse receives a sizable inheritance.
Continue reading

by

It has long been established that texting and driving is one of the most dangerous things that you can do as you drive. However, one recent study indicates that cell phone use may not be the number one most common reason for a distracted driving accident. The study suggests that simple daydreaming may be to blame for most crashes.

Our Highland accident attorneys know that a driver who is distracted by anything – from a phone to a music system to the thoughts going through his mind — can be dangerous. Unfortunately, if daydreaming really is a major contributing factor in distracted driving accidents, it may be even harder than expected to combat the problems of distracted driving and to get all drivers to focus on what’s going on in front of them as they travel the roads.Daydreaming a Top Distracted Driving Cause?

According to a recent article on Fox News, Erie Insurance Company recently did a study of more than 6,500 fatal accidents between 2010 and 2011 that had been classified as distracted driving crashes. Erie Insurance Company reviewed the police reports and other relevant available information about the crashes in order to assess what types of distracted driving behaviors were most dangerous.

Surprisingly, it turned out that the study did not reveal texting or cell phones as a top cause of distracted driving crashes. In fact, based on the written police reports, 62 percent of the crashes reportedly involved one or more people who were “lost in thought” as opposed to on the phone. The percent of accidents caused by daydreamers was far more than the 12 percent of accidents that were attributed to phone use.

“Lost in thought” also topped several other common distractions as a potential cause of distracted driving accidents. For example, using in-vehicle controls like a GPS or music system was listed as a contributing cause of only one percent of accidents. Smoking and animals in the car were also attributed to only about one percent of accidents.

Of course, this doesn’t necessarily mean that everyone has given up texting and that the only risk to people on the roads is a daydreaming driver. The Erie Insurance Company’s data and conclusions were ascertained using police reports explaining how the crash happened. The information in the police reports was determined based on what the drivers at the scene said, as well as based on the police officer’s own reading of the situation.

Some drivers who are in accidents might try to deny they were talking on a phone or doing something else equally distracting at the time, especially if the accident was a serious one and the driver is afraid he or she will get into trouble. This means some of the drivers who said they were daydreaming to explain their distracted behavior may actually have been doing something else entirely.

If daydreaming is a top cause of distracted driving, however, the problem is going to be a tough one to solve because no lawmaker can make or enforce a law against daydreaming.
Continue reading

by

Last summer, two teenage bicycle riders were killed in Northern Indiana by an intoxicated driver. Fort Wayne.com recently reported that the impaired driver who caused the deaths has now pled guilty and will serve 18 years in prison for his actions. While this sentence brings justice for the families of the bicycle riders who were killed, it doesn’t bring back the teens who lost their lives.Unfortunately, these two teens were not the only ones to die in bicycle accidents in Indiana last year. Our Highland accident attorneys know that bike accidents are far too common, especially as the weather grows warmer and more people are out on their bicycles enjoying the spring and summer months.

While bicycle riders may not be able to protect themselves from drunk drivers or prevent every bike accident that occurs, there are some things that riders can do in order to reduce the changes of being seriously hurt or killed in a crash. Drivers of motor vehicles also need to be aware that there may be more bicycle riders out-and-about over the summer and should adjust their driving behavior accordingly to make sure everyone is safe.

Bicycle Safety Tips

To protect themselves, bicycle riders should follow some basic safety tips when riding including the following:

  • Always wear a helmet when riding.
  • Try to ride in areas where there are sidewalks, bike lanes or trails and to avoid areas where you will be forced to ride along the shoulder of the road.
  • Obey all driving safety laws including speed limit and right-of-way laws.
  • Wear bright colored clothing and use reflectors if necessary in order to ensure that cars can see you.
  • Refrain from bicycle riding at night whenever possible. If you must ride at night, you should have a light on your bicycle and/or reflective strips and clothing.
  • Check your bicycle carefully before any bike trip to ensure that the bicycle is in good working order. You should focus especially on the brakes and the tires to ensure they aren’t in need of maintenance.
  • Wear comfortable clothing that is not too loose fitting and that will not get caught in the pedals of the bicycle.

By following these tips, bike riders can hopefully avoid getting into a crash. Drivers of passenger vehicles must also be on the lookout for bike riders and need to be aware that bicycle riders deserve respect just as any other vehicle on the road does. This means yielding the right-of-way when required and giving bike riders sufficient space to navigate safely.
Continue reading

by

A bill was recently proposed in the Alabama legislature that would allow the state to terminate parental rights in cases where a parent, addicted to drugs or alcohol, had relapsed after receiving a second round of in-patient treatment.Our Munster child custody lawyers know that if this law were to pass, while it wouldn’t affect Indiana families directly, it could set a troubling precedent.

This is not to say that the state does not have a valid interest in protecting the children from harm caused by a drug-addicted parent. Indeed, it does. However, both in Indiana and in Alabama, there are legal provisions that allow either the other parent or the state to step in and seek remedies – up to and including termination of parental rights. Capping treatment options is not the solution.

While we understand the framers of the bill had intended to draw the line when it comes to protecting our children and saying, “Enough is enough,” it may actually end up resulting in fewer parents seeking much-needed treatment, for fear they may lose their children if they falter one more time.

That being said, we have represented numerous clients who were at their wits’ end with the seemingly endless cycle of addiction of their former spouse. In many cases, that was what led to divorce in the first place.

In cases like this, one of the first things we might seek to do is file for emergency child custody. This won’t be a permanent order, but it will allow you to keep your child safe while the courts have an opportunity to sort through all the details of what is being alleged.

Your first step in a case like this, in which you fear for your child’s safety due to your ex’s addiction, would be to contact an experienced family law attorney. He or she can help you file the petition, which will allow you to get an immediate hearing, as it is considered an emergency. Your lawyer may also at the same time submit a form requesting a more permanent custody arrangement be addressed at a later date. This will allow you to pursue the long-term custody arrangement, whether the court grants the temporary order or not.

With the understanding that these situations sometimes unfold rapidly, you still want to try to be as prepared as possible. Bring any relevant police reports, voice mail recordings, text messages, e-mails or photographs that could serve to further bolster your case. Specific examples might be reports of a DUI or drug-related arrest or previous convictions, photographs of drugs or paraphernalia in the home or statements from third party witnesses attesting to the severity of the other parent’s addiction and the danger it poses to the child.

Termination of parental rights in Indiana is altogether another matter, but it is one that may be initiated in the most severe of circumstances. Some potential circumstances in which termination of rights is considered by the court:

  • The child has been living in an alternative care situation (foster care or with a relative) for at least six months;
  • The parent has been convicted of a series crime (i.e., murder, manslaughter, rape, sexual misconduct, etc.) and the victim was either under the age of 16 or the child named in the petition;
  • There is a reasonable probability that either the problems that led to the child’s removal from the home won’t be remedied or the child’s continued relationship with the parent poses a harm to his or her well-being;
  • Termination of rights is in the child’s best interest;
  • There is a satisfactory plan for care and treatment of the child following the termination of rights.

Courts in Indiana take child custody loss and parental rights termination very seriously. If you need legal assistance in either of these matters, contact us today.
Continue reading

Contact Information
8320 Kennedy Ave
Highland, IN 46322
Phone: 219-836-2200
Fax: 219-836-9388

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2015 – 2025, Padove Law
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design