December 30, 2015 Warren Buffet made a splash in 2006 when he announced plans to start giving away the bulk of his fortune. An impressive philanthropic move, to be sure, but when he made the decision he was already 76 years old. And that’s the way it’s almost always been: the WWII generation and the baby boomers have generally been tight-fisted with their money, only donating it once they’ve reached their golden years or, more often, after they’ve kicked the bucket. But a new trend in the world of philanthropy is upon us, one that sees younger billionaires, mostly from Silicon Valley, giving sooner rather than later. Here’s what you need to know about the donation habits of today’s industry titans. Zuckerberg is leading the charge At only 31 years old and with a reported net worth of around $45 billion, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg is America’s richest man under 40. And he and his wife, Priscilla Chan, have recently announced plans to give 99% of their Facebook stock away to charity over time. This isn’t the first time Zuckerberg has cut a big check—he and his wife have given away well over a billion dollars to various charities up to this point. Others with deep pockets are joining in The beginnings of this spirit of giving have their roots in the Buffet announcement as well as the Giving Pledge , of which Zuckerberg is a signatory. This is a commitment from the world’s wealthiest people, including Microsoft’s Paul Allen, Oracle’s Larry Ellison, and Facebook’s Sheryl Sandberg, to give away the majority of their wealth. And most of these folks are starting sooner rather than later. Tech vets are catching the giving fever too What got as much ink as Buffet’s 2006 announcement that he was giving away his cash, was just who would receive all that wealth: The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation . Through this foundation, Bill Gates has been funding a number of initiatives, be it clean-energy technology, agricultural development, HIV research and more. But even Gates himself has admitted that he didn’t really hop on the give-back train until he was in his 40s. Looks like today’s tech billionaires have got him beat on that front. Zuckerberg, via an open Facebook post to his newborn daughter Max, suggests that his decision to give away his fortune is for her sake. He wants his kids to grow up in a better world than he did. But maybe there are selfish reasons too; by giving away his cash now, he will live long enough to see the positive effects it will have on our world. Win-win.
December 21, 2015 A Pennsylvania appeals court agreed with a lower court ruling and determined that actress Sherri Shepherd is financially liable for a child that a surrogate birthed prior to Shepherd’s divorce from her ex. The court upheld the surrogacy contract despite Shepherd’s efforts to void it. The actress and television personality must keep paying $4,100 monthly in child support. Her ex-husband, Lamar Sally, has custody of the 1-year-old boy. Shepherd acted in movies and various sitcoms and co-hosted “The View” on ABC between 2007 and 2014. She did not provide a comment on the legal decision. Sally told the media that she does not want to be involved in the child’s life and as the father, he is happy to be raising the boy. Together, the couple paid more than $105,000 for a Philadelphia woman to carry the boy to term after he was conceived by Sally’s sperm with a donor egg. Of that money, Shepherd contributed more than $100,000. However, as the marriage struggled when the birth mother approached her due date, Shepherd backed out of her involvement in the surrogacy and quit attending the woman’s medical appointments. Originally, the birth certificate named the mother as the surrogate, and California officials initially pursued her for child support. Pennsylvania had not previously ruled on surrogacy contracts although other states have not recognized their validity. The owner of a surrogacy clinic expressed her relief at the decision as well, stating that surrogates enter into a legal agreement with another person to carry a baby on their behalf. Implicit in surrogacy is that the gestational carrier has no rights to the child. The court held that since Shepherd admitted that she agreed to the surrogacy, she was directly responsible for the child, who would not have been born without her involvement. As such, they held that she was the legal mother. As surrogacy and other options in parenting become increasingly common, the related legal issues will become more complex. A knowledgeable family law attorney can help clients wade through these complicated matters.
December 7, 2015 On Nov. 10, 2015, a Florida man filed his 15th bankruptcy petition since 2002 , just weeks after his ban on filing ended. He might well own the notorious title of Tampa Bay’s most frequent bankruptcy filer. His previous filings effectively avoided foreclosure on his residence for more than a decade. He now hopes to prevent eviction from his rental townhome in the same manner. One Tampa bankruptcy judge observed that she had never seen so many bankruptcy filings from one individual. His file reflects that as it makes a large volume of his record and bankruptcy discharges . However, she observed that serial filers might not be taking advantage of the system. Instead, they consider why the person is filing bankruptcy. For example, complications with the IRS might lead to different foreclosure problems. The man claimed that his current economic struggles are due to seizures and related health issues. With monthly rent payments of $2,200, he is delinquent to the tune of $7,800 or over three months behind on payments. He and his wife purchased a previous home just a few miles away from his current home in 2001. He quit making payments within months, and the bank began foreclosure proceedings. He filed bankruptcy the following year. Since bankruptcy automatically stops debt collection and any foreclosure proceedings, the couple was able to stay in their home without making payments for 12 years by submitting bankruptcy petitions to block the sale each time the bank attempted to foreclose. Since he did not submit the proper paperwork, the judge kept dismissing the petitions. The bank would start foreclosure proceedings again, starting the cycle over. Although judges have the option of stopping a debtor from repeated filings if they think that the debtor is taking advantage of the system, he continued this pattern for more than a decade. Technically, the government imposes no limits on how many petitions a person can file. On Sept. 20, 2013, a judge finally labeled him a serial filer and prohibited him from additional filings until Sept. 20, 2015. His home was repossessed, and his family moved to the current rental. In some cases, people need to file repeated bankruptcy , depending on their personal and business situations. Our law firm can assist you with legal counsel regarding your options and how long you need to wait in between bankruptcy filings.
Learn the first steps in the divorce process with Larry Bellomo Attorney at Law in Mission Viejo, CA. Expert family law guidance—click to read our guide now.
January 28, 2018 According to an October 27, 2017, announcement, the Los Angeles jeans company, True Religion, exited Chapter 11 bankruptcy with about $357 million less debt, debt maturities extended, cash to implement a growth plan and a positive outlook for the future. The company emerges with a reduced retail footprint and an exit loan of $60 million from Citizens Bank, the same bank that provided the initial cash during the reorganization process. At the peak of the company, True Religion jeans were selling anywhere from $150 to $250 a pair at their nearly 140 stores and online. The brand also sold at upscale department stores, such as Bloomingdales, Saks Fifth Avenue and Nordstrom and at other locations in the U.S., Mexico and South America. Around 2013, True Religion, like many other apparel stores, struggled for success, watching sales decline as it competed with the internet, online shopping and competing discount retailers. The rapid growth in the trend of athletic wear for leisure caused the sales of blue jeans to quickly decline. Behind $192,000 on rent for its California office headquarters and drowning in major debts owed to creditors, manufacturers, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and malls around the country, True Religion filed for bankruptcy on July 5, 2017, in a U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Delaware. At the time of filing, the company had 128 stores in the United States and 11 stores outside the country. The company made some major changes, hiring John Ermatinger as CEO and president and bringing on a new chief marketing officer and a new vice president of sourcing. They also reduced costs, streamlined processes and closed unprofitable stores. John Ermatinger publicly thanked the company’s supporters — consumers, employees, vendors and suppliers — for their ongoing commitment and devotion to True Religion. He expressed his excitement regarding the future of the company, which includes implementing new growth strategies through innovative partnerships, expanding True Religion’s digital presence and refining its marketing operations. You do not have to be a major corporation to file bankruptcy , Like in the case of True Religion, bankruptcy allows individuals to emerge in a better financial position than before. Our legal team can help you navigate through these difficult times.
January 16, 2018 A Fresno State professor who intimidated a pro-life group was ordered to pay $17,000 and attend training on the First Amendment. He was recorded on video in an attempt to harass pro-life students who were drawing with chalk on the sidewalk. He also asked students from his public health class to assist him in his efforts. He claimed they were outside of the campus free speech area, but no such area has existed on campus since 2015. The sidewalk messages suggested pro-life options for students. The president of the club stated that the First Amendment gives students the right to speak on campus. She documented an incident between herself and the professor on video. He can be heard telling her that she is not in a free-speech area. However, she claimed that she had school permission to be there and to be speaking. The professor began erasing the sidewalk messages with his shoe. He told her that she did not understand the areas where free speech was permitted on campus. Alliance Defending Freedom acted as legal representation for the group, the Fresno State Students for Life. The professor must pay $1,000 to the president and $1,000 to another student as well as legal fees. However, he said that the money was paid by his insurance company, so he is not concerned about the legal fees. He does not admit to any wrong actions but is willing to attend the training so that he can learn the opinions and thoughts of others. The president expressed her relief that he will not be able to harass them again and explained that the case was not about winning money. She was extremely surprised at his actions, especially on a public campus. She further opined that professors should encourage and not prohibit free speech. Legal counsel for the pro-life group stated that the professor’s behavior flagrantly violated the First Amendment He added that school officials do not have the right to restrict freedom of speech on campus. The school did not comment about the case. If you believe that your First Amendment rights have been violated, you will need experienced legal representation to defend you. Contact us so that we can discuss your case.
January 5, 2018 The complexities of any divorce include dividing money, property and assets between both parties. While this might not be as complex for a millennial as it is for a couple who has spent their lifetime acquiring possessions, both types of divorce require finding a qualified family lawyer to deal with the personal issues. Legal experts report that stereotypes claim that other generations are more loyal than millennials who don’t really value traditions. She continues that even though they wait to marry, they still place a high priority on the institution. However, she added that they will not tough out a relationship the way their parents did. This by no means makes a divorce any easier for millennials. They feel just as hurt and disappointed as any others who divorce , but their outlook for the future tends to be more optimistic. Although marriage rates in the U.S. continue to decline, divorce rates are also dropping. Millennials delay marriage until later in life, placing an emphasis on education and careers before taking this significant life step. Millennials tend to be more open to diverse relationships, including living together. In the past, prenuptial agreements held a negative connotation as if one of the parties expected the marriage to end. The more-practical millennials, who prioritize acquiring and preserving wealth, see the prenup as a planning tool and communication map to manage financial expectations and interests. Creating a prenup with a lawyer realistically deals with the uncertainty of the future and helps a couple draft specific plans. Millennials choosing to live together instead of marrying can benefit from an attorney’s expertise when drawing up a cohabitation agreement, protecting both parties and their assets in case the relationship ends. When couples know the laws regarding cohabitation , marriage and divorce in their state, they tend to be ready for even unexpected contingencies. Whether a couple plans to cohabitate, marry or file for divorce, planning for a big relationship step helps the individuals prepare for the future, no matter what happens in the marriage. Consulting with a knowledgeable, experienced family lawyer sets up both parties for success.
December 23, 2017 The 32-year-old mother entered the high rise in downtown Memphis as a memory tugged at the far corners of her mind. Suddenly, it came to her. She had been in this very building with her own mother for the same purpose — to file bankruptcy . She anguished over the decision but a court order had recently enforced a judgement against her that allowed a company to seize a portion of her check. With her struggle to make ends meet, the judgment would put an unbearable strain on her already overburdened finances — the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back. Despite the stigma, she decided that bankruptcy would stop the vicious cycle of juggling bills each month so that she could now start fresh. She even dreamed of becoming a homeowner one day. While the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Tennessee in Memphis funnels millions of dollars to the court, the lawyers and the creditors, the debtors for whom the entire system exists don’t fare so well. The clients are stuck in a vicious cycle. Most people choose to file Chapter 7, which allows the person to start over from square one without seizing any debts. In contrast, Chapter 13 requires monthly payments while stopping car repossessions and home foreclosures. This method is most common in the South and was what this mother chose. She didn’t understand the difference between the two. However, filers who opt for Chapter 13 must continue making payments for five full years. Most cannot even last 12 months under the program. These individuals went through each and every step of the bankruptcy — paying filing and legal fees and dealing with a seven-year blemish on their credit record — but do not ultimately benefit from the program. Once they have defaulted, they revert back to all unpaid debts with interest rates higher than ever. When comparing Caucasian filings with African-American filings, the latter usually file under Chapter 13 but cannot complete the program. Some return for repeat filings, with a few filing Chapter 13 up to 20 times during their lifetimes. They view bankruptcy as a last resort. If you are considering bankruptcy, talk to our knowledge attorneys about which options — Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 — is best for you.
