Texas Lawyer Helping Texas Residents
Licensed for over a decade Texas Lawyer Alex Hernandez Jr. is concerned with his clients constitutional and legal rights. This blog is general information about current legal issues and issues that clients bring up.
Error: Rate limit exceeded
“White Collar” crimes are a distinct area of law that even has a show named after it on the USA network. It’s a show depicting a “White Collar” criminal who is helping the FBI. But does white collar mean a handsome man in a white suit? not necessarily….
White Collar depicts the areas of crime that are financially motivated, nonviolent types of criminal activity. These criminals are in it for the money. The most famous white collar criminals? Martha Stewart and her insider trading crime; and Bernie Madoff, Allen Stanford, and any group of Ponzi schemers. The bigger criminal culprits? Enron and WorldCom. Other types of white collar crimes include insider trading, embezzlement, cybercrime, copyright infringement, money laundering, identity theft, and forgery. How did I get into representing this specific group of criminal activity? My start was in Federal court appointed by Federal judges, it seems my background in investment management and economics before law school helped my understand the money issues of some white collar crimes.
This are the links to my websites
Every once in a while I accept a case where I think the legislation made a mistake in passing the law or didn’t give enough time for the public to react to the change and couldn’t possibly be obligated to follow it. Such laws that make immediate impact and yet hold businesses or individuals accountable right away such as tax law changes make things complicated for businesses, or other laws that an individual can’t possibly have time to react to. A lot of jurisdictions don’t handle these cases properly in giving businesses or individuals notice. Some juries agree with me, and hence the term “jury nullification” comes into play. Jury nullification is where a defendant is technically guilty but the jury just can’t come to terms with punishing the defendant, maybe because of due process issues or what I was speaking about before, where the law passed just doesn’t make sense at the time. Juries can’t come to terms to punish the defendant for a dumb law or violation of due process. Our jury system is one of the best systems in the world and jury nullification is a process that proves that point.
What does it mean when you hear “No Fault”? Texas is a “No Fault” state meaning that neither spouse is blamed for the breakup of the marriage, or no one is at fault. No proof of wrong is needed to get the divorce and most of the time “irreconcilable differences” or just not getting along anymore is the reason used to file for divorce. Is that fair? Maybe not, I don’t know the answer but it seems like it’s just too easy to get a divorce and thus 50% of marriages end in divorce and 60 to 80% of remarriages end in divorce. No Fault can sometimes just mean “I give up. ” Alex Hernandez Jr. Attorney at Law Corpus Christi * Victoria Texas
If you’re a man in an abusive relationship, it’s important to know that you’re not alone. It happens to men from all cultures and all walks of life. Figures suggest that as many as one in three victims of domestic violence are male. However, men are often reluctant to report abuse by women because they feel embarrassed, or they fear they won’t be believed, or worse, that police will assume that since they’re male they are the perpetrator of the violence and not the victim.
An abusive wife or partner may hit, kick, bite, punch, spit, throw things, or destroy your possessions. To make up for any difference in strength, she may attack you while you’re asleep or otherwise catch you by surprise. She may also use a weapon, such as a gun or knife, or strike you with an object, abuse or threaten your children, or harm your pets. Of course, domestic abuse is not limited to violence.
Your spouse or partner may also:
* Verbally abuse you, belittle you, or humiliate you in front of friends, colleagues, or family, or on social media sites.
* Be possessive, act jealous, or harass you with accusations of being unfaithful.
* Take away your car keys or medications, try to control where you go and who you see.
* Try to control how you spend money or deliberately default on joint financial obligations.
* Make false allegations about you to your friends, employer, or the police, or find other ways to manipulate and isolate you.
* Threaten to leave you and prevent you from seeing your kids if you report the abuse.
If your in a abusive relationship the first thing to do is ask for help, then look into a possible divorce.
The case of Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, and a challenge to the Top Ten Percent Admissions Rule
The case of Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, 631 F.3d 213 (5th Cir. 2011) [2011 BL 26613
In 2008, Abigail Fisher and Rachel Michalewicz, both Texas residents, were denied undergraduate admission to the University of Texas at Austin for the class entering in Fall 2008. They filed this suit alleging that UT's admissions policies discriminated against them on the basis of race in violation of their right to equal protection under theFourteenth Amendment and federal civil rights statutes. They lost at summary judgment hearing with the court deciding there was no evidence of any discrimination. They have appealed.
The court's concurring opinion had the following opinion;
"The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment provides that no State shall "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." U.S. CONST. amend. XIV. One of [*248]the Amendment’s “core principles” is to “do away with all governmentally imposed discriminations based on race,”Palmore v. Sidoti, 466 U.S. 429, 432 (1984), and to create “a Nation of equal citizens in a society where race is irrelevant to personal opportunity and achievement.” Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co., 488 U.S. 469, 505-06(1988). This is why “[r]acial and ethnic distinctions of any sort are inherently suspect and . . . call for the most exacting judicial examination.” Miller v. Johnson, 515 U.S. 900, 904 (1995) (quoting Regents of the Univ. ofCal. v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265, 291 (1978) (opinion of Powell, J.)). It matters not whether the racial preference is characterized as invidious or benign: strict scrutiny applies regardless of “the race of those burdened or benefitted by a particular classification.” Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630, 650-51 (1993) (quoting Croson, 488 U.S. at 494). To survive such exacting scrutiny, laws classifying citizens on the basis of race must be “narrowly tailored to achieving a compelling state interest.” Miller, 515 U.S. at 904.
In Grutter, the majority acknowledged these fundamental principles, see Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306,326-27 (2003), but then departed and held, for the first time, that racial preferences in university admissions could be used to serve a compelling state interest. Id. at 328. Though the Court recognized that strict scrutiny should govern the inquiry into the use of race in university admissions, id. at 326, what the Court applied in practice was something else entirely.”
The University of Texas uses many factors including Top Ten Percent Admission to admissions in their practice. The plaintiffs have challenged that Top Ten percent practice.
The practice of the University of Texas at Austin will be scrutinized again in October when the Texas Supreme Court hears the arguments of the plaintiffs. The fate of affirmative action could rest upon the ruling.
According to the Texas Real Estate Licensing Act, a licensee must
advise prospective buyers in writing of the need for title assurance
when the earnest money contract is signed. This is required for a
commission. Perhaps the need for a survey should be required as well
because every land transaction may reveal the possible loss of land.
The land loss occurs through a legal concept known as adverse
possession. A person who possesses and uses another’s land without
permission eventually may become the owner. No consideration is required.
Because the adverse use of another’s property is marked—usually
by fence lines—a survey is needed to determine if the fence
placement conforms to the legal description.
The statutory rules governing adverse possession are codified in Sections 16.021 through 16.034 of
the Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code. Section 16.021 defines
adverse possession as the “actual and visible appropriation of real property,
commenced and continued under a claim of right that is inconsistent
with and is hostile to the claim of another person.”
Adverse possession is, in fact, a combination of conduct (or activity) on the part of the adverse possessor
and the owner’s inactivity or failure to oust the intruder. The adverse possessor must enter the land without consent (adversely) and stay openly, obviously and continuously in peaceable possession
for a given number of years. The term peaceable possession is statutorily
defined as “possession of real property that is continuous and is
not interrupted by an adverse suit to recover the property.” The
owner fails to act by not filing a lawsuit or using other legal means
to remove the intruder within the statutes of limitation.
Four periods (or statutes of limitation) govern adverse possession.
Under the three-year statute, the intruder must enter the land either
under title or color of title as defined by the statute. Title means
the chain of title from the sovereignty. Color of title refers to a
claim based on a land right, land warrant, land scrip or an irregular
chain of title “that does not want of intrinsic fairness or honesty.”
Thereafter, the owner fails to file suit to recover the property within
three years. The three-year statute generates the least controversy. If a buyer
purchases land from the presumed owner as indicated by the chain of
title, in all probability, the grantee received title. Adverse possession
is not an issue. Under the five-year statute, the owner must file suit to recover the
property before an intruder: • cultivates, uses or enjoys the property;
• pays the property taxes for five consecutive years before they
become delinquent; and • claims the property under a duly registered warranty deed.
The adverse possessor may not claim the land based on
a forged deed, a deed executed under a forged power
of attorney or under a quitclaim deed.
The mere payment of the property taxes can not cause adverse possession under the five-year
statute. For this reason, one cotenant who pays all the property taxes for five consecutive years
can never acquire the other cotenants’ interests under this
The ten-year statute is sometimes referred to as true adverse possession. No incidence of title or deed is required for entry. No payment of property taxes is mandated after entry. According to
Section 16.026, the adverse possessor simply cultivates, uses or
enjoys the property for ten continuous years. Some restrictions apply to the
amount of land claimed. If the person enters without title, and if
the land is not enclosed, the claim is limited to 160 acres. If the land
is enclosed, the person may claim all the enclosed acreage that is
adversely and peaceably possessed. If the person enters under a registered
deed or other memorandum of title, however, the
possessor’s claim extends to the specified boundaries after ten
The concept of tolling alters the number of years actually applied
toward the three-, five- and ten year statutes. According to Section
16.022, if an owner suffers from a legal disability when the
possessor enters, the three-, five and ten-year statutes of limitation
will not begin running until the disability is removed.