Sentences with phrase «advice is available in each state»

Free legal advice is available in each state and territory.

Not exact matches

Virginia Mollenkott states concerning Paul's advice to women: «My training as a literary critic simply will not permit me to indulge in interpretations which depend on evidence which is not yet available.»

Unlike in the West (particularly in the United States), where the medical writing profession is more established and assistance from several writing associations in getting contacts, work, support, and advice is available, this profession is relatively new in Asia.

The land use plans were developed during over a multi-year process in partnership with the states and local partners, guided by the best available science and technical advice from the FWS.

Free legal advice on your debts is also available from community legal centres and Legal Aid offices in each state and territory.

Take advantage of the Business Platinum Concierge service, which is available 24 hours a day when you need an extra hand to find a place to eat or stay, or need advice on getting a gift or putting a floral arrangement together for a client in another state.

For less severe ailments, our plans include Teladoc, a service that instantly connects travelers with a network of physicians for information, advice and treatment, including prescriptions when appropriate (services may not be available in all states and international services may be limited).

E-4295 promulgated the 8.5 GWh production figure although the advice letter states: «The PPA is a short - term, bilateral contract for as - available output from a test facility that eSolar built in Lancaster, California to evaluate and demonstrate its solar tower technology.»

In Upjohn Co. v. United States, 6 the United States Supreme Court held that a company's attorney — client privilege extends to company counsel's communications with employees in certain prescribed circumstances.7 Rather than providing a simple objective test, the Upjohn court instead established five factors to guide courts in determining whether the company's privilege should extend to counsel's communications with its employees: (1) whether the communications were made by employees at the direction of superior officers of the company for the purpose of obtaining legal advice; (2) whether the communications contained information necessary for counsel to render legal advice, which was not otherwise available from «control group» management; (3) whether the matters communicated were within the scope of the employee's corporate duties; (4) whether the employee knew that the communications were for the purpose of the company obtaining legal advice; and (5) whether the communications were ordered to be kept confidential by the employee's superiors, including that the communications were considered confidential at the time and kept confidential subsequent to the interview.8 When these elements are established, courts generally consider communications between company counsel and an employee to be within the scope of the company's attorney — client privilegeIn Upjohn Co. v. United States, 6 the United States Supreme Court held that a company's attorney — client privilege extends to company counsel's communications with employees in certain prescribed circumstances.7 Rather than providing a simple objective test, the Upjohn court instead established five factors to guide courts in determining whether the company's privilege should extend to counsel's communications with its employees: (1) whether the communications were made by employees at the direction of superior officers of the company for the purpose of obtaining legal advice; (2) whether the communications contained information necessary for counsel to render legal advice, which was not otherwise available from «control group» management; (3) whether the matters communicated were within the scope of the employee's corporate duties; (4) whether the employee knew that the communications were for the purpose of the company obtaining legal advice; and (5) whether the communications were ordered to be kept confidential by the employee's superiors, including that the communications were considered confidential at the time and kept confidential subsequent to the interview.8 When these elements are established, courts generally consider communications between company counsel and an employee to be within the scope of the company's attorney — client privilegein certain prescribed circumstances.7 Rather than providing a simple objective test, the Upjohn court instead established five factors to guide courts in determining whether the company's privilege should extend to counsel's communications with its employees: (1) whether the communications were made by employees at the direction of superior officers of the company for the purpose of obtaining legal advice; (2) whether the communications contained information necessary for counsel to render legal advice, which was not otherwise available from «control group» management; (3) whether the matters communicated were within the scope of the employee's corporate duties; (4) whether the employee knew that the communications were for the purpose of the company obtaining legal advice; and (5) whether the communications were ordered to be kept confidential by the employee's superiors, including that the communications were considered confidential at the time and kept confidential subsequent to the interview.8 When these elements are established, courts generally consider communications between company counsel and an employee to be within the scope of the company's attorney — client privilegein determining whether the company's privilege should extend to counsel's communications with its employees: (1) whether the communications were made by employees at the direction of superior officers of the company for the purpose of obtaining legal advice; (2) whether the communications contained information necessary for counsel to render legal advice, which was not otherwise available from «control group» management; (3) whether the matters communicated were within the scope of the employee's corporate duties; (4) whether the employee knew that the communications were for the purpose of the company obtaining legal advice; and (5) whether the communications were ordered to be kept confidential by the employee's superiors, including that the communications were considered confidential at the time and kept confidential subsequent to the interview.8 When these elements are established, courts generally consider communications between company counsel and an employee to be within the scope of the company's attorney — client privilege.9

The High Court judge, Mr Justice Francis, said that Parliament can not have intended for legal aid not to be available in such cases: «However, it does seem to me that when Parliament changed the law in relation to legal aid and significantly restricted the availability of legal aid, yet continued to make legal aid available in care cases where the state is seeking orders against parents, it can not have intended that parents in the position that these parents have been in should have no access to legal advice or representation... I am aware that there are many parents around the country in similar positions where their cases have been less public and where they have had to struggle to represent themselves.

As indicated elsewhere in this Terms and Conditions Statement, the legal information and legal documents available from this Web site is not a substitute for the legal advice of an attorney who is a member of the bar of the state where you live or do business as a legal document preparation service.

The Court relied heavily on guidelines given by the Family Division in Coventry City Council v C [2013] EWHC 2190 (Fam), where the Court stated that every social worker must be satisfied that the person giving consent has capacity to do so, and that even if the person does not lack capacity that the social worker must be satisfied that the consent is fully informed (meaning that the parent must understand the consequences of giving consent, the range of choices available, the consequences of refusal and of giving consent, and must be in possession of all the facts and issues material to the giving of consent), fair and proportionate, and where possible parents must obtain legal advice before consenting.

The U.S. Supreme Court, in Swidler & Berlin v. United States, 524 U.S. 399, 403 (1998), reasoned that full and frank disclosure is a prerequisite that attorneys need in order to give their clients the best legal advice available.

For less severe ailments, our plans include Teladoc, a service that instantly connects travelers with a network of physicians for information, advice and treatment, including prescriptions when appropriate (services may not be available in all states and international services may be limited).

However, community legal centres and Legal Aid agencies offer free legal advice, and services are available in every state and territory.

Free legal advice on your debts is also available from community legal centres and Legal Aid offices in each state and territory.

Fostering services: National Minimum Standards NMS 22.12 states: «During an investigation the fostering service makes support, which is independent of the fostering service, available to the person subject to the allegation and, where this is a foster carer, to their household, in order to provide: Information and advice about the process Emotional support, and If needed, mediation between the foster carer and the fostering service and / or advocacy (including attendance at meetings and panel hearings)»