Ten Foot Pole!
Dec 4th 2003, 1:45 am
#76
Banned
Joined: Sep 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 3,825
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Whatever (lol). Glad to see time has not eroded your wit, intelligence or sparkling personality :-).
Dec 4th 2003, 1:47 am
#77
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,266
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Originally posted by Ranjini
I agree with Paul here 100%. When "do-it-yourselfers" (your term Matt) like us start researching the process we like to have all aspects and all the do's and don'ts at our fingertips. That way, we know with certainty that the path we we have chosen from point A to B is the quickest and the safest.
You and Folinsky jump in and advise people of all the negatives of a certain dubious path and that's GOOD. Paul pointing out that the law actually has loopholes in certain instances is knowledge. But not necesserily a path that he thinks someone should take. All this argument is also GOOD. Because it's debate. And debate is always GOOD. Matt, you can't expect people to accept what you say, just because you are an attorney. You have to be more open to people challenging you. Folinsky somehow takes all this in better spirit than you do. Come off it Matt....
I agree with Paul here 100%. When "do-it-yourselfers" (your term Matt) like us start researching the process we like to have all aspects and all the do's and don'ts at our fingertips. That way, we know with certainty that the path we we have chosen from point A to B is the quickest and the safest.
You and Folinsky jump in and advise people of all the negatives of a certain dubious path and that's GOOD. Paul pointing out that the law actually has loopholes in certain instances is knowledge. But not necesserily a path that he thinks someone should take. All this argument is also GOOD. Because it's debate. And debate is always GOOD. Matt, you can't expect people to accept what you say, just because you are an attorney. You have to be more open to people challenging you. Folinsky somehow takes all this in better spirit than you do. Come off it Matt....
Hi:
I happen to be quite good a locating "loopholes." In fact, a large part of my practice is referrals from other immigration lawyers because I see loopholes that other people miss.
However, there is very BIG difference between a "loophole" and recommending BREAKING the law with the idea that the loophole might help at a later time.
BTW, I will apologize that you have hit a pet peeve of mine -- the misuse of the word "loophole" -- I remember once seeing Leslie Stahl doing a story on "60 Minutes" describing the H-1b program as a "loophole" which allows hiring foreign engineers at lower salaries that paid US engineers. Hell, that level of payment is PROHIBITED by the H-1b laws -- it wasn't a "loophole" -- it was violating the law pure and simple.
Dec 4th 2003, 2:01 am
#78
Banned
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,933
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Originally posted by Folinskyinla
Hi:
I happen to be quite good a locating "loopholes." In fact, a large part of my practice is referrals from other immigration lawyers because I see loopholes that other people miss.
However, there is very BIG difference between a "loophole" and recommending BREAKING the law with the idea that the loophole might help at a later time.
Hi:
I happen to be quite good a locating "loopholes." In fact, a large part of my practice is referrals from other immigration lawyers because I see loopholes that other people miss.
However, there is very BIG difference between a "loophole" and recommending BREAKING the law with the idea that the loophole might help at a later time.
However, I do agree that it would certainly be irresponsible on the part of an attorney to actually recommend breaking the law. I agree with you 100%.However, Paul is not an attorney and I don't believe he was recommending to anyone that they actually break the law. I think I agree with him upto the point that knowledge on part of someone entering the US could actually prevent that person being blindsided by an unscrupulous POE officer, IF in fact he was not breaking the law...
Dec 4th 2003, 2:08 am
#79
Banned
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,933
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Originally posted by Matthew Udall
Whatever (lol). Glad to see time has not eroded your wit, intelligence or sparkling personality :-).
Whatever (lol). Glad to see time has not eroded your wit, intelligence or sparkling personality :-).
Dec 4th 2003, 2:21 am
#80
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,266
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Originally posted by Ranjini
I would have thought that spotting loopholes was the hallmark of a good attorney However, I do agree that it would certainly be irresponsible on the part of an attorney to actually recommend breaking the law. I agree with you 100%.
However, Paul is not an attorney and I don't believe he was recommending to anyone that they actually break the law. I think I agree with him upto the point that knowledge on part of someone entering the US could actually prevent that person being blindsided by an unscrupulous POE officer, IF in fact he was not breaking the law...
I would have thought that spotting loopholes was the hallmark of a good attorney
However, I do agree that it would certainly be irresponsible on the part of an attorney to actually recommend breaking the law. I agree with you 100%.However, Paul is not an attorney and I don't believe he was recommending to anyone that they actually break the law. I think I agree with him upto the point that knowledge on part of someone entering the US could actually prevent that person being blindsided by an unscrupulous POE officer, IF in fact he was not breaking the law...
I've posted this before, but it bears posting again. I drum three rules into my clients' heads for dealing with ANY immigration related innterview or examination. I tell my clients that they are NOT to think about what the law or try to get into the examiner's/interrogator's head. The rules are:
ONE: Tell the truth, its easier to remember. [Thanks to Ron Tassof for that one]. Corollary: don't guess. "I don't know" or "I don't remember" are good answers if thats the truth.
TWO: Understand the question being asked. This is particularly important if English is not your first language. If you answer a question you don't understand, you are then guessing and violating rule number one. If you don't understand, say "Repeat that, please" or "what?" or "huh???". The question will be repeated.
THREE: Answer ONLY the question ASKED, and nothing more. If the officer asks you "Do you know what time it is?" the only two possible answers are "yes" or "no" -- do NOT give them the time of day unless they specifically ask.
I have found that these rules work in ALL situations -- even if you don't get what you want at that time, it prevents you from exacerbating the problems you may already have.
Dec 4th 2003, 2:32 am
#81
Banned
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,933
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Originally posted by Folinskyinla
ONE: Tell the truth, its easier to remember. [Thanks to Ron Tassof for that one]. Corollary: don't guess. "I don't know" or "I don't remember" are good answers if thats the truth.
ONE: Tell the truth, its easier to remember. [Thanks to Ron Tassof for that one]. Corollary: don't guess. "I don't know" or "I don't remember" are good answers if thats the truth.
Dec 4th 2003, 3:37 am
#82
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
Ranjini wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="[email protected]">Ori ginally
posted by Matthew Udall <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Whatever (lol). Glad to see time has not
eroded your wit, intelligence or sparkling personality :-). <br>
</blockquote>
<!---->Was that addressed to De Faria or to me? If it was to me, I
actually think you are paying me a compliment<br>
</blockquote>
And if it was to me it was not a compliment! <span
class="moz-smiley-s2"><span> :-( </span></span><br>
<br>
Hey my post was just a quick, light-hearted attempt at humor. Sure I
poked fun at lawyers in general - but it was a joke! If you can't laugh
at yourself then you have no sense of humor.<br>
<br>
-- <br>
As a computer, I find your faith in technology amusing.<br>
</body>
</html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
Ranjini wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="[email protected]">Ori ginally
posted by Matthew Udall <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Whatever (lol). Glad to see time has not
eroded your wit, intelligence or sparkling personality :-). <br>
</blockquote>
<!---->Was that addressed to De Faria or to me? If it was to me, I
actually think you are paying me a compliment
<br></blockquote>
And if it was to me it was not a compliment! <span
class="moz-smiley-s2"><span> :-( </span></span><br>
<br>
Hey my post was just a quick, light-hearted attempt at humor. Sure I
poked fun at lawyers in general - but it was a joke! If you can't laugh
at yourself then you have no sense of humor.<br>
<br>
-- <br>
As a computer, I find your faith in technology amusing.<br>
</body>
</html>
Dec 4th 2003, 3:40 am
#83
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
Ranjini wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="[email protected]">Ori ginally
posted by Folinskyinla <br>
<blockquote type="cite">ONE: Tell the truth, its easier to remember.
[Thanks to Ron Tassof for that one]. Corollary: don't guess. "I don't
know" or "I don't remember" are good answers if thats the truth.<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
Yes Mr INS guy, I did enter on a vistor visa but I intend to marry my
fiancee (Just trying to keep on topic)! <span class="moz-smiley-s1"><span>
:-) </span></span><br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="[email protected]"><!----><!----></blockquote>
<br>
-- <br>
I don't have a solution but I admire the problem.<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
Ranjini wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="[email protected]">Ori ginally
posted by Folinskyinla <br>
<blockquote type="cite">ONE: Tell the truth, its easier to remember.
[Thanks to Ron Tassof for that one]. Corollary: don't guess. "I don't
know" or "I don't remember" are good answers if thats the truth.<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
Yes Mr INS guy, I did enter on a vistor visa but I intend to marry my
fiancee (Just trying to keep on topic)! <span class="moz-smiley-s1"><span>
:-) </span></span><br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="[email protected]"><!----><!----></blockquote>
<br>
-- <br>
I don't have a solution but I admire the problem.<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>
Dec 4th 2003, 3:44 am
#84
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,350
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Originally posted by Folinskyinla
Hi:
Actually, inasmuch as the "victim" in marriage fraud is the US government, I think my duty of confidentiality would trump any obligation to warn the US government.
But lets say that I was retained to do visa work and was informed that the true purpose of the visa was to enable the bagman for an Al-gaeda cell to enter the U.S. -- would I be required to inform the US government? I don't know the answer.
I did attend a "MCLE" seminar on legal ethics, and this issue is under consideraton in the context of corporate counsel -- in the light of Enron and others.
Hi:
Actually, inasmuch as the "victim" in marriage fraud is the US government, I think my duty of confidentiality would trump any obligation to warn the US government.
But lets say that I was retained to do visa work and was informed that the true purpose of the visa was to enable the bagman for an Al-gaeda cell to enter the U.S. -- would I be required to inform the US government? I don't know the answer.
I did attend a "MCLE" seminar on legal ethics, and this issue is under consideraton in the context of corporate counsel -- in the light of Enron and others.
This is not a settled issue. Indeed, it's only becoming more aggressively litigated. And until the dust settles, attorneys need to tread extremely carefully in the shark infested ethical waters where an attorney's "duty to speak up" (federal ethics rules, under certain circumstances) and the "duty to shut up" (state ethics rules, such as those in California, Washington and others) collide.
As a lawyer in California who nonetheless practices primarily in a federal jurisdiction, I imagine Folinskyinla must feel this tension all the time.
Last edited by Dekka's Angel; Dec 4th 2003 at 3:48 am.
Dec 4th 2003, 4:13 am
#85
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,266
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Originally posted by Andrew Defaria
Yes Mr INS guy, I did enter on a vistor visa but I intend to marry my
fiancee (Just trying to keep on topic)!
Yes Mr INS guy, I did enter on a vistor visa but I intend to marry my
fiancee (Just trying to keep on topic)!
Precisely. Never, ever lie to the jerks.
If you are asked point blank on that topic -- you want to have a "no valid visa" finding [212(a)(7)] and be allowed to "withdraw" your application for admission. A "misrepresentation" finding [212(a)(6)(C)] is bad news indeed.
Dec 4th 2003, 1:00 pm
#86
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
In article <[email protected]>,
Ranjini <member839@british_expats.com> wrote:
>Just stating facts. People have their say, you say they are guilty of
>UPL. Happens all the time. Paul says he does it for fun. When all is
>said and done, people make their views known, including yourself.
>What's so wrong about that???
Honestly, Ranjini...
I'd rather have Matt giving us his advice (regardless of a personal slant or
not - I haven't perceived one other than "CMA") than you and Gani raving and
ranting about him saying things he has NOT said (isn't that libel - still
illegal, AFAIK), and trying to make him look bad at every turn, when neither
of you are licensed to practice law.
You may have a history in this forum, but right now, you're looking like a
troll, plain and simple..
Mattias
Ranjini <member839@british_expats.com> wrote:
>Just stating facts. People have their say, you say they are guilty of
>UPL. Happens all the time. Paul says he does it for fun. When all is
>said and done, people make their views known, including yourself.
>What's so wrong about that???
Honestly, Ranjini...
I'd rather have Matt giving us his advice (regardless of a personal slant or
not - I haven't perceived one other than "CMA") than you and Gani raving and
ranting about him saying things he has NOT said (isn't that libel - still
illegal, AFAIK), and trying to make him look bad at every turn, when neither
of you are licensed to practice law.
You may have a history in this forum, but right now, you're looking like a
troll, plain and simple..
Mattias
Dec 4th 2003, 1:33 pm
#87
Banned
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,933
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Originally posted by Mattias Hembruch
In article <[email protected]>,
Ranjini <member839@british_expats.com> wrote:
>Just stating facts. People have their say, you say they are guilty of
>UPL. Happens all the time. Paul says he does it for fun. When all is
>said and done, people make their views known, including yourself.
>What's so wrong about that???
<snip> than you and Gani raving and
ranting about him saying things he has NOT said (isn't that libel - still
illegal, AFAIK) <snip>
Mattias
In article <[email protected]>,
Ranjini <member839@british_expats.com> wrote:
>Just stating facts. People have their say, you say they are guilty of
>UPL. Happens all the time. Paul says he does it for fun. When all is
>said and done, people make their views known, including yourself.
>What's so wrong about that???
<snip> than you and Gani raving and
ranting about him saying things he has NOT said (isn't that libel - still
illegal, AFAIK) <snip>
Mattias
Matt has his usefulness on this forum as much as Paul. I think Matt knows what I'm talking about, even if you don't
So let's just leave it at that.
Dec 4th 2003, 2:46 pm
#88
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,266
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Originally posted by Dekka's Angel
As a lawyer in California who nonetheless practices primarily in a federal jurisdiction, I imagine Folinskyinla must feel this tension all the time.
As a lawyer in California who nonetheless practices primarily in a federal jurisdiction, I imagine Folinskyinla must feel this tension all the time.
Fortunately, I find that the ethical rules provide a pretty clear course to follow most of the time.
However, when they come into conflict, then I really do feel the tension.
On the SEC/WSBA fight, I'm of the opinion that Federal preemption will win out in the end. I think the Supremes Sperry v. Florida case dictates that. That was a pure conflict between Federal and State law on the practice of law. There have been subsequent cases on constitutional, not statutory, implications -- advertising, residence and certification come to mind at the moment.
However, I wouldn't want to be the attorney subjected to discipline to test the matter. Sigh.
Dec 4th 2003, 3:23 pm
#89
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,049
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Andrew,
He did give you the name, all you had to do was read it.
"The interesting point on that page is that the sample name given as an example is the mother of cases on professional liability with knowledge of liklihood of future illegal conduct with obliations of silence."
Regards, JEff
He did give you the name, all you had to do was read it.
"The interesting point on that page is that the sample name given as an example is the mother of cases on professional liability with knowledge of liklihood of future illegal conduct with obliations of silence."
Regards, JEff
Originally posted by Andrew Defaria
Had you included that name I would have searched... Thanks for the name.
......
Had you included that name I would have searched... Thanks for the name.
......
Dec 4th 2003, 5:33 pm
#90
Banned
Joined: Sep 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 3,825
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Originally posted by Ranjini
I think Matt knows what I'm talking about
I think Matt knows what I'm talking about