The below cited case gives the possibility to a new coined term for precedent: Industry Handjob. Legal theory and precedent; Shepardizing has been in my blood for years. Almost twenty years ago I cut my teeth as a legal liaison working on an issue impacting the autonomous Rainbow Family with respect to Public Objections IN RE: 36 C.F.R. § 251. I had occasion to learn the intricacies of the K Street mentality in my interactions with United States Department of Agriculture‘s (USDA) Administrative Promulgator, Marion Connolly.
The right to Petition For Redress of Grievance is a right hammered out by our Founding Fathers. In the same manner as the Writ of Habeas Corpus, the Framers of our Constitution realized that usurpation by both governmental and private financial interests posed clear and present dangers to our “…Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Balderas v. Massage Envy
- United States District Court, Northern District of California
- Case Type: Employment class action
- Status: Class action on file
DPLO, along with its co-counsel Landman & Mazza LLP is prosecuting this action against Massage Envy, a national franchisor of massage spas. The suit, which is now pending in federal court in San Francisco, was brought by a massage therapist who alleges that she was forced to bear the costs of background checks and individual liability insurance in order to work, in violation of California labor laws.
The Mortgage Field Services Industry has been issuing Demand after Demand, by fiat, for years. The hedge has been that most Contractors simply do not understand the law; the boots on the ground generally follow along like sheeple and graze at the feet of the Order Mills. While this mentality might do well in Soviet Russia, we live in a Democracy; a Republic. There are Laws of the Land that while the Financial Institutions may flaunt them, the Order Mills do not have to Capital Reserves to do the same.
