|
Your transactions and information are secure.
|
|
News and Resources
ABA Commission on Mental and Physical Disability Law
Newsletters
Summer 2011
Spring 2011
Winter 2011
Fall 2010
Historic US Supreme Court Case Sacks v. Sacks ...
America's Children Not Protected by the Courts....
JUSTICE DENIED FOR AMERICA’S CHILDREN
US Supreme Court denied Sacks v. Sacks 10-1381
Mothers of America….Beware of the Courts…if
you stand up to protect your children….documented
evidence shows you will LOSE THEM to the
perpetrator…..if you don’t think this can happen to
you…read the Petition for Writ of Certiorari
attached….and read about this national crisis affecting
58,000 children
a year.
Sad
day for America’s Children
and their
protective parents…..
so now we must
all join
together to let our voices be heard….
and one day justice will prevail……
On June 27, 2011 the US Supreme
Court denied the Petition for Certorari in Sacks v.
Sacks Case 10-1381 showing the failure of courts all
over the US in protecting our most vulnerable….America’s
children.
The US Supreme Court in their decision to
decline to hear the case, shows there is no justice for
our children in the courts of the United States of
America. Linda Marie is more determined than ever to
expose this national crisis….and is so grateful for all
the support from Mothers, advocates and organizations
who are part of the solution…..please circulate this
Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to everyone….as this
cert documents the failure of “official avenues”,
courts, judges, police, Dept. of Children and Families,
CPT Child Protection Teams, and all of the court
appointed Custody Evaluators, Parental Coordinators, to
protect our children from documented abuse, and the safe
protective parent, will lose all custody, or be placed
on supervised visitation, while the perpetrator, named
by the child, will receive sole physical custody,
regardless of the documented evidence. This is a
NATIONAL EPIDEMIC, and this cert shows the documented
details of this court ordered child abuse to our
children.
How can this happen in the United States
of America? One answer is Court Appointed Custody
evaluators who provide false and misleading reports to
the courts…In the US Supreme Court Case Sacks v.
Sacks…Dr. Deborah O. Day, Court Appointed Custody
Evaluator from Psychological Affiliates, Winter Park,
Florida is quoted in Appendix J1 and states that Linda
Marie’s daughter at 8 years old, “in this examiners
opinion she has pediatric bipolar and that negates any
child sexual abuse”…..and then she thwarted the
investigation by DCF and the police department and
failed to protect the minor children. If you know of any
Dr. Deborah O. Day cases, please contact Linda Marie, as
this is being exposed…more cases are being brought to
her attention.
One day justice will prevail...thanks to
all of the national organizations, Mothers and
advocates who are addressing this crisis. Linda Marie
was chosen as the Poster Mother of the Family Court
Crisis by the NOW National Organization of Women, and
featured in their Spring Newsletter April 2011….www.now.org
and click on Spring Newsletter.
NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN: FACTS
FOUNDER ADELE GUADALUPE INTERVIEWS LINDA SACKS ABOUT HER
CASE
May 6, 2011 Press Release: Linda Marie
Sacks Filed Today in The US Supreme Court — Historic
Moment for all of America’s “Protective Parents”
In
domestic law on
May 7, 2011
at
5:52 am
May 6, 2011
Press Release
HISTORIC CASE FILED IN THE US SUPREME COURT IN THE US
SUPREME COURT IN WASHINGTON DC TODAY
In a landmark case, the Sacks v. Sacks case was accepted
today at the US Supreme Court in Washington DC. Linda
Marie Sacks, a Florida Mother hand delivered her 40
Petition for Certiorari, all wrapped in Red, White, and
Blue American Flag ribbon. She said “This is an
historic moment for all of America’s “Protective
Parents” and their children who are not being protected
by the “official avenues” who are supposed to protect
them, judges, police and the Dept. of Family and
Children. I am truly the all American Mom, and never did
I ever imagine, that I could lose custody of my children
for believing them and trying to protect. The Family
Court system is giving pedophiles and batterers custody,
and the safe, fit “protective parents” rights are
terminated, or like me are placed on supervised
visitation for years without a case plan or
reunification plan”.
She is a pro se litigant, and many years ago was quoted
in the
Momlogic.com
article that she had her sights on the US Supreme Court
if the family court did not return her children to her,
as they were “legally kidnapped in April 2007 by Judge
Shawn L. Briese. His ruling was REVERSED and REMANDED in
08/08 due to her constitutional rights to due process
being violated, but this rare reversal provided no
relief as Judge Briese refused to vacate the supervised
visitation order or protect the minor children.
The last time a case similar to this was presented was
the Wendy Titelman case. Wendy wrote a book titled “A
Mothers Journal” Let my Children Go! And it’s all about
child placed in the custody of their abusive parent and
the failure of Cobb County GA to protect her children.
The book is included in the Sacks Cert Petition, on page
38 and it quotes Hon. Sol. Gothard when he says “the
problems expressed in Wendy’s book are epidemic and
widespread.
These types of case and outcomes are noted by the DOJ,
and OVW, as well as national advocates and Mothers all
over the US.
Sacks is only allowed to see her children for 2 hours a
month at the local visitation center the 2nd
and 4th Saturday for 1 hour. This has only
amounted to 8 5
hours in 4years and
4months.
Sacks, is a “squeaky clean”, mom, and before the April
2007 ruling by Judge Briese, she was her daughter’s
primary care giver, and a loving caring Mother, as well
as their class mom, soccer mom, car pool Mom, community
volunteer, with no drugs, no alcohol, no abuse, no
infidelity, and she lost physical custody of her
children, and all she did was try to protect them. The
trial court dismissed, ignored, and suppresses credible
evidence of child sexual and physical abuse.
The Fifth District Court of Appeals with
Judge Evander, Judge Torpy and Judge
Cohen, affirmed Judge Briese’s ruling
and now this is an historical case being presented to
the US Supreme Court. (meet them at bottom)
READ MORE AND WATCH VIDEOS
www.CenterforJudicialExcellence.org
_________________________________
Meet the judges responsible for the children in this
case and some of their outstanding
achievements concerning women and children.
Honorable Judge Torpy: Children’s Advocacy Center, 1998
Honorable Judge Evander: Florida Judicial Ethics
Advisory Committee, June, 2007 – Present. Florida
Supreme Court Steering Committee on Families and
Children in the Court, July, 2002 – June 2005; Florida
Supreme Court Children's Improvement Committee, July,
2000 – June, 2001; Governor/Florida Supreme Court Award
for Outstanding Child Advocacy (2000).
Honorable Judge Cohen: He has been a member of the
Central Florida Woman Lawyers Association since 1988.
Judge
Shawn L. Briese (the family court judge responsible for
this case)
Division 30
125 E. Orange Avenue
Daytona Beach, FL 32114
Phone (386) 257-6090
Fax (386) 248-8145
Judicial Assistant - Michele Westfall
Circuit Judge Shawn L. Briese was elected as a Volusia
County Court judge in 1987 and was elected to the
circuit bench in 1990. Before becoming a judge, he was
an assistant attorney general and assistant state
attorney. He earned his undergraduate degree from
Florida State University and a juris doctor from Nova
Southeastern University. Judge Briese has heard
criminal, civil, juvenile dependency (and related
delinquency cases) and family cases.
He currently hears family cases at the Volusia County
Courthouse Annex in Daytona Beach.
This
was a rare opportunity for the US Justices to review an
historical case, which could have established case law,
clearly needed to uphold the constitutional of the
United States, for a parent to establish a home, and to
the care and custody of their children, and violated in
courtrooms all across the U.S.
The last time a case similar to this was presented to
the U.S. Supreme Court was Wendy Titelman’s case. Ms.
Titelman’s book, A Mother's Journal Book One: Let my
Children Go! details her children’s case in Cobb
County, Georgia where her children were placed in the
custody of their allegedly abusive parent after the
failure of that family court system to protect her
children. Ms. Titelman’s book is cited in the Sacks Cert
Petition and, on page 38 includes a quote from Hon. Sol
Gothard who said,“the problems expressed in Wendy’s book
are epidemic and widespread.”
These cases and outcomes are so widespread, they have
gained the attention of our Department of Justice’s
Office on Violence Against Women and advocates all over
the United States. (Page 12, 13 and 37 of the Cert
Petition).
According to The Leadership Council, 58,000 are
court-ordered to live with a sexually or physically
abusive parent after a divorce in the U.S. This a
“public health crisis” for America’s children.(www.leadershipcouncil.org).
This information is included in Ms. Sacks’ petition on
page 24.
The California Protective Parent Association (www.protectiveparent.com)
cites case studies showing a clear pattern of similar
cases and has asked for Congressional hearings to
address this crisis. Sacks petition pages 34-35.
Linda Marie Sacks states, “This is an historic case
for all of America’s children who are not being
protected by the official avenues which were put in
place to protect them. I am truly the “All American Mom”
and never did I ever imagine, that I could lose
custody of my children for believing them and trying to
protect them. The family court system is giving
pedophiles and batterers custody. Typically, the
parental rights of safe and absolutely fit protective
parents are being terminated - or like me are placed on
supervised visitation for years without a case plan or
reunification plan.”
Please forward to all and thank you for all you do,
as YOU are part of the solution to this nationwide
crisis.
Press Contact:
Kathleen Russell
Executive Director
Center for Judicial Excellence
495 Miller Avenue, Suite 304
Mill Valley, CA 94941
Main 415.388.9600 Fax 415.388.4610
www.CenterforJudicialExcellence.org
For more information please contact:
Linda Marie Sacks
386-453-3017
lindamariesacks@aol.com
June 7, 2011
National Disability Rights Network
Baltimore, MD
"When you add up all of these reforms, the
Affordable Care Act is the most comprehensive civil
rights law for people with disabilities since the
Americans with Disabilities Act. It reflects our
deep commitment to working toward the day when all
Americans who want to live in their community have the
freedom to do so."
Read entire speech>>
The
Center for Judicial Excellence Will Be on the Dr.
Phil Show This Monday Memorial Day!
We just heard from the Dr. Phil Show
that an episode that the Center for Judicial Excellence
previously taped will air on his show this
Monday, May 30! Dr. Phil is in the midst of a
series on ending the silence on domestic violence,
Monday's show is titled "Ending the Silence on Domestic
Violence: Custody Battles." A preview of Monday's show
can be found on Dr. Phil's homepage. The show will air
at 8:00 p.m. on Monday night in the San Francisco Bay
Area. For local listings, please check Dr. Phil's
website. This will be the the Center's second appearance
on the Dr. Phil Show -- Kathleen was on last year and
Stephen Burdo will appear on Monday.
________________________________________________________________________
FBI ALERT! JURY DUTY SCAM
This has been verified by the FBI (their link is also
included below). Please pass this on to everyone in your
email address book. It is spreading fast so be prepared
should you get this call. Most of us take those
summonses for jury duty seriously, but enough people
skip out on their civic duty that a new and ominous kind
of fraud has surfaced.
The caller claims to be a jury DUTY coordinator. If you
protest that you never received a summons for jury duty,
the Scammer asks you for your Social Security number and
date of birth so he or she can verify the information
and cancel the arrest warrant. Give out any of this
information and bingo, your identity was just stolen.
The fraud has been reported so far in 11 states,
including Oklahoma , Illinois , and Colorado , AZ and
more. This (swindle) is particularly insidious because
they use intimidation over the phone to try to bully
people into giving information by pretending they are
with the court system.
The FBI and the federal court system have issued
nationwide alerts on their web sites, warning consumers
about the fraud.
___________________________________________
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
May 20, 2011
HISTORIC CASE ON DOCKET IN UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT ON BEHALF
OF ALL OF AMERICA’S CHILDREN
US Supreme Court Clerk’s Office says Mothers Pro Se Cert is
Perfect
CASE 10-1381
CASE GOING TO THE US SUPREME COURT JUSTICES
Amicus Briefs and Press Needed Please…..
Historic Petition for Certiorari Attached to Press Release
Washington, D.C. May 20, 2011 – On May 6, 2011 a mother from
Daytona Beach, Florida, Linda Marie Sacks, walked over to our
nation's
highest court and hand delivered forty copies of her
Petition for Certiorari – wrapped in red, white, and blue
American flag ribbons. The US
Supreme Court Clerk’s office on
May 11, 2011 informed Sacks that her Pro Se Cert Petition’s were
perfect and complied with all of the
stringent rules of
procedure, so next week will go before the US Supreme Court
Judges, who will each have an opportunity to read, firsthand
about the crisis in the family court’s for America’s children
and their “Protective Parents”.
Full story
__________________________________________________________
May 5, 2011
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
PRESS CONFERENCE May 6th, 2011 at 12 Noon
Location:
US Supreme Court
One First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20543
Sidewalk in front of the US Supreme Court
HISTORIC US SUPREME COURT CASE
Child Advocates and Legal Scholars are anxiously awaiting the filing of a
Petition for Writ of Certiorari on May 6, 2011 at 12 noon at the US Supreme
Court in Washington, D.C. in the Sacks v. Sacks case.
This truly will be an Historic Day at the US Supreme Court, for America's
children and their "Protective Parents", as this landmark case is being hand
delivered by a Florida Mother and exposes a national crisis all over the US.
The Sacks v. Sacks case is the perfect opportunity for the US Supreme Court
to thoroughly explore and address the issue of Battered Mothers and child
abuse, and their documented evidence of "protective parents" losing custody
and the failure of family courts and Child Protective Services to thoroughly
investigate and handle Domestic Violence, child sexual/and or child physical
abuse cases properly, therefore resulting in a verdict, contrary to the
"bests interests of the child(ren)". full story
_______________________________________________
The American Bar
Association
is
offering an excellent
opportunity to help law students
and law school applicants with
disabilities.
The ABA Section of Legal
Education and Admission to the
Bar’s (LEAB) Standards Review
Committee (SRC) is soliciting
comments from
interested parties
(for more details, see:
http://apps.americanbar.org/legaled/committees/comstandards.html).
Comments to SRC are due by
mid-July. SRC will then process
the comments and submit its
suggestions to LEAB in August.
LEAB will then release the
proposed changes to the public
for another round of comments.
Therefore, there will be two
bites at this apple. in order to
ameliorate the ABA Standards and
Rules of Procedure for Approval
of Law Schools (Standards).
more
_________________________________________________
Department of Justice
Protecting Our Elders
http://protectingourelders.org/
________________________________________
Court rules for 'little guys' over corporations in
two business cases
Tony
Mauro
The National Law Journal l March 22, 2011
In a pair of business cases decided
Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court by lopsided
majorities ruled in favor of an employee in a
wage-and-hours dispute, and in favor of plaintiffs
in a securities class action. Corporations lost both
cases.
The rulings, like several in recent months, gave
anecdotal ammunition to those who insist the Roberts
Court does not deserve its reputation as a
reflexively "pro-business" Court.
In Kasten v.
Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp.,
the Court decided that the Fair Labor Standards Act
protects from retaliation employees who complain
about violations — even when the complaint is oral,
not written, and voiced to the employer, not a
government agency. And inMatrixx
Initiatives v. Siracusano, the justices
were unanimous in rejecting drug maker Matrixx's
claim that class action plaintiffs had made
insufficient pleadings to go forward with their
suit. The class asserts Matrixx defrauded investors
by issuing misleading information about the possible
side effects of Zicam, the cold remedy.
Within the past month, the Court has issued several
similar opinions favoring the "little guy" over
corporations in disputes over seat belt safety,
workplace discrimination against members of the
military, and corporate privacy interests.
The liberal Constitutional Accountability Center, a
leading critic of the Court's pro-business tilt,
felt compelled last month to "give credit where
credit is due" to Justice Clarence Thomas for a
concurring opinion that sided with consumers in
allowing state tort suits against automakers.
In the Kasten case, the Court continued its recent
trend of favoring employees in retaliation cases.
Justice Stephen Breyer, writing for the majority,
went back to the language of the Fair Labor
Standards Act and its context when it was passed in
1938 to protect "particularly illiterate, less
educated, or overworked workers." Given that
background, Breyer reasoned that the law, which bars
the firing of anyone who has "filed any complaint"
about wage-and-hours violations, was meant to cover
oral as well as written complaints. Justice Antonin
Scalia, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas,
dissented, arguing that the law only protects those
who filed complaints with a court or government
agency.
The Matrixx decision was perhaps more surprising,
given that the Court has been tightening up pleading
standards in recent years to discourage meritless
suits against corporations. Its rulings in Bell
Atlantic v. Twombly and Ashcroft
v. Iqbal have fueled much of the
criticism that the Roberts Court is unfairly
shielding corporations from litigation.
But Tuesday's decision, authored by Justice Sonia
Sotomayor, may represent a step back from the higher
pleading standards embraced in Twombly and Iqbal.
Sotomayor wrote that the plaintiffs in the Zicam
class action had "adequately pleaded materiality" to
the point that their claim should not have been
dismissed at the pleading stage. The class claimed
that, through press releases and other statements,
the company misled investors in the wake of
publicity about cases in which users of the
zinc-based Zicam had lost their sense of smell.
Matrixx asserted that the incidents of loss of smell
were insufficient to make a "statistically
significant correlation" to Zicam. But the unanimous
Court found that statistical significance or
insignificance is "not dispositive of every case."
The mere existence of so-called "adverse event"
reports is not in itself enough to make out a case
of securities fraud, Sotomayor wrote, but it can be
a factor in the "total mix" of things that would
influence a reasonable investor to sell or buy
stock. As a result, the class had presented enough
evidence to get past the pleading stage, though
Sotomayor concluded, "whether respondents can
ultimately prove their allegations and establish
scienter is an altogether different question."
The Matrixx ruling was also notable for unanimously
upholding a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the 9th Circuit — a relative rarity.
So why is the pro-business Court ruling against
business so often these days? "Perhaps it's because
the Roberts Court is not quite as pro-business as
critics make it out to be," said Richard Samp, chief
counsel of the Washington Legal Foundation, which
frequently advocates for the business side in
Supreme Court cases. Samp estimates that, so far
this term, the Court has ruled against business more
often than in favor — though the Court has so far
issued fewer than half of the decisions it will
produce this term.
In Kasten and
other recent retaliation cases, Samp said, the Court
has tended to side with employees mainly because the
statutes involved are written explicitly to protect
workers from punishment. "They're not pro-business
or pro-employee," Samp said of the justices.
"They're trying to interpret the statute in front of
them."
Darren Robbins of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd, the
lead plaintiffs' firm in the Zicam class action,
applauded the ruling in Matrixx.
"I'm not so cynical to think that, notwithstanding
certain conservative leanings on the Court, they
won't look at the facts of the case." Whatever
hostility justices may have had about class actions
has "started to fade away" in light of the financial
meltdown and its impact on retirees and pension
funds, Robbins said. "I can't believe that when
justices Alito and Scalia and Roberts look at
themselves in the mirror, they are saying, 'I am a
pro-business justice.' "
Doug Kendall of the Constitutional Accountability
Center, which has criticized the Court for its
rulings that favor Chamber of Commerce positions,
said Tuesday, "I'd love to claim that CAC issued a
report and the conservatives on the Supreme Court
suddenly stopped ruling so much for the Chamber, but
that's not the way the world works. We think it's
great the Court has been able to reach unanimous
decisions in a number of these early cases, but the
real test will come later in the term when it takes
on issues that have divided the Roberts Court."
Tony Mauro can
be contacted at tmauro@alm.com
____________________________________________________
NEWS RELEASE
NCD #10–611
December 2, 2010
Contact: Mark S. Quigley
mquigley@ncd.gov
202-272-2004
National Council on Disability Partners with U.S. Department of
State to Recognize International Day of Persons with
Disabilities
WASHINGTON—The
National Council on Disability (NCD) is cosponsoring three
panel discussions with the U.S. Department of State in
observance of International Day of Persons with Disabilities on
December 3. The panels will include discussions on the United
Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
(CRPD), violence against women and girls with disabilities, and
HIV/AIDS and disability.
The
annual observance of the International Day of Persons with
Disabilities on December 3 was established by the
International Year for Disabled
Persons in 1981. The Day is set aside to promote a better
understanding of disability issues with a focus on the rights of
people with disabilities and societal gains that come from the
integration of people with disabilities in every aspect of the
political, social, economic, and cultural life of their
communities. The World Programme of Action concerning Disabled
Persons developed the goal of full and effective participation
of people with disabilities in society and development, which
was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1982.
”NCD has
a long and rich history of involvement with the international
community in advocating for the rights of all people with
disabilities. We are proud to have worked in collaboration with
so many on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities, which was adopted in 2006 and signed
by the United States. We must continue to work together to
create measurable goals to increase the inclusion of people with
disabilities in every corner of the globe,” said Joan Durocher,
NCD’s General Counsel and Director of Policy, who presented at
the World Standards Cooperation accessibility workshop held
recently in Geneva, Switzerland. NCD also participated in the
recent meeting of the Global Initiative for Inclusive ICT
(G3ICT) forum co-sponsored by the U.S. Department of State and
George Washington University, where Ms. Durocher discussed NCD’s
upcoming overseas accessibility study, which examines Article 32
of the CRPD and the inclusion of people with disabilities around
the world.
According to
NCD Chairman Jonathan Young, “We are delighted that this
collaboration continues today with NCD participating in the
State Department’s observance of International Day of Persons
with Disabilities. It is our intention to continue to work with
people with disabilities around the world to achieve equal
opportunities to better themselves as they live, learn and earn
their way to success as they define it.”
“It is
estimated that there are 50 million people with disabilities in
the United States and 650 million people with disabilities
worldwide. As we celebrate the 20th anniversary of the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA), we know that our work is far from
over. We have made great accomplishments in this country and
around the world, but much more needs to be done,” said NCD
Executive Director Aaron Bishop.
NCD is an
independent federal agency charged with advising the President,
Congress, and other federal officials and entities on all
policies, programs, practices and procedures affecting people
with disabilities. NCD’s mission is to further the goals
enshrined in the ADA of 1990: equality of opportunity, full
participation, independent living and economic self-sufficiency
for all people with disabilities. NCD also provides technical
assistance on disability issues to countries around the world.
For more
information, please contact NCD’s Director of Communications,
Mark Quigley, at
mquigley@ncd.gov or by telephone at 202-272-2004.
________________________________________
FACT SHEET: Obama Administration Highlights Unprecedented
Coordination
across Federal Government to Combat Violence Against Women
As part of ongoing Administration efforts to reduce domestic
and sexual abuse, HHS, HUD, DOJ, Treasury, Labor and FDIC
announce new initiatives to protect victims of abuse, provide
resources to prevent abuse.
see fact sheet
The
National ADA Symposium
womenslaw.org
The Mission of WomensLaw.org is to provide easy-to-understand legal information
and resources to women living with or escaping domestic violence or sexual
assault. By reaching out through the Internet, we empower women and girls to
lead independent lives, free from abuse...
Issues & Advocacy: Tell the President We Need a Disability Rights Leader like
Justice Stevens! By Robert Poulin
Despite Congress's bipartisan passage in 2008 of the ADA
Amendments Act (ADAAA) to restore the law's broad reach after years of hostile
court rulings, judges are still getting the ADA wrong - still shutting the
courthouse door on people
more...
Celebrate the 20th Anniversary of
the Americans with Disabilities Act! Join the 2010 by 2010 Campaign!
From AAPD (2.23.10):
Congressional Leadership Join Justice For All Action Network in
Commemorating the ADA and Announcing 20th Anniversary Agenda
Face To Face: The Final Take, Justice for All?, Article
from The Las Vegas Sun, Nov. 12, 2008,
Ms. Huffer is the first to coin the phrase....
Call it what you will, the syndrome exists...
top
|
|
Copyright©
1995-2011 Karin Huffer and Fulkort Press, LLC. All
Rights Reserved.
NOTICE: "Legal Abuse Syndrome" and the
materials contained within "Overcoming the Devastation
of Legal Abuse Syndrome" are copyrighted to Karin Huffer.
Any entity wishing to use the term or material must
obtain Dr. Huffer's prior written permission.
Disclaimer: LVAA does not give legal advice or
perform duties requiring a license to practice law.
Clerical work is the product of the customer and
research is restricted to issues pertinent to access to
the Court for those with special needs.
Notice:
RE: ADA Advocates.
If someone represents themselves as being an ADA
Advocate certified by Dr. Karin Huffer, or associates
with LVAA or any affiliate service in any way they will
have a certificate and an identification badge with an
identifier serial number. Our Advocates are focused
only on the functionality of the client under the ADAAA.
ADA Advocates are Third Party disinterested
participants in legal actions on an administrative basis
only.
|
|
