Oklahoma Ranks 17th, Most Knowledgeable Drivers in Idaho and Wisconsin, Least Knowledgeable in New York.

WINSTON-SALEM, N.C – Results from the 2009 GMAC Insurance National Drivers Test released today found that 20.1 percent of licensed Americans – amounting to roughly 41 million drivers on the road – would not pass a written drivers test exam if taken today. When probed on driving behavior, 30 percent of those surveyed say financial strains have triggered a desire to drive less and seek out new ways to save money.  

Overall, findings from the fifth annual survey indicate the number of drivers with knowledge of basic road rules is decreasing, with this year’s test scores lower than last year’s (76.6 percent vs. 78.1 percent).

Click to see full size image.

Idaho and Wisconsin drivers tied for first in the nation, with an average test score of 80.6 percent; New York drivers ranked last, with an average score of 70.5 percent. This is the second time Idaho ranked first and the second time New York has ranked last in the survey’s five-year history.

“When we began this campaign five years ago, we embarked on a mission to help drivers become more aware of the rules of the road,” said Wade Bontrager, senior vice president, Affinity Division, GMAC Insurance. “We’ve seen the results ebb and flow, and this year, scores are down. This reiterates the fact that each and every one of us need to continually be brushing up on safe driving practices.”

In general, geographical regions ranked similarly to previous years, with the lowest average test scores in the Northeast, while the states in the Midwest held the highest averages. When comparing genders, men are still more likely to pass the test than women, but the gap is considerably smaller in 2009 (81 percent of males versus 79 percent of females) than in 2008 (87 percent of males versus 80 percent of females).

Respondents continued to have difficulty on questions about yellow lights and safe following distances, while almost all drivers answered correctly what a solid line meant.

Additional key findings from the 2009 GMAC Insurance National Drivers Test include:

•          With Age Comes Wisdom: The older the driver, the higher the test score. Drivers 35+ years old were most likely to pass. The age group with the highest failure rates was young adults (18 to 24 years old). White males older than 45 received the highest average score.
•          The Northeast had the lowest average test scores (74.5 percent), the South had the highest failure rate (41 percent). The Midwest had the highest average test scores (79 percent) and the lowest failure rates (15 percent).
•          Idaho and Wisconsin replaced Kansas’s 2008 ranking as most knowledgeable; New York replaced New Jersey’s 2008 ranking as least knowledgeable.

Survey Says: Economic Concerns Causing People to Drive Less

In addition to the 20-question DMV exam, GMAC Insurance posed subsequent questions exploring participants’ planned driving habits for the following year and their take on mileage-based auto insurance programs (pay-as-you-drive insurance). These findings reveal:

•          Approximately 30 percent of drivers surveyed reported they plan on driving less within the following 12 months, with the primary reason being “worry over the economy” (74 percent). Twenty-four percent indicated they plan on driving less to “reduce expenses due to financial problems.”
•          Ninety-three percent of respondents had never heard of a “pay as you go insurance” pricing model for automobile insurance.
•          However, one-in-three drivers (35 percent) would enroll in a “pay as you go insurance” program, such as the GMAC Insurance Low-Mileage Discount (OnStar.GMACInsurance.com), if their insurance company offered one.

State Rankings

Where are the most knowledgeable drivers in the nation? The following is a complete list of state rankings for the 2009 GMAC Insurance National Drivers Test.

The survey, which polled more than 5,000 licensed Americans from all 50 states and the District of Columbia, is designed to gauge driver knowledge by administering 20 actual questions taken from state Department of Motor Vehicles exams. The margin of error for the total sample surveyed is 1.4 percent.

Get in the Driver’s Seat: Take the Test Yourself

GMAC Insurance encourages the public to put their skills to the test at www.gmacinsurance.com. Play a quirky driving game, take the written test itself, compare your score to the national average and challenge friends to top your score via email and Facebook. Also, see how your state ranked in previous years and, most importantly, brush up on safe driving tips.

The GMAC Insurance survey was administered by TNS, a leading market information resource and the world’s largest provider of custom research and analysis. The national sample was comprised of 5,183 licensed drivers in the United States, aged 16-60+. For more information about TNS, please visit www.tns-us.com.

Las Vegas Business Press – Las Vegas,NV,USA

BY TIM O’REILEY

A Las Vegas bankruptcy judge has dealt a blow to an obscure but critical piece of the mortgage enforcement machinery that could slow foreclosures.

After a rare hearing in front of three judges last year that initially encompassed 27 cases, U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Linda Riegle has ruled that the Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS) could not represent lenders seeking to foreclose on delinquent homeowners already in bankruptcy unless it could produce the actual loan note. This goes to the heart of how home lending has evolved over the past two decades, with a loan rarely staying on the books of the originator but often being sold several times to other institutions or investment groups. As a result, producing a loan document is far more complex than opening a drawer in a filing cabinet.

MERS, a joint venture of numerous lenders launched in 1993, is a database tracking an estimated 60 million mortgages and promising to take responsibility for functions such as foreclosure as long as a mortgage stays with a MERS member. To reach this point, en route to its self-professed goal of “register(ing) every mortgage loan in the United States,” it has fought off court challenges to its status across the country and challenged the argument that it must possess a loan document to have legal standing. MERS has represented hundreds of different lenders in Las Vegas in recent years.

For that reason, MERS quickly appealed Riegle’s decision in April. Although not commenting directly on the case, a MERS spokeswoman points to other states such as Florida, where MERS lost at the trial-court level but ultimately won on appeal.

The case has attracted industrywide attention. Writing last October in the American Bankruptcy Institute newsletter, Johnathan Bolton, a bankruptcy attorney with the Houston firm of Fulbright & Jaworski, noted that the local case “could have a great impact on the ability to enforce mortgages in the United States.”

“Since Nevada is a nonjudicial foreclosure state, this issue is only now coming to a head,” said Bill Uffelman, president of the Nevada Bankers Association. “If in fact you can’t produce the note, it puts the whole thing (a foreclosure) into abeyance.”

But for people with homes worth far less than the loan balance or without the income to cover monthly payments, the ruling may buy only a few months of breathing room.

“Whether this changes the outcomes of foreclosures remains to be seen,” said Henderson attorney Robert Massi, who represents debtors. “But it does buy time and gains some negotiating leverage” even before a bankruptcy.

Lenard Schwartzer, a private attorney and a bankruptcy trustee who won the case, has come to doubt its practical significance.

“In most cases, it buys an additional three to six months,” he said. ”But not many people seem to care.”

Because people tire of living under the threat of a forced move-out, especially when a house has negative equity, he now describes his work on the case as “50 to 100 hours of wasted legal time.”

The ruling comes amid swelling complaints that mortgage servicers have exacerbated the deluge of foreclosures in the past couple of years. Assembly Speaker Barbara Buckley has introduced a bill in the current legislative session to allow financially besieged homeowners to request arbitration of a default, partly to bypass servicers and force lenders to the table.

MERS claims credit for an integral role in the widespread expansion of mortgage lending options for consumers by providing the mechanism not only to follow loans from owner to owner but avoid tens of millions of dollars of recording fees every year and the piles of paperwork that come with it. MERS highlights one section of a Florida court decision that called it “an innovative instrument of commerce.”

Nevertheless, Riegle’s ruling not only parsed federal and state law but at least implicitly rapped MERS on the knuckles for its practices. For example, she noted that MERS acted as the attorney on several loans in Las Vegas even after they were transferred to non-MERS members. She also rejected the argument that lenders who belong to MERS and designated it to be their legal representative should be good enough for the court. Without the loan papers, she concluded, MERS’ terms and conditions for its members do not give it any rights to foreclose under Nevada law.

“To reverse an old adage,” she wrote, “if it doesn’t walk like a duck, talk like a duck and quack like a duck, then it’s not a duck.”

Foreclosure is just a lawsuit brought by the bank to try to take back your property. You have the legal right to fight that lawsuit. Banks must take specific steps, in the correct order, with the correct timing, in order to have the right to foreclose.  Whether it is a commercial or residential foreclosure, I can fight your mortgage company.  Brian Huddleston

Agreement reached on Oklahoma civil justice plan – BusinessWeek.

Senate President Pro Tem Glenn Coffee, R-Oklahoma City, said all groups had agreed to the bill’s language and predicted it will be signed into law by Gov. Brad Henry, who has opposed some civil justice changes and vetoed a lawsuit reform proposal last year.

“I believe that he will sign this bill,” Coffee said.

In a statement, Henry called the bill “perhaps the most comprehensive tort bill in state history” and said it is similar to the compromise proposal he made in 2007 but was unable to reach a consensus for.

“I will be reviewing the measure in greater detail in the days to come, but based on my initial reading of it, I believe this is a strong piece of reform legislation,” the governor said.

“I have always supported reasonable and responsible reforms that improve the civil justice system without impairing a citizen’s constitutional right to have his or her legitimate grievances appropriately addressed in court. This legislation appears to strike the delicate balance required to meet those goals,” he said.

Among the bill’s sweeping changes are a redefining of what constitutes a frivolous lawsuit and strengthening of summary judgment rules to make it easier for a judge to dismiss a lawsuit that has no merit before it goes to trial.

The bill also makes changes to joint and several liability guidelines in which an injured person can recover all his damages from any defendant regardless of their individual share of the liability.

It reinstates a certificate of merit requirement for injured people who want to file professional malpractice lawsuits but broadens it beyond a similar rule that was ruled unconstitutional by the Oklahoma Supreme Court in 2006.

That measure dealt exclusively with medical malpractice lawsuits and the high court said it was an unconstitutional special law. It also ruled the requirement that a medical malpractice claimant obtain a professional’s opinion at a cost of up to $5,000 was an unconstitutional monetary barrier to the courts.

The latest proposal requires certificates in any lawsuit alleging professional negligence by physicians, attorneys, accountants and others, a requirement vetoed by Henry last year. Those who cannot afford the cost of a certificate can obtain one for free under existing pauper guidelines, officials said.

The measure would cap non-economic damages, also known as pain and suffering, at $400,000 but allow a judge or jury to waive the cap in cases of gross negligence or catastrophic injury. Supporters had originally wanted a cap of $300,000 with no waiver guidelines.

The bill requires the state to explore the purchase of a $20 million insurance policy by May 1, 2011, to create an indemnity fund for non-economic damages in excess of $400,000.

“This part of HB 1603 (tort reform) made me chuckle — the bill provides that, in settlements where only coupons are awarded, the successful attorney shall receive his fee in coupons. Classic.” Brian Huddleston

Oklahoma Ten Commandments bill wins final OK | NewsOK.com.

The Oklahoma Senate has given final approval to a bill to permit a Ten Commandments monument to be erected on the grounds of the state Capitol.

Ten Commandments on the Capitol grounds in Austin, Texas.

President Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (the “Stimulus Act”) on February 17, 2009, providing $787 billion to create and maintain jobs and to spur economic growth. Of the total, tax relief accounts for $212 billion. The other $575 billion will be disbursed by Federal agencies through construction and other contracts and grants to state and local governments and nonprofit organizations. The Stimulus Act allocates specified amounts to named Federal agencies for designated programs and activities.

The day after the Stimulus Act became law, the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) issued its Initial Implementing Guidance (the “Initial Guidance”) to Federal agencies that will receive stimulus funds. The Initial Guidance provides the agencies with direction on planning for and authorizing contracts and grants. Like the Stimulus Act itself, the Initial Guidance emphasizes transparency and accountability. Federal agencies will be required to make available a wealth of information about their plans for spending stimulus funds and about the effectiveness of the spending.

The Initial Guidance also includes important information for companies and nonprofits that want to obtain stimulus-funded contracts and grants. They will want to keep track of agency planning and inform themselves of the criteria that will guide awards and the special provisions designed to make stimulus spending transparent and accountable. The chief tool for tracking this information is the OMB-maintained website www.recovery.gov.  This site will give the public access to stimulus information submitted by the agencies to OMB. In addition, each agency will dedicate a portion of its website to stimulus planning and spending. Recovery.gov provides a link to each affected agency’s website.

Similarly, in an effort to ensure full transparency and accountability, Gov. Brad Henry ordered the creation of a state Web site to help track the use of Oklahoma stimulus funds. This site will provide the citizens of Oklahoma access to clear and concise information about the federal stimulus initiative.

The Stimulus Act presents tremendous opportunities for those who keep informed and act quickly to identify ways to participate in Federal and state stimulus spending. But the stimulus contracting process will be complex, as will be the accountability and other requirements for those receiving stimulus funds. The Initial Guidance is only the first of what likely will be several Federal and state stimulus-related pronouncements.

Huddleston Law Offices can assist clients in identifying key opportunities and challenges presented by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and related administrative policies.

FOXNews.com – Student Wins Suit After Teacher Says Creationism ‘Superstitious Nonsense’ – Local News | News Articles | National News | US News.

SANTA ANA, Calif. —  A federal judge ruled that a public high school history teacher violated the First Amendment when he called creationism “superstitious nonsense” during a classroom lecture.

U.S. District Judge James Selna issued the ruling Friday after a 16-month legal battle between student Chad Farnan and his former teacher, James Corbett. Farnan sued in U.S. District Court in 2007, alleging that Corbett violated the establishment clause of the First Amendment by making repeated comments in class that were hostile to Christian beliefs. The lawsuit cited more than 20 statements made by Corbett during one day of class, all of which were recorded by Farnan, to support allegations of a broader teaching method that “favors irreligion over religion” and made Christian students feel uncomfortable.

During the course of the litigation, the judge found that most of the statements cited in the court papers did not violate the First Amendment because they did not refer directly to religion or were appropriate in the context of the classroom lecture. But Selna ruled Friday that one comment, where Corbett referred to creationism as “religious, superstitious nonsense,” did violate Farnan’s constitutional rights.

Farnan is not interested in monetary damages, said his attorney, Jennifer Monk of the Murrieta-based Christian legal group Advocates for Faith & Freedom. Instead, he plans to ask the court to prohibit Corbett from making similar comments in the future. Farnan’s family would also like to see the school district offer teacher training and monitor Corbett’s classroom for future violations, Monk said.

There are no plans to appeal the judge’s rulings on the other statements listed in the litigation, she said. “They lost, he violated the establishment clause,” she told The Associated Press in a phone interview. “From our perspective, whether he violated it with one statement or with 19 statements is irrelevant.”

In making his decision, Selna wrote that he tried to balance Farnan’s and Corbett’s rights. “The court’s ruling today reflects the constitutionally permissible need for expansive discussion even if a given topic may be offensive to a particular religion,” the judge wrote. “The decision also reflects that there are boundaries. … The ruling today protects Farnan, but also protects teachers like Corbett in carrying out their teaching duties.” Corbett, a 20-year teaching veteran, remains at Capistrano Valley High School. Farnan is now a junior at the school, but quit Corbett’s Advanced Placement European history class after his teacher made the comments.

The establishment clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from making any law establishing religion. The clause has been interpreted by U.S. courts to also prohibit government employees from displaying religious hostility. Selna said that although Corbett was only found to have violated the establishment clause in a single instance, he could not excuse or overlook the behavior. In a ruling last month, the judge dismissed all but two of the statements Farnan complained about, including Corbett’s comment that “when you put on your Jesus glasses, you can’t see the truth.” Also dismissed in April were comments such as, “Conservatives don’t want women to avoid pregnancies — that’s interfering with God’s work” and “When you pray for divine intervention, you’re hoping that the spaghetti monster will help you get what you want.” On Friday, Selna also dismissed one of the two remaining statements, saying that Corbett may have been attempting to quote Mark Twain when he said religion was “invented when the first con man met the first fool.”

Corbett has declined to comment throughout the litigation. His attorney, Dan Spradlin, did not immediately return a message left Monday by The Associated Press. Spradlin has said, however, that Corbett made the remark about creationism during a classroom discussion about a 1993 case in which a former Capistrano Valley High science teacher sued the school district because it required instruction in evolution. Spradlin has said Corbett was simply expressing his own opinion that the former teacher shouldn’t have presented his religious views to students.

Farnan’s family released a statement Friday calling the judge’s ruling a vindication of the teen’s constitutional rights. The Capistrano Unified School District, which paid for Corbett’s attorney, was found not liable for Corbett’s classroom conduct.

One of my wife’s relatives worked on this case for the student.  Brian