The brainchild of billionaire investor Steven A. Cohen, the nonprofit Cohen Veterans Network clinics hope to provide free mental health services to veterans and their family members. Besides treating a wide range of mental health disorders, they also help veterans make a smoother transition to civilian life. Staff members offer support in transportation, housing, education, employment and other areas.

Cohen said the clinics are focusing on areas of high need. The network is currently operating clinics in Los Angeles, Philadelphia, New York City, San Antonio and Addison, Texas. With Cohen’s investment of $275 million nationally, there are plans to open 20 more clinics over the next five years.

Cohen said the clinics were inspired by his son Robert, a Marine. He said although his son did not need mental health care upon returning from Afghanistan, many of his friends did. A key factor that sets the clinics apart is that they care for veterans regardless of how they were discharged.

Many veterans may seek care outside the VA because they do not qualify for government-funded services and benefits. Because the clinics do not have strict eligibility rules, they hope to cater to veterans who are currently struggling to get the help they need.

In the case, Shirley Adams et al. v. Murphy Exploration & Production Co.-USA, the lessors and royalty owners sued lessee Murphy for breach of contract, claiming that Murphy had failed to drill an offset well to protect two tracts of land against drainage.

Murphy was assigned oil and gas leases executed by lessors in the Eagle Ford Shale. The parties did not dispute that the leases required the lessee, if a well was completed, to drill an offset well to prevent drainage. A lower court granted Murphy’s motion for summary judgment based on evidence that a well had been drilled and Murphy’s expert’s testimony that it was an offset well.

The Fourth Court of Appeals held that in order for Murphy’s summary judgment burden to be met, Murphy had to conclusively prove that the well was an offset well as a matter of law, thus disproving the element of breach. However, the appeals court found that Murphy failed to meet that burden, as it failed to prove that the well met the commonly understood meaning of the term “offset well,” which is a well used for protection from drainage. The appeals court reversed the grant of summary judgment and remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings.

Gregory D. Jordan is an Oil and Gas lawyer in Austin. To learn more, visit http://www.theaustintriallawyer.com or call 512-419-0684.

By Richard LaGarde

Chesapeake is appealing a 2014 ruling by a San Antonio appeals court that upheld a decision by a state district court awarding at least $1 million to a Fort Worth family. The Hyder family argued that its lease with Chesapeake was heavily negotiated and specifically tailored to be “cost-free,” but Chesapeake has altered its interpretation of its obligations, attempting to deduct post-production costs.

The case is being closely watched by the oil and gas industry in Texas. The National Association of Royalty Owners-Texas and the Texas Land and Mineral Owners Association are backing the Hyders, saying that this case is one of many in which Chesapeake has sought to improperly deduct costs from royalty payments.

Observers say that the impact of the case will depend on whether the high court addresses its previous ruling in Heritage Resources v. NationsBank, which permitted the deduction of post-production costs even when contracts appear to disallow it. The Hyder lease included a provision stating that the findings in the Heritage case do not apply. The Fourth Court of Appeals in San Antonio agreed that the contract provision served to modify the general rule set forth in the Heritage case.

Gregory D. Jordan is an Oil and Gas lawyer in Austin. To learn more, visit http://www.theaustintriallawyer.com or call 512-419-0684.

The state high court’s 5-4 decision in Chesapeake Exploration, LLC v. Hyder clarifies when post-production costs may be exempted from overriding royalty interests. The court stated that generally, an overriding royalty on production of gas and oil is not burdened by production costs, but must carry a share of post-production costs, unless there is an agreement that states otherwise. The court stated that the only question to be decided in the lawsuit was whether there was an agreement allocating post-production costs, and the court concluded that there was.

The Texas Supreme Court agreed with San Antonio’s Fourth Court of Appeals, which in turn had sided with a court in Tarrant County, Texas, which awarded the Hyder family about $1 million.

In the Hyder case, the state high court revisited its 1996 ruling in Heritage Resources Inc. v. NationsBank. Before Hyder, the default rule had been that royalty interests were subject to post-production costs, which may include taxes and expenses for transportation and treatment. While case law recognized that post-production costs could be allocated by agreement, the court’s ruling in Heritage Resources made it difficult in practice. The “default rule” that post-production costs may be charged to royalty owners has now been significantly weakened.

Gregory D. Jordan is an Oil and Gas lawyer in Austin. To learn more, visit http://www.theaustintriallawyer.com or call 512-419-0684.

Christine Peden and Jeanne Martinez, employees of the City’s Animal Care Services, discovered they were being paid less than male coworkers with the same job title of operations managers. They filed a federal lawsuit, which was joined by Brenda Werts, then an employee of the Capital Improvements Management Services department. The lawsuit alleges violation of the federal Equal Pay Act and pay discrimination. Martinez and Peden also accuse the city of retaliating against them after they raised their concerns about pay.

The women’s arguments were recently supported by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency that investigates employment discrimination, which found that the City had indeed discriminated against them. The EEOC also found that the City’s use of “counseling letters” to respond to the women’s concerns about their pay constituted a violation of the Equal Pay Act. The EEOC is now attempting to facilitate a settlement between the City and the women through a “conciliation” process.

The federal lawsuit is proceeding separately. According to the women’s attorney, the lawsuit is in the discovery process, and mediation efforts have been unsuccessful thus far.

According to the National Women’s Law Center, Texas’ gender wage disparity is comparable to the national pay gap between women and men. On average in the U.S. and in Texas, women earn $0.79 for every $1.00 men earn.

The Equal Pay Act provides that women and men in the same workplace, who work substantially equal jobs, be given equal pay. The Act applies to all types of pay, including salary, wages, bonuses and vacation pay. Employers are not permitted to reduce the pay of either sex to correct a wage disparity.

Gregory D. Jordan is an employment lawyer. To learn more, visit http://www.theaustintriallawyer.com or call 512-419-0684.

Many of the immigrants have arrived alone on relatively short work contracts, but others bring their wives and families and pursue residency or citizenship. The area has also seen an influx of South Asian residents from other states who have moved to San Antonio for the low cost of living and strong economy.

The city’s “Little India” is located both near the headquarters of the USAA, which employs many South Asian information technology workers, and near the Medical Center, where many South Asian physicians and medical professionals work. The area includes numerous Indian and Pakistani restaurants, grocery stores and community centers.

According to Dr. Jayesh Shah, president of the American Association of Physicians of Indian Origin, San Antonio now contains about 300 physicians and 3,000 families of Indian origin.

The nation as a whole has seen a recent burst of South Asian immigration. The new arrivals are mostly skilled workers, including physicians and technology workers. Cities such as Houston, New York and Chicago have some of the largest Indian populations, and Indians now represent the third-largest immigrant group nationwide.

San Antonio’s “Little India” is a source of community and cultural continuity for many members of the city’s South Asian population. Residents can incorporate their style of living in India into their new culture in Texas, purchasing Indian groceries, visiting Indian restaurants, meeting at the Hindu Temple of San Antonio and participating in popular pastimes like cricket.

A. Banerjee is a Houston immigration lawyer in Texas. Before selecting an attorney, contact the Law Offices of Annie Banerjee by visiting their information filled web site at http://www.visatous.com.

<!– Social Buttons Generated by Digg Digg plugin v5.3.6,
Author : Buffer, Inc
Website : http://bufferapp.com/diggdigg –>

Collective action certification has been sought under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) for the lawsuit on behalf of about 125 workers currently or formerly employed by a number of defendants. It is possible that the collective action could be expanded.

Wessam “Sammie” Aldeeb, the defendant franchisee, asserts that he has not underpaid employees and that his success depends on keeping his employees happy. Aldeeb operates at least eight franchise locations in San Antonio and Boerne, according to the lawsuit. The franchisers were not named in the suit.

An attorney for the plaintiffs has asserted that wage and hour violations are common in the restaurant industry. One of the plaintiffs has claimed that she worked many overtime hours for which she was not paid. Another attorney for the plaintiffs has argued that it is unfair and illegal competition for some businesses to keep labor costs down by violating the FLSA, earning profits at the expense of law-abiding competitors and of their own employees.

The lawsuit seeks certification as a collective action under the FLSA. Such collective actions share some characteristics with class action lawsuits, with notable differences. If employees are “similarly situated” to the plaintiffs in the lawsuit by being subject to a common policy or design, then they may “opt in” to the lawsuit. Employees who do not opt in may maintain the right to file a subsequent private action.

Gregory D. Jordan is an employment lawyer. To learn more, visit http://www.theaustintriallawyer.com or call 512-419-0684.

But in recent years, the Lone Star State’s political epicenter has come of age economically and culturally. Immigration has been a prime engine behind the growing cosmopolitan character of the state capital.

While higher percentages of foreign-born residents still fill the populations of Houston and Dallas (composing 28 percent and 25 percent, respectively), foreign-born Austin residents now make up 20 percent of their city’s community.

Austin’s figure is greater than either Fort Worth (17 percent) or San Antonio (14 percent) can claim. Austin even beats the statewide percentage of foreign-born residents (16 percent) and the national figure (13 percent).

The breakdown of the foreign-born population is rich, too. 66 percent of the group is from Latin America, 24 percent from Asia and 6 percent from Europe.

Immigrants from Asia belong to Austin’s fastest-growing demographic group, boasting a 60 percent growth rate in the last 10 years — three times the rate of overall growth in the city. The dynamic high-tech sector attracts a large number of these Asian immigrants, many of whom seek an education or who already have the skills and education in great demand in the technology industry.

But the healthy economy has not been limited to Austin, nor has its benefits been enjoyed by immigrants only. Indeed, a low-tax, low-regulation environment throughout Texas has spurred growth across the state. That fact, in itself, has been the prime reason why immigrants — both native- and foreign-born — have been drawn to the Lone Star State.

While it may be counterintuitive to think that high immigration would be compatible with low unemployment, the unemployment rate in Texas stands at 6.2 percent — lower than the national rate of 7 percent — even as the percentage of foreign-born residents in the state has risen from 15.7 percent in 2006 to 16.4 percent today.

And when the foreign-born get to Texas (or elsewhere) and settle in, they spend money. It has been estimated that U.S. immigrants from Asia and Latin America possess approximately $2 trillion in purchasing power, which translate into homes, cars and other big-ticket items that help to stimulate the economy and create jobs.

In Austin, much of the rationale for spending among immigrants in the local economy is linked to either the tech industry or to higher education.

“We’ve long had an international community, and it’s very much been tied to the University of Texas,” said Ryan Robinson, an Austin demographer. “That’s huge.”

A. Banerjee is a Houston immigration attorney in Texas. Before selecting an lawyer, contact the Law Offices of Annie Banerjee by visiting their website at http://www.visatous.com.

<!– Social Buttons Generated by Digg Digg plugin v5.3.0,
Author : Buffer, Inc
Website : http://bufferapp.com/diggdigg –>