Law office of David Akintimoye

Succes stories: Miss Hunt came to my office some few days ago unhappy and sad over a letter she got from her employer indicating that an organization that had obtained a judgment against her wanted to garnish her wages beginning July 2021. I reviewed the history of her case and I told her that I could stop the garnishment without filing for bankruptcy. She was elated. She hired me. I filed a motion to recall and quash the writ of executiion issued in her case and to stop the ...garnishment based on the argument that the underlying judgment was void in law. After the opponent's attorney read the motion, he called me and conceded that the motion had merit. He could not oppose the motion. A judge heard the motion this morning and granted it. End of garnishment. Last year, an individual called Chun (not his actual name) entered into a business deal with a man and agreed to share the profit from the business according to a percentage they had agreed upon. The rich and powerful man thought he was above the law. After profit was made, the rich man refused to share any profit with Chun. Chun hired me to sue him to recover her share of the profit. I filed the lawsuit in Los Angeles Superior Court. As the case went on, the rich guy became afraid and settled the case out of court. Chun recovered $300,000 (Three hundred thousand dollars) and she was very happy. See more

ICE announces temporary guidelines for its enforcement and removal operations on February 18, 2021: In reviewing the ICE's new policy regarding removal priority... of non-citizens for immigration violations that was recently issued by it, I note that non-citizens who have a final order of removal/deportation without any underlying serious crimes appear to be exempted from the new enforcement priority scheme. The Immigrant community should be perpetually grateful to President Joe Biden for his humane and sensible immigration policy. The entire new ICE enforcement guidelines are reproduced below: "Enforcement (ICE) is implementing interim operating guidance that will temporarily govern its civil immigration enforcement and removal operations, until Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas issues new enforcement guidelines for the Department. Secretary Mayorkas is expected to issue new enforcement guidelines in less than 90 days, after consultation with Department personnel and external stakeholders. ICE’s interim guidance will focus the agency’s civil immigration enforcement and removal resources on threats to national security, border security and public safety. The guidance defines which cases are presumed to present such threats and do not require prior approval. The guidance also sets forth a pre-approval process for any civil immigration enforcement action that does not meet the presumption criteria. In addition, the guidance sets forth weekly reporting requirements to ensure coordination and consistency and to inform the development of the Secretary’s final enforcement guidelines. By focusing our limited resources on cases that present threats to national security, border security, and public safety, our agency will more ably and effectively execute its law enforcement mission, said ICE Acting Director Tae Johnson. Like every law enforcement agency at the local, state and federal level, we must prioritize our efforts to achieve the greatest security and safety impact. Further, by implementing a system for obtaining prior approval before pursuing certain cases, and through regular reporting of civil immigration enforcement actions, we will better coordinate our efforts, achieve consistency in our operations, and inform the development of the Secretary’s new enforcement guidelines. We look forward to working closely with the Secretary throughout this process. The operating guidance issued today defines which cases are presumed to present national security, border security and public safety threats, and which cases do not carry such presumptions and thus require prior approval before pursuing. Individuals are presumed to present a threat to national security if they have engaged in or are suspected of terrorism or espionage, or if their apprehension is otherwise necessary to protect our national security. Individuals are presumed to be a border security enforcement priority if they are apprehended while attempting to unlawfully enter the United States on or after November 1, 2020, or if they were not physically present in the United States before November 1, 2020. And, individuals are presumed to be a threat to public safety if, for example, they have been convicted of an aggravated felony or engaged in certain activity as part of a criminal gang or transnational criminal organization and there is reason to believe they currently pose a threat. In evaluating whether an individual poses a threat to public safety, officers and agents are to consider the extensiveness, seriousness and recency of any criminal activity, as well as mitigating factors, including, but not limited to, personal and family circumstances, health and medical factors, ties to the community, and evidence of rehabilitation. ICE’s prioritization of individuals with aggravated felony convictions is consistent with Congressional intent in creating that distinct category of offenses. Absent exigent circumstances, ICE’s field personnel will need to obtain prior approval from their chain of command before pursuing cases that do not meet the presumption criteria. Today’s interim operating guidance requires ICE personnel to review cases on an individualized basis, in accordance with the law, and encourages coordination between in-the-field personnel and agency leadership. The issuance of today’s interim guidance is one step in the agency’s effort to use its limited resources to enforce the nation’s immigration laws most impactfully and justly" Call me at 951-656-5777 for advice regarding your immigration matter. See more

President Joe Biden's comprehensive immigration reform by David A. Akintimoye, attorney at law: His bill called US Citizenship Act 2021 is designed to overall... United States immigration law and to make it humane and to reflect the changing demographics of this great country. There is no guarantee that the bill will become law because the bill needs 60 federal senators to vote for it. I cannot tell if at least 10 GOP senators will support the bill because some of them are known to be against any form of amnesty for immigrants even though various forms of amnesty such as parole, probation, supervised release, pardon and fines in lieu of imprisonment are available for many criminal offenders in our federal and state criminal statutes! Watch and learn more. See more

After church service today

Took a Selfie while walking in a park

During my walk in one of the parks this afternoon

During my prayer walk at a park.

New Law Protects Many Californian Homeowners Who Can’t Pay Their Bills: A California homestead exemption increase has been announced. The new law will allow mor...e people to qualify to file for bankruptcy. It became effective on January 1, 2021. Assembly Bill 1885, was formally approved by California Governor Gavin Newsom and filed with the secretary of state on September 18, 2020. It increases the exemption to protect a greater amount of equity in your home should you file for Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 bankruptcy. In California, where a state bankruptcy exemption system is used, exemption amounts are updated every three years by the California Judicial Council. The new law provides for more significant changes in the California homestead exemption. WHAT IS A HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION? A homestead exemption protects home equity from a homeowner’s creditors, up to a certain dollar amount. Collectors cannot acquire any funds within this amount to settle past-due debt. This applies if you file for bankruptcy or you experience financial difficulties after a divorce or your spouse passes away. You can also get a California homestead exemption on property taxes, in which you’re taxed on the value of your home minus the exemption amount. HOW DOES THE HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION WORK? By law, a certain amount of your assets is protected. The homestead exemption protects the home of a debtor and its equity from being seized by creditors. Otherwise, a creditor can file a lawsuit, obtain a judgement against you, and take actions to collect on judgements, such as garnishing paychecks/bank accounts or forcing the sale of property. The homestead exemption kicks in when a particular creditor attempts to sell your home to pay a judgment against you. If you file for bankruptcy (personal or business), it also protects all or a portion of your home equity from creditors in general. Again, it only offers protection up to a certain dollar amount. If the legally available exemption is a greater amount than that of your home equity, your home is fully protected from creditors. A lender then cannot force the sale of your property. INCREASE IN THE CALIFORNIA HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION The California homestead exemption in 2020 was $75,000 for a single homeowner, with a maximum of $175,000 for homeowners who met specific family, income, and age requirements. The new law eliminates many qualifying conditions and provides a homestead exemption to anyone with a principal residence. As of January 1, 2021, the California homestead exemption amount was at least $300,000 if the median sale price for homes in your county were less than that during the prior year. However, it can be as high as $600,000 if the median sale price in your county was more than that amount. HOW DOES THIS INCREASE APPLY TO MY COUNTY? The exemption amount can fall between $300,000 and $600,000; the actual amount will equal the prior year’s median home sale price amount if it is within this range. Some real world examples include the median price in Los Angeles County, which as of September 2020, stood at $677,000 (this would qualify a homeowner for a homestead exemption of $600,000). In Riverside County, the median price was $487,000, so the homestead exemption would be $487,000. Pertinent amounts to use won’t be available until the end of the prior calendar year. Accepted sources for this information haven’t yet been determined, but a reliable source of statistics is the California Association of Realtors. AUTOMATIC HOMESTEAD VS. DECLARED HOMESTEAD In California, you don’t necessarily have to file a homestead declaration. An automatic homestead protects your home against a forced sale if the proceeds wouldn’t be enough to pay the homestead before the creditor. If there’s a judgement lien on your property, the creditor gets paid from a home sale before you get the homestead. Homestead amounts are the same for automatic and declared homesteads. The difference is that a declared homestead only protects exempt equity when a home is sold voluntarily. Proceeds are protected for six months during which you can reinvest the homestead in a new home (if that amount covers the sale price and other costs). Filing a declaration is a good idea if you have equity in your home and experience financial trouble. Your homestead won’t be lost after a property sale and the proceeds will be protected for a full six months. The California homestead exemption also has two different systems. System 1 applies to any property where you reside and to proceeds from forced sales of property received six months before filing for bankruptcy. System 2 applies to property a debtor uses as a residence (the resident can be independent of the debtor as well) and allows for unused portions of the exemption plus a wildcard amount to be used. HOW DOES THIS COMPARE TO FEDERAL LAW? The homestead is part of state law. It does not set limits on what the IRS or other federal agencies can collect. The IRS has its own set of exemptions for delinquent taxpayers, although these don’t do much in protecting a home. Nonetheless, it is rare for the IRS to force the sale of a home; more likely, a lien on real property will be a barrier to selling or refinancing it. You don’t have a choice in which law applies to your situation; according to the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, federal law takes precedence over state law. As one of the very few attorneys in the State of California certified as a specialist in bankruptcy law by the State Bar of California, Board of Legal Specialization, I am very up-to-date on the California homestead exemption increase law. I can determine how it may apply to your financial situation and the exact amount your home qualifies for. Immediate assistance might avoid foreclosure, wage garnishment, and other collections actions not to mention the stress that being in debt can cause. To speak to me with your best interests in mind, request a free evaluation or call me directly at 951-379-0846. See more

Can President Donald Trump be removed from office under the 25th Amendment to the United States Constitution? I am not partisan and I express no opinion on whet...her President Donald Trump should be removed from office under the 25th Amendment. I write strictly from a scholarly point of view as an impartial attorney analyzing the law for public education and consumption, devoid of any political bias. Section 4 of the 25th Amendment (the relevant portion of the entire amendment) provides in part that, "Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President." The first thing to note is that the Vice President and other executive officers or members of Congress have to agree that the President "is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office" before the Vice President can take over the duties of the President. A resolution must be passed by the Congress, not just the House or the Senate, that a President is unable to function as President. Thus, the Amendment cannot be invoked along party line. The phrase "unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office" was not defined in the 25th amendment. One can only speculate regarding the circumstances that may cause a Vice President and other enumerated persons to decide that a President is unable to carry out his functions as such. If the ground for invoking the Amendment is the medical or mental condition of the President, I think the medical or mental condition of the President will be evaluated by a team of very competent medical and mental health professionals. I think it will have to submit a report of its findings to a Vice President. I think the report must objectively demonstrate that the medical or mental condition of a President completely impairs his ability to perform his duties as a President. And I think that a President will have the 5th Amendment's Due Process Right to challenge the report in a court of law if he wants to do so. Another circumstance that may give rise to the invocation of the Amendment is if the whereabouts of the President are unknown and every effort to find him proves abortive. I think in that case, a reasonable period of time must elapse before the amendment can be invoked. In the case of the death or resignation of the President, Section 1 of the 25th Amendment provides that the Vice President shall become President. Thus, the concurrence of the Executive officials or Congress is not required. I do not think that the commission of a serious or heinous crime(s) by a President, will justify the invocation of the 25th Amendment. The fact that a President may have committed a serious or heinous crime is not tantamount to "inability to carry out the functions of his office". A person can be a murderer and still be a good dad. The 25th Amendment is not the proper vehicle for removing a President who commits a serious crime. The proper vehicle is impeachment by the House and conviction by the Senate. I do not think that the dereliction of duties by a President will suffice to invoke the Amendment. Dereliction or deliberate abandonment of duties is not the same as inability to perform duties of an office. Dereliction is an unwillingness whereas inability is incapacity. In my view, dereliction of duties will be a ground for impeaching a President but not a ground for invoking the 25th Amendment. David A. Akintimoye Attorney at law See more

After church service today

Took a Selfie while walking in a park

During my walk in one of the parks this afternoon

During my prayer walk at a park.

Chapter 13 plan confirmation: I just got a second amended chapter 13 plan confirmed yesterday by bankruptcy Judge Mark Houle on behalf of my client. She was ineligible for a chapter 7 bankruptcy because of a previous filing less than eight years ago. Under the plan, my client would pay 3% of the allowed unsecured non priority claims to her creditor. About two months ago, I also got an original chapter 13 plan confirmed on behalf of another client. If you have any bankruptcy related matter, please call my office. I have represented over 400 bankruptcy clients since my admission to the California Bar.

I want to thank all my clients for hiring my law office. Please be advised that my office will be closed on Thursday through Saturday. Sincerely David A Akintimoye, LL.M attorney at law

For all your legal needs, call 951-656-5777 or 951-379-0846. We will return your call as soon as possible. Thank you for your business. David A. Akintimoye, LL.M. Attorney at law

Success Galore: I represented a woman in a family law case this morning involving the issues of child custody, visitation, child and spousal support. I was able to convince the judge to modify the current orders from joint legal and physical custody to joint legal and sole physical custody to my client, the woman; the man to have visitation at the discretion of the woman. I was also able to convince the judge to increase the child and spousal support payable by the man to the... woman by over $700 despite the fact that the man was hiding his income and was represented by one of the top family attorneys in Riverside County, California. Later in the afternoon, I also successfuly won an unlawful detainer case for a female landlord whose tenants had been a nightmare to her. For all your legal problems in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties of California, call me at 951-656-5777. I have mastered the arts of litigation. I am the attorney you need See more