(IL Photo/ Steve Linsenmayer)
Anna Mandula, a general negligence and health care attorney, has shown herself in the community to be an honorable and excellent
example of what a young lawyer should be: she has class, intelligence, ethics, humility and integrity. She participates in
Share the Love to support women in the community and supports The Cancer Resource Centre. Anna is always willing to lend a
hand to fellow attorneys.
In 2012, I’d like to
continue to gain knowledge and experience to build my career and be better able to serve clients and positively impact
the community at large.
The best advice I could give a recent law school graduate is
to remember that what you lack in experience, make up for in preparation.
The three words that best describe me are
hardworking, determined and honest.
My long-term career goal is
to make partner at my firm.
If I weren’t an attorney, I’d be
an interior designer and decorator.
My escape from work is
spending as much time as possible with my family and friends and redecorating my house (and my parents’ house,
too).
My mentor has taught me
(and continues to teach me) what being an attorney is all about; to not be afraid to admit when you don’t know
something; and the value of extensive preparation.
In the movie about my life,
Rachel Weisz would play me.
on Facebook & Twitter
Back to Top
Qualified immunity, means that if you wear a badge, you are exempt from law and free to do anything you please! The courts will back badge toting individuals, because they think they are above the law as well. They think, they have judicial immunity, they do not.
Deeply, deeply concerned? I'll bet if it was the judge's money that had been swindled we'd see deep concern with actual consequences. First a Ponzi scheme, then a shell game with the assets…c'mon, hasn't Conour abused the judicial system and his clients long enough? I say enough already.
Wow, just wow.
Forcing a defendant to wear a stun belt, in court or otherwise, is a violation of american principles! It is also unconstitutional!
So, if I save $100.00 cash per week, from my $500.00 per week paycheck, for 50 years, at which time, I will have saved $260,000.00, the government can raid my home and take my money, just by saying it is drug money! Shouldn't the government, have some kind of evidence of drugs, rather, than just saying we are the government and we will take anything you own, anytime we choose? Tyranny is upon us! If you don't know your rights, you don't have any!