C.Chan=Winning Results! AFFORDABLE! 4.7/5 Ratings by Clients,Friendly+Affordable!CHICO

Thursday, November 26, 2020

Actual Reviews from Past....... I don't Just talk, I Do What It Takes to Either Win, Fix or Solve Your Problems

Just some of prior Reviews:
Attorney Chan has been very responsive to our calls and provides excellent service and advice. Her fees are great and she is very easy to work with. Thanks Carolyn Review Left On 02/27/2020 RORY HICKS
I'm a mama bear and grandma and appreciate having Carolyn working with my son to protect his rights as a father. She is down to earth and a regular person who doesnt tangle you up with legalease. Review Left On 05/27/2020 Kathleen Oman
Her fees are the best I have found along with great reviews she cant be beat. Review Left On 05/29/2020Bradley Nugent
Are you looking for a dynamite attorney that actually cares about their client and actually wants to win? Then retain Ms. Chan. She is relentless in making sure her case wins. She is very reasonable in her fees, she is worth every penny! She has been awesome with my case. She is extremely knowledgeable of family law, domestic violence and criminality. All things that my case is riddled with. She is a tough cookie, but she definitely knows what she's talking about and will go to hell and back to make sure she wins for you. Go with Chan, you won't regret it. Review Left On 02/27/2020 Lacey Turner
Fair prices and straight talk. Often times you get a lot of run around from attorneys spouting legal jargon that the everyday man or woman can't understand...Miss Chan puts it in layman's terms and talks with intelligence but not as though she is above anyone...as an equal. We were treated fair and though I wasn't involved in the legalities, she listened to my perspective as an outsider looking in on a difficult situation. Highly recommend her. Review Left On 04/17/2020Robert Snow
She has provided me with excellent service in dealing with my case. Miss Chan knows her stuff. She has been a life saver. I would recommend her services to everone. Review Left On 02/27/2019 Nicki Bennett
Carolyn was super amazing in helping me navigate an extremely stressful and emotional legal issue. Her knowlegde of the law is excellent as she responds to communication very quickly, and is very forth right about possible outcomes. I would absolutely use her again and highly recommend her to anyone navigating a pet or family issue (in my case it was both). Review Left On 01/27/2020Deekay David
Ms Chan has been my attorney for over 25 yrs. She has handled my divorce from how to resolve my case and helping me keep my children in a professional manner at a very reasonable cost. I can't even imagine what would've happened if I didn't retain her services.
Review Left On 08/19/2020sigrid wroolie Wonderful. I have very complicated situation and Carolyn was the only attorney I spoke with that understood and offered solutions. She is confident and professional. After hiring her I could sleep nights knowing she was there to help resolve what seemed overwhelming. Even the judge straightened up when she spoke firmly and pleasantly. She cuts to the chase to get things done not wasting billable time. I trust her to protect the issues I most value. Review Left On 05/27/2019Duckie Maggetti
Thank you for everything and all the help with my case definitely recommending you if i know anyone who needz an attorney Review Left On 08/07/2020dave parks
We hired attorney based on a friend's recommendation and after looking at various legal sites because we needed a stand up type of person who is not afraid to speak up [after having suffered from using a very weak lawyer in the past, it didn't work for us....]anyway we found the attorney's insight on people to be very keen, and she was more than willing to go the extra steps we needed to get the result we were working on , plus she even talked to us after hours several times. Talk can be cheap sometimes but for me personally, I am more than happy with the attorney's service to us. Review Left On 12/27/2019Dale Hanson
Though I have not personally talked with Ms Chan, I can say she has given great counsel to my daughter at fair prices throughout her difficult process of her divorce. Review Left On 06/27/2020 Michael Alexander
Carolyn was a great choice! Her prices are the best I've seen and she truly cares about her clients. Carolyn was by my side throughout the entire process with great advice and support in and out of the courtroom Review Left On 11/13/2019
Review Left On 06/27/2019Remy Martin I appreciate her honesty and the fact that she's blunt. There is no guessing what she means which is very rare to find; especially in an attorney. She has given me hope and there is a light at the end of this custody battle.
Review Left On 06/24/2019Denny Patinoz For what I was charged especially, and the research done, I would recommend her because she tries much harder than other attorneys I have seen in past, knows what she is doing in strategy, and can own the truth, regardless. Hard to ask for more, no joke. Especially these days!

Sunday, November 15, 2020

New Help with Introductory Savings on both Legal and Paralegal Work --Automatically, Find Out How?!!

Due to the problems of Covid and some people not being able to work full time, attorney is featuring cash savings to new clients. The initial consultation is free. Cases that will require an RFO (Request for Order) or other motion which needs to be heard by Judge, will usually qualify for the cash savings, and most other motions or long cause hearings in court, including Domestic Violence and protective orders, harassment, mediation, supervised visitation, drug testing cases,and more.

Typically this may involve various motions to modify, hearings involving mediation, and requests for drug testing, supervised visitation, or other issues such as requesting spousal support or modification of same. 
We guarantee another attorney of 20+ years experience will NOT be able to meet or exceed our value. (*It is true that some attorneys will charge you $250-$300 for a consultation/then apply that toward your fees. If you would rather pay upfront unnecessarily it's up to you, for a consultation.)

In addition, if you use our paralegal services also, you will save even more. Even though attorney can or may attend all hearings it is possible via Limited scope, to not have attorney attend every hearing and only have that done when necessary. (Not every hearing requires attorney in every cases..)

While many law and motion hearings take place daily, the key to winning is to know what you are doing with the case. When you believe you do know what you are doing BUT you are not making headway with the judge, then it's usually because you are not getting the point accross clearly, judge may not like you [believe me, it does happen] or the other side has lied so much that the court might start believing the wrong party? OR possibly you did not do the documents carefully enough, or you put too much unnecessary data in the moving arguments and judge stopped reading what you wrote.

When we see cases come in, they normally have some things that should have been done differently (if you are trying to win whatever you are doing) so if no one helps you fix your error, assuming there is one, you will likely not make much progress. If there is no error but judge is actually prejudiced against you {this does happen sometimes} we would have to review the entire file to see if that is what is occurring. Most cases may not have serious errors but lack the clarity coupled with legal reasoning to make the mark.

CONTACT US TODAY TO SEE IF WE CAN HELP YOU WITH YOUR CASE ---> and SAVE AT THE SAME TIME !! **Attorney can confidentally say that her cases usually do produce either a positive outcome or a win for client. It is not 100% but it is pretty close because our main purpose is to win whatever we are attempting. Our main goal is not settling unless the client wants only that.There is a big difference between settling and winning.
Clear cut cases usually mean one side has the winning side, HOWEVER-- it will depend on how long the case has been going, how bad the parties have been (or how good..), how many mistakes or errors have transpired, how many months or years has passed, how diligent each party was in the past, how bad each party was in the past, and a host of other factors. some cases are obviously much more difficult than others. Unlike some attorneys, attorney herein does not believe in settling everything, especially if something has been done which is very wrong, by the other party. IF nothing has been done which was wrong, then the case should take less time. However some clients will fight over everything, so it will depend on the client's beliefs in some respects. 

Family Law Attorney Carol Chan
  Rating  · Divorce lawyer
2485 Notre Dame Blvd #370  CHICO 95928
Closed ⋅ Opens 9AM Mon · (530) 359-8810
WEBSITE (link to Butte County Attorney site)     https://affordablefamilylawattorneychico.blogspot.com/



176R

Thursday, November 12, 2020

NEW...EXPANDED PARALEGAL SERVICES NORTHERN CALIF. 530.497.0777

 We are now promoting expanded paralegal services for local northern counties ....we can usually work on issues such as document production for discovery, claim forms, all family law discovery including requests for financial holdings; requests which require a private investigator, and the like.

See www.justicefactorx.com online ----     to view...

We also can provide document production and assembly for court filings including evictions, stay away orders, domestic violence and civil harassment and personal service of such documents via registered server. 

When and if COVID ever subsides, the huge backlog in all courts will mean it's best to do it sooner than later, regardless!!

Any questions just call us!!? Friendly/ easy to work with!


Wednesday, November 11, 2020

Veterans Day Salute!!!

For all veterans! Today we give our thanks for all those nationwide who have served our country and helped So many...we are eternally grateful!



 


Saturday, November 7, 2020

How Many times Can You Say Something Over + Over Before People BELIEVE It?!

The "illusory truth effect" (also known as the illusion of truth effect, validity effect, truth effect, or the reiteration effect) is the tendency to believe false information to be correct, after repeated exposure. ... The first condition is logical, as people compare new information with what they already know to be true. Typically, in the news and in entertainment on TV, and of course politics, we can see this happening all the time.

Particularly with most of society, often glued to the Internet (not a book) but a computer, phone, tablet, etc.--people and even children may know how to
"read" but the truth is, actual reading these days is not something all kids do that well. Of course they teach it in schools but reading takes some initiative and time, whereas being glued to a TV, computer games, programs and ads not to mention Utube and the crap they push out there for kids--it's not surprising that kids today do not exactly learn things the old fashioned way?

If one thinks about it, if you keep repeating the same actual truth to a Judge in court, as to what you are saying--will the Judge eventually just believe you? In attorney's experience, the answer may likely be NO, because usually once a pro se litigant (without an attorney) starts up with the same argument, the Judge just won't want to hear it. Not again.
So basically when attorney herein reviews pro se documents [by those who have not had an attorney] for court that make up the case file, if there was never an attorney on the case, attorney will note that repetition galore has in fact been placed into the case file by the unrepresented litigant. Because judges like to hear legal reasons for why they should or should not do something, attorneys must somehow explain that legal reasoning if it exsists.

But believe it or NOT, even IF the pro se litigant does PUT that legal reasoning into his or her documents, many judges will just not take the time to read it all [from what attorney herein has noticed over the years] and will defer the case to mediation or wherever [it could be called something else in different areas or counties]..... Thus, after reading thousands of these documents over and over, it becomes apparent that attorney must restructure how the client does or does not take actual data, and what the client must do, so attorney can prepare the case so that you can win, since I don't think people prepare a case in order to lose it?

It is this exact problem that attorney can help nearly all clients with, plus the fact that attorney has been trained in people interaction and sales, which means it's a lot easier to convince someone about a fact if you can direct the explanation in a certain way? While all attorneys can make arguments if the case is on their side, not all attorneys are that good at arguing something that is not on their side? And to be honest, NOT all cases which have bad fact patterns can be changed--there are some cases so bad that they are not capable of being changed. However-- most cases can be changed to some degree.

Attorney does excel at changing bad cases, if only because this is what attorney has an interest in---fixing cases that were not fixed, changing the mistakes or throwing out some things and bringing in new evidence, there are many ways to change a case. One of the few things that often cannot be changed is when one parent has over-bonded with a child to point that the other parent basically has no contact with the child, and no type of positive relationship. Or one parent has just given up entirely.
Or where one parent has an affliction (usually mental) that cannot be improved, and no one seems to believe that it's true that such a condition can be detrimental to a child or even teen? Due to disability rights, Judges cannot discriminate on that, however, the fact that a person has such an affliction which CAUSES either bad behavior, or illegal actions, simply cannot be ignored. For obvious examples, severe mental illness is often linked to men being imprisoned in jail? The facts prove that about 67% of men in prison suffer from some type of mental affliction, even starting at ADD, sometimes left untreated, and far worse mental maladies.

For example, diagnosis by physicians which indicate a person is in fact, bipolar, can mean that if several doctors render the same conclusion on the diagnosis, a person so diagnosed is entitled to social security disability? Surprisingly, not everyone knows that? Many bipolar patients cannot keep a job for longer than 1-3  years. So obviously the social security might be helpful. 
So let's say that your ex actually is diagnosed with bipolar disorder, and that his or her past conduct was detrimental to the kids. While the bipolar status itself is a disability, would the court allow bad or unsafe conduct by the bipolar parent as to the kids? The answer should be NO. IF a judge is not aware of psychiatric afflictions, he or she will need to become aware of how a mediator might handle such issues. Attorney has seen it countless times--not all mediators do the same things on all cases.

Attorney is very aware that Butte County has a high incidence of mental illness when compared to statewide CA counties. Therefore knowing how to handle these types of cases is important, especially when the afflicted person cannot get any help from his or her own doctors? 
      These issues can be extremely difficult, especially when opposing attorney becomes fixated on having some type of medical documentation that the doctor will not or cannot produce for institutional or other reasons? At that point the client will likely have to either seek help from the actual agency at a higher level, or contact the local county involving mental health to see if workers there can suggest alternatives.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/psych-unseen/202001/illusory-truth-lies-and-political-propaganda-part-1

Wednesday, November 4, 2020

Pitbull Litigator-- If the Hat Fits? Federal Court Litigation+ Famous Landmark Supreme Court Case U.S. v Stevens, on First Amendment Violation


Attorney Chan is well qualified to speak on the issues involving the dogs commonly known as "pitbulls" "APB😏 😄 Ts" (American Pitbull Terriers) or just "pitbulls" (generic classification for which there is not necessarily known genetic markers or proof that such dog is actually descended from APBT actual line, and there is no genetic link necessarily...dog might just look like one?)

Why is that?     


The "why is that" ---  is because attorney Chan has long studied the issues, starting in 2002, and litigated in CA state and CA Northern and Southern District Federal Courts and Denver CO Federal courts.. over issues involving the dogs and the dog breed laws which often "ban" such dogs. Attorney has worked on these issues in Northern District Federal Court San Francisco, and although we did not win on the issue of pitbull dogs being treated disparately (years ago), everyone these days realizes that the pitbull is one of the most widely liked breed type (despite the haters...)

...Many "pitbull" dogs are actually not APBT but are mixed down (mongrels) which can cause issues. The reason for this is due to fact that the actual APBT dogs were bred by using a bulldog and small terrier dog; they were used for dog fighting wagering, and not for killing. The original size was about 35lbs, NOT 70lbs. People began later to mix molosser type canines with APBT and in part, this has caused harm to the dogs, since one cannot use cross overs from unknown lines and expect to produce a line of dogs which have certain characteristics.

Attorney has worked with well known canine experts and has studied the subject for many years. in fact, our canine expert was actually used in the Landmark case of U.S. v Stevens, LII Supreme Court UNITED STATES v. STEVENS ( No. 08-769 ) 533 F. 3d 218, affirmed. Syllabus Opinion [Roberts] Dissent [Alito] HTML version PDF version HTML version PDF version HTML version PDF version Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued.The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader.See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321 . SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES UNITED STATES v . STEVENS Certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the third circuit No. 08–769. Argued October 6, 2009—Decided April 20, 2010

Congress enacted 18 U. S. C. §48 to criminalize the commercial creation, sale, or possession of certain depictions of animal cruelty. The statute addresses only portrayals of harmful acts, not the underlying conduct. It applies to any visual or auditory depiction “in which a living animal is intentionally maimed, mutilated, tortured, wounded, or killed,” if that conduct violates federal or state law where “the creation, sale, or possession takes place,” §48(c)(1). Another clause exempts depictions with “serious religious, political, scientific, educational, journalistic, historical, or artistic value.” §48(b).

The legislative background of §48 focused primarily on “crush videos,” which feature the torture and killing of helpless animals and are said to appeal to persons with a specific sexual fetish. Respondent Stevens was indicted under §48 for selling videos depicting dogfighting. He moved to dismiss, arguing that §48 is facially invalid under the First Amendment . The District Court denied his motion, and Stevens was convicted. The Third Circuit vacated the conviction and declared §48 facially unconstitutional as a content-based regulation of protected speech.
Held: Section §48 is substantially overbroad, and therefore invalid under the First Amendment . Pp. 5–20.


What this means, is that animal activists got HSUS to try and convict the guy who was selling historical videos of dogs, not that different from any movie which shows beating of slaves, killing of Indians, torture of ethic people, or barbaric actual events from the past?

BUT the United States Supreme Court found that the animal activist statute (on snuff films using animals) was not only poorly written, it was illegal in the sense that the Court found a ton of things wrong with it (by using the parameters of constitutional law)...THUS- the District court below received direct testimony from OUR expert who lives in Washington. The rest is HISTORY--and the law had to be stricken and re-written properly. This was just another tactic by activists trying to smear legally operated businesses!!

Attorney recommends that people interested in obtaining the "right" type of dog check out the Dog encyclopedia book, or the book on 150 common dog breeds, BEFORE even attempting to buy a dog or even a "rescue" dog. MOST dog rescues do NOT know the actual history of many of their dogs, the lineage or even anything about the dogs.

In SOME cases they may have data from the pound (and that is usually sketchy, but a temperament test was likely done at the pound..) I cannot tell you how many people with absolutely NO canine knowledge at all, will just buy any canine without researching a thing. AS A HORRIBLE EXAMPLE--A HUMANE SOCIETY IN SAN DIEGO SOLD A DOG TO A COUPLE THAT HAD A NEW BABY. THEY SOLD THEM A HUGE DOG, RESCUED PURPORTEDLY...no humane society should EVER, EVER sell or adopt out ANY large breed dog, to parents of a new baby in household??
It's common sense so obviously this humane group did not do its job correctly.
Especially when the parents know nothing about dogs, or how dogs act, and especially a rehomed large dog which appeared to be part bully dog or in that family of canines? ANY rescue or humane group should know better than to give such an animal to a family with a newborn baby. AS it happened--these dumb parents put this huge dog in BED with them AND with the new baby?? Utterly stupid, stupid, stupid. So what happens? The DOG ended up killing the baby right there in the BED???

All of this could have been avoided by: (1) Never adopt out any large breed dog to new owners who probably had no clue about dogs at all. (2) Never adopt out any unknown pound dog to owners who have no experience with dogs.(3) Make new owners pass a test (written) re dog ownership (4) Ask simple questions of would-be-new-owners as to safety, dog safety, and child safety? There is no other way to know unless this is done in person !!!!!

That is sheer stupidity and all children should know dog safety BEFORE obtaining any dog!!! Most children are bitten on the face due to lack of supervision, parents who are idiots, and parents who have no idea of what it takes to own a dog. No child who lacks dog safety training should have a dog, simply because it's dangerous. Many schools offer dog-child safety training. If you cannot locate this help, contact me and I will find the help for you.

The encyclopedia book is huge and fairly expensive but will last a lifetime. You should also research online but be careful what sources you are believing. There is a lot of untrue data out there. And if you are inclined to buy a dog off the internet and have it shipped, you should do much research first. It is difficult to return dogs that are shipped from breeders you know nothing about. Here are examples of what you can learn by reading-- (Mastiff)--
For APBT Dogs.....
Most of the canine litigation out there involves federal law, rational basis, and criminal cases, civil cases and local laws. In addition, attorney has done dog rescue for over twelve years and is readily familiar with animal shelters and related penal code (for example PC597, PC597.1,etc) which focuses on alleged "abuse"and has handled criminal cases involving animal laws as well.

SEE https://petdefense.wordpress.com/ Attorney is likely one of the few attorneys outside of  San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego, that has first hand knowledge and data on canine issues involving certain breeds, restrictions in the sales of dogs, and the abuses by certain non profits claiming to be "rescues." Non profits do not pay taxes. Yet some BUY animals including dogs, from auctions and then resell them, claiming they are rescued? For example, a claimed rescue group paid over $7k (yes, seven thousand) for one dog that was pregnant, then they SOLD 3 of the pups for over $4,000 EACH. Importing alleged "rescue"dogs has resulted in new strains of virulent disease not seen in the USA prior.




Let's get real people---if you are selling dogs, fine. But don't claim that doing it under a 501(c)(3) makes you a "rescue." It in fact, does the opposite.

And an update on one of the biggest dog related cases in the state, is continuing in Sacto Federal Court where the owners are suing Placer County/others,  because the non profit "humane group" acting as the animal control apparently, has been accused of illegal action. Attorney herein already knows what happened because attorney worked on the case for a year previously, before any lawsuit was filed.

Attorney herein believes the case is a civil rights case, and when coupled with PC597.1, proves that the PC597.1 code was applied improperly,*** resulting in great harm.

https://casetext.com/case/dahlin-v-frieborn-1
The case may have been dismissed but if it was, crucial data was not used and instead the case may only have used a government claim and failed to single out a non governmental entity, even if they worked together.
 [In constitutional law as to statues, one either uses the strict wording, or "as applied" to the case; in this case, they used the strict wording to create knowing harm and blatantly ignored the "as applied" which was very very obvious.] Placer County is no stranger to these type of cases. Years ago in a horse case, the owner found her horse was given away to a government employee without due process. If we get rid of due process, then this obviously means our government is way way off base.

***
  • California Court of Appeals, 4th District: "Our role in construing a statute is to ascertain the intent of the Legislature so as to effectuate the purpose of the law. (People v. Jefferson (1999) 21 Cal.4th 86, 94 [86 Cal.Rptr.2d 893, 980 P.2d 441].) Because the statutory language is generally the most reliable indicator of that intent, we look first at the words themselves, giving them their usual and ordinary meaning. (People v. Lawrence (2000) 24 Cal.4th 219, 230 [99 Cal.Rptr.2d 570, 6 P.3d 228].) 
  • We do not, however, consider the statutory language in isolation, but rather examine the entire substance of the statute in order to determine the scope and purpose of the provision, construing its words in context and harmonizing its various parts. (People v. Acosta (2002) 29 Cal.4th 105, 112 [124 Cal.Rptr.2d 435, 52 P.3d 624].)" Alford v. Superior Court(People) (2003) 29 Cal.4th 1033, 1040

Tuesday, November 3, 2020

Do you have a Difficult, Challenging, or Near Impossible Case?!

Cases which fall into this category can be very difficult because no attorney may want to work that hard, the fees charged would be way too high, or the client realizes not everything can actually be resolved. Attorney realizes however, that every case comes with different issues and parameters and many cases that seem quite daunting might be able to be broken down into sections first.

Then it might be, that if one issue is not related to other issues, the lesser issue might be overcome and start paving the way for various changes which can slowly at first, not be so obvious.Attorney says this because attorney is always finding issues within cases that have been ignored, glossed over, or handled improperly. This means usually, that there is hope for the case!

When document preparers handle for example, monetary issues within a case, there might not appear to be a big problem at first, so they put that into a category of no action. BUT if that preparer failed to realize there was a time-related or time-barred problem, a lot of issues might arise that could cause the case to go very differently? Possibly, very badly?
Because clients usually don't know the law or even some of their own rights, it stands to reason that clients may stand to lose more than they bargained for, especially when the other party controlled the finances. Or when one party, say the husband, earned quite a bit during his work tenure and the wife earned less than half the amount but has a mediocre job, should the wife give up spousal because husband doesn't earn as much now?

In family law it is true there are a few rules that may appear to favor certain parties, but for the most part, most litigation is often centered on custody of kids, support to be paid or not (spousal),physical or mental issues, drugs, move-aways (with or without permission), abduction, schooling, and domestic violence. If bankruptcy arises, this can make the case more difficult depending on what issues are involved--and it's very unlikely that even if a case is not heavily disputed--the fact that spouses may have separate or joint debt may be a huge issue and bankruptcy can more adversely affect one spouse in some cases?

Some litigants believe they can file bankruptcy and get rid of spousal support, for the most part, that is not highly likely and if properties are bing sold, traded or hidden; if assets have been hidden, or other investments, if tax returns may be audited (and one party was filing non-kosher returns) there can be some very ugly problems ahead. Secured debt may create issues, outstanding debt owed to the couple may cause !issues, lawsuits may cause problems, separately owned property if commingled with community funds can be an issue, secret winnings (gambling, lottos, etc.) owned rentals and owned anything else (like planes, businesses, huge income on undeclared properties, and etc.) may all come up when one least expects it.

Because of these possibilities, many clients with higher incomes can then hire attorneys. But for those without higher incomes, one party may get drastically taken advantage of because he or she has no funds for an attorney; but that spouse may have equity in undivided assets. Therefore, it would be likely that one still might find an attorney to help out, even if the client cannot put up much money for the retainer. If you believe you are in this boat, call attorney. You never know what can happen.

Corona virus Directives by Newsom is Getting Old....

Monday, November 2 6:07 p.m.: Judge limits Newsom's powers during pandemic https://www.capradio.org/articles/2020/11/02/california-coronavirus-updates/

A judge has preliminarily ordered California Gov. Gavin Newsom to stop issuing directives related to the coronavirus that might interfere with state law.
Sutter County Superior Court Judge Sarah Heckman tentatively ruled Monday that one of the dozens of executive orders Newsom has issued overstepped his authority. She more broadly barred him from infringing on the state Legislature. It’s the second time a judge in the same county has reached the conclusion, which runs counter to other state and federal court decisions backing the governor’s emergency powers. Heckman’s decision will become final in 10 days. Newsom's administration says it disagrees and is evaluating its next steps...