Max Mizejewski (pronounced majeski) received his undergraduate degree from the University of California at Berkeley in 1993. In 1997, Max graduated from Northwestern School of Law of Lewis and Clark College and went on to work in the public sector before entering private practice. As Manager of the Oregon Department of Transportation Environmental Unit, Max gained valuable experience negotiating, problem solving and working through confrontational issues with emotionally charged individuals. Max brings this experience to his private practice which focuses on criminal defense and family law.


Max believes in taking the time to understand each clients unique situation and specific needs. Max represents clients in criminal prosecutions, administrative hearings, dissolution of marriage, custody matters and appeals. Max's tenacious attitude and strategic mindset make him the right advocate to have on your side.

Mr. Mizejewski believes everyone's rights should be protected, and everyone deserves the best possible defense. If you have been charged with a criminal offense, you need to know your rights.  We can defend you against your criminal charges, including the following:

• Drunk Driving (DUII, DUI, DWI) - including underage drinking and driving, refusing a breathalyzer test, driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and other drug or alcohol related driving offenses
• Criminal Driving Offenses - including manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide, assault, hit & run, attempting to elude police, reckless driving and licensure issues
• Drug Crimes - including possession, delivery, and manufacturing of marijuana, cocaine, methamphetamine, heroin, designer drugs and prescription drugs
• Property Crimes - including theft, embezzlement, forgery, fraud, computer crimes and burglary
• Violent Crimes - including menacing, stalking and assault
• Stalking - including criminal offenses and civil actions

For more information about Oregon criminal law, Oregon criminal courts,  the criminal process, or to discuss your criminal charges with an experienced criminal defense attorney, please call 541-505-9872 or contact us online.

Many Americans were glued to their television as President Obama delivered his first State of the Union address last Thursday.

Near the conclusion of his speech, I sat and watched as the President publicly criticized the highest judicial authority, the Supreme Court, for ruling in favor of “allowing corporations to spend without limit in our elections.”

While this statement alone was enough to rile support from some seated in the House chamber, six of nine justices in attendance remained seated; their unmoved faces reflecting their point of view. Except for Samuel Alito.

“Not true, not true,” the Associate Justice appeared to say as he visibly shook his head in opposition to Obama’s scolding.

The question I pose is, where does the disrespect come to an end across the board?

While media networks criticized Alito for his blatant acts of disagreement, no one has questioned the extent to which President Obama took to openly disagree with the Supreme Court.

In the years of the State of the Union address, legal experts do not recall encountering a president openly scolding the court since Roosevelt’s address to Congress in 1937.

Rather than sharing how he felt about their decision, President Obama should have exercised restraint for this particular occasion. The State of the Union address should be a time designated for the president to “report to Congress the current state of the Union” and to implement his own legislative ideas.

At the same time, Associate Justice Alito should refrain from making his gestures of disagreement so blatant.

I am sure that Obama is grateful that he did not have another “you lie” incident, however if the President wants respect from other high ranking politicians, he too should give respect where it is due.

http://www.insiderexclusive.com/component/content/article/1-shows/104-chrysler-death-flax-v-daimlerchrysler-butler-wooten-a-fryhofer-

Chrysler Death

On November 11, 2004, a Nashville, Tennessee, jury returned a verdict of $105.5 million against the DaimlerChrysler Corporation, finding the seatbacks in Chrysler minivans were unsafe, defective and unreasonably dangerous. The case involved injuries to and the death of an 8-month-old child, Joshua Flax, in the rear-end collision which occurred in Davidson County, Tennessee, on June 30, 2001. Joshua was fatally injured when his grandfather’s 1998 Dodge Caravan minivan was hit in the rear. The front passenger’s seatback collapsed backward, and the passenger’s head hit Joshua’s forehead, fracturing his skull. Joshua died the next day. The Insider Exclusive will show how George W. Fryhofer III and Leigh Martin May of the law firm of Butler, Wooten & Fryhofer won this historic $105 million verdict by proving that:

1. Chrysler had known for over 20 years that these seats were deadly and never warned anybody. Instead, they continue to claim there’s nothing wrong and try to mislead the press, public and juries.

2. Chrysler had been marketing minivans as “safe family vehicles” despite evidence to the contrary from their own engineers and executives.

3. In 1992, when Chrysler appointed a “Minivan Safety Leadership Team” to investigate safety problems with its minivans, the team concluded that the seatback problem needed to be fixed immediately.

4. Chrysler then ordered Paul Sheridan, the safety leadership team’s chairman, to destroy the team’s meeting minutes and later fired Sheridan. Chrysler sued Sheridan for $82 million in an attempt to muzzle him. Chrysler collected zero from Sheridan.

5. To date, 7 million Dodge, Plymouth and Chrysler minivans are still riding America’s highways with these defective seats. Chrysler still refuses to recall or warn of this danger.

Federal authorities are seizing two Rhode Island mansions and a New York City apartment from a Florida lawyer accused of masterminding a $1 billion fraud scheme.

An amended forfeiture complaint against attorney Scott Rothstein lists two adjacent multimillion-dollar homes on Rhode Island's Narragansett Bay. The complaint filed last week also lists a $6 million Manhattan apartment and a $7.2 million home in Boca Raton.

The FBI says Rothstein orchestrated a $1 billion fraud scheme involving investments in fake legal settlements.

No criminal charges have been filed, but prosecutors have moved to seize Rothstein's numerous properties, luxury cars, boats and other assets. Investors have filed lawsuits against Rothstein and others.

It's Business 101: When a practice area of your law firm suddenly becomes its sole focus, it's time to revise your business plan.

That is exactly what Ken Gross and law firm Thav, Gross, Steinway & Bennett PC have done in light of the state and national economic crisis.

Previously, a quarter of the firm's practice centered on bankruptcy and tax collection. Today, it makes up the majority of its business.

To handle the sharp increase in these areas, the Bingham Farms firm has developed a Financial Crisis Management practice, added new tools for its attorneys to use and modernized its marketing strategy to get the word out.

The result is a vibrant practice that has attracted new clients, both individuals and corporations, said co-founder Ken Gross.

For businesses, Thav Gross creates strategies that tackle delinquent taxes and problems resulting from banks withholding or not renewing lines of credit. For individuals, the firm has designed new programs to help with loan modifications, debt resolution, bankruptcy protection and tax relief.

hen Biopure Corp. decided to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in July, the biotech was already working with Ropes & Gray LLP, the largest law firm in Boston.

But Biopure CEO Zaf Zafirelis decided to tap a much smaller firm, a 26-lawyer Boston-based outfit called Craig & Macauley PC with virtually no name recognition, to handle its bankruptcy proceedings.

“I was very, very impressed with the clarity with which they outlined what was going to happen,” said Zafirelis. “It’s a traumatic event for any company to file for bankruptcy. I can honestly say that working through this whole thing with (Craig & Macauley) made it a lot simpler for us.”

Like Craig and Macauley, bankruptcy boutiques across the country have been quietly booming in this economy as bankruptcies and workouts soar. Unlike large law firms which have been pummeled by the recession, forcing them to fire lawyers and entirely rethink established business practices, these smaller bankruptcy shops say the current economy is actually an opportunity to shine.

In major U.S. cities, Chapter 11 bankruptcy filings have spiked during the past 12 months as companies run out of cash and banks come to collect. In Boston, Chapter 11 filings have nearly doubled over the past year to 115 total cases in Boston during the period between January 1 and September 30, 2009, compared to 58 Chapter 11 bankruptcy filings during the same period last year, according to a review of filings at the Boston office of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Boston.

Bankruptcy boutiques are in a unique position to cash in on the boom because nationally, there are literally only dozens that focus specifically on business bankruptcies, as opposed to individual bankruptcy filings. Smallfirms that have substantial bankruptcy practices include Craig & Macauley, Hanify & King PC in Boston, Warner Stevens LLP in Fort Worth, Texas and Shaw Gussis Fishman Glantz Wolfson & Towbin in Chicago. While most large law firms have bankruptcy practices, they are conflicted out of handling many

cases because they also work with large financial institutions. The sparse number of boutique bankruptcy firms can also be explained by the fact that the work is cyclical and once the boom arrives, the matters are deeply complex.

Peter Roberts a partner with the bankruptcy law firm Shaw Gussis Fishman Glantz Wolfson & Towbin LLC in Chicago, says his firm began to see an uptick in work about six months ago for the types of companies the firm works with, which tends to be smaller to middle market businesses. In Chicago, Chapter 11 filings have more than doubled to 241 during the first three quarters of 2009, compared to 96 during the same period last year, according to U.S. Bankruptcy Court filings.

Nobody can say this America's Cup is boring.

What used to be an insulated sport for fabulously wealthy men named Lipton and Vanderbilt has morphed into something out of a James Bond movie or a Tom Clancy novel, all wrapped up in two of the fastest, most-extreme boats ever to cut through — or in this case, literally fly above — the sea spray.

When two-time defending champion Alinghi of landlocked Switzerland picked little-known Ras al-Khaimah, United Arab Emirates, to host its nautical grudge match beginning Feb. 8 against an American crew led by Silicon Valley maverick Larry Ellison of Oracle Corp., it did more than make people click on Google Maps.

The stodgy sport suddenly sailed into a maelstrom involving: bickering billionaires Ellison and biotech mogul Ernesto Bertarelli of Alinghi, who once were pals but are now bitter rivals; Ras al-Khaimah's proximity and suspected ties to Iran; a concerned congressman; and a lawyer who couldn't win for Al Gore but beat Microsoft.

Court filings that had argued arcane rules spanning the 158-year history of the America's Cup now raise fears of terrorists in speedboats attacking a 90-by-90-foot trimaran named USA as it sails some 80 miles off Iran's coastline.