(703) 369-4738

Author archives: Yolanda Burnett

27
Jun
2022

Prince William Chamber 2022-2023 Annual Meeting

The Prince William Chamber of Commerce (PWCC) had a great day at its Annual Meeting on June 16th, hosted at the Farm Brewery at Broad Run! Rick Nishanian is the new Chairman of the Board for the PWCC and the fourth VFN partner to serve in this role. Please congratulate Rick on this great accomplishment.

This blog post is not intended to provide legal advice or substitute for the advice of legal counsel with respect to specific facts and situations. See disclaimer

21
Jun
2022

The Right to Exclude!

By Martin Crim, Esq.

Should hunters be able to enter other people’s land to retrieve their dogs?

Should police be able to enter land and peek through your windows to search for drugs?

Should relatives be able to visit the graves of their family members on private land?

What if the land is posted “no trespassing”?

Few people would complain if firefighters or EMT’s responded to a genuine emergency on their property, and it’s hard to imagine a judge saying that they commit a civil or criminal wrong by coming onto your property to provide emergency help.  This is true even if you didn’t give them your approval. Your approval is implied in a situation where public or private necessity outweighs the practicality of seeking permission to enter your property ahead of time.

But what is there is no emergency? What if you look out your kitchen window and see a stranger standing there on your property? You might, understandably, be alarmed. In this situation, you might assume that the law will back you up if you tell the stranger to leave. But in some circumstances, the law won’t back you up. So, what happens then? Let’s examine some circumstances where the right to exclude may not apply.

First, let us consider a situation of a property owner who wants a particular person to stay off their property. The property owner has the option to issue a “no trespassing letter” to that person, even if the property is normally open to the public, like a school or church. Local governments have a role in enforcing such letters, and in order to do so need to know things like “who has the authority to issue the letter” and “what if the person needs to enter the property for a valid purpose like voting or a parent-teacher conference”? For example, at my church, we have a policy saying exactly who has the authority to exclude someone from the building, to avoid having a situation where it’s unclear who is in charge.

A related issue comes up when a local government tries to protect homeowners’ right to exclude people. In that situation, it becomes a difficult task to specify who is permitted to approach your front door without your approval – and local governments have run afoul of the U.S. Constitution by providing a list of exceptions that allowed everyone but religious missionaries to do so.

Now, what if a homeowner wants to enforce a prohibition against certain visitors? In that case, homeowners have the option to post signs that prohibit certain classes of people – door-to-door salespeople, political canvassers, or whoever.  But what consequences can a homeowner impose upon someone who violates this prohibition? If the trespasser harmed the homeowners in some way, maybe a court would let them collect money from the trespasser. Without some tangible harm, the legal remedy becomes less clear. But what are rights without enforcement mechanisms?

Next, let’s consider a scenario where a loved one’s grave is located on private property. A 1993 Virginia law says that relatives of people buried in a cemetery, along with people who own burial plots there and genealogists, can enter and cross private property to reach the cemetery. There are, limitations, of course. Such visitors have to give notice, limit their activities there, and act appropriately, but the private property owner where the cemetery is located has lost the ability to say, “keep out.” They’ve lost the right to exclude, at least in part.

Next, consider a warrantless police search. US Supreme Court precedents say that police can enter “open fields” even if there are signs warning against entry and fences to keep people out. Under these circumstances, the police can also search your property using aircraft within “navigable airspace,” which means that the government took your right to exclusive use of the airspace over your property and used it to reduce the scope of your right to privacy.

Then we come to the hunting dogs. There’s a case pending in the courts right now that challenges Virginia’s law giving certain hunters the right to retrieve their dogs from other people’s lands. The plaintiffs are property owners who claim that they have been damaged by these dogs running loose on their property. The pending lawsuit builds off a US Supreme Court case that said a company could exclude union activity on its property.

Of possible relevance to the hunting dog case is the portion of the Virginia Constitution that says the people have a right to hunt, fish, and harvest game, subject to laws passed by the General Assembly. The Virginia Constitution also says that the right to private property is “fundamental,” which presumably means that it carries heavier weight than ordinary rights. Those competing rights collide with each other when hunters want to retrieve their dogs.

In some countries, there is a “right to roam,” which protects customary rights to travel, particularly in forests and coastal lands. In the US, a similar right protects “navigable waterways,” which allows people to use bodies of water that are “susceptible for use, by themselves or in connection with other waters, as highways for substantial interstate or foreign commerce.” That’s subject to a lot of interpretation – and potential abuse.

In law school, students read a case about someone sailing on a lake who ties up at a pier during a storm, even though told not to do so. The principle being taught there is the doctrine of necessity, which forms a defense against the claim that the sailors were trespassing. There is a fundamental moral principle that the right to exclude people from your property has to yield to their right to remain alive in an emergency. But that raises other questions, such as “what constitutes an emergency?”

As that brief survey shows, the right to exclude is an important aspect of the right to property, but like most rights, it is not absolute. Legislators and courts will continue to have to balance competing rights. Businesses, property owners, local governments, and others can’t rely on basic principles like the “right to exclude” because there are often competing principles that affect the legal rights in issue.

If you have a property rights problem, you should consult an attorney to learn your rights and how you might enforce those rights. You should also be cautious dealing with that stranger standing on your property and don’t assume that your property rights are the only thing the law cares about. I have been practicing in this area of the law for 30 years and encourage you to reach out if you have any questions regarding your right to exclude or about what circumstance may allow someone to enter your property without your consent.

Martin Crim is a shareholder at Vanderpool, Frostick & Nishanian, and has been practicing law for over thirty years, primarily for cities, towns, and other local governments. If you have additional questions or concerns contact Martin Crim at mcrim@vfnlaw.com or call us at 703-36-4738.


This blog post is not intended to provide legal advice or substitute for the advice of legal counsel with respect to specific facts and situations. See disclaimer

2
Jun
2022

Navigating the Backlog of the American Immigration System

Written By Meghan M. Phillips, Esq.[1]

Introduction: A Case Caught in the Backlog for Ten Years

In March 2022, I litigated case before the immigration court on behalf of an incredibly deserving asylum-seeker who had been waiting ten years to receive a decision on her case. Her hearing would decide whether she would be granted asylum, withholding of removal, or protection under the Convention Against Torture, or if she would be order removed to the country of her citizenship.

Even though recent country condition reports show that our client would likely be harmed, tortured or executed if she returned to her country, asylum is an immigration benefit, which provides access to other governmental benefits and allows asylees to petition for permanent residency after one year. Therefore, a grant of asylum is not guaranteed by an asylum officer or immigration judge: an asylum-seeker must prove they qualify for asylum, and it is also a matter of those factfinders’ discretion.

Although the client and her family knew I believed in the strength of her case and that she truly merited the immigration judge’s positive exercise of discretion, I explained that the burden of proof was ours and we needed to prepare accordingly. So, prepare we did, and it truly was a team effort. Happily, our work, which also included a motion to advance the hearing, paid off, and our client was finally granted asylum.

However, not all cases caught in the U.S. immigration system’s backlogs will end with a positive outcome; in some cases, waiting in the backlog means that the case is prejudiced or that the applicant might no longer qualify for the immigration benefit they seek. For example, country conditions can dramatically improve, causing asylum seekers to lose their case by the time they have their hearing. Evidence could be lost, or a witness crucial to the case could pass away before testifying while waiting in the backlog. Worst of all, certain types of relief require clients or their qualifying relatives to be under a certain age. For instance, for cancellation of removal, if one’s qualifying relative is a U.S. citizen child, the child will no longer be a qualifying relative if he or she reaches the age of twenty-one. Thus, it is important to not only have one’s merits hearing before the qualifying relative ages out, but to also have time for the visa to issue, which currently can take about two to three years.

Even if one does eventually receive a positive outcome, awaiting a decision on an immigration case due to the backlogs can be incredibly stressful and lead to many negative side effects. It can mean families are separated for long periods of time, businesses can be waiting long periods for workers they desperately need, and qualified applicants might not be able to travel, access health care, or other federal benefits such as financial aid for education.

State of the Backlog

Sadly, although the ten-year duration of the above-mentioned asylum case might seem unusually long, the backlogs in the American immigration system mean that long wait-times are not the exception but the norm. The current estimated time for an asylum case is 58 months – in other words, about five years.[2]  For immigrant visa cases, the National Visa Center (NVC) reported that in May 2022, they scheduled 28,447 applicants for visa appointments, but 421,136 eligible visa applicants are still pending the scheduling of their interviews.[3]  As of February 2022, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), was reviewing more than 9.5 million pending applications.[4] Finally, the immigration courts have a massive backlog of 1.6 million cases.[5]

Causes of the American Immigration Backlog

These estimates are also sadly unlikely to improve: a number of factors mean that the backlogs are only going to grow.  One of the main reasons for the backlog is the COVID-19 pandemic, which caused shutdowns of embassies, consulates, and immigration offices. However, fiscal issues and a governmental hiring freeze also contributed to backlogs with USCIS.[6]

Ricard Zuniga, the Biden administration’s special envoy for the Northern Triangle region recently predicted that the U.S. is likely to see an increase in asylum requests and immigration from Central America because three countries’ democracies are facing grave difficulties.[7] In Guatemala, an anti-corruption judge went into exile due threats against her life.[8] El Salvador is experiencing a spike of gang-related homicides, causing the government to make mass arrests.[9] Finally, the former president of Honduras, Juan Orlando Hernandez, has been extradited to the United States on drug trafficking charges.[10] Additionally, asylum requests from Ukrainians at the Mexican border are growing, due to the ongoing war.[11]

Strategies to Navigate the Backlog

            So, what can be done to help you, your family, or your business navigate these immigration backlogs so as to achieve your immigration goals? My most important tip is to avoid scammers or fraud notarios and find experienced and licensed legal counsel.[12] Although legal fees have a cost, doing your applications yourself or entrusting your case to an unlicensed person can have terrible consequences; not only could it cause your case to take longer, but you might also lose eligibility for immigration benefits entirely.

One reason your case might take longer is because what you file and where you file for your case matters. Knowing all the evidence needed to process your application and the proper filing address and fees can help you ensure that your application is not rejected and that you avoid Requests for Evidence (RFEs), which can make processing of your application take even longer.

Additionally, once you have retained legal counsel to help ensure your immigration application is properly filed, you can also ask him or her if any of these strategies might be right for you:

  1. Prosecutorial Discretion: Lawyers with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), who serve as prosecutors in immigration court have been directed to help clear low-priority immigration cases from the immigration court backlog by exercising their discretion in a variety of forms, including motioning to dismiss or administratively close removal proceedings, joining motions to reopen a deportation order, or not opposing immigration relief.[13]  An experienced immigration attorney can help you determine if you might qualify for this, whether such a request to DHS is in your best interest, and help you file a request for prosecutorial discretion with the required evidence with DHS.

 

  1. Motion to Advance: You might be able to file a motion to advance your court date with the immigration court. For example, in the previously discussed asylum case, our firm filed a motion to advance our client’s immigration court hearing date. This motion was granted and allowed our client to finally have her individual merits hearing on her asylum case.

 

  1. Requesting Premium Processing: For certain employment visa categories, you might be able to file a request for premium processing with an additional fee to request faster processing of your case.[14] However, knowing whether your case qualifies, and making sure you comply with all requirements can be tricky without an attorney who can walk you through each step of the process.

 

  1. Expedite Request: In some cases, you might also be able to request that USCIS or NVC expedite your interview. For example, if you can prove that: delay to your case could cause severe financial loss to a company or person; there is an emergency or urgent humanitarian reason to expedite your case; a nonprofit organization has an urgent need to expedite your case based on your specific role within the nonprofit in furthering cultural or social interests; it is in U.S. government interests to expedite your case; or there is a been clear USCIS error in your case.[15]  

 

  1. Case Outside Normal Processing Times Inquiry: After checking the processing times for your application to verify that your case it outside normal processing times, you may be able to submit an inquiry, asking USCIS to explain the delay or to receive an estimated time frame. An attorney can help you check your case processing time and submit such an inquiry.   

 

  1. Assistance Contacting a Member of Congress or Senator: Sometimes, a lawmaker such as your member of Congress or a senator can help make inquiries on your behalf or encourage the relevant immigration agency to expedite your case. An attorney can help you facilitate such a request.

 

  1. Federal Litigation such as a Writ of Mandamus or suit under the APA: When an immigration case has been pending without a decision for an unreasonable amount of time, and no other course of action has led to a decision or timeline for a decision, a lawsuit against USCIS or other government agencies, might be your best option. This lawsuit, called a writ of mandamus or complaint under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), will order the agency to make a decision on your case. However, this does not mean your case will be approved, only that a decision will be made. The lawsuit must be filed in the correct federal court with jurisdiction over your address or case, and you must show that you have exhausted all other avenues to receive a decision and that the time elapsed without a decision is unreasonable. An experienced immigration attorney can ensure that you file in the correct court and that you have tried all other strategies so as to avoid dismissal of your case. Furthermore, an experienced attorney can advise you on the risks of a negative decision and whether the time elapsed has indeed been unreasonable.

Conclusion

The U.S. immigration system backlog is extensive and navigating the backlog can be extremely difficult alone. Having an attorney help you choose the best strategy for your case can help immensely. However, above all, please do your research and pick a licensed and experienced immigration lawyer or representative for your case.

At VFN Immigrants First, we have four licensed immigration attorneys who are admitted to practice both by state bars and EOIR (the immigration court system) and who take their professional duties extremely seriously. We would be happy to help you find the best legal strategy to meet your immigration goals and help you navigate the immigration system’s enormous backlogs.

Please give us a call at 703-335-2009, visit our website, www.immigrantsfirst.com, or stop by our office at 9200 Church Street, Suite 203, in Manassas, Virginia to learn more or make an appointment for a consultation

 

[1] Meghan M. Phillips, Esq., is an associate immigration lawyer with the Immigration Law Practice Group, Immigrants First, at Vanderpool, Frostick & Nishanian, PC. She primarily handles family and humanitarian immigration, Special Immigrant Juvenile custody, and removal defense and appeal cases. She is a member of the Virginia State Bar and admitted to practice before the U.S. immigration courts (EOIR), the Eastern District of Virginia Court, and the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

[2] Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) Immigration, Syracuse University, A Mounting Asylum Backlog and Growing Wait Times, Dec. 22, 2021, available at: https://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/672/.

[3] U.S. Department of State – Bureau of Consular Affairs, National Visa Center (NVC) Immigrant Visa Backlog Report, May 2022, available at: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/visa-information-resources/visas-backlog.html.

[4] Cmilo Montoy-Galvez, CBS News, U.S. immigration agency moves to cut 9.5 million-case backlog and speed up processing, Mar. 29, 2022, available at: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/immigration-uscis-case-backlog-processing-delays/.

[5] Rick Jervis, USA Today, COVID-19, surge in new cases create historic backlog jam in US immigration courts, report says, Jan. 19, 2022, available at: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2022/01/19/covid-19-creates-huge-backlog-us-immigration-court/6581042001/.

[6] U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), USCIS Backlog Reduction and Processing Times, May 18, 2022, available at: https://www.uscis.gov/outreach/upcoming-national-engagements/uscis-backlog-reduction-and-processing-times.

[7] Cincy Carcamo, Los Angeles Times, Biden official says U.S. will likely see an uptick in asylum requests and immigration, Apr. 2, 2022, available at: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-04-02/la-me-ricardo-zuniga-on-biden-asylum-reversal-policy-central-america.

[8] Id.

[9] Id.

[10] Id.

[11] Sharif Paget and Karol Suarez, CNN, The number of Ukrainians seeking asylum at the US-Mexico border is growing by the day, Apr. 2, 2022, available at: https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/02/us/ukrainians-us-mexico-border/index.html.

[12] See my previous blog article, The Wrong Immigration Help Can Hurt, for more information about the perils of entrusting your case to an immigration scammer or notario and what you can do to avoid these scams and find licensed, legal help. 

[13] Memorandum from Kerry E. Doyle, Principal Legal Advisor, Guidance to OPLA Attorneys Regarding the Enforcement of Civil Immigration Laws and the Exercise of Prosecutorial Discretion, April 3, 2022 (taking effect April 25, 2022), available at: https://www.ice.gov/doclib/about/offices/opla/OPLA-immigration-enforcement_guidanceApr2022.pdf ; Memorandum from Alejandro N. Mayorkas, Secretary of Homeland Security, Guidelines for the Enforcement of Civil Immigration Law (Sept. 30, 2021), available at: https://www.ice.gov/doclib/news/guidelines-civilimmigrationlaw.pdf.

[14] USCIS, How Do I Request Premium Processing?, May 27, 2022, available at: https://www.uscis.gov/forms/all-forms/how-do-i-request-premium-processing.

[15] USCIS, How to Make an Expedite Request, Mar. 21, 2022, available at: https://www.uscis.gov/forms/filing-guidance/how-to-make-an-expedite-request.

 

This blog post is not intended to provide legal advice or substitute for the advice of legal counsel with respect to specific facts and situations. See disclaimer

31
May
2022

Beware of Office Birthday Parties!

Written by: Monica Munin, Esq.

One Kentucky employer got a nasty surprise after inadvertently hosting a birthday party on behalf of an employee who requested that his birthday not be observed due to social anxiety. Kevin Berling, a former employee of Gravity Diagnostics, sued the Company after he was fired for behavior, he exhibited in response to an unwanted birthday party.

Berling had approached his office manager to request that the Company not throw him an office birthday party. He explained that he had an anxiety disorder as well as a propensity for panic attacks that becomes exacerbated when he is the center of attention. Berling also indicated he had accumulated “bad memories” associated with his birthday that made parties upsetting to him. The Office Manager inadvertently forgot to pass on the information to the rest of the company and was out of the office on Berling’s birthday.  As a result, a birthday party, including balloons and a banner, was set up for Berling in the office break room. When Berling heard about the party, he suffered a severe panic attack and went to his car to hide from the celebration.  The next day Berling was called into a meeting to discuss the incident where his managers allegedly scolded and belittled him for his reaction to the unwanted birthday party.  Berling indicated one manager accused him of “stealing his co-worker’s joy.”  The meeting led to another panic attack with Berling clenching and unclenching his fists as instructed by his therapist to try and mitigate his panic symptoms. His behavior further alarmed his managers who asked him to immediately leave the property and assumed he was on the verge of a violent outburst.  Later that week Berling was terminated “because of the events of the previous week.” Berling then brought suit alleging discrimination under a Kentucky disability law similar to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and retaliation for exercising his rights. The Company asserted that Berling had been fired due to a legitimate fear of violence rather than because of his anxiety. A jury sided with Berling and found that the Company violated Berling’s disability rights, awarding him $450,000. The jury essentially held that Berling’s reaction was a reasonable mitigating measure to control his panic attacks and that the manager’s assumption Berling was on the verge of violence was discriminatory. Berling’s attorney, Anthony Bucher, summarized the incident to the British Broadcasting Company by stating:

“He had a panic attack. That is all. And, because representatives from Gravity Diagnostics did not understand his panic response and were unnerved by his response, they assumed he was a threat. Assuming that people with mental health issues are dangerous without any evidence of violent behavior is discriminatory.”

The incident serves as a reminder to employers that mental disabilities can qualify for protection under disability discrimination statutes and that employees are not required to file a formal request for accommodations in order to be entitled to those protections. Here, the jury found that Berling’s request was an exercise of his right to a reasonable accommodation under Kentucky disability law even though he did not explicitly refer to the law or use the phrase “reasonable accommodation.” Federal and Virginia state disability statutes have also been interpreted by courts as providing expansive rights to eligible employees. Employees do not need to use specific “buzz words” in order to be entitled to protections under the statutes. It is vitally important that employers ensure their supervisors and staff are familiar with employee rights under disability law and that they receive training regarding what a request for an accommodation can look like. Further, training should be sure to include general information regarding mental disabilities. While the facts in Berling’s case are unique, we can be sure that disability cases involving mental health disorders are likely to continue to evolve as courts attain a better understanding of the nature of such disabilities.

Need supervisor training? Unsure about a disability matter or other employment law issue? Contact Monica Munin, Esq. at mmunin@vfnlaw.com for answers.

This blog post is not intended to provide legal advice or substitute for the advice of legal counsel with respect to specific facts and situations. See disclaimer

31
May
2022

Immigration Updates!!!

Written By Lisa Shea, Esq.

We are keeping our community aware of the Immigration changes. Please see the updates below:

Temporarily in effect as of May 4th, 2022. Due to USCIS delay in processing the issuance of employment authorization cards; USCIS has now increased automatic extensions from 180 days to 540 days for eligible applicants applying to renew their work authorization card. Attached is the link to the webpage with further information. https://www.uscis.gov/eadautoextend

Uniting for Ukraine

Uniting for Ukraine provides a pathway for Ukrainian citizens and their immediate family members who are outside the United States to come to the United States and stay temporarily in a two-year period of parole.

Here is the webpage for further information on requirements and eligibility for Uniting for Ukraine. https://www.uscis.gov/ukraine

.

FOR MORE INFORMATION ON A SPECIFIC SITUATION, PLEASE CONTACT:

Lisa Shea is a shareholder at Vanderpool, Frostick & Nishanian, P.C. She is leading the firm’s Immigration practice, as well as Immigration Chair for the Prince William County Bar Association.  If you have additional questions or concerns contact Lisa Shea at or call us at 703-335-2009.

www.immigrantsfirst.com (for information about immigration solutions)
www.vfnlaw.com (for information about solutions in other areas of law)

This blog post is not intended to provide legal advice or substitute for the advice of legal counsel with respect to specific facts and situations. See disclaimer

25
May
2022

Community Meeting with American Legion Post 114

Written by: Olaun Simmons

VF&N’s Olaun Simmons attended a community meeting with American Legion Post 114 and People, Inc. to discuss the revitalization of the historic American Legion Post building and the development of duplexes on Prince William Street in Manassas, Virginia.

If you have any questions on how VF&N can assist you, please feel free to reach out by way of phone or email Olaun Simmons.

This blog post is not intended to provide legal advice or substitute for the advice of legal counsel with respect to specific facts and situations. See disclaimer

23
May
2022

Afghan TPS Update!!

Written By Lisa Shea, Esq.

On May 19, 2022, the Department of Homeland Security designated Afghanistan for temporary protected status (TPS) for 18 months from May 20, 2022, to November 20, 2023.  The designation allows for Afghan nationals to file initial applications for TPS who have continuously resided in the United States since March 15, 2022.   TPS grantees qualify for employment authorization documents and must undergo background security checks.  We are happy to assist our Afghan clients with the process of obtaining TPS.

FOR MORE INFORMATION ON A SPECIFIC SITUATION, PLEASE CONTACT:

Lisa Shea is a shareholder at Vanderpool, Frostick & Nishanian, P.C. She is leading the firm’s Immigration practice, as well as Immigration Chair for the Prince William County Bar Association.  If you have additional questions or concerns contact Lisa Shea at or call us at 703-335-2009.

www.immigrantsfirst.com (for information about immigration solutions)
www.vfnlaw.com (for information about solutions in other areas of law)

This blog post is not intended to provide legal advice or substitute for the advice of legal counsel with respect to specific facts and situations. See disclaimer

20
May
2022

Rising Star Super Lawyer

Brett Callahan
Civil Litigation

We are pleased to announce for the second year in a row, our very own Brett Callahan has been selected as a Rising Star Top Rated Business Litigation Attorney in Virginia by Super Lawyers.  Super Lawyers is a research-driven, peer-influenced rating service of outstanding lawyers who have attained a high degree of professional achievement and peer recognition.  Each year no more than 5 percent of the attorneys in the state are selected for the Super Lawyers list, and no more than 2.5 percent for the Rising Stars list.

Brett_Rising-Star
18
May
2022

A Day of Service Supporting Our Community!

Written by: Tyler Blaser, Esq.

This past Saturday, VFN business counsel, Tyler Blaser, engaged in a day of service to benefit Carried to Full Term, a 501©(3) providing long-term housing to pregnant and homeless women, alongside his Leadership Prince William 2022 classmates. Carried to Full Term is a place of hope for women who find themselves in a crisis pregnancy situation. Their home is located in the heart of the Town of Haymarket, providing housing, counseling, social service contacts, and postpartum support in an independent living environment.

Over 75 volunteers participated in this year’s class project, beginning at 6 a.m. and lasting well into the afternoon. Inside the home, volunteers cleaned, painted, and decorated a community room, office, bathroom, and various bedrooms, while installing new curtains, rugs, lamps, and appliances. On the outside of the facility, community members built a gazebo, picnic table, and playhouse. We also weeded, mulched, and planted gardens. Multiple members of the Prince William County Board of Supervisors spoke at the event to recognize the hard work and spirit of our Prince William community.

If you need me or just want more information, please give me a call at 703.479.3181, send an email to tblaser@vfnlaw.com, or visit my Attorney Page.

This blog post is not intended to provide legal advice or substitute for the advice of legal counsel with respect to specific facts and situations. See disclaimer