Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Harold Ramis, Alchemist of Comedy, Dies at 69

The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro was sad to hear the news about director and actor, Harold Ramis. Our thoughts and prayers go out to his family.

Harold Ramis, a writer, director and actor whose boisterous but sly silliness helped catapult comedies like “Groundhog Day,” “Ghostbusters,”“Animal House” and “Caddyshack” to commercial and critical success, died on Monday in his Chicago-area home. He was 69.The cause was complications of autoimmune inflammatory vasculitis, a disease that involves swelling of blood vessels, said Chris Day, a spokesman for United Talent Agency, which represented Mr. Ramis.
Mr. Ramis was a master at creating hilarious plots and scenes peopled by indelible characters, among them a groundskeeper obsessed with a gopher, fraternity brothers at war with a college dean and a jaded weatherman condemned to living through Groundhog Day over and over.

“More than anyone else,” Paul Weingarten wrote in The Chicago Tribune Magazine in 1983, “Harold Ramis has shaped this generation’s ideas of what is funny.”
And to Mr. Ramis, the fact was that “comedy is inherently subversive.”
“We represent the underdog as comedy usually speaks for the lower classes,” Mr. Ramis once said. “We attack the winners.” Mr. Ramis collaborated with the people who came to be considered the royalty of comedy in the 1970s and ’80s, notably from the first-generation cast of “Saturday Night Live,” including John Belushi, Dan Aykroyd, Chevy Chase and Gilda Radner.
His breakthrough came in 1978 when he joined Douglas Kenney and Chris Miller to write “National Lampoon’s Animal House,” which starred Mr. Belushi and broke the box-office record for comedies at the time. With Mr. Aykroyd, he went on to write “Ghostbusters” (1984) and “Ghostbusters II”(1989), playing the super-intellectual Dr. Egon Spengler in tales of a squad of New York City contractors specializing in ghost-removal. He made his directorial debut with the country club comedy “Caddyshack” (1980) and his film acting debut the next year in “Stripes,” a comedy about military life that he wrote with Dan Goldberg and Len Blum. Mr. Ramis played Russell Ziskey, who, with his friend John (Bill Murray), joins the Army as a lark.

The film is an example of his ability to be simultaneously silly and subversive. At one point Mr. Murray exhorts his fellow soldiers by yelling: “We’re not Watusi! We’re not Spartans — we’re Americans! That means that our forefathers were kicked out of every decent country in the world. We are the wretched refuse. We’re the underdog. We’re mutts. Here’s proof.” He touches a soldier’s face. “His nose is cold.” Harold Ramis was born in Chicago on Nov. 21, 1944, to parents who worked long hours at the family store, Ace Food and Liquor Mart. He loved television so much, he said, that he got up early on Saturday mornings and stared at the screen until the first program began. In high school, he was editor in chief of the yearbook and a National Merit Scholar. He then attended Washington University in St. Louis on a full scholarship. Dropping pre-med studies, he went on to earn a degree in English in 1967. After graduation he got a job as an orderly in a psychiatric hospital in St. Louis and married Anne Plotkin. The two moved to Chicago, where Mr. Ramis worked as a substitute teacher in a rough neighborhood while writing freelance articles for The Chicago Daily News. In 1968 he was assigned to cover Chicago’s Second City improvisational troupe, which included Mr. Belushi and Mr. Murray. “I thought they were funny,” Mr. Ramis told The Chicago Tribune Magazine in 1983. “But at the same time I thought I could be doing this. I’m that funny.” Soon he was hired as jokes editor at Playboy magazine, where he moved up to associate editor. He also began attending an acting workshop and, after two audition attempts, joined Second City’s touring company.

Original Source

Contact Neil O'Toole and John Sbarbaro

at the Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C.

Phone: 303-595-4777

Located in the Denver Metro area.

226 West 12th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80204

Disclaimer

Any content of this blog is intended for informational purposes only.It is not intended to solicit business, provide legal advice from The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C. and does not serve as a medium for an attorney-client relationship. Therefore, The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C. is not responsible for the information on this blog which may not apply to every reader. Always seek professional counsel if you have any legal matters. Contents within the blog of The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C., logos and other related media are protected by the copyright laws of the United States and other jurisdictions.

Friday, February 14, 2014

Happy Valentine's Day from the Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C.

Ekant Veer, a marketing professor from New Zealand, shared the “brutally honest” valentines he’s been making for his wife for the last few years.

Enjoy:

Original Source

Contact Neil O'Toole and John Sbarbaro

at the Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C.

Phone: 303-595-4777

Located in the Denver Metro area.

226 West 12th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80204

Disclaimer

Tuesday, February 11, 2014

Little Bit of ‘Fantasia’ as NBC Begins Olympic Show

Olympic opening ceremonies are a little like a Match.com first date: The host country, dolled up with costly hair extensions, Christian Louboutin heels and a brand-new black cocktail dress, recounts amusing childhood anecdotes and college triumphs but leaves out her D.W.I. arrest. (Or, in the case of Russia, the gulag.)

Russia isn’t alone in airbrushing the past and puffing up its chest. At the 2002 Winter Games in Salt Lake City, the United States had to show resilience after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and also get past the bidding scandal for those Games.

Russia has a uniquely troubled history, but every host nation has something to prove — and hide. That’s also true of a host network. NBC, like Russia, has a lot riding on these Olympic Games. The “Today” show, for so long No. 1, is now steadily beaten by “Good Morning America” on ABC. NBC just shoved aside Jay Leno, who was No. 1 in late night, for a younger talent, Jimmy Fallon, whose ability to maintain the primacy of “The Tonight Show” has yet to be proved. It didn’t help network karma that Bob Costas was forced by an eye infection to don eyeglasses and work from an odd isolated studio — it looked like an ice cave in Oz — at an Olympic broadcasting center far from the action.

Accordingly, NBC erected its own Potemkin village for the Olympic coverage. It passed over current “Today” hosts and reached out to a more popular alumna, Meredith Vieira, to add some charisma to Matt Lauer’s coverage of the opening ceremony. NBC also recruited the New Yorker editor David Remnick, author of “Lenin’s Tomb,” to lend some intellectual heft. Remnick told his co-hosts that Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin, didn’t care if the world saw him as an autocrat. Putin, he said, wants Russians to see themselves as a “modernizing great power.”
Like Putin’s presidency, the ceremony was majestic, grandiose and quite humorless — with much of the artful theatricality but none of the self-deprecating touches that distinguished the London Olympics in 2012.

Yet even the most Russia-centered pageantry and over-the-top Slavic spectacle — reindeer herders, ballet dancers, Tchaikovsky, Sputnik — were presented in a slick, Disneyesque package, including an introductory video with a little girl in a white dress, Lyubov, who floated on a cloud of dreams through an alphabet of Russian history (T was for Tolstoy and television).

It was a little bit Alice in Putinland, but also “Fantasia” on the Black Sea and an indication of how much Russia has adapted to Western values since it shook off Soviet rule. Putin may be hoping to use the Games to project Slavic power and Russian exceptionalism, but Friday’s immersion course in Mother Russia had an unmistakable glint of Hollywood make-believe and show-business pizazz. China’s opening ceremony in 2008 in Beijing was far more indigenous, a staggering paean to communist-style mass regimentation, discipline and collective self-effacement.
The most elaborate special effects Friday celebrated a more palatable past — Peter the Great, the Russian Imperial Navy, “War and Peace” — but there were glancing allusions to some elements of Soviet history, like the October Revolution.

Perhaps the most telling throwback to Soviet times was Russian television’s handling of a glitch in the pyrotechnics. Five giant snowflakes were supposed to morph into Olympic rings and explode into fireworks, but one failed to open properly and the fireworks fizzled.

“One of the snowflakes is not quite cooperating,” Lauer said. “This is what happens when you are this ambitious in a show like this.” Russia’s Channel One switched to rehearsal footage so Russian viewers wouldn’t see the misstep.

When the camera showed Putin in the stands, applauding the Ukrainian team with measured enthusiasm and a small, smug smile, Lauer reminded viewers of Putin’s love of martial arts and other sports. Remnick put it differently: “He loves to perform his own machoness.”

President Obama didn’t attend the event, but he gave Costas an interview that wasn’t exactly flattering to Putin’s self-image. Obama said that privately, the Russian president always treated him with respect, but that he made a point of looking bored in joint interviews for domestic consumption.

“My sense is that’s part of his shtick back home politically as wanting to look like the tough guy,” Obama said. “U.S. politicians have a different style. We tend to smile once in a while.”

Original Source

Contact Neil O'Toole and John Sbarbaro

at the Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C.

Phone: 303-595-4777

Located in the Denver Metro area.

226 West 12th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80204

Disclaimer

Thursday, February 6, 2014

MYTH #4: Technology Will Cure All of Our Ills

There are many exciting technological changes on the horizon, and much discussion about how fast and efficient our world will be. Indeed, the possibilities are tremendous, but only if that technology is integrated and used intelligently.

Technology, like any tool, must be used with skill and purpose. Give a running chainsaw to a monkey, and the results will not be pretty. All you’ll gain is utter devastation and a highly agitated monkey. The same rules apply for the implementation of new technology based systems. Too many companies use process based decisions to conduct technology selection, when they should be focusing on end result goals. New gizmos should not be used just because they are new – they should be used because they help an organization meet a need, and drive the company to successful goal attainment.

Technology selection should start with two basic questions:

1) What are we trying to accomplish?
This, of course, contains a broad set of queries. What are the pain points? Where are our production bottlenecks? What do we need to stay competitive? What costs need reducing? A successful company will involve their “front line” employees in this discussion, and eliminate any disconnects between reality and upper management’s perception of reality.

2) What do we need to solve the issues we just identified?
It is a simple idea. Identify the needs, and work with those actually tasked with doing the job to determine what will meet them. It is from this point that a company can begin to define specifically what solutions it should be looking for.

A final warning: Technology will likely take your company mobile in the coming years. Having a plan to separate and protect your employee’s personal lives will not only make you an employer of choice, it will keep many agitated monkeys off your back.

Original Source

Contact Neil O'Toole and John Sbarbaro

at the Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C.

Phone: 303-595-4777

Located in the Denver Metro area.

226 West 12th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80204

Disclaimer

Monday, February 3, 2014

Tough loss for the Denver Broncos at the Super Bowl.

The only good news Sunday night for the most prolific offense in NFL history came on the final play of the third quarter.

That's when Denver avoided the ignominious fate of being the first team ever to get shut out in a Super Bowl.

Mind you, this is nothing to brag about. But what was considered unthinkable entering Super Bowl 48 had actually become plausible by the time Broncos quarterback Peyton Manning threw a 14-yard touchdown pass to wide receiver Demaryius Thomas.

Such was Seattle's dominance in a 43-8 whipping that matched the NFL's top offense (Denver) and top defense (Seahawks).

"All those people who like to say defense wins championships can gloat about that," Seahawks head coach Pete Carroll said. "It certainly proved true today."
The rout was well underway by the time Manning and Thomas finally connected in the end zone. The Broncos were burned on special teams by an 87-yard Percy Harvin kickoff return for a touchdown to open the second half. Denver's defense also struggled getting off the field, with the Seahawks frequently converting on third downs.

"I don't want to use the word embarrassed," Broncos tight end Julius Thomas said after his unit's four-turnover performance. "But this shows what happens when you don't execute."

The game's first offensive snap proved a harbinger of what was to come. Manning approached the line of scrimmage to shout signals when center Manny Ramirez fired a snap that bounced off the quarterback's helmet and into the end zone. The miscommunication -- Ramirez said Manning shouldn't have stepped forward after making the final offensive adjustment -- led to a Seahawks safety only 12 seconds into the first quarter.

"We weren't sharp offensively from the get-go," Manning admitted. "For whatever reason, we couldn't get much going after that."

Denver's future possessions weren't any prettier. A three-and-out series was followed by a Manning overthrow on the next possession that was intercepted by Seahawks safety Kam Chancellor.

The Broncos were already behind, 15-0, by the time Knowshon Moreno rushed for the team's initial first down -- almost five minutes into the second quarter. But just when the Broncos were pressing to get on the MetLife Stadium scoreboard, the two best aspects of Seattle's defense -- smothering coverage and fierce pass rush -- came shining through.

An offensive line that had done an excellent job in protection throughout the playoffs sprung a leak. On third-and-13 from Seattle's 35-yard line, Seahawks defensive end Cliff Avril overcame a 60-pound weight disadvantage to bull right tackle Orlando Franklin back toward Manning. Avril then hit the quarterback's arm, forcing one of the Manning "ducks" that Seahawks cornerback Richard Sherman alluded to during a pre-Super Bowl news conference.

Moreno then made a mistake by not trying harder to catch or bat down the errant, wobbly throw. Seahawks outside linebacker Malcolm Smith charged for the interception and returned it 69 yards for a touchdown that extended Seattle's lead to 22-0.

Read Full Article

The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C.

Phone: 303-595-4777

226 West 12th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80204

Disclaimer

Wednesday, January 29, 2014

The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C. successful at the Colorado Supreme Court

The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C., is pleased to announce the Colorado Supreme Court affirmed an entitlement to temporary total disability benefits for one of their Clients. Unfortunately, this injured worker has been without any money and funds to live upon since August 24, 2009. Although the wheels of justice move quicker in the Colorado Workers' Compensation System, after no less than 3 separate appeals, the Supreme Court of the State of Colorado has spoken affirming the original award of benefits.

You may review the claim Here

The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C.

Phone: 303-595-4777

226 West 12th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80204

Disclaimer

Tuesday, January 28, 2014

We Should Pay Less Attention to Seniors and More Attention to Workers

—By Kevin Drum

Our story so far: a few days ago I wrote a post describing the Social Security Administration's MINT forecast of retiree income. As the chart on the right shows, they project that retiree income will continue its steady rise, increasing from $20,000 in 1970 to $46,000 in 2041 (adjusted for inflation). Based on this, I questioned whether the much-talked-about "retirement crisis" was for real.

Dean Baker responded to my post, for which I'm grateful. He basically made five points:

Social Security is a big part of the reason for rising retiree income. No argument there.
Income replacement rates have declined from 95 percent for Depression-era workers to 84 percent for future retirees. This is true. However, as I explained on Friday, this is more because of sluggish income growth among workers than it is because retiree incomes are in any real trouble.
65-year-olds are living longer and are more likely to be working these days, which is part of the reason for strong incomes among seniors. Again, no argument there. But income is income, regardless of where it comes from. (It's also worth noting that longer lifespans are primary a phenomenon of the well-off, not those with lower incomes.)
Medicare premiums are increasing, which is an added expense for seniors.
The MINT projections include imputed rent as part of income. In some cases this is fine, since living rent-free in a paid-off house does indeed have the same effect as cash income. In other cases, where retirees live in large houses with large imputed rents, it can give an inflated idea of how well off a retiree is.

The first three of these items don't really change the picture. They're just observations about the nature of the income that retirees are likely to have. Item #4 is relevant, but I think it's cherry picking. Every age group has expenses that others don't, and those expenses rise and fall differently. The only way to judge this fairly is to look at overall inflation rates for various age groups, and most efforts to do this have yielded only modest and ambiguous results. Finally, item #5 is a good point. It probably inflates the MINT projections modestly.

Overall, then, I don't think this affects my point too much. If you revised the MINT projections to take into account CPI-E and made an adjustment for possible overestimates of imputed rent, the projected income line would probably go down a bit. But not very much. We'd still be looking at a world in which, relatively speaking, retirees are doing quite a bit better than current workers. In fact, their incomes are growing more strongly than pretty much any other age group.

This is why I'm not on board with calls to expand Social Security. Rhetoric and pretty charts aside, I simply don't see any real evidence of a looming retirement crisis that urgently needs to be addressed, and I think focusing on it just distracts us from our real problem: sluggish wage growth among workers. And the funny thing is that Baker basically agrees:

Seniors income has been rising relative to the income of the typical working household because the typical working household is seeing their income redistributed to the Wall Street crew, CEOs, doctors and other members of the one percent....We can argue about whether young people or old people have a tougher time, but it's clear that the division between winners and losers is not aged based, but rather class based.

That's precisely right. I'm not willing to dismiss the relative problems of young and old quite as quickly—I think the young are being pretty badly screwed these days, and unlike seniors they have no one in Congress who really cares about them—but this is essentially a class problem, not an age problem. We should be doing everything possible to raise low and middle incomes regardless of age. If we do that, retirees will benefit, but so will everyone else.

This is obviously a lot harder than a simple crusade to expand Social Security. But the latter helps plenty of people who don't really need it, while the former helps those who do. If part of helping those with low and middle incomes means changing Social Security payouts to reduce the future growth rates of high earners and increase the future growth rates of lower earners, that's fine with me. But if I can borrow Baker's headline, we need to keep our eye on the ball here. Let's stop inventing crises that don't really exist. If we want to move the Overton Window, let's move it for the thing that really matters: the fact that the fruits of economic growth now accrue almost entirely to the rich, with the rest of us treading water at best.That's the transcendent economic problem of the 21st century.

Original Source

The Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C.

Phone: 303-595-4777

226 West 12th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80204

Disclaimer

Friday, January 24, 2014

Office Ergonomics

Contact Neil O'Toole and John Sbarbaro

at the Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C.

Phone: 303-595-4777

Located in the Denver Metro area.

226 West 12th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80204

Disclaimer

Wednesday, January 22, 2014

Bar Hopping with Lawyers for Children

By Robert Wilson 22 hours 21 minutes ago

As a point of clarification, no lawyers will be bar hopping for children. There will be lawyers, and there will be bar hopping, but the purpose will be "for the children" rather than "for" the children. Anything else would be plain creepy.

This March the American Bar Association is holding its mid-winter workers' compensation conference in Chicago. It is being sponsored by the Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Section's Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability Law Committee and The Section of Labor and Employment Law. One of the events being held that week is a "pub crawl" designed to raise money for two worthwhile charities. Those charities are Kids' Chance and The Blessed Child.

Kids’ Chance is an organization which helps children of injured and killed workers by providing them with educational scholarships so that they may pursue their dreams of graduating from various institutions of higher education. The Blessed Child is a community outreach organization located in Chicago, IL which helps families with children in their time of need. The organization is not government funded and depends solely on fundraising efforts and private donations.

On Thursday, March 13, 2014, the Conference is holding a Pub Crawl in the spirit of St. Patty’s Day. Persons wishing to participate are asked to bring a donation of $25.00 (cash or check made payable to Kids’ Chance). They will meet in the lobby of the Conrad Hotel at 8:00 pm. The classic River North Bars that will be visited will all be within walking distance of the Conrad Hotel. Drink and food purchased directly at the establishments are not included in the donation.

So, I for one will be pub crawling with lawyers that night. It should be a lot of fun. Lawyers are, after all, real people; or at least they are rumored to be. Plus, as an added bonus, I get to write nice things about lawyers who buy me drinks. Unless, of course, they buy me too many drinks, in which case I may not recall their name, or in fact which city we were collectively crawling pubs.

No matter. I was never a stickler for accuracy anyway.

If you happen to be in the Windy City that night, I would certainly suggest that you join us. It's Chicago during St. Patrick's week, after all. The pubs should be hoppin' and most of the snow should have abated, which will make the crawling much, much easier. And of course, we will be doing it "for the children". Sometimes these sacrifices have to be made.

And it goes without saying, if you buy me drinks there is a good chance I'll say something nice about you in my blog - if I can remember your name that is.

Original Source

Contact Neil O'Toole and John Sbarbaro

at the Law Office of O'Toole & Sbarbaro, P.C.

Phone: 303-595-4777

Located in the Denver Metro area.

226 West 12th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80204

Disclaimer