|
|
|
Court won't hear appeal in witness tampering case
Law Firm News |
2012/11/15 12:56
|
The Supreme Court won't review a decision to throw out sanctions and a $600,000 award against Miami prosecutors in a witness-tampering investigation where members of the defense team had allegedly been secretly recorded.
The high court on Tuesday refused to hear an appeal from Dr. Ali Shaygan, who has been acquitted of 141 counts of illegally prescribing painkillers. A federal judge said publicly that three prosecutors and a Drug Enforcement Administration agent acted "vexatiously and in bad faith" for failing to obtain permission before authorizing two witnesses to record conversations with Shaygan's attorney and his investigator.
But a federal appeals court threw out the sanction and award, saying the judge violated the prosecutors' due process rights in 2009 when he issued a public reprimand for their alleged misconduct.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limits on class-action lawsuits at Supreme Court
Law News |
2012/11/06 10:51
|
The Supreme Court appeared divided Monday in two cases in which businesses are trying to make it harder for customers or investors to band together to sue them.
The justices heard arguments in appeals from biotech company Amgen Inc. and cable provider Comcast Corp. that seek to shut down class-action lawsuits against the businesses.
Amgen is fighting securities fraud claims that misstatements about two of its drugs used to treat anemia artificially inflated its stock price. Comcast is facing a lawsuit from customers who say the company's monopoly in parts of the Philadelphia area allowed it to raise prices unfairly.
Last year, the Supreme Court raised the bar for some class-action suits when it sided with Wal-Mart against up to 1.6 million of its female employees who complained of sex discrimination. In the Wal-Mart case, the court said there were too many women in too many jobs at the nation's largest private employer to wrap into one lawsuit.
Class actions increase pressure on businesses to settle suits because of the cost of defending them and the potential for very large judgments. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Former Navy lawyer goes before Kan. Supreme Court
Law News |
2012/10/27 13:58
|
A former Navy lawyer who was convicted during a court martial in 2007 for mailing secret information about Guantanamo Bay detainees is seeking to get his law license reinstated in Kansas.
Attorneys for Matthew Diaz will argue on Thursday before the Kansas Supreme Court to accept a recommendation from the Office of Judicial Administration to suspend his law license for three years effective 2008. Because of the timeline, Diaz would be reinstated with the Kansas bar.
The disciplinary hearing panel said Diaz warranted "significant discipline" for his actions, which included the act of printing and sending classified information and sending it to an unauthorized person. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chile OK's extradition bid for ex-US Navy officer
Legal & Political |
2012/10/25 13:58
|
Chile's Supreme Court has approved an extradition request for a former U.S. military officer wanted in the 1973 killings of two Americans, including one whose disappearance was the focus of the movie "Missing," a lawyer said Wednesday.
Former U.S. Navy Capt. Ray E. Davis was charged last year in the deaths of journalist Charles Horman and student Frank Teruggi, who were killed during the 1973-1990 dictatorship of Gen. Augusto Pinochet.
Attorney Sergio Corvalan, who represents Horman's widow, told The Associated Press that the Supreme Court approved by a 4-1 vote a request by judge Jorge Zepeda to seek Davis' extradition to face trial in Chile.
A court official, who agreed to discuss the case only if not quoted by name, said the vote would be formally announced Thursday.
After Davis was charged a year ago, the AP contacted his wife, Patricia Davis, at her home in Niceville, Florida. She said her husband previously denied any involvement in killings. She said he no longer talked because of Alzheimer's disease and was in a nursing home that she declined to identify. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court won't block early voting in Ohio
Legal & Political |
2012/10/22 14:59
|
The Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared the way for voters in the
battleground state of Ohio to cast ballots on the three days before
Election Day, giving Democrats and President Barack Obama's campaign a
victory three weeks before the election.
The court refused a request by the state's Republican elections chief
and attorney general to get involved in a battle over early voting.
Ohio is among 34 states, plus the District of Columbia, where people
can vote early without giving any reason. About 30 percent of the
swing state's total vote — or roughly 1.7 million ballots — came in
before Election Day in 2008. Crucial to Obama's win that year was
early voting in Ohio, North Carolina and Florida.
Obama won Ohio four years ago, but Republican rival Mitt Romney is
making a strong play for it this year. No GOP candidate has won the
White House without Ohio in his column.
Obama's campaign and Ohio Democrats had sued state officials over
changes in state law that took away the three days of voting for most
people but made exceptions for military personnel and Ohioans living
overseas.
Their lawsuit cited a recent study saying nearly 105,000 people voted
in the three days before the election in 2008, and they argued
everyone should have the chance to vote on those days. They also said
eliminating the opportunity for most Ohio residents to vote in person
on those days, while giving military or overseas voters the chance to
do so, leads to unequal treatment. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
