Today's Date: Add To Favorites
FCC Chair Seeks To Move Telecom Merger Forward
Breaking Legal News | 2006/12/02 17:59

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Kevin Martin has asked the FCC general counsel to consider whether one commissioner with a potential conflict of interest may be allowed to consider a proposed $82.2 billion merger of BellSouth and AT&T. The merger has been delayed three times as the proposal has failed to gain approval from a majority of the five FCC commissioners. Republicans hold a 3-2 advantage, but voting has been deadlocked at 2-2 as Republican Commissioner Robert McDowell, a former lobbyist, recused himself from voting due a conflict of interest. Martin took steps to break the stalemate Friday, notifying Congress of his petition to the FCC general counsel. Title 18, Section 208 (b) of the US Code would allow the general counsel to reinstate McDowell if "the interest of the Government in the employee's participation outweighs the concern that a reasonable person may question the integrity of the agency's programs and operations."

The merger has already been approved without reservation by the US Department of Justice Antitrust Division following an eight-month investigation that concluded that AT&T's proposed acquisition of BellSouth was not likely to "substantially reduce competition" in the US telecom market. In an October letter, the Democratic FCC commissioners said that serious questions remained about whether the merger would serve the public interest, especially against the backdrop of other forms of consolidation and concentration in the telecommunications industry.



US House to vote on Mexico offshore drilling bill
Legal Business | 2006/12/02 16:49

Republicans in the US House of Representatives agreed Friday to vote on a compromise offshore drilling bill on Tuesday under special rules that limit amendments and generally speed up proceedings, but require a two-thirds majority for approval. If passed, the bill would allow oil and gas drilling in about 8.3 million acres of federal waters in the eastern-central Gulf and boost federal royalty shares from two percent to 37.5 percent in Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. Environmental leaders, however, oppose the measure, especially in light of the GOP's pending loss of majority rule.

The Senate passed the compromise bill, 71-25, in August, limiting offshore expansion to the Gulf of Mexico. The bill passed by the House in June, the Deep Ocean Energy Resources Act, would have ended the offshore drilling moratorium on 85 percent of the coastal waters surrounding the US.



New Hampshire GOP phone jamming case settles
Law Center | 2006/12/02 15:49
The lawsuit brought against the New Hampshire Republican State Committee for the jamming of Democratic phone lines in the 2002 Senate race has been settled, according to a statement Friday from GOP state Committee Chairman Wayne Semprini. The New Hampshire Democratic Party filed civil suit for compensation for the 800 hang-up phone calls that were placed to interfere with Democratic get-out-the-vote campaigns. The settlement comes just as trial was set to start Monday in Hillsborough County Superior Court on issues of phone system interference and compensation, after the trial judge dismissed 5 of the initial 8 counts in the complaint. Democrats sought $4 million compensation for the cost of the seven-month voter turnout campaign, while Republicans wanted damages to be limited to the $4,974 spent on phone rentals and use. A judge ruled Wednesday that damages above phone rentals could be sought, though not the full $4 million, and that the Democrats had the right to allege that the phone jamming thwarted their efforts to increase voter turnout. The settlement amount has not been disclosed. In a statement Saturday, the New Hampshire Democratic Party said that although the settlement "closes one chapter of the litigation stemming from the shameful and criminal Republican campaign to rob people of their fundamental right to vote, the federal criminal investigation will continue."


New York Times seeks dismissal of anthrax libel lawsuit
Court Watch | 2006/12/02 12:48

The New York Times has asked US District Judge Claude M. Hilton to dismiss a libel lawsuit brought by Dr. Stephen J. Hatfill, a former Army germ-warfare researcher who was named a "person of interest" by the FBI in its investigations of anthrax mailings shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Hatfill sued the Times for libel and intentional infliction of emotional distress after the newspaper published a story stating that the government's decision not to further pursue Hatfill as a suspect was the result of "poor investigation." The newspaper moved to dismiss the lawsuit on the grounds that as a public speaker on bioterror, Hatfill is a public figure and therefore must prove a higher standard of defamation. The "public figure" must prove that the defamatory actions were taken with "actual malice", a standard which the Times motion contends Hatfill has failed to meet.

Hatfill's suit against the Times and columnist Nichols Kristoff was initially dismissed by a trial court, who ruled the columns were an ongoing report about a government investigation, not libel. The US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed, ruling that a jury should decide that issue. In March, the Supreme Court refused to grant certiorari in the case. Hatfill has also sued the government for related claims.



Japan Court Orders To Compensate 'War Orphans'
International | 2006/12/01 16:41

A Japanese court on Friday ordered the government of Japan to pay 468 million yen to 61 Japanese plaintiffs who were displaced as children in China after World War II. The plaintiffs - known as "war orphans" - alleged that the government failed to promptly remove them from China after the war, causing them to face hardship as foreigners in China.

They also claim that they endured difficulty acclimating to Japanese culture when they were repatriated in the 1970s. According to the lawsuit, the government failed to assist the repatriation process although many of the plaintiffs did not speak Japanese or were shunned by living relatives. In the 1930s, the government transported 320,000 settlers to the Manchuria province to establish a base of operations for Japan's 1937 invasion of China. Many Japanese settlers were left behind after the war, however, and many children were raised by Chinese citizens. The plaintiffs remained displaced until 1975 when the government began locating them.

In 1994, the Japanese government passed legislation providing financial assistance to Japanese nationals who returned to Japan. Last year, an Osaka court rejected similar claims from a different group of plaintiffs, declaring that the government had no obligation to provide compensation.



EPA drops plan for less frequent toxic release reporting
Environmental | 2006/12/01 10:29

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has abandoned plans to decrease the frequency of reporting requirements for the release of toxic chemicals by polluting companies, it was announced Thursday. The changes would have required polluters to report every other year rather than the current mandate of annual submissions. The EPA also asserted, however, that it will push next year for an increase in the amount of pollutants that triggers the requirement for companies to report, essentially exempting about one-third of 23,000 companies from the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) reporting established in the 1986 Emergency Planning & Community Right to Know Act.
Under existing standards, polluters must report any release over 500 pounds, while the proposed change would only require reporting after the release of 5,000 pounds. The EPA's move follows criticism from US Senators Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ), who staunchly oppose the proposed changes. Lautenberg, who penned the Right to Know law, called the changes a "giveaway to corporate polluters at the cost of everyday Americans' health" and an "irresponsible policy stand."

The chemicals that must be reported under TRI requirements include DDT, mercury, PCBs and other chemicals that do not substantially dissipate. The lower TRI standard would exempt many companies in the mining, utility, oil, rubber, plastics, printing, textile, leather tanning and semiconductor industries.



Video Game Industry Wins Two More Legal Battles
Breaking Legal News | 2006/12/01 09:48

The Entertainment Software Association, the trade group representing video game companies, won two more legal battles this week against laws aimed at restricting the sale of violent games to minors. On Tuesday, the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit upheld the 2005 ruling that the "Safe Games Illinois Act" was unconstitutional. The appeals court agreed that the labeling requirements and restrictions on the sale of objectionable games to minors were overbroad and not narrowly tailored.
Under the original district court order in the case, Illinois also owes the ESA over $500,000 in legal fees - an amount which has not been paid. A spokesman for Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich said the state "will comply with any court order" but didn't provide a timetable for payment or a reason for the delay. The ESA has gone to court to request a deadline for payment and is seeking an additional $7,800 in interest; a ruling on their motion is expected next month.

The US District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana has meanwhile delivered a similar victory for the ESA, ordering a permanent injunction against a Louisiana law that would ban the sale of violent video games to minors. Judge James Brady made the ruling from the bench with no written opinion; in issuing a temporary injunction in August, he wrote "the evidence that was submitted to the legislature in connection with the bill that became the statute is sparse and could hardly be called in any sense reliable". Assistant Attorney General Burton Guidry said "We did everything we could to defend the law, but, as the judge said, the law was practically unenforceable as written". Outspoken video game critic Jack Thompson had drafted the law, although he later feuded with Guidry over the case and even accused Guidry of not adequately presenting the government's side.



[PREV] [1] ..[1162][1163][1164][1165][1166][1167][1168][1169][1170].. [1177] [NEXT]
All
Class Action
Bankruptcy
Biotech
Breaking Legal News
Business
Corporate Governance
Court Watch
Criminal Law
Health Care
Human Rights
Insurance
Intellectual Property
Labor & Employment
Law Center
Law Promo News
Legal Business
Legal Marketing
Litigation
Medical Malpractice
Mergers & Acquisitions
Political and Legal
Politics
Practice Focuses
Securities
Elite Lawyers
Tax
Featured Law Firms
Tort Reform
Venture Business News
World Business News
Law Firm News
Attorneys in the News
Events and Seminars
Environmental
Legal Careers News
Patent Law
Consumer Rights
International
Legal Spotlight
Current Cases
State Class Actions
Federal Class Actions
Retrial of Harvey Weinstein ..
Starbucks appears likely to ..
Supreme Court will weigh ban..
Judge in Trump case orders m..
Court makes it easier to sue..
Top Europe rights court cond..
Elon Musk will be investigat..
Retired Supreme Court Justic..
The Man Charged in an Illino..
Texas’ migrant arrest law w..
Former Georgia insurance com..
Alabama woman who faked kidn..
A Supreme Court ruling in a ..
Court upholds mandatory pris..
Trump wants N.Y. hush money ..


Class action or a representative action is a form of lawsuit in which a large group of people collectively bring a claim to court and/or in which a class of defendants is being sued. This form of collective lawsuit originated in the United States and is still predominantly a U.S. phenomenon, at least the U.S. variant of it. In the United States federal courts, class actions are governed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule. Since 1938, many states have adopted rules similar to the FRCP. However, some states like California have civil procedure systems which deviate significantly from the federal rules; the California Codes provide for four separate types of class actions. As a result, there are two separate treatises devoted solely to the complex topic of California class actions. Some states, such as Virginia, do not provide for any class actions, while others, such as New York, limit the types of claims that may be brought as class actions. They can construct your law firm a brand new website, lawyer website templates and help you redesign your existing law firm site to secure your place in the internet.
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Lorain Elyria Divorce Lawyer
www.loraindivorceattorney.com
Legal Document Services in Los Angeles, CA
Best Legal Document Preparation
www.tllsg.com
Car Accident Lawyers
Sunnyvale, CA Personal Injury Attorney
www.esrajunglaw.com
East Greenwich Family Law Attorney
Divorce Lawyer - Erica S. Janton
www.jantonfamilylaw.com/about
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
  Law Firm Directory
 
 
 
© ClassActionTimes.com. All rights reserved.

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Class Action Times as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. Affordable Law Firm Web Design