|
|
|
Court orders Calif. to set standard for chemical
Court Watch |
2013/08/01 00:01
|
A California court has ordered the state's Department of Public Health to establish a safe drinking water standard for the cancer-causing chemical made famous in the film "Erin Brockovich."
An Alameda County Superior Court judge directed the agency to propose a drinking water standard for hexavalent chromium by the end of August.
The ruling on July 18 came nearly a year after environmental groups filed a lawsuit against the state, claiming it was eight years late in setting the standard.
Results of state water quality testing conducted between 2000 and 2011 throughout California showed that about a third of the 7,000 drinking water sources tested had hexavalent chromium levels at or above a preliminary benchmark set by the California EPA. The chemical comes chiefly from industrial pollution, but also occurs naturally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mass. convict in terror case argues court appeal
Criminal Law |
2013/08/01 00:01
|
A deluge of terror-related images used by prosecutors scared jurors and influenced them to convict a Massachusetts man of trying to help al-Qaida, the man's lawyer argued to a federal appeals court Tuesday.
Tarek Mehanna of Sudbury was sentenced to 17 1/2 years in prison after being convicted in 2011 of four terror-related charges and three charges of lying to authorities.
During Mehanna's trial, prosecutors said he traveled to Yemen for training in a terrorist camp and intended to go on to Iraq to fight U.S. soldiers. When that plan failed, Mehanna returned to the United States and disseminated materials online promoting violent jihad, prosecutors said.
In arguments before the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Mehanna's lawyer, Sabin Willett, said prosecutors showed 28 images of the World Trade Center in flames on Sept. 11, 2001, and numerous terror-related videos and repeatedly made references to Osama bin Laden in an attempt to prejudice the jury against Mehanna. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ohio kidnap suspect in court, plea talks ongoing
Legal Spotlight |
2013/07/26 10:00
|
Prosecutors and lawyers for a Cleveland man accused of holding three women captive in his home for more than a decade signaled Wednesday that they are talking about a possible plea deal.
With a trial less than two weeks away, there was no mention of whether the prosecutor will seek the death penalty. Attorneys for Ariel Castro, 53, say a deal is dependent on taking it off the table.
"My understanding is that the parties have discussed possible pleas and that you're working to see if that would be an effective resolution, is that correct?" Judge Michael Russo asked.
Both sides responded "yes" without elaboration and left the courtroom without commenting. Last month, the judge had mentioned the possibility of a plea deal raised by the defense.
Castro mostly kept his head down during the brief hearing and quietly answered "yes" to routine questions from the judge.
The hearing focused on the trial date, Aug. 5, and whether the prosecution had provided its evidence to the defense in a timely fashion, as required. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arizona high court to hear school funding case
Breaking Legal News |
2013/07/23 10:33
|
The Arizona Supreme Court on Tuesday hears arguments in an appeal of a lower court's ruling that requires the state Legislature to give schools an annual funding increase even in lean years to account for inflation.
The high court is reviewing a Court of Appeals decision. It said a voter-approved law requires the Legislature to provide an annual inflation adjustment for state funding to public schools.
School districts and education groups sued after the Legislature in 2010 instead only increased schools' transportation funding, eliminating a $61 million increase in general school spending.
The Supreme Court says it is considering is whether the Voter Protection Act allows voters to require the legislature to increase funding for schools.
The Voter Protection Act severely restricts the Legislature's to change voter-approved laws.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pitt schools segregation lawsuit in federal court
Court Watch |
2013/07/21 10:33
|
Nearly 60 years after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down racial segregation in public schools, lawyers are set to square off in a federal courtroom in eastern North Carolina over whether the effects of that Jim Crow past still persist.
A trial was to begin Monday in U.S. District Court in Greenville in the case of Everett v. Pitt County Board of Education.
A group of black parents represented by the UNC Center for Civil Rights will ask the court to reverse a 2011 student assignment plan they say effectively resegregated several schools in the district.
Lawyers for the Pitt schools will ask a judge to rule that the district has achieved "unitary status," meaning the "vestiges of past discrimination have been eliminated to the extent practicable." The designation would end federal oversight of the Pitt schools, in place since the 1960s.
This case is the first of its kind brought in North Carolina since 1999. More than 100 school districts across the South are still under federal court supervision. The decision in the Pitt case is expected to be widely followed by those other school systems.
Mark Dorosin, the managing attorney for the UNC Center for Civil Rights, said the case is a critical test of the continued viability of one of the most fundamental principles of school desegregation: That school districts still under court order must remedy the lasting vestiges of racial discrimination.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Legal status can't be used in civil cases
Court Watch |
2013/07/17 20:20
|
A person's legal status in the country can't be used in civil cases by attorneys to intimidate or coerce under a new rule approved by the Washington Supreme Court last week.
Since 2007, advocates have been working to make the change to the Rules of Professional conduct that attorneys licensed in the state must adhere to following. The lobbying began after members of the Latino/a Bar Association of Washington had seen attorneys and, in some cases, judges discuss a person's legal status in the country openly in court to intimidate.
"We thought it was unethical to do," said Lorena Gonzalez, who was president of the attorney association at the time. "We looked at the rules there was silence on the issue."
The rule does not affect criminal cases, but does cover civil matters, such as family disputes, personal injury claims, workplace cases, medical malpractice and other fields.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court sides with Yahoo in data collection case
Business |
2013/07/16 08:35
|
Yahoo has won a court fight that could help the public learn more about the government's efforts to obtain data from Internet users.
The U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which reviews government requests to spy on individuals, ruled Monday that information should be made public about a 2008 case that ordered Yahoo Inc. to turn over customer data.
The order requires the government to review which portions of the opinion, briefs and arguments can be declassified and report back to the court by July 29.
The government sought the information from Yahoo under the National Security Agency's PRISM data-gathering program. Details of the secret program were disclosed by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, who has fled the U.S.
The program came to light in early June after The Washington Post and Guardian newspapers published documents provided by Snowden. It allows the NSA to reach into the data streams of U.S. companies such as Yahoo, Facebook Inc., Microsoft Corp., Google Inc. and others, and grab emails, video chats, pictures and more. U.S. officials have said the program is narrowly focused on foreign targets, and technology companies say they turn over information only if required by court order.
Yahoo requested in court papers filed June 14 to have the information about the 2008 case unsealed. A Yahoo spokeswoman hailed Monday's decision and said the company believes it will help inform public discussion about the U.S. government's surveillance programs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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. |
Law Firm Directory
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
