|
|
|
More US Catholics take complaints to church court
Court Watch |
2012/01/14 09:33
|
Parents upset by the admission policy at a parochial school. Clergy and parishioners at odds over use of their building. A priest resisting a transfer to another parish.
It was once assumed that disagreements like these in the Roman Catholic Church would end one way: with the highest-ranking cleric getting the last word.
But that outcome is no longer a given as Catholics, emboldened following the clergy abuse scandals that erupted a decade ago this month, have sought another avenue of redress.
In recent years, clergy and lay people in the United States have increasingly turned to the church's internal legal system to challenge a bishop's or pastor's decision about even the most workaday issues in Catholic life, according to canon lawyers in academia, dioceses and in private practice. Sometimes, the challengers even win.
In one example cited by veteran canon lawyers, parishioners wanted to bar musical performances in their church that weren't liturgical. Their priest had been renting space to a local band. In another case, a nun filed a petition after a religious superior disclosed the nun's medical information to others — a potential violation of privacy. Regarding bishops' often contentious decisions to close parishes, the liberal reform group FutureChurch posts a guide on its website called "Canonical Appeals for Dummies" on seeking Vatican intervention to stay open. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court hearing Thursday on Credit Suisse loans
Business |
2012/01/13 10:12
|
Attorneys for Credit Suisse told a federal judge in Idaho that a multi-billion dollar lawsuit brought by homeowners at four resorts should be tossed out because there's not enough factual evidence to support the claims.
The lawsuit from property owners at Idaho's Tamarack Resort, the Yellowstone Club in Montana, Nevada's Lake Las Vegas resort and the Ginn Sur Mer Resort in the Bahamas is backed by Yellowstone Club founder Tim Blixseth. The plaintiffs allege Credit Suisse inflated the value of the resorts and issued loans so large to developers that they could never be repaid in hopes of foreclosing on the properties as part of a so-called "loan to own" scheme.
Credit Suisse contends the lawsuit is baseless and that Blixseth is just trying to escape blame for the financial problems at the ultra-exclusive Yellowstone Club.
Roughly two dozen attorneys representing the plaintiffs, Credit Suisse and real estate consultant Cushman & Wakefield gathered before U.S. District Judge Ronald Bush in Boise on Thursday to argue over several motions, including one to have the lawsuit dismissed and one to have Cushman & Wakefield reinstated as a defendant. The real estate consultancy was listed as a defendant when the case was originally filed in 2010, but last year U.S. District Judge Edward Lodge dismissed all the claims against the company.
One of Credit Suisse's attorneys, David Lender, told the court that the plaintiffs have never been able to show there was any misrepresentation made to the homeowners by the bank. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sanford Wittels & Heisler Files Employment Class Action
Class Action |
2012/01/12 09:33
|
Attorneys at Sanford Wittels & Heisler today filed a $100 million gender discrimination employment class action complaint against Quest Diagnostics, Inc. and AmeriPath, Inc., in U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.
The complaint details the systemic discriminatory treatment of female sales representatives company-wide by the self-proclaimed "world leader in diagnostic testing, information and services."
"Although Quest boasts about its dedication to delivering quality care down to the molecular level, the company falls woefully short of devoting similar attention to extending equal employment opportunities to its female sales reps," said David Sanford, the plaintiffs' lead attorney. "Quest has known or should have known that its business practices have an illegal disparate impact on women, employees with family responsibilities and pregnant employees. However, it has consistently failed to adopt measures to rectify this pervasive discrimination that its discriminatory policies, practices and procedures creates."
Indiana resident Erin Beery and Florida resident Heather Traeger, both of them current Quest employees in the AmeriPath division, filed the suit on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly-situated sales reps employed from February 17, 2010 to the present. Beery is an Executive Territory Manager in Quest's Anatomical Pathology Sales Division in Indianapolis; Traeger is Senior Executive Territory Manager in the Anatomical Pathology Sales Division in Bradenton.
The complaint details a wide range of discriminatory practices in the selection, promotion and advancement of sales reps at Quest Diagnostics and AmeriPath, including discrimination on the basis of pregnancy and caretaking responsibilities in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other federal statutes.
In addition, both of the named plaintiffs in the case have individual claims of disparate pay, differential treatment, gender hostility, the creation of a hostile work environment and retaliation in the workplace affecting them in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other federal statutes.
New Jersey based Quest is one of the largest companies in the U.S. It is currently ranked at 320 on the Fortune 500, reporting revenue of $7.4 billion and employing 42,000 workers in 2011.
About Sanford Wittels & Heisler, LLP
Sanford Wittels & Heisler is a law firm with offices in Washington, D.C., New York, and San Francisco that specializes in qui tam, employment discrimination, wage and hour, consumer and complex corporate class action litigation and has represented thousands of individuals in major class action cases in the United States.
http://www.nydclaw.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Md. man's leave lawsuit lands in Supreme Court
Breaking Legal News |
2012/01/11 10:43
|
The Supreme Court wrestled with how the federal Family and Medical Leave Act applies to state government workers in a case that could affect millions of them.
The case argued before the high court Wednesday was brought by a Maryland man who says he was wrongly fired for trying to take a 10-day medical leave to deal with hypertension and diabetes and then was barred from suing state officials for money damages.
Daniel Coleman was fired from the Maryland court system in 2007.
The 1993 federal leave act provided workers a right to unpaid medical leave, but Maryland and Coleman disagree about the penalty for violations. Coleman argues he should be able to sue the state for money damages. Maryland and 26 other states argue they're protected from such lawsuits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. man suing Facebook fined $5,000 by court
Court Watch |
2012/01/11 10:42
|
A man who's suing for part ownership of Facebook has been fined $5,000 by a federal judge for failing to fully comply with an order to turn over his e-mail account information.
A man suing for part ownership of Facebook was fined $5,000 for failing to comply with a court order.
Paul Ceglia was also ordered to pay some of Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg's legal expenses.
The sanctions are a setback for Ceglia's claim in U.S. District Court that a 2003 contract he and Zuckerberg signed entitles him to half ownership of the social networking site estimated to be worth more than $50 billion.
The judge issued the sanctions late Tuesday, faulting Ceglia for ordering his lawyers not to fully obey his orders.
Palo Alto, California-based Facebook claims Ceglia's contract is fake. Ceglia's lawyer says his client will pay the penalties.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court weighs policy against curse words on TV
Court Watch |
2012/01/10 09:35
|
The Supreme Court is considering whether government regulators may still police the airwaves for curse words and other coarse content at a time when so many Americans have unregulated cable television, and the Internet is awash in easily accessible adult material.
The justices are hearing arguments Tuesday in a First Amendment case that pits the Obama administration against the nation's television networks. The material at issue includes the isolated use of expletives as well as fines against broadcasters who showed a woman's nude buttocks on a 2003 episode of ABC's "NYPD Blue."
The broadcasters want the court to overturn a 1978 decision that upheld the Federal Communications Commission's authority to regulate both radio and television content, at least during the hours when children are likely to be watching or listening. That period includes the prime-time hours before 10 p.m.
At the very least, the networks say the FCC's current policy is too hard to figure out, penalizing the use of particular curse words on awards programming but not in the airing of the movie "Saving Private Ryan," for example.
The administration said that even with the explosion of entertainment options, broadcast programming remains dominant. It also needs to be kept as a dependable "safe haven" of milder programming, the administration said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Law Office of James C. Kelly Announces Investigation
Legal Marketing |
2012/01/10 04:34
|
The Law Office of James C. Kelly announces that it is investigating potential claims against the board of directors of Inhibitex, Inc. concerning possible breaches of fiduciary duty and other violations of law related to the Company's entry into an agreement to be acquired by Bristol-Myers Squibb Company in a transaction with an approximate value of $2.5 billion.
Under the proposed agreement, Bristol-Myers will commence a tender offer to acquire all of the outstanding shares of Inhibitex's common stock at a price of $26.00 per share in cash. The investigation concerns whether Inhibitex's board of directors adequately shopped the Company to obtain the best price possible for the Company's shareholders before entering into the agreement with Bristol-Myers.
If you are a holder of Inhibitex common stock and want to discuss your legal rights, you may e-mail or call The Law Office of James C. Kelly who will, without obligation or cost to you, attempt to answer your questions. Please contact James C. Kelly, Esq., of The Law Office of James C. Kelly, 477 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10022, by toll free telephone at (888) 643-7517
For more information about the firm, please visit its website at http://www.jckellylaw.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
