|
|
|
US House group files motion in gay marriage suit
Court Watch |
2011/10/16 09:54
|
Gays and lesbians are not entitled to the same heightened legal protection and scrutiny against discrimination as racial minorities and women in part because they are far from politically powerless and have ample ability to influence lawmakers, lawyers for a U.S. House of Representatives group said in a federal court filing.
The filing Friday in San Francisco's U.S. District Court comes in a lesbian federal employee's lawsuit that claims the government wrongly denied health insurance coverage to her same-sex spouse. Karen Golinski says the law under which her spouse was denied benefits — the Defense of Marriage Act — violates the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal protection.
But attorneys representing the House's Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group counter that DOMA is subject to a lower level of court scrutiny because gays and lesbians don't meet the legal criteria for groups who receive heightened protection from discrimination. Under that lower standard, DOMA is constitutional, they argue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court blocks Ala. from checking student status
Court Watch |
2011/10/15 09:55
|
Armando Cardenas says he has thought about leaving Alabama because of the possibility of being arrested as an illegal immigrant and the hostility he feels from residents.
But now that a federal appeals court has sided with the Obama administration and dealt a blow to the state's toughest-in-the-nation immigration law, Cardenas said he will stay for at least a while longer.
"It's not easy to leave everything you have worked so hard for," Cardenas said after the appeals court blocked public schools from checking the immigration status of students.
The decision from the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also said police can't charge immigrants who are unable to prove their citizenship, but it let some parts of the law stand, giving supporters a partial victory. The decision was only temporary and a final ruling isn't expected for months, after judges can review more arguments.
Unlike in other states where immigration crackdowns have been challenged in the courts, Alabama's law was left largely in effect for about three weeks, long enough to frighten Hispanics and drive them away from the state. Construction businesses said Hispanic workers had quit showing up for jobs and schools reported that Latino students stopped coming to classes. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
US House group files motion in gay marriage suit
Law Center |
2011/10/15 09:55
|
Gays and lesbians are not entitled to the same heightened legal protection and scrutiny against discrimination as racial minorities and women in part because they are far from politically powerless and have ample ability to influence lawmakers, lawyers for a U.S. House of Representatives group said in a federal court filing.
The filing Friday in San Francisco's U.S. District Court comes in a lesbian federal employee's lawsuit that claims the government wrongly denied health insurance coverage to her same-sex spouse. Karen Golinski says the law under which her spouse was denied benefits — the Defense of Marriage Act — violates the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal protection.
But attorneys representing the House's Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group counter that DOMA is subject to a lower level of court scrutiny because gays and lesbians don't meet the legal criteria for groups who receive heightened protection from discrimination. Under that lower standard, DOMA is constitutional, they argue. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court to decide double jeopardy question
Legal Business |
2011/10/12 09:42
|
The Supreme Court will decide whether a jury forewoman's offhand comment that the jury was unable to make a decision on a murder charge means the suspect can't be retried on that charge.
The high court on Tuesday agreed to hear an appeal from Alex Blueford, whose murder trial in Arkansas ended in a hung jury.
The jury forewoman told the judge before he declared a mistrial that the jury had voted unanimously against capital murder and first-degree murder. The jury had deadlocked on a lesser charge, manslaughter, which caused the judge to declare a mistrial.
Blueford argued the forewoman's statement, said in open court, meant that he has been acquitted of capital murder and first-degree murder.
Prosecutors decided to retry Blueford on all three charges. He contended he could not be retried on capital murder and first-degree murder because of Fifth Amendment double jeopardy protections.
Arkansas courts have disagreed. The high court will now review that decision.
Blueford was on trial for killing his girlfriend's 20-month-old son. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FDIC backs ban on banks trading for own profit
Business |
2011/10/11 09:41
|
Banks would be barred from trading for their own profit instead of their clients under a rule being proposed by federal regulators.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. backed the draft rule on a 3-0 vote Tuesday. The ban on proprietary trading was required under last year's financial overhaul law.
For years, banks had bet on risky investments with their own money. But when those bets go bad and banks fail, taxpayers could be forced to bail them out. That's what happened during the 2008 financial crisis.
The Federal Reserve has also approved the draft of the so-called Volcker Rule, which was named after former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker.
The Securities and Exchange Commission and Treasury Department must still vote on it, and then the public has until January 13 to comment. The rule is expected to take effect next year after a final vote by all four regulators.
Congress and President Barack Obama had high hopes for the rule. But they left most of the details for regulators to sort out.
It's unclear how strictly the ban will be enforced. For example, it can be hard to tell whether an investment is intended to benefit a bank or its clients and whether federally insured deposits could be put at risk by these trades.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Defense lawyer will not help Edwards at trial
Court Watch |
2011/10/11 09:41
|
A key member of the legal team defending John Edwards against campaign finance charges will not represent the former Democratic presidential candidate at his upcoming trial following questions about a potential conflict of interest.
A motion filed by federal prosecutors says Raleigh defense lawyer Wade Smith will withdraw. The move comes after prosecutors questioned whether Smith had a conflict of interest due to a 2009 conversation with a financial advisor for Bunny Mellon, a wealthy socialite who provided the bulk of nearly $1 million used to support Edwards' pregnant mistress, Rielle Hunter, as he ran for president in 2007.
According to the government, Smith told Mellon's advisor that Edwards knew the money was intended to help him. That appears to conflict with statements by Edwards that he knew nothing of the payments.
Edwards is charged with six felony and misdemeanor counts related to campaign finance violations. He has pleaded not guilty. A trial is scheduled to begin in January.
Smith is among the most well-known defense lawyers in North Carolina, with a list of previous clients that includes members of the Duke University lacrosse team cleared of charges they gang-raped a stripper. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Law Office of Robbins Umeda LLP Announces Class Action
Class Action |
2011/10/11 09:41
|
Robbins Umeda LLP announces that the firm commenced a class action lawsuit on October 7, 2011, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, Eastern Division, on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased the common stock of Stereotaxis, Inc. between February 28, 2011 and August 9, 2011 against certain of the Company's officers and directors for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The plaintiff is represented by Robbins Umeda LLP and Carey, Danis & Lowe.
Stereotaxis designs, manufactures, and markets a cardiology instrument control system, called Niobe®, for use in a hospital's interventional surgical suite to enhance the treatment of coronary artery disease and arrhythmias. The Company also markets the Odyssey system as a data management solution for remote viewing and recording of live interventional procedures. The Company's executive offices are located in St. Louis, Missouri.
The complaint alleges that beginning on February 28, 2011, Chief Executive Officer Michael Kaminski, along with certain officers and directors at Stereotaxis, issued a series of positive statements to investors about the business condition and future prospects of the Company that were materially false and misleading, and that caused shares of the Company's stock to trade at artificially high prices.
In particular, the complaint alleges that officials at the Company failed to disclose to investors material adverse facts that: (1) Stereotaxis was unable to leverage its extensive portfolio and scale of products and services in a strategically beneficial manner; (2) market feedback from users of the Company's technology was "mixed"; (3) the Niobe system was far from the "standard of care" and needed "fundamental product improvements"; (4) demand for the Niobe and Odyssey systems was weak, and that the number of units being sold was decreasing; (5) the reported backlog of orders did not fairly represent future revenue the Company expected to recognize; and that (6) the Company overstated its market edge.
On August 8, 2011, the Company announced financial results for the second quarter of 2011 that revealed that the Company was performing well below expectations. Additionally, the press release disclosed to investors that the Company was forced to suspend its full year guidance for 2011, and that Daniel Johnston was resigning as the Chief Financial Officer. On this news shares of Stereotaxis declined by more than 58% of their value, closing on August 9, 2011 at just $1.19 per share.
If you purchased Stereotaxis stock during the Class Period and wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from October 10, 2011. To discuss your shareholder rights, please contact attorney Gregory E. Del Gaizo at 800-350-6003 or via the shareholder information form.
Robbins Umeda LLP represents individual and institutional shareholders in derivative, direct, and class action lawsuits. The law firm's skilled litigation teams include former federal prosecutors, former defense counsel from top multinational corporate law firms, and career shareholder rights attorneys. Robbins Umeda LLP has helped its clients realize more than $1 billion of value for themselves and the companies in which they have invested. For more information, please go to http://www.robbinsumeda.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
