Today's Date: Add To Favorites
US high court won't hear Microsoft, Alcatel case
Court Watch | 2010/05/25 09:05

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Microsoft Corp's appeal in a case that could have reshaped the standards used in court fights to determine if patents have been infringed.

Lower courts had found that the date-picker tool in Microsoft's Outlook calendar infringed a patent held by French telecommunications equipment maker Alcatel-Lucent. The companies have an unresolved fight over damages.

In its appeal, Microsoft argued that a patent could be held invalid if evidence is presented in a court case that was not available at the time the patent was granted. It also said that the standard for invalidating a patent should be a "preponderance" of evidence, rather than "clear and convincing" evidence.



Judiciary chairman defends Kagan against GOP fire
Political and Legal | 2010/05/25 09:03
The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee is defending Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan against Republican criticism.

Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont says the GOP should set aside its "overheated rhetoric" questioning the qualifications and integrity of President Barack Obama's nominee. He's also urging Republicans to stop complaining about the timeline he set for Kagan's confirmation hearings, which are to begin June 28.

Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the top Judiciary Republican, has suggested the date is too soon, and warned Monday he might ask for a delay.

Leahy called the gripes "crocodile tears." The timetable mirrors the one used for Republican and Democratic nominees.

Kagan was back on Capitol Hill Tuesday for private meetings with senators.



Feds ask Va. health reform lawsuit be dismissed
Breaking Legal News | 2010/05/25 04:05
The Obama administration is asking a federal judge in Virginia to dismiss the state's lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the new health reform law.

In a motion filed hours before the court deadline on Monday, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius argued that Congress acted well within its authority. It also claims Virginia lacks jurisdiction to sue.

State Attorney General Ken sued hours after Congress passed the sweeping health reform bill in March.

He alleged that by requiring Virginians to buy health coverage or pay a fee, Congress exceeded its authority under the 10th Amendment.

Sebelius argues that the new law is well within the scope of the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.



Mathew B. Tully Awarded Prestigious Air Force Space Badge
Attorneys in the News | 2010/05/25 04:05

Founding Partner Mathew B. Tully has been awarded the impressive Air Force Space Badge due to his completion of space training. Tully is among one of the few Army Officers awarded this prestigious badge, and among an even smaller number of National Guardsmen authorized to wear it. 

In late 2008, Tully attended the clandestine National Security Space Institute (NSSI), the Department of Defense’s premier institute for providing service members with the space education and training required to support military operations. Upon graduation, he became one of only 200 space operations officers in the Army and the only space professional in New York. 

“I am honored to be one of the few National Guardsmen authorized to wear the Air Force Space Badge and grateful that the Army has given me the opportunity to experience our country’s space systems technology and capabilities firsthand,” said Tully. “I look forward to my continued space training and service to our country in the Army National Guard.”

Tully is a Major in the New York Army National Guard, holding the position of Space Operations Officer. His military service and experiences have led him to dedicate his legal career to protecting and upholding the rights of veterans and service members across the country. Founded in 2003, Tully Rinckey PLLC has pioneered many landmark Veterans Preference and USERRA cases.                                                                                        

To speak with Tully or to learn more about Tully Rinckey PLLC, please contact Jessica Brociek at 202-787-1900 or via email at jbrociek@tullylegal.com.



High court to hear Arizona school case
Tax | 2010/05/25 02:06
The U.S. Supreme Court will consider ending a lawsuit that challenges Arizona's tax breaks for donations for thousands of private school scholarships.

The Washington-based court on Monday said it will hear two appeals filed by the state and supporters of the 13-year-old program that provides dollar-for-dollar state income tax breaks for donations to school tuition organizations.

The action "is terrific news for the thousands of families who desperately need scholarship assistance to send their children to the school of their choice," said Tim Keller, executive director of the Institute for Justice's Arizona chapter.

The institute was one of several groups defending the program.

A lawyer for the challengers said he hopes the justices' action doesn't mean the Supreme Court intends to open the door for broad state funding of religious instruction.

"I hope they didn't take this case to say that," said attorney Paul Bender.

The American Civil Liberties Union and others challenged the program as unconstitutional because religious organizations award most of the scholarships and require children to enroll in religious schools. The suit says the program amounts to an unconstitutional state endorsement of religion.

The Arizona Supreme Court previously upheld the constitutionality of the 1997 law as written, but the current case being considered by federal courts challenges how the program has been implemented.

A U.S. District Court judge dismissed the current case, but the federal appeals court in San Francisco last year ruled that the lawsuit could proceed. In that ruling, a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel said the program could be unconstitutional because parents seeking scholarships didn't have a realistic range of education choices for students to attend nonreligious schools.



Court: NFL is 32 teams, not single business
Corporate Governance | 2010/05/24 08:57

The Supreme Court says the National Football League can be considered as 32 separate teams - not one big business - when it comes to to selling NFL-branded items like jerseys and caps.

The high court has unanimously reversed a lower court ruling throwing out an antitrust suit brought against the league by one of its former hat makers.

American Needle had sued the league after losing the contract to Reebok. The company said the NFL violated antitrust law because all 32 teams worked together to freeze it out of the NFL-licensed hatmaking business. The NFL said it did not violate antitrust law because the teams are all one business.



High court rejects Microsoft patent appeal
Intellectual Property | 2010/05/24 06:57

The Supreme Court has turned down Microsoft Corp.'s appeal of a jury verdict that it infringed on another company's patent.

The justices said Monday they will not intervene in Microsoft's legal fight with Alcatel-Lucent. The disputed patent covers a method of entering information into fields on a computer screen without using a keyboard. Alcatel-Lucent says Microsoft's Outlook calendar and other programs illegally used this technology.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit already has ordered the trial court to reconsider the $358 million in damages the jury awarded to Alcatel-Lucent.



[PREV] [1] ..[412][413][414][415][416][417][418][419][420].. [1187] [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
Florida Attorney General Ash..
Americans’ trust in nation..
Trump asks the Supreme Court..
Rudy Giuliani is in contempt..
Small businesses brace thems..
Appeals court overturns ex-4..
Amazon workers strike at mul..
TikTok asks Supreme Court to..
Supreme Court rejects Wiscon..
US inflation ticked up last ..
Court seems reluctant to blo..
Court will hear arguments ov..
Romanian court orders a reco..
Court backs Texas over razor..
New Hampshire courts hear 2 ..


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