Today's Date: Add To Favorites
Judge upholds $100M Mattel verdict over Bratz
Business | 2009/04/28 07:48
A federal judge upheld a $100 million jury verdict Monday for Mattel Inc. in a lengthy legal battle over rights to the Bratz doll, a rival to Mattel's Barbie.

U.S. District Judge Stephen Larson also confirmed in his ruling late Monday that the Bratz doll — marketed by MGA Entertainment Inc. since 2001 — is Mattel property. He appointed a temporary federal receiver to take control of the Bratz brand and MGA's assets.

The receiver will decide who produces the doll and under what terms, but the order authorizes the receiver to maximize profits by "selling Bratz-branded dolls and other goods through appropriate channels of trade and distribution."

Mattel attorneys have said in court that the company is willing and able to produce Bratz dolls once receivership issues are sorted.

MGA President Isaac Larian said his company will appeal the ruling.

Mattel sued MGA in 2004, alleging that Bratz designer Carter Bryant developed the concept for the pouty-lipped doll while working for Mattel.

After a four-year legal dispute, a jury last year awarded Mattel $10 million for copyright infringement and $90 million for breach of contract.

After the verdict, Mattel sought to block MGA from ever making the Bratz dolls, and Larson ordered the company in December to end its sales in early 2009.

MGA argued that retailers would not order the toys unless the court could guarantee they would remain in stores through most of this year. MGA got a reprieve in January when Larson ruled that the dolls could remain in stores for the rest of the year.

He left open the possibility that Mattel or a court-appointed receiver could ultimately market the dolls this year.

A hearing is scheduled for May 18 to discuss whether the receivership should be made permanent.



Supreme Court takes up special education case
Court Watch | 2009/04/28 07:47
The Supreme Court is again trying to decide when taxpayers must foot the bill for private schooling for special education students.


The court will hear arguments Tuesday in an Oregon case in which a local school district contends that students should at least give public special education programs a try before seeking reimbursement for private school tuition.

A federal appeals court sided with a high-school student identified in court papers only as T.A. The student enrolled in a $5,200-a-month private program and sought reimbursement from the Forest Grove School District.

The Supreme Court heard a similar case from New York in 2007, but split 4-4 on the outcome.

The case is Forest Grove School District v. T.A., 08-305.



Supreme Court OKs regulation of language on TV
Breaking Legal News | 2009/04/28 07:46
The Supreme Court is giving tentative approval to government regulation of the use of even a single curse word on live television.


But the court, in a 5-4 decision Tuesday, is refusing to pass judgment on whether the Federal Communications Commission's "fleeting expletives" policy is in line with First Amendment guarantees of free speech. The justices say a federal appeals court should weigh the constitutionality of the policy.

The decision throws out a ruling by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York. The appeals court had found in favor of a Fox Television-led challenge to the policy and had returned the case to the FCC to let the agency provide a "reasoned analysis" for its tougher line on indecency.

The commission appealed to the Supreme Court instead.



Regulators urge BofA, Citi to boost capital
Securities | 2009/04/28 03:37
Bank of America Corp. and Citigroup Inc., which have each received $45 billion in government bailout funds, have been told by regulators that "stress test" results show they may need to raise additional capital, The Wall Street Journal said Tuesday.


Charlotte, N.C.-based Bank of America is looking at a shortfall in the billions of dollars, the paper said, citing people familiar with the situation. Both banks plan to rebut the preliminary findings, according to the paper, with Bank of America expected to respond Tuesday ahead of its shareholder meeting Wednesday. Bank of America declined to comment.

Citigroup said in a statement, "Until the results of the stress tests are announced, our regulators have prohibited all financial institutions, including Citi, from making any comments related to the stress tests."

A Citi spokesman added that the bank is continuing with its plan to exchange debt for equity and shed assets as part of a program to further bolster its capital position.

Citi has reached a basic agreement to sell its Japanese brokerage unit, Nikko Cordial, to Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group Inc. for 500 billion yen ($5.2 billion), according to The Nikkei business newspaper. Citi declined to comment on the potential sale of the unit.

Shares of Citigroup fell 18 cents, or 5.9 percent, to $2.89 in morning trading. Bank of America shares declined 59 cents, or 6.6 percent, to $8.33.

Treasury Department spokesman Andrew Williams said Treasury officials would not comment on whether regulators told Bank of America and Citigroup they may need to raise more capital.



Court refuses to let officer sue over his arrest
Law Center | 2009/04/28 02:47
The Supreme Court has refused to let an Atlantic City, N.J., police officer sue prosecutors and investigators for wrongfully arresting and charging him with the murder of his wife.


The high court on Monday refused to hear James L. Andros III's appeal of a lower court decision throwing his lawsuit out.

Andros was arrested after an on-call medical examiner mistakenly listed the death of his wife, Ellen, as homicide through asphyxiation in 2001.

The charges were dropped a month before his trial after it was determined his wife had died of a rare heart condition. By that time, the veteran Atlantic City policeman had been suspended from his job and lost custody of his two young daughters.

Judges at the U.S. District Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that Andros could not sue because the prosecutors were acting in their official role in charging him and the investigators had probable cause to suspect him in his wife's death.



Texas case before high court to test voting rights
Breaking Legal News | 2009/04/27 08:37
The community of Canyon Creek was ranchland rich with limestone and cedar trees when Jim Crow held sway in the South. The first house wasn't built until the late 1980s and not even a hint of discrimination attaches to this little slice in suburbia.


President Barack Obama won more than 48 percent of the vote in November in this overwhelmingly white community northwest of the state capital.

Yet Canyon Creek, the heart of Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One, is the site of a major Supreme Court battle over the federal government's often used and most effective tool in preventing voting discrimination against minorities.

The utility district's elected five-person board manages a local park and pays down bond debt. Because it is in Texas, the board is covered by a section of the Voting Rights Act that requires approval from the Justice Department before any changes can be made in how elections are conducted.

That requirement applies to all or parts of 16 states, mostly in the South, with a history of preventing blacks, Hispanics and other minorities from voting.

The utility district is challenging that section of the law, which Congress extended in 2006 for 25 years. The Obama administration is defending it.

The Voting Rights Act, enacted in 1965, opened the polls to millions of black Americans. The law "has been the most important and transformative civil rights act in our country's history," said John Payton, director of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund.



Judge waives waiting period for gay Iowa couple
Breaking Legal News | 2009/04/27 08:36
A same-sex Iowa couple will be allowed to wed as soon as Monday after a judge allowed them to bypass the state's three-day waiting period.


Melisa Keeton and Shelley Wolfe of Des Moines received their waiver by 9 a.m.

Same-sex couples in Iowa began applying for marriage license Monday after a state Supreme Court ruling legalizing gay unions took effect.

The high court issued an order early in the day confirming that the appeals process in the case has officially concluded.

The Iowa Supreme Court's unanimous and emphatic decision on April 3 made Iowa the third state to allow same-sex marriage, joining Massachusetts and Connecticut. Vermont has passed a law that will take effect in September.



[PREV] [1] ..[587][588][589][590][591][592][593][594][595].. [1190] [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
Supreme Court sides with the..
Ex-UK lawmaker charged with ..
Hungary welcomes Netanyahu a..
US immigration officials loo..
Turkish court orders key Erd..
Under threat from Trump, Col..
Military veterans are becomi..
Austria’s new government is..
Supreme Court makes it harde..
Trump signs order designatin..
US strikes a deal with Ukrai..
Musk gives all federal worke..
Troubled electric vehicle ma..
Trump signs order imposing s..
Elon Musk dodges DOGE scruti..


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