|
|
|
Attorney Sara Youn Joins Scandaglia & Ryan
Law Firm News |
2008/10/07 09:02
|
Scandaglia & Ryan welcomes Associate Sara Youn to the firm. Ms. Youn, who joined S&R on September 22, 2008, has experience representing clients in complex product liability cases, franchisor-franchisee disputes and class action defense litigation. Prior to joining the firm, Ms. Youn was a staff attorney practicing in the Seattle office of Perkins Coie. She also served as a judicial extern for the Honorable Gary Larson, District Judge for the Fourth Judicial District of Minnesota. Ms. Youn received a J.D. from the University of Minnesota Law School in 2007, where she received a Dean’s Elite Scholarship. During law school, she was the managing editor of the Minnesota Law Review (2006-2007). In 2002, Ms. Youn received a B.A., magna cum laude, from Georgetown University, where she was a George F. Baker Scholar. She also authored an honors thesis, “Out of That Land: American Missionary Influence on Early Korean Immigration to Hawaii.” Scandaglia & Ryan is a litigation firm founded on the principle of providing sophisticated legal services in a cost-effective manner. To achieve this, we have adopted a client-centered process that we call Total Quality Litigation®. In pursuing strategic business and legal solutions for our clients, TQL® minimizes uncertainty and increases accountability. We believe our clients deserve nothing less.
For further information, visit our website at www.scandagliaryan.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court denies appeal of judge's sentencing goof
Legal Business |
2008/10/07 08:24
|
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected an appeal from an Alabama man who was sentenced to five years in prison when a judge wrongly thought the law required him to serve time. U.S. District Judge William Steele didn't want to order Patrick Lett, a 17-year Army veteran who served two tours in Iraq, to prison after the former soldier pleaded guilty to cocaine possession. But the judge thought the law required prison time. When Steele learned differently, he reduced the punishment to 11 days of time served and three years of supervised release. That didn't satisfy prosecutors, who appealed the lighter sentence on the grounds that Steele didn't have the authority to change the initial five-year sentence. The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the judge could not undo his sentence, and the Supreme Court rejected Lett's appeal of that decision without comment. A new sentencing hearing is set for Oct. 24, though one of Lett's attorneys said a delay may be needed to prepare arguments. Attorney Douglas Berman of Ohio State University's Moritz College of Law in Columbus said Monday that defense attorneys are expected to argue Lett initially had ineffective legal representation. A Justice Department spokesman was not immediately available for comment on the high court's ruling. At the initial sentencing, Steele noted that Lett had led "an exemplary life up until the time of the offenses and even after," when Lett re-enlisted and served another 17 months before his indictment. Lett, now 39, pleaded guilty to cocaine possession for his involvement in a cousin's drug operation. Lett works full time doing fiber optics work at a shipyard in Pascagoula, Miss. His two children, who live with Lett's mother, visit him on weekends. He supports his family as a single parent, his attorney said. |
|
|
|
|
|
High court could block 'light' cigarettes lawsuit
Breaking Legal News |
2008/10/07 08:22
|
The Supreme Court picked up Monday where it left off last term, signaling support for efforts to block lawsuits against tobacco companies over deceptive marketing of "light" cigarettes. The first day of the court's new term, which is set in law as the first Monday in October, included denials of hundreds of appeals. Chief Justice John Roberts opened the new session in a crowded courtroom that included retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Last term, the justices handed down several opinions that limited state regulation of business in favor of federal power. Several justices posed skeptical questions in this term's first case, whether federal law prevents smokers from using consumer protection laws to go after tobacco companies for their marketing of "light" and "low tar" cigarettes. The companies are facing dozens of such lawsuits across the country. The federal cigarette labeling law bars states from regulating any aspect of cigarette advertising that involves smoking and health. "How do you tell it's deceptive or not if you don't look at what the relationship is between smoking and health?," Chief Justice John Roberts said during oral arguments on the case. Three Maine residents sued Altria Group Inc. and its Philip Morris USA Inc. subsidiary under the state's law against unfair marketing practices. The class-action claim represents all smokers of Marlboro Lights or Cambridge Lights cigarettes, both made by Philip Morris. The lawsuit argues that the company knew for decades that smokers of light cigarettes compensate for the lower levels of tar and nicotine by taking longer puffs and compensating in other ways. A federal district court threw out the lawsuit, but the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said it could go forward. The role of the Federal Trade Commission could be important in the outcome. The FTC is only now proposing to change rules that for years condoned the use of "light" and "low tar" in advertising the cigarettes, despite evidence that smokers were getting a product as dangerous as regular cigarettes. |
|
|
|
|
|
Republicans to high court: Stop Palin ethics probe
Political and Legal |
2008/10/07 03:23
|
Alaska Republicans are asking the state's highest court to block an abuse-of-power investigation into vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin's firing of a state commissioner before a potentially embrassing report on the matter is released. Five GOP state lawmakers, in a brief filed Monday, say the inquiry has exceeded its authority and is too political. Palin is the focus of a legislative investigation into allegations she abused her power by firing her public safety commissioner. The commissioner says he was pressured to dismiss a state trooper who was involved in a messy divorce with Palin's sister. Investigators are scheduled to submit a report on the investigation Friday. Oral arguments are scheduled for Wednesday. |
|
|
|
|
|
Top court again rejects abortion poster case
Court Watch |
2008/10/06 09:25
|
The Supreme Court has rejected for the third time an appeal by anti-abortion activists to undo a multimillion-dollar verdict for their use of "wanted" posters to identify abortion clinic doctors. The justices did not comment Monday in turning down a dozen individuals and two groups that oppose abortion rights. The court turned down similar appeals in 2003 and 2006. Four physicians and abortion clinics sued in 1995 after the activists released a Wild West-style poster that named a dozen abortion doctors underneath the headline, "Wanted." A related Web site, titled the "Nuremberg Files," declared the doctors guilty of crimes against humanity, and listed their addresses and telephone numbers. In 1999, a jury awarded the doctors and clinics more than $100 million under racketeering laws and a 1994 federal law that makes it illegal to incite violence against abortion doctors. Courts reduced the judgment to more than $16 million. The activists say the verdict violated their free speech rights under the Constitution. |
|
|
|
|
|
Top court stays out of DVR patent fight
Breaking Legal News |
2008/10/06 09:25
|
The Supreme Court refused Monday to disturb a $74 million judgment against Dish Network Corp. for violating a patent held by TiVo Inc. involving digital video recorders. Without comment, the justices declined to consider Englewood, Colo.-based Dish's appeal. In January, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit agreed with a lower court that digital video recorders distributed by Dish, formerly known as EchoStar Communications Corp., violated the software elements of Alviso,Calif.-based TiVo's patent. The ruling overturned the lower court's finding that Dish also infringed on the patent's hardware elements. TiVo issued a statement saying it was "extremely pleased" with the Supreme Court's decision and said company lawyers would press for Dish to pay financial damages. TiVo sued in 2004, alleging that EchoStar, a satellite broadcaster, infringed on TiVo's patented technology that allows viewers to record one program while watching another. EchoStar Communications changed its name to Dish in late 2007. TiVo pioneered digital video recorders that allow viewers to pause, rewind and fast forward live television shows. The lower court had ordered Dish to shut down the 3 million digital video recorders used by its customers because they use TiVo's technology, but that order was put on hold pending appeal. Dish Network has said that the ruling would not affect its customers because the company had developed and distributed new DVR software that "does not infringe the Tivo patent at issue in the Federal Circuit's ruling." |
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court rejects jury Bible case
Breaking Legal News |
2008/10/06 09:24
|
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to consider a murder case in which a jury foreman read passages of the Bible to hold-out jurors who subsequently voted to impose the death penalty. Without comment, the justices declined to consider whether the jury foreman's conduct violated the rights of Jimmie Lucero, an Amarillo, Texas, man sentenced to death after being convicted in the shotgun slayings of three neighbors at their home in 2003. The state of Texas argued that the Bible passage merely duplicated instructions of the trial court. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals found the introduction of the Bible into the jury room to be "harmless error." A Texas jury took about five hours to decide on the death penalty for Lucero. The two jurors who switched their votes said the reading of the scripture and its content had no impact on their votes. During deliberations, the foreman read aloud from Romans 13:1-6, which states that everyone must submit to authority and that those who do wrong should be afraid, for a ruler is "God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment to the wrongdoer." Lucero was convicted in the killings of 71-year-old Pedro Robledo, his 72-year-old wife, Maria, and their daughter, Fabiana, 31. |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|