Today's Date: Add To Favorites
Court Strikes Down Longer Hours for Truckers
Breaking Legal News | 2007/07/25 06:58
A federal appeals court on Tuesday struck down a Bush administration rule that loosened the work hours of truck drivers after concluding that officials had failed to justify the changes adequately. In a unanimous decision, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said that the federal agency that oversees the truck industry did not provide enough evidence to demonstrate the safety of its 2005 decision to increase the maximum driving hours of truck drivers. The hours of service were increased to 77 from 60 over 7 consecutive days, and to 88 hours from 70 over 8 days.

The court found that the agency, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, a unit of the Department of Transportation, had ignored the results of a database it commissioned to catalog more than 50,000 truck accidents from 1991 to 2002. Using the data, the study extrapolated that the risk of fatigue-related accidents would be substantially higher in the extra hours of service allowed by the new rules.

“F.M.C.S.A. failed to provide an adequate explanation for its decision to adopt the 11-hour daily driving limit,” the court said.

The new rules had been adopted after heavy lobbying by politically connected leaders of the trucking industry. The changes were part of the broader strategy by the Bush administration to reduce regulations on businesses.

Safety experts and insurance analysts challenged the changes. They said longer driving hours have contributed to the high number of truck accidents. About 100 people die each week in truck-related accidents, making trucking America’s most treacherous industry as measured by overall deaths and injuries.

Supporters of the loosened standards say they have made it faster and cheaper to move goods across the country. They say the changes promote safety because shorter hours would force the industry to put more drivers with little experience behind the wheel. And they note that the fatality rate, or the number of deaths per miles traveled, has continued a long decline.

Still, the fatality rate for truck-related accidents remains nearly double that involving only cars. And the Bush administration has repeatedly missed its own targets for reducing the number of fatalities from truck accidents.

The decision today came in a case filed by Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy group. It was the third time in three years that the courts have been critical of the motor carrier agency.

A different appeals panel criticized the agency in December 2005 for failing to issue adequate rules for the training of drivers, saying the agency had ignored its own studies on the need for more comprehensive training.

And in 2004, a third panel of the appeals court struck down virtually identical new hours of service rules as the ones at issue in Tuesday’s decision, saying that they had been “arbitrary and capricious.”

After Congress, at the urging of the Bush administration and the trucking industry, intervened to block the enforcement of the 2004 court order, the motor carrier agency issued the 2005 rules. At the time, the agency said it had addressed the concerns raised by the appeals court’s 2004 decision.

In a regulatory impact analysis accompanying the 2005 changes, the agency concluded that the economic costs to the industry of tightening the hours of service rules, as consumer groups had proposed, outweighed the safety benefits.

But the court said today that analysis was flawed. The opinion was written by Judge Merrick B. Garland and signed by Chief Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg and Judge Karen Lecraft Henderson.

Safety groups hailed Tuesday’s ruling and said the court had confirmed their view that the agency had failed to adequately justify relaxing the rules.

“The court is saying once again, no,” said Jacqueline S. Gillan, vice president of Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, an alliance of consumer, health and insurance organizations. “For three and a half years this agency has tried every which way to defend a rule that would result in longer consecutive driver hours and longer total work hours. This has a dramatic dangerous impact on the lives of truck drivers and on the lives of everyone sharing the roads with trucks. And once again the court has said, ‘No, you cannot go ahead with a rule when it violates the law and you clearly have not justified it.’ ”

The agency would not say whether it would appeal the decision or seek a stay of the court’s order, which is set to go into effect in September.

“We are analyzing the decision issued today to understand the court’s findings as well as determine the agency’s next steps to prevent driver fatigue, ensure safe and efficient motor carrier operations and save lives,” said a statement issued by the agency.

The American Trucking Associations, which defended the changes to the rules in the proceeding, said they would ask the court to stay its ruling to give the agency time to provide a better justification of the changes.



Judge orders trash hauler back to court
Court Watch | 2007/07/25 03:57

A skeptical Alameda County judge ordered garbage hauler Waste Management on Tuesday to return to court next week to prove it is abiding by his order to collect all the trash in Oakland or face big fines for scores of missed pickups.

Superior Court Judge Richard Keller, at a hearing in his Fremont courtroom, said Oakland officials provided evidence that as many as 300 customers a day have not been receiving garbage service despite his order last week that the company truck away all the city's trash.

"That's more than ... just a matter of a couple of missed pickups," Keller said to Waste Management lawyers who told him the company is covering all of its routes. "All I'm saying is there's a certain amount of common sense that comes into play here in all this, and then there's gilding the lily."

Keller scheduled a hearing for Aug. 3 to determine whether the company should be held in contempt of his July 19 order -- which could subject the firm to fines of $2,500 per day for each of the hundreds of pickups the city says have been missed since then.

Meanwhile, representatives from Waste Management and the Teamsters union, along with Oakland Mayor Ron Dellums and a federal mediator, spent 10 hours Tuesday trying to work out a deal and planned to resume negotiations at 11 a.m. today in Oakland. A contract agreement would end the company's lockout of nearly 500 union garbage haulers that began July 2.

Dellums said the two sides made progress in their talks Tuesday.

"We have reached agreement on several of the outstanding issues,'' he said Tuesday night, declining to provide details. "I'm actually feeling very good because there was substantial progress. I believe the remaining issues can be resolved -- that's not to say they're not difficult issues."

Since July 19, city officials said they have received 3,000 complaints about spotty trash, recycling and yard waste pickups, while Waste Management officials have said they resumed regular weekly pickups in Oakland and other East Bay areas affected by the lockout.

"Each day it goes on, it becomes more and more frustrating," said Dellums, who described the negotiations as tedious and difficult. Waste Management has hired hundreds of temporary workers to pick up trash in Oakland and other East Bay communities and has added extra drivers and trucks to East Bay routes since Keller's order last week, Waste Management attorney John Lynn Smith said at Tuesday's hearing.

Smith said the company has 117 drivers on routes in Oakland, a number equal to the number of Teamster drivers in the city before the lockout, which came three days after the union's contract with the company expired.

"We'll continue to move forward to make sure people get service," Waste Management spokeswoman Monica Devincenzi said after the hearing, adding that on Saturday temporary drivers will go back over routes to gather any missed pickups from the week. "We truly apologize for any inconvenience we've caused our customers. We're trying our best to get it done."

But Deputy Oakland City Attorney Kandis Westmore said the city has received 200 to 300 complaints about missed pickups each day since the judge's order -- evidence, she said, that the company is not abiding by the order.

The city will have to prove in court that Waste Management has willfully failed to pick up garbage, Keller said. The city's efforts could be undermined, he said, by company claims that Teamster picketers at the firm's office in East Oakland have delayed replacement drivers on their routes by up to three hours.

Keller acknowledged that the potential fines, while substantial, might not motivate the multimillion-dollar corporation. "It's like swatting a gnat off the back of an elephant," he said.

City Attorney John Russo has said the city could hire another hauler to pick up trash in Oakland, but a spokeswoman for City Administrator Deborah Edgerly said Tuesday that city officials will continue efforts to compel Waste Management to comply with the terms of its franchise agreement.

"The performance standards are clearly spelled out -- pick up the trash," Karen Boyd said.

The company's contract with Teamsters Local 70 expired June 30, and Waste Management locked out its drivers in what company officials described as a pre-emptive move against a rumored Teamsters strike.

Union officials said their members did not intend to strike and planned to work while union and company officials negotiated a new contract.

Oakland, Emeryville, Albany, Hayward, Newark and part of San Leandro, along with unincorporated areas of Alameda County, including Castro Valley and San Lorenzo, are affected by the lockout.



Ex-Newark Mayor Pleads Not Guilty to Corruption
Breaking Legal News | 2007/07/24 08:48
At his arraignment in federal court Monday, former Mayor Sharpe James pleaded not guilty to corruption charges and then listened as one of his lawyers defended himself against allegations that it would be a conflict of interest if he remained part of Mr. James’s defense team. Prosecutors told Judge William J. Martini of United States District Court that the lawyer, Thomas R. Ashley, had represented two other people involved in the case against Mr. James and his companion, Tamika Riley.

Mr. James is accused of charging more than $58,000 in personal expenses on city-issued credit cards during his two decades as mayor and of selling city land at below market rates to Ms. Riley, who the authorities said then resold the property at an enormous profit.

Judith Germano, an assistant United States attorney, told Judge Martini that Mr. Ashley represented someone referred to in the criminal complaint as “Individual 1.” The person, who is not named in the indictment but who is “close to both defendants James and Riley,” lent $10,000 to Ms. Riley to help her pay for several properties in Newark and later received checks from Ms. Riley, according to prosecutors.

Ms. Germano said the other person Mr. Ashley represented was “an attorney in a number of real estate transactions” that are part of the case. In response, Mr. Ashley said, “I don’t see that there’s a conflict.” The judge told Ms. Germano to submit a brief with her concerns.

During the hourlong court appearance, Mr. James, 71, wearing a dark blue suit, smiled and seemed relaxed, limiting himself before and after the hearing to a single, repeated comment to reporters: “God is good all the time.” He and Ms. Riley, 38, who also pleaded not guilty, waived their right to a speedy trial.

Ms. Riley, whose relatives sat in the small, packed gallery, looked more anxious than Mr. James. She wore a black suit, flipped through legal papers, and did not smile.

Prosecutors said the evidence against Mr. James and Ms. Riley was largely contained in 40 banker’s boxes, each holding roughly 200 documents. Perry Primavera, a special assistant United States attorney, said that the prosecution would call about 60 witnesses, and that the trial would last about 12 weeks. The trial is tentatively set to begin in early February.

Mr. Ashley, a well-known criminal defense lawyer here, once represented Mr. James’s chief of staff, Jackie R. Mattison, who was found guilty in 1997 of taking bribes. After Monday’s court hearing, Mr. Ashley said of the prosecutors: “I didn’t know they were going to try to have me removed. I anticipated it could be an issue. They were never too happy with my representation.”

In court, Ms. Germano said that Mr. Ashley himself could be called as a witness in the case, to give evidence about a personal trip Mr. James and his companions made to Martha’s Vineyard in 2003, which prosecutors said cost the city of Newark more than $3,500.



California court backs ban on kangaroo shoes
Court Watch | 2007/07/24 08:47
California's high court has decided that football shoes made from kangaroo leather cannot be sold in the state, rejecting arguments from sportswear giant Adidas. Lawyers for Adidas held that the state ban on kangaroo products was in conflict with a US federal law that allows for imports of some kangaroo-skin items.

But the San Francisco-based court unanimously ruled on Monday in favour of a British animal rights group, Viva International Voice for Animals, which challenged Adidas and retail firms saying US states can enact stricter wildlife protections than the federal government, according to the decision posted on the court's website.

The animal rights group charges that kangaroos are slaughtered in a cruel manner and that hunters are often not able to distinguish between species that are endangered or not, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

California imposed a ban on the import and sale of kangaroo products in 1971.

The case will now be taken up by the Court of Appeal in San Francisco, where Adidas will have a chance to present other arguments on the issue.

A spokesperson for Adidas said kangaroo leather shoes coveted by footballers comprise only one percent of the company's footwear sold in the United States and that no shoes are made from threatened or endangered kangaroos, the Chronicle reported.


Bromwell pleads guilty in corruption case
Legal Business | 2007/07/24 06:47
Once one of the leading Democrats in the General Assembly, former state Sen. Thomas L. Bromwell Sr. pleaded guilty this morning to accepting bribes from a Baltimore construction company executive in return for the ex-politician's help in winning contracts. Federal prosecutors charged Bromwell, who represented Baltimore County for more than two decades, and his wife, Mary Patricia, in October 2005 with using his political power to help Baltimore-based Poole and Kent in exchange for more than $200,000 in cash, bogus salary and discounted home-improvement materials.

As part of the plea deal his lawyer negotiated with prosecutors, Bromwell, 58, admitted assisting Poole and Kent and its president, W. David Stoffregen, win a multimillion-dollar contract over a competitor with a lower bid for work at the University of Maryland Medical System's Weinberg Building in Baltimore.

Mary Patricia Bromwell, 44, signed a separate plea agreement to a single fraud count for accepting an $80,000-a-year salary for a no-show job from a contractor controlled by Poole and Kent.

If U.S. District Judge J. Frederick Motz follows recommended guidelines, Bromwell will receive a prison term of 6 1/2 years to about eight years for a guilty plea to racketeering conspiracy and tax evasion. His wife could receive up to 2 1/2 years in prison, but her attorneys are more likely to argue for some combination of home detention and probation permitted under the guidelines.

The plea agreement is the climax so far of the largest public corruption investigation in recent Maryland history. Seven other defendants in the case earlier pleaded guilty.

The agreement holds the former senator at least partly responsible for $2.1 million in illegal profits and kickbacks from the scheme with Stoffregen, attorneys said.

In the end, defense lawyers said, the Bromwells agreed to hand over the house where Poole and Kent did construction work valued at more than $85,000. The labor and materials were provided by Stoffregen free or at a reduced cost, according to his guilty-plea agreement.

Bromwell began his political career as a state delegate at age 28. He eventually became chairman of the Senate Finance Committee and one of the state's most powerful politicians. He even kept a large measure of his political clout after he tried, but failed, to overthrow his one-time ally, Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller.

Resigning from public office in May 2002, Bromwell accepted a top post with the Injured Workers' Insurance Fund, a quasi-public agency that is Maryland's largest insurance fund for injured employees.


California Class-Action Lawsuit Filed against Microsoft
Class Action | 2007/07/23 11:58

Christine Moskowitz and Dan Wood found themselves the apparent victim of poorly crafted Xbox 360s, or so according to the complaint they filed in Federal Court in California. The class-action lawsuit they filed seeks $5 million in damages for Xbox 360 buyers affected by the console which apparently damages game discs, making them unstable and impossible to play. According to the Gamasutra post, Moskowitz lost Gears of War, Crackdown and Saints Row to the console’s scratching. Wood lost Tom Clancy’s Splinter Cell.

After both of the parties contacted Microsoft and reported the problem, they were refused reimbursement or replacement discs. That’s when they decided to take legal action.

Microsoft has acknowledged the obvious defects in its consoles with the red rings of death, but they have yet to acknowledge any defects in their console which scratches discs. Perhaps they will have to add on to the $1 billion they’ve already set aside to deal with the red rings.



Former Officer Pleads Guilty to Civil Rights Charge
Court Watch | 2007/07/23 11:29

Shannon Houchin, a former police officer with the Crittenden County Sheriff’s Office in West Memphis, Ark., pleaded guilty today in federal court in Little Rock to a felony civil rights charge.

During his guilty plea, Houchin admitted that he abused his authority as a police officer when, in May 2006, he unnecessarily assaulted an arrestee while at the Crittenden County Detention Facility.

Houchin faces a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison and a maximum fine of $250,000.

“It is unacceptable for law enforcement officials to willfully abuse those committed to their custody,” said Wan J. Kim, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. “The overwhelming majority of correctional officers dispatch their difficult duties with honor and professionalism. The Justice Department will aggressively prosecute those who cross the line and violate federal law.”

The Civil Rights Division is committed to the vigorous enforcement of every federal criminal civil rights statute, such as laws that prohibit the willful use of excessive force or other acts of misconduct by law enforcement officials. In fiscal year 2006, nearly 50 percent of the cases brought by the Criminal Section of the Civil Rights Division involved such prosecutions. Since fiscal year 2001, the Division has convicted 50 percent more defendants for excessive force and official misconduct than in the preceding six years.

Today’s plea resulted from the investigative work of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. Civil Rights Division attorneys Christine Dunn and Karen Ruckert handled the case for the Justice Department.



[PREV] [1] ..[932][933][934][935][936][937][938][939][940].. [1192] [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
US completes deportation of ..
International Criminal Court..
What’s next for birthright ..
Nations react to US strikes ..
Judge asks if troops in Los ..
Judge blocks plan to allow i..
Getty Images and Stability A..
Supreme Court makes it easie..
Trump formally asks Congress..
World financial markets welc..
Cuban exiles were shielded f..
Arizona prosecutors ordered ..
Trump Seeks Supreme Court Ap..
Budget airline begins deport..
Jury begins deliberating in ..


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