Today's Date: Add To Favorites
White House defends immigration reform deal
Politics | 2007/05/22 02:23

The White House over the weekend defended an immigration reform agreement reached Thursday with key Republican and Democratic senators which has drawn opposition from both aisles of Congress, threatening what President Bush called a "secure, productive, orderly, and fair" proposal. The deal has been derided by some Republicans as amounting to "amnesty" for up to 12 million undocumented immigrants currently in the United States. Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez told CNN Sunday that for those critics "the only thing that would not be amnesty is mass deportation." DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff  meanwhile challenged critics to offer alternative solutions instead of simply saying "this isn't good enough." Bush himself championed the deal in his weekly radio address Saturday, insisting that it contained "all the elements required for comprehensive immigration reform", specifically rejecting the "amnesty" characterization, and noting that the agreed reform would "require that strong border security and enforcement benchmarks are met before other elements of the legislation are implemented."

Democratic objections to the immigration reform proposal have focused on its restrictions on the right of legal immigrants to be joined by their families and its preference for high-tech workers. Under the proposal, undocumented immigrants would be able to obtain a probationary card allowing them to live and work legally in the United States, but which would not place them on the road to permanent residency or citizenship. The proposal also seeks to create a temporary guest worker program that would be implemented once the borders are declared "secure." Up to 1.5 million migrant farm-workers can also obtain legal status through an "AgJobs" measure, supported by Sen. Diana Feinstein (D-CA) and Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID). AgJobs creates a five-year pilot program that would grant legal status to those who have worked in US farms for at least 150 days in the last two years.



N.C. Court of Appeals Hears Lottery Lawsuit
Law Center | 2007/05/21 12:20

Is the North Carolina Education Lottery a tax, and was the law making it legal in the Tar Heel state passed unconstitutionally? State Superior Court Judge Henry Hight, in March 2006, ruled against a lawsuit challenging the lottery's legality, saying the bill was legally passed, because it is not a tax and no one is forced to play the lottery. But Bob Orr, former executive director of the North Carolina Institute of Constitutional Law and one of the lawyers pressing the challenge to the lottery, argued before the state Court of Appeals Tuesday that it was indeed a tax, because 35 percent of the lottery proceeds are allocated for education and that any money raised for the public's general benefit is a tax.

At issue in the case is how the General Assembly passed the law and whether it was constitutional.

North Carolina law requires votes on separate days for laws that lead to higher taxes or borrow against the state's credit.

Attorneys for the state have argued that the lottery law does neither and that both chambers' votes were legal. (In April 2005, the House approved the lottery bill by a vote of 61-59. In August of the same year, the Senate needed a tie-breaking vote from Lt. Gov. Beverly Perdue for the measure to pass 25-24.)

The bigger question, however, for appeals court judges Tuesday was what happens if the lottery, which recently reached the $1 billion sales mark, is ruled unconstitutional -- specifically, what would happen to all the money already rewarded.

Attorneys for the plaintiff, however, said they were only seeking to change the future of the lottery law and wasn't interested in lottery winnings since the lottery launched in March 2006.



Telecom antitrust suit can't proceed-top US court
Breaking Legal News | 2007/05/21 09:29

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Monday that an antitrust lawsuit against Verizon and other regional Bell companies cannot proceed without specific allegations to back it up. By a 7-2 vote, the justices reversed a U.S. appeals court ruling that allowed the class action antitrust lawsuit to go forward on a general allegation that Verizon predecessor Bell Atlantic Co. and other Bell companies had conspired not to compete in each other's territories.

"We hold that such a complaint should be dismissed," Justice David Souter wrote for the court majority.

At issue is a class action lawsuit against Bell Atlantic, which contends that lack of competition for local telephone service and "parallel conduct" of the regional Bells were evidence of an antitrust conspiracy.

More than a decade after the court-ordered breakup of AT&T into seven regional Bells, Congress passed a landmark legislation in 1996 designed to foster competition among carriers. It required regional Bells such as Verizon to make their networks available to rivals in exchange for gaining access to the lucrative long-distance voice and data markets.

The case was dismissed by a district court judge, who said the plaintiffs could not sue based only on a "bare-bones" allegation of conspiracy.

But that decision was reversed by a federal appeals court in New York, which ruled the case should not be dismissed unless the charges were implausible.

The U.S. Justice Department's antitrust division has sided with the telephone companies, arguing that "parallel action and inaction" alone was not enough to provide a basis for an antitrust lawsuit.

The Supreme Court's majority opinion agreed, ruling that an allegation of parallel conduct and a bare assertion of conspiracy is not enough. There must be enough facts to suggest an agreement was made, Souter said.




Guantanamo Bay Detainee Transferred to Australia
International | 2007/05/21 09:25

Australian Guantanamo detainee David Hicks was transferred to a maximum security prison near his hometown of Adelaide South Australia Sunday to serve the remainder of his nine-month prison sentence. In March, a US military commission at Guantanamo Bay recommended sentencing Hicks to seven years in prison, but all but nine months of that were effectively suspended by a military judge under the terms of a plea agreement kept secret from the panel of military officers during its deliberations.

Hicks has spent more than five years in US custody since being captured in Afghanistan. Under the plea agreement, Hicks was required to state that he "has never been illegally treated" while being held as an enemy combatant by the United States and that his detention was lawful pursuant to the laws of armed conflict. Hicks is also prohibited from having contact with the media for a period of one year, is to not take any legal action against the United States for his treatment during his 5 year detention, and is required to turn over any profits from an eventual sale of his story to the Australian government.



Bush appointments may dominate court
Political and Legal | 2007/05/20 11:41

In the years since President Bush took office, he has picked three of the seven U.S. District Court judges in Colorado and The Pueblo Chieftain has learned he will have the chance to pick two more of them. If the Democrat-controlled U.S. Senate confirms the Republican president's next two choices, he will have picked more of the court's full-time judges than any president since Colorado became a state. The president will get that opportunity next spring because two of the court's seven full-time judges disclosed in interviews that's when they will switch to part-time service, creating vacancies.

At that point, all of the judges will have been appointed by President Bush except for one judge picked by Democrat President Bill Clinton and one picked by President Bush's father, the first President Bush.

Switching to part-time service are Lewis Babcock of Denver and Walker Miller of Greeley.

Babcock is a native of Rocky Ford and was a state district court judge in Otero, Bent and Crowley counties from 1978 to 1983. Babcock was picked in 1988 for the court by former Republican President Ronald Reagan.

Miller was picked in 1996 by Clinton over Pueblo District Judge Dennis Maes, who wanted the job.

Judgeships on the U.S. District Court are coveted and prestigious. The judges, paid $161,000, are entitled to hold their jobs as long as they want.

Persons significantly involved in the matter say a deal between the president and the Senate is needed. A deal would make it more likely that nominees by the lame-duck president of one party will be confirmed by the Senate controlled by another party.

Otherwise, the court will be two judges short, creating a backlog of cases and slower-than-usual disposition of them.

If the two replacement judges are not confirmed before President Bush leaves office in January 2009, it is likely to be late in 2009, at the earliest, that the vacancies, which will occur early in 2008, would be filled.

Court veterans say a significant slow-down in handling cases, detrimental to persons with cases in the court, are likely if the court becomes two judges short.

The majority Senate Democrats, hoping their party's candidate will be elected president in November, could block confirmation of Bush's choices.

The state's two U.S. senators, Republican Wayne Allard and Democrat Ken Salazar, could play a key role in getting a deal to make it more likely that replacements will be in place promptly.

Allard's chief of staff, Sean Conway, said Friday that the senators met last month with Babcock, chief judge for the past seven years, and Edward Nottingham, who becomes chief judge on June 8 for a seven-year term, to discuss the need for promptly filling the expected vacancies.

Conway said the two senators plan to work together to try to get replacement judges in office as soon as possible "once the White House makes nominations based on our recommendations and with bipartisan support."

Conway said the two senators have "a very good working relationship," but have not yet decided on what process they will use to make recommendations to the president. In the past, senators have appointed bipartisan committees to offer suggested judgeship candidates to them before deciding whom to recommend to the president.

Salazar and his staff did not make themselves available for comment.

Bush in recent years picked Marcia Kreiger of suburban Denver, Robert Blackburn, who lived in Las Animas, and Phillip Figa of suburban Denver for the court. When those three were confirmed by the Senate it was controlled by Republicans and the president was not a lame-duck, so the potential was much less for political fighting over who would become judges.

Figa is seriously ill with a brain tumor, but has been working part time while undergoing extended treatment. He hopes to return to handling a fuller caseload when his health permits.

If he is unable to do that, his position could become open.

The first President Bush picked Nottingham, then of Grand Junction, in 1989. The other judge among the seven, Wiley Daniel of Denver, was picked in 1995 by Clinton.

In addition to the seven full-time judges, known in federal court parlance as "active" judges, the court now has three part-time judges, known as senior judges. There will be five part-time judges when Miller moves to that status in March and Babcock in April.



Federal court: Three guilty of FEMA fraud
Breaking Legal News | 2007/05/20 11:31

Three people have been sentenced in federal court in Biloxi on charges of illegally receiving disaster payments from the Federal Emergency Management Agency for debris cleanup after Hurricane Katrina. Clinton K. Miller of Carrier and Lauren Robertson of Picayune, who both worked for a debris monitoring company, were sentenced to 33 months and 13 months, respectively. Each was ordered to pay $275,057 in restitution.
 
Allan Kitto of Dundee, Fla., owner and operator of J.A.K. DC&ER Inc., worked under a subcontract as a debris hauler. He was sentenced to 25 months in jail and a $275,057 fine.

The three pleaded guilty in February to conspiracy involving submission of $716,677 in false debris hauling tickets.

Kitto submitted the tickets, while Robertson signed them, in most instances at her home, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office. Miller collected and submitted the slips for reimbursement.

Prosecutors said Kitto admitted he tried to conceal the conspiracy by depositing the money in a bank account opened under an employee's name.

Miller paid Robertson for signing the slip and also offered her extra "hush money," prosecutors said.

Meanwhile, W.C. Blackmon of Canton pleaded guilty Friday in federal court in Jackson to filing a false FEMA claim for Katrina disaster assistance funds.

U.S. Attorney Dunn Lampton said FEMA mailed $14,470 to an address in Biloxi, based on a false statement from Blackmon claiming hurricane damage to items there.

Blackmon will be sentenced July 27. He faces a maximum five years in prison and a $250,000 fine.



Man pleads not guilty in fire death of girlfriend
Court Watch | 2007/05/19 11:27

A man pleaded not guilty to charges he poured gasoline on his girlfriend and set her on fire, causing her death.
Michael Wilson, 33, pleaded not guilty to a charge of murder Friday in a Marion County court. Nupur Srivastava, 33, died May 13 in a hospital where she had been in a coma since April, when she suffered third-degree burns on 60 percent to 80 percent of her body.

Srivastava told medics that Wilson doused her with gasoline and set her on fire during an argument at the couple's home on the Southside of Indianapolis, according to police.

Wilson, who was treated for burns to his forearms and hands, initially told firefighters he and Srivastava had been burned when he tried to light a propane grill, but police said Wilson's grill still had its plastic cover on it.

"Things are not always as they seem," said Wilson's attorney, Marvin Coffey.

"We're not disputing the fact that she had gasoline on her; we're disputing the fact that she died of that, and it is a terrible, tragic thing," he said. "Now the question remains, was it an intentional act?"

Wilson's trial was scheduled for July 30. If convicted, he could face 45 to 65 years in prison.



[PREV] [1] ..[991][992][993][994][995][996][997][998][999].. [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