Today's Date: Add To Favorites
Ex-Spartan pleads not guilty in neighbor's slaying
Court Watch | 2007/05/01 03:08

A judge ordered a mental health examination for a former Michigan State football player who pleaded not guilty on Monday to tossing a neighbor to his death from a third-floor apartment balcony. Defense attorney Steven Wagner requested that DuPage County Judge Robert Anderson order the evaluation to determine Hubert D. Thompson’s mental fitness, the Chicago Tribune and (Arlington Heights) Daily Herald reported.

"I do believe fitness is going to be an issue," Wagner said.

Thompson, 28, of Lombard pleaded not guilty to a five-count indictment charging him with first-degree murder.

He is accused of killing his neighbor, 66-year-old James Malone, by throwing him off a balcony in the building where they lived on March 30. Thompson surrendered to authorities that evening after a nearly seven-hour standoff with police.

Thompson was a standout athlete at a suburban Chicago high school and played defensive end at Michigan State.

The New Orleans Saints signed Thompson in 2000. But he was cut before the start of the season after getting into a dispute with a teammate during a workout.

Thompson’s mother, Maggie Ross, has said doctors diagnosed her son with bipolar disorder and that he had stopped taking medication because the drugs made him feel listless and dizzy.



Man pleads guilty in siblings' deaths
Court Watch | 2007/05/01 02:09

A 19-year-old man took responsibility Monday for being intoxicated and causing a Dec. 30, 2006, wreck that killed three siblings.

Jurors will return to the 347th District Court on Wednesday to decide the punishment of Scott Ryan Helgerson, who pleaded guilty to three counts of intoxication manslaughter and one count of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

Each charge is punishable by as much as 20 years in prison.

Sahar Mostaghasi, 24, and 12-year-old twins Negin and Sepehr Mostaghasi died in the wreck, which happened at Cimarron Boulevard and Brockhampton Street at about 5 a.m.

The siblings died after their vehicle, a 2006 Toyota Corolla, was struck by a 1998 Dodge Caravan driven by Helgerson, according to police.

Their brother, Morteza, 16, was a front-seat passenger in the vehicle.

He was released from a hospital two days after the accident.

Before Helgerson's plea Monday, his attorney, Richard Rogers, asked 347th District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos to recuse herself from the trial on the grounds that she inappropriately had a conversation in her chambers with Albert Huerta, the attorney representing the Mostaghasi family in a civil suit against Helgerson.

The Mostaghasi family is seeking an unspecified amount from Helgerson for damages including medical and funeral expenses and pain and suffering, according to a lawsuit filed by Huerta in January.

Huerta said Monday that the conversation was unrelated to the case.

After later speaking with his client, Rogers withdrew the motion.

Jury selection will begin Wednesday.



Gonzales gave aides power to hire, fire appointees
Breaking Legal News | 2007/04/30 22:56

Deputy Attorney General Paul J. McNulty told congressional investigators that he had limited involvement in the firing last year of eight U.S. attorneys and that he did not choose any to be removed, congressional aides familiar with his statements said yesterday. McNulty said he provided erroneous testimony to Congress in February because he had not been informed that Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and his aides had been working with the White House on the firings for nearly two years, the congressional aides said.

The statements Friday, during a private interview with investigators from the House and Senate Judiciary committees, make McNulty the latest senior Justice official to assert that he did not identify any of the U.S. attorneys to be fired and that his role was minimal.

Gonzales, former chief of staff D. Kyle Sampson and William E. Moschella, the principal associate deputy attorney general, also told Congress they did not choose who was fired.

"If the top folks at DOJ weren't the key decision-makers, it's less likely that lower-down people at DOJ were, and much more likely that people in the White House were making the major decisions," said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.).

Moschella was also interviewed last week. He told investigators he was solely responsible for a provision in the USA Patriot Act reauthorization law that gave Gonzales the authority to appoint U.S. attorneys for an indefinite time, a congressional aide said.

Moschella also said that, when the provision was drawn up in November 2005, he was not aware of a dispute over the appointment of a U.S. attorney in South Dakota, the aide said. Justice officials have pointed to that case as a key justification for the provision, which Congress has since repealed.

Democrats criticized Gonzales yesterday for giving Sampson and his White House liaison in March 2006 the authority to hire and fire certain employees. "It is disturbing to learn that the attorney general was granting extraordinary and sweeping authority to the same political operatives who were plotting with the White House to dilute our system of checks and balances in the confirmation of U.S. attorneys," said Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.).

Administration officials said Gonzales's order, published in the Federal Register and first reported yesterday by the National Journal on its Web site, codifies a process that is standard for agencies throughout the government in dealing with political appointees. "The notion that the White House shouldn't be involved in presidential appointments is bizarre," said White House spokesman Tony Fratto.



DOJ Announces Guilty Plea in P2P Piracy Crackdown
Intellectual Property | 2007/04/30 21:31

A sixth defendant has pleaded guilty in connection with Operation D-Elite, the first criminal enforcement action targeting individuals committing copyright infringement on a peer-to-peer (P2P) network using BitTorrent technology, Assistant Attorney General Alice S. Fisher of the Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Gregory A. White for the Northern District of Ohio announced today.

Scott D. Harvanek, 22, of Tucson, Ariz., pleaded guilty to a two-count felony information charging him with conspiracy to commit criminal copyright infringement and criminal copyright infringement of a pre-commercial release work in violation of the Family Entertainment Copyright Act. The plea was entered before U.S. District Judge Christopher A. Boyko for the Northern District of Ohio who set a sentencing date for July 23, 2007, at 11 a.m. Mr. Harvanek faces up to five years in prison, a fine of $250,000, and three years of supervised release.

Mr. Harvanek's conviction is the sixth in a series of convictions arising from Operation D-Elite, an ongoing federal crackdown against the illegal distribution of copyrighted movies, software, games and music over P2P networks employing the BitTorrent file sharing technology. Operation D-Elite targeted leading members of a technologically sophisticated P2P network known as Elite Torrents. At its height, the Elite Torrents network attracted more than 133,000 members and facilitated the illegal distribution of more than 17,800 titles—including movies, software, music and games—which were downloaded over 2 million times. The virtually unlimited content selection available on the Elite Torrents network often included illegal copies of copyrighted works before they were available in retail stores or movie theatres. Mr. Harvanek was an "uploader" to the Elite Torrents network, responsible for supplying the network with the first copy of a particular movie or other content that was then made available to the entire network for downloading.

On May 25, 2005, federal agents shut down the Elite Torrents network by taking control of its main server. After seizing the server, authorities replaced the existing Web page with a law enforcement message announcing that "This Site Has Been Permanently Shut Down by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)." Within only one week, the law enforcement message was viewed over half a million times. Operation D-Elite is a joint investigation by ICE and the FBI as part of the Computer and Technology Crime High Tech Response Team (CATCH), a San Diego task force of specially trained prosecutors and law enforcement officers who focus on high-tech crime. Federal and state member agencies of CATCH include ICE, the FBI, the Department of Justice, the San Diego District Attorney's Office, San Diego Police Department, the San Diego Sheriff's Department, and San Diego County Probation.

This case was prosecuted by Andrea Sharrin and Tyler Newby, trial attorneys for the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section of the Criminal Division, and Robert W. Kern, Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio.



Virginia ends a loophole in gun laws
Law Center | 2007/04/30 12:55

Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine issued an executive order Monday closing the loophole that allowed Virginia Tech gunman Seung-Hui Cho to purchase a firearm despite having been ordered to receive psychiatric treatment by a Virginia court in 2005. The executive order amends Virginia law so that any person who has received involuntary outpatient or inpatient mental health care will be prohibited from purchasing a firearm by having their name and record placed in a database.

Previously, only those receiving inpatient mental health care were to be listed in the database, which allowed Seung-Hui Cho to bypass the screening process. A federal law prohibits persons "who have been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution" from possessing or receiving "any firearm or ammunition."

Legislation to improve enforcement of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) has been introduced in the House of Representatives the past three terms, but has never become law.



UK soldier jailed for abusing Iraqi detainees
International | 2007/04/30 12:55

British Army Corporal David Payne, convicted of abusing Iraqi detainees in 2003, was sent to jail for one year on Monday. Payne, who was one of seven British soldiers who faced court-martial for charges of detainee abuse, had pleaded guilty to charges of inhumane treatment in September. The court-martial of the seven was the first prosecution of British military personnel under the International Criminal Court Act 2001 (ICCA) and Payne was the first British soldier to admit to committing a war crime in Iraq.

The charges stemmed from a 2003 raid on a hotel in Basra in which British troops detained several Iraqi civilians, including hotel receptionist Baha Musa [Herald report], who died while in custody. The soldiers allegedly took the Iraqis to a detention facility where they were held for 36 hours and subjected to physical abuse, causing Musa's death, according to prosecutors. Charges against the other soldiers were eventually dropped.



Court modifies legal test for invalidating patents
Patent Law | 2007/04/30 08:46

The U.S. Supreme Court made it easier to challenge patents for failing to introduce genuine innovations, siding with Intel Corp. and Cisco Systems Inc. and dealing a setback to the drug and biotechnology industries. The justices today unanimously overturned a decades-old test used by the lower court that handles patent appeals, saying the lower court went too far to shield patents from legal attack. The ruling threw out a Teleflex Inc. lawsuit that accuses KSR International Inc. of using a patented invention for adjustable gas pedals.

The decision extends a Supreme Court trend that has put new limits on patent rights. In today's case, the justices heeded arguments from large computer companies and automakers that the lower court test, which centered on the requirement that an invention be "non-obvious,'' had given too much power to developers of trivial technological improvements.

"Granting patent protection to advances that would occur in the ordinary course without real innovation retards progress,'' Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the court.

In a second ruling today, the court gave software makers new protections from patent lawsuits on exports, ruling that Microsoft Corp. doesn't owe damages to AT&T Inc. for copies of the Windows operating system installed on computers overseas.

The gas-pedal case concerned claims that a patent was invalid because it simply combined prior inventions. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit had required challengers to show a "teaching, suggestion or motivation'' -- typically in writing -- to put the earlier inventions together.

Companies that are frequent targets of patent-infringement claims urged the Supreme Court to overturn the Federal Circuit test. The group included Intel, Cisco, Microsoft, Time Warner Inc., Viacom Inc., Micron Technology Inc. and automakers General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and DaimlerChrysler AG.

Other companies, more concerned about protecting their own patents, took the opposite side in the case. General Electric Co., 3M Co., Procter & Gamble Co., DuPont Co., Johnson & Johnson and trade groups for the brand-name drug and biotech industries signed briefs backing Teleflex in the case.

The disputed Teleflex patent covers an electronic sensor combined with gas, brake or clutch pedals that adjust to the height of the driver. Teleflex says its method took less space than previous combinations.

KSR, based in Ridgetown, Ontario, makes adjustable pedals for GM's Chevrolet and GMC trucks and sport-utility vehicles.

A federal judge in Detroit ruled the technology was too obvious to qualify for a patent. The Federal Circuit in Washington revived the suit, ordering the judge to reconsider whether the patent was valid.

Teleflex argued that the Federal Circuit standard avoided the problem of "perfect hindsight'' by requiring proof that an innovation was obvious at the time it was created.

Teleflex, based in Limerick, Pennsylvania, sold its auto- pedal business in August 2005 to DriveSol Worldwide, an affiliate of Sun Capital Partners Inc., a private investment firm based in Boca Raton, Florida. Sun Capital has taken over the case.



[PREV] [1] ..[995][996][997][998][999][1000][1001][1002][1003].. [1177] [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
Starbucks appears likely to ..
Supreme Court will weigh ban..
Judge in Trump case orders m..
Court makes it easier to sue..
Top Europe rights court cond..
Elon Musk will be investigat..
Retired Supreme Court Justic..
The Man Charged in an Illino..
Texas’ migrant arrest law w..
Former Georgia insurance com..
Alabama woman who faked kidn..
A Supreme Court ruling in a ..
Court upholds mandatory pris..
Trump wants N.Y. hush money ..
Supreme Court restores Trump..


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