Today's Date: Add To Favorites
FCC too harsh on 'fleeting expletives,' court rules
Breaking Legal News | 2007/06/05 07:42

Kevin Martin, chairman of the FCC, said the agency was now considering whether to seek an appeal before all the judges of the appeals court or to take the matter directly to the Supreme Court. The decision, by a divided panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York, was a sharp rebuke for the FCC and for the Bush administration. For the four television networks that filed the lawsuit, Fox, CBS, NBC and ABC, it was a major victory in a legal and cultural battle that they are waging with the commission and its supporters.

Under Bush, the FCC has expanded its indecency rules, taking a much harder line on obscenities uttered on broadcast television and radio.

While the court sent the case back to the commission to rewrite its indecency policy, it said that it was "doubtful" that the agency would be able to "adequately respond to the constitutional and statutory challenges raised by the networks."

The networks hailed the decision.

Martin, the chairman of the commission, attacked the court's reasoning.

He said that if the agency was unable to prohibit some vulgarities during prime time, "Hollywood will be able to say anything they want, whenever they want."

Beginning with the FCC's indecency finding in a case against NBC for an obscenity uttered by the U2 singer Bono during the Golden Globes awards ceremony in 2003, Bush's Republican and Democratic appointees to the commission have imposed a tougher policy by punishing any station that broadcasts a fleeting expletive.

That includes profanities blurted out on live shows like the Golden Globes or scripted shows like "NYPD Blue," which was cited in the case.

Reversing decades of more lenient policy, the commission had found that the mere utterance of certain profane words implied that sexual or excretory acts were carried out and therefore violated the indecency rules.

But the court said vulgar words were just as often used out of frustration or excitement, and not to convey any broader obscene meaning.

"In recent times even the top leaders of our government have used variants of these expletives in a manner that no reasonable person would believe referenced sexual or excretory organs or activities," the court said

Adopting an argument made by lawyers for NBC, the court then cited examples in which Bush and Cheney had used the same language that would be penalized under the policy. Bush was caught on videotape last July using a common vulgarity that the commission finds objectionable in a conversation with Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain.

Three years ago, Cheney was widely reported to have muttered an angry profane version of "get lost" to Sen. Patrick Leahy on the floor of the U.S. Senate.



Supreme Court rules in favor of Safeco, Geico
Breaking Legal News | 2007/06/04 11:36

The U.S. Supreme Court limited the rights of consumers under a federal credit-reporting law in a victory for insurers Safeco Corp. and Geico Corp. and other financial-services companies. The justices today said the Fair Credit Reporting Act doesn't require insurers to notify every consumer who is offered something short of the best rate when seeking a quote or applying for a policy.

"Notices as common as these would take on the character of formalities, and formalities tend to be ignored,'' Justice David Souter wrote for seven of the court's nine justices.

The court also unanimously limited the applicability of a provision that permits damage awards even when consumers don't suffer any injury. Although the justices didn't go as far as the insurance industry had sought, they said Safeco wasn't subject to the provision because it didn't recklessly violate the law.

The insurance industry had said it faced the prospect of billions of dollars in damage claims had it lost the high court case. Some 2,600 lawsuits alleging violations of the fair-credit law are pending in federal courts.

The "most critical aspects'' of the ruling favored the industry, said David F. Snyder, a lawyer with the American Insurance Association. "The Supreme Court balanced both consumer needs and business needs in a common-sense decision.''



DOJ charges 4 in alleged JFK Airport terror plot
Breaking Legal News | 2007/06/03 11:41

Federal authorities arrested three men Saturday and are still searching for a fourth after foiling a terrorist plot to bomb John F. Kennedy International Airport. The complaint charging the four men claims the plot was intended to "cause greater destruction than in the Sept. 11 attacks," according to one of the suspects. The plot could have destroyed parts of New York's borough of Queens, where an underground fuel pipeline serving the airport runs.

Authorities have been tracking the plot for more than a year. The suspects include Russell Defreitas, a US citizen native to Guyana and former JFK air cargo employee, Abdul Kadir of Guyana, Kareem Ibrahim of Trinidad, and Abdel Nur of Guyana, who is still being sought in Trinidad. Defreitas said he formed the plot more than a decade ago when he worked as a cargo handler. He said he chose the airport because its destruction would put "the whole country in mourning."



Judge to release Libby sentencing letters
Breaking Legal News | 2007/06/01 07:43

US District Judge Reggie B. Walton said Thursday that he will release more than 150 letters he has received in relation to next week's sentencing of former vice-presidential aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. While Libby opposed the release of the letters, saying that the writers did not intend for them to become public, various news sources argued that the letters were now matters of public record. Walton agreed that transparency is needed and will release the letters, minus addresses and other personal information, after Tuesday's sentencing.

Walton said that the letters run the full spectrum, with some urging leniency while others call for a substantial sentence. Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald recommended a sentence of two-and-a-half to three years, following Libby's March conviction of perjury and obstruction of justice related to the investigation of the Valerie Plame CIA leak case.



US violent crimes, FISA warrants up in 2006
Breaking Legal News | 2007/06/01 06:40

FBI Assistant Director of Public Affairs John Miller said Wednesday during an interview with C-SPAN that an FBI report expected to be released next week will detail a nationwide increase in murders, robberies and other violent crimes for a second straight year. Miller said the report will likely show "a continued uptick in violent crime, particularly among midsized American cities." Miller also told AP and the New York Daily News that 2,176 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) search warrants were approved by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) in 2006, an increase from 1,754 in 2005.

Miller said most of warrants were issued against search targets inside the United States, and attributed the increase to a "high tempo of terrorist activity." In April of last year, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) reported a record number of approved FISA warrants during 2005. The Bush administration has sought amendments to FISA, which it says is inflexible and unable to meet the threat of terrorism.

In December, the FBI's Preliminary Semiannual Uniform Crime Report found an increase of 3.7 percent in violent crimes, but a 2.6 percent decrease in property crimes such as burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft. In 2005, the FBI's Annual Report on Violent Crime found that violent crimes had increased for the first time since 2001 by 2.3%.



DOJ probe to look into attorney hiring practices
Breaking Legal News | 2007/05/31 09:44

The Justice Department has launched an internal investigation into whether Bush administration officials violated civil service rules by favoring conservative Republicans when hiring lawyers in the Civil Rights Division, the department disclosed yesterday in a letter to Congress. The probe will also examine whether the administration illegally used a political litmus test when vetting candidates for non-partisan positions elsewhere in the Justice Department, according to the heads of the department's offices of inspector general and professional responsibility.

The disclosure that the two watchdogs are focusing on the Civil Rights Division marks an expansion to a new arena of the Justice Department of an ongoing investigation into whether politics played a role in the firing of nine US attorneys in 2006. The probe has widened to encompass allegations that the administration has used its control of the Justice Department to gain a partisan edge.

"This is to notify you that we have expanded the scope of our investigation to include allegations regarding improper political and other considerations in hiring decisions within the Department of Justice," wrote Inspector General Glenn Fine and Office of Professional Responsibility chief Marshall Jarrett , who are conducting a joint inquiry.

Under federal law, officials may not take political affiliation into account when hiring career professionals, permanent, non-partisan employees who stay on when an administration changes. But last week, a former aide to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales , Monica Goodling , told Congress that she had "crossed the line" by attempting to block liberal applicants from being hired as career assistant prosecutors and immigration judges.

Goodling, a key figure in the US attorney firings who resigned in April, was granted immunity from prosecution in exchange for her testimony. While it was known that Goodling's hiring practices were under investigation, the letter made clear for the first time that the internal probe has now been extended to hiring by other administration appointees as well.

"Among the issues that we intend to investigate are allegations regarding Monica Goodling's and others' actions in DOJ hiring and personnel decisions; allegations concerning hiring for the DOJ Honors Program and Summer Law Intern Program; and allegations concerning hiring practices in the DOJ Civil Rights Division," they wrote.

The offices did not disclose whom else they are investigating. Dean Boyd , a Justice spokesman, declined to comment on the probe's expansion.



Accounting firm executives charged with tax fraud
Breaking Legal News | 2007/05/31 08:35

US federal prosecutors unsealed an indictment Wednesday charging four current and former partners of "Big-Four" accounting firm Ernst & Young with tax fraud. The indictment alleges that the defendants created tax shelters through development of "false and fraudulent factual scenarios", and marketed them to individuals with taxable income generally exceeding $10-20 million. The four are charged with a number of violations, including conspiring to defraud the IRS, tax evasion, making false statements, and impeding and impairing the lawful functioning of the IRS. Prosecutors decided against bringing criminal charges against Ernst & Young itself.

Lawyers for the two present Ernst & Young partners, Richard Shapiro and Martin Nissenbaum, said in statements that their clients had not engaged in any wrongdoing, and were cooperating with authorities. Lawyers for former partners Robert Coplan and Brian Vaughn have not yet commented on the case.



[PREV] [1] ..[213][214][215][216][217][218][219][220][221].. [260] [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
New Hampshire courts hear 2 ..
PA high court orders countie..
Tight US House races in Cali..
North Carolina Attorney Gene..
Republicans take Senate majo..
What to know about the unpre..
A man who threatened to kill..
Ford cuts 2024 earnings guid..
Kenya’s deputy president pl..
South Korean court acquits f..
Supreme Court grapples with ..
Supreme Court leaves in plac..
Kentucky sheriff accused of ..
New rules regarding election..
North Carolina appeals court..


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