Today's Date: Add To Favorites
Ohio taking death penalty case to US Supreme Court
Breaking Legal News | 2012/01/15 09:32
Ohio's governor and attorney general said Sunday the state is asking the U.S. Supreme Court for a ruling that Ohio's protocol for carrying out the death penalty is constitutional.

Gov. John Kasich and Attorney General Mike DeWine said in a statement that the state wants the high court to reverse a federal appeals court decision to delay the Wednesday execution of Charles Lorraine.

Lorraine was condemned to death in the 1986 slaying of an elderly Trumbull County couple. But the federal appeals court said Friday his execution should be delayed to review changes Ohio has made in carrying out the death penalty.

Lorraine argued that Ohio broke its promise to adhere strictly to its execution procedures. But the state said that deviations from the procedures during the last execution were minor and that an inmate's rights would not be violated by changes, such as which official announces the start and finish times of an injection.



Md. man's leave lawsuit lands in Supreme Court
Breaking Legal News | 2012/01/11 10:43
The Supreme Court wrestled with how the federal Family and Medical Leave Act applies to state government workers in a case that could affect millions of them.

The case argued before the high court Wednesday was brought by a Maryland man who says he was wrongly fired for trying to take a 10-day medical leave to deal with hypertension and diabetes and then was barred from suing state officials for money damages.

Daniel Coleman was fired from the Maryland court system in 2007.

The 1993 federal leave act provided workers a right to unpaid medical leave, but Maryland and Coleman disagree about the penalty for violations. Coleman argues he should be able to sue the state for money damages. Maryland and 26 other states argue they're protected from such lawsuits.



Texas electoral maps at issue before Supreme Court
Breaking Legal News | 2012/01/09 10:00
A federal law says states and localities with a history of discrimination cannot change any voting procedures without first getting approval from the Justice Department or a federal court in Washington. Yet Texas is asking the Supreme Court to allow the use of new, unapproved electoral districts in this year's voting for Congress and the state Legislature.

The outcome of the high court case, to be argued Monday afternoon, could be another blow to a key provision of the Voting Rights Act. In 2009, the justices raised doubts about whether Southern states still should need approval in advance of voting changes more than 40 years after the law was enacted.

The case also might help determine the balance of power in the House of Representatives in 2013, with Republicans in a stronger position if the court allows Texas to use electoral districts drawn by the GOP-dominated Legislature.

The complicated legal fight over Texas' political maps arises from the state's population gain of more than 4 million people, most of them Latino or African-American, in the 2010 census, and involves federal district courts in Texas and Washington, as well as the Supreme Court. It has come to a head now because Texas needs to be able to use some maps to hold elections this year.

The state has so far failed to persuade three judges in Washington, including two appointees of Republican President George W. Bush, to sign off on new political maps adopted by the Legislature. The justices jumped into the case at Texas' request after judges in San Antonio who are hearing a lawsuit filed by minority groups drew their own political lines for use in the 2012 elections.


Ill. lawyer wins appeal in NY trial of $2.4B fraud
Breaking Legal News | 2012/01/09 10:00
A Chicago lawyer sentenced to seven years in prison in a $2.4 billion fraud at Refco Inc. is entitled to a new trial because of errors the judge made in dealing with the jury, a federal appeals court said Monday.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the conviction of Joseph P. Collins, saying U.S. District Judge Robert P. Patterson erred when he failed to disclose the contents of a jury note and didn't include lawyers when he spoke with a juror accused of trying to barter his vote.

"This sequence of events deprived Collins of his right to be present at every stage of the trial. Because the deprivation was not harmless, we vacate and remand for a new trial," the appeals court wrote.

The lawyer from Winnetka, Ill., was convicted in July 2009 of conspiracy and other charges. Federal sentencing guidelines had called for 85 years in prison.

Refco was once one of the nation's largest independent commodities brokers.

The company in the mid-1990s sustained hundreds of millions of dollars of losses through losing trades and engaged in an elaborate campaign to cover them up, attracting the attention of federal authorities. Refco filed for bankruptcy in 2005, just weeks after going public and soon after revealing that a $430 million debt owed to the company by a firm controlled by former Refco CEO Phillip Bennett had been concealed.


US Supreme Court asked to ponder drug dog's sniff
Breaking Legal News | 2012/01/03 23:31
Franky the drug dog's supersensitive nose is at the heart of a question being put to the U.S. Supreme Court: Does a police dog's sniff outside a house give officers the right to get a search warrant for illegal drugs, or is the sniff an unconstitutional search?

Florida's highest state court has said Franky's ability to detect marijuana growing inside a Miami-area house from outside a closed front door crossed the constitutional line. The state's attorney general wants the Supreme Court to reverse that ruling.

The justices could decide this month whether to take the case, the latest dispute about whether the use of dogs to find drugs, explosives and other illegal or dangerous substances violates the Fourth Amendment protection against illegal search and seizure.

Many court watchers expect the justices will take up the case.

"The Florida Supreme Court adopted a very broad reading of the Fourth Amendment that is different from that applied by other courts. It's an interpretation that a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court will question," said Tom Goldstein, who publishes the widely read SCOTUSblog website and teaches at the Harvard and Stanford law schools.

The case, Florida v. Jardines, is being closely monitored by law enforcement agencies nationwide, which depend on dogs for a wide range of law enforcement duties.


Del. court says ex-HP CEO can't keep letter secret
Breaking Legal News | 2011/12/30 13:13
Former Hewlett-Packard Co. CEO Mark Hurd will have to make public a letter detailing sexual-harassment allegations that led to his ouster.

The Delaware Supreme Court, the state's highest, ruled on Wednesday that Hurd's lawyers didn't show that disclosing the letter would invade California privacy rights. The ruling said information that is only "mildly embarrassing" is not protected from public disclosure. The letter, it added, does not contain trade secrets or non-public financial information that would qualify.

Although the letter goes into "embarrassing detail about Hurd's behavior, it does not describe any intimate conversation or conduct," the ruling said. Some sentences, concerning Hurd's family, were ordered redacted, but no one appealed that part of a lower court's decision, according to the ruling.

Celebrity attorney Gloria Allred sent the letter last year on behalf of Jodie Fisher, who was hired to help with HP networking events and later accused Hurd of sexual harassment. Although an investigation did not find any sexual harassment, it uncovered inaccurate expense reports that ultimately pressured Hurd to resign. Hurd now works as co-president at rival Oracle Corp.



Supreme Court rejects Hessler appeal
Breaking Legal News | 2011/12/26 16:25
The Nebraska Supreme Court on Friday rejected a death-row inmate’s claim that his lawyer failed to properly represent the convicted kidnapper, rapist and murderer at his sentencing.

Jeffrey Hessler had argued that his trial-court lawyer should have demanded a competency hearing when Hessler moved to represent himself at his sentencing. The state Supreme Court rejected that argument, saying allowing someone to serve as their own attorney did not constitute ineffective counsel and Hessler failed to show he couldn’t adequately represent himself at sentencing.

Hessler was convicted of first-degree murder, kidnapping, first-degree sexual assault of a child and use of a firearm to commit a felony in December 2004. He was sentenced to die for the 2003 kidnapping, rape and shooting death of 15-year-old Heather Guerrero. She was delivering newspapers on her morning route just blocks from her home when Hessler grabbed her and forced her into his car.

A jury found that Hessler took her to an abandoned house at nearby Lake Minatare, raped her and then shot her in the head on Feb. 11, 2003. Guerrero’s body was found the next day at the house, about 12 miles from where she disappeared.

Hessler claimed in his appeal that his trial lawyer was ineffective and failed to tell the court that he suffered from mental health problems, including hallucinations.

Scotts Bluff County District Judge Randall Lippstreu dismissed that claim earlier this year, saying Hessler and his attorneys seemed to have had philosophical differences between the time of Hessler’s conviction and sentencing hearing. But, the judge said, that did not constitute ineffective counsel.


[PREV] [1] ..[70][71][72][73][74][75][76][77][78].. [262] [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
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 ..
Judge bars deportations of V..
Judge to weigh Louisiana AG..
Court won’t revive a Minnes..
Judge bars Trump from denyin..
Supreme Court sides with the..
Ex-UK lawmaker charged with ..
Hungary welcomes Netanyahu a..


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