|
|
|
Court keeps cell tower backup rules on hold
Court Watch |
2008/07/09 08:40
|
More than a year after they were introduced, federal rules intended to keep cell phone towers operating during natural disasters remain in limbo. A federal appeals court on Tuesday put off deciding on the wireless industry's challenge to the regulations until the Federal Communications Commission gets preliminary clearance for the rules. After a panel of experts appointed by the FCC pointed out that many cell towers along the Gulf Coast stopped working when they lost power during Hurricane Katrina, the agency proposed in May 2007 that all cell towers have a minimum of eight hours of backup power that would switch on in the event a tower lost its regular energy source. The loss of power contributed to communication breakdowns that complicated rescue and recovery efforts during the 2005 disaster. Wireless companies have said the regulations were illegally drafted and would present a huge economic and bureaucratic burden. In particular, they said, the thousands of generators or battery packs required would be expensive and local zoning rules or structural limitations could make installation impossible in some places. The FCC agreed in October to exempt cell sites that a wireless carrier proved couldn't meet the rules. The FCC would give companies six months to report on the feasibility of installing backup power and another six months either to bring sites into compliance or explain how they would provide backup service through other means, such as portable cellular transmitters. CTIA-The Wireless Association, Sprint Nextel Corp. and others asked the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., this year to intervene, saying the exemptions would still leave wireless companies scrambling to inspect and compile reports on thousands of towers. The appeals court put the rules on hold while it heard each sides' arguments in May. |
|
|
|
|
|
Special court for vets addresses more than crime
Court Watch |
2008/07/06 08:48
|
The first clue that the Tuesday afternoon session in Part 4 of Buffalo City Court is not like other criminal proceedings comes just before it starts. Judge Robert Russell steps down from his bench and from the aloofness of his black robe. He walks into the gallery where men and women accused of stealing, drug offenses and other non-violent felonies and misdemeanors fidget in plastic chairs. "Good afternoon," he says, smiling, and talks for a minute about the session ahead. With the welcoming tone set, Russell heads back behind the bench, where he will mete out justice with a disarming mix of small talk and life-altering advice. While the defendants in this court have been arrested on charges that could mean potential prison time and damaging criminal records, they have another important trait in common: All have served their country in the military. That combination has landed them here, in veterans treatment court, the first of its kind in the country. Russell is the evenhanded quarterback of a courtroom team of veterans advocates and volunteers determined to make this brush with the criminal justice system these veterans' last. |
|
|
|
|
|
NYC crane inspector pleads not guilty
Court Watch |
2008/07/03 06:22
|
A former inspector accused of lying about examining a crane that later collapsed in midtown Manhattan and killed seven people has pleaded not guilty in a New York City court. Edward Marquette entered the plea at his arraignment in state Supreme Court in Manhattan on Thursday. He was charged with tampering with public records, offering a false instrument for filing, falsifying business records and official misconduct. He had been scheduled to inspect the crane on March 4. It collapsed 11 days later, but officials said it was unlikely the inspection would have prevented that. Justice Marcy Kahn allowed Marquette to remain free and ordered him back in court on Aug. 14. Neither he nor his lawyer would comment |
|
|
|
|
|
R.I. high court overturns lead paint verdict
Court Watch |
2008/07/02 03:53
|
Rhode Island's Supreme Court on Tuesday overturned a first-in-the-nation jury verdict that found three former lead paint companies responsible for creating a public nuisance, rejecting a closely watched case that had been seen as a bellwether for potential suits across the country. The 4-0 decision ends the nearly decade-long court fight and spares the companies from potentially billions in cleanup costs for hundreds of thousands of contaminated homes. Rhode Island was the first state to successfully sue former makers of lead pigment and paint, which can cause learning disabilities, brain damage and other health problems in children. A jury in 2006 found Sherwin-Williams Co., NL Industries, Inc. and Millennium Holdings LLC liable for creating a public nuisance by manufacturing a toxic product. The state had proposed that the companies spend $2.4 billion inspecting and cleaning hundreds of thousands of Rhode Island homes believed to contain lead paint. The ruling was immediately denounced by groups supporting punitive action against paint companies. |
|
|
|
|
|
High court overturns lead paint verdict
Court Watch |
2008/07/01 07:52
|
The Rhode Island Supreme Court overturned a landmark verdict against three former lead paint producers Tuesday, a major setback for communities that want the companies to decontaminate hundreds of thousands of homes and other buildings. The unanimous decision reversed the lone victory to date against the lead paint industry. A jury found Sherwin-Williams Co., NL Industries Inc. and Millennium Holdings LLC liable in 2006 for creating a public nuisance by manufacturing and selling a toxic product. The state had proposed that the companies spend an estimated $2.4 billion to inspect and clean hundreds of thousands of homes built before 1980 that it said were likely to contain lead paint. The court, in its 4-0 decision, said the state's lawsuit should have been dismissed at the outset. It said that while lead paint was a public health problem in Rhode Island, it wasn't the companies' responsibility to clean it up because they had no control over how the paint was used. |
|
|
|
|
|
Texas high court rules exorcism protected by law
Court Watch |
2008/06/28 08:46
|
The Texas Supreme Court on Friday threw out a jury award over injuries a 17-year-old girl suffered in an exorcism conducted by members of her old church, ruling that the case unconstitutionally entangled the court in religious matters. In a 6-3 decision, the justices found that a lower court erred when it said the Pleasant Glade Assembly of God's First Amendment rights regarding freedom of religion did not prevent the church from being held liable for mental distress triggered by a "hyper-spiritualistic environment." Laura Schubert testified in 2002 that she was cut and bruised and later experienced hallucinations after the church members' actions in 1996, when she was 17. Schubert said she was pinned to the floor for hours and received carpet burns during the exorcism, the Austin American-Statesman reported. She also said the incident led her to mutilate herself and attempt suicide. She eventually sought psychiatric help. But the church's attorneys had told jurors that her psychological problems were caused by traumatic events she witnessed with her missionary parents in Africa. The church contended she "freaked out" about following her father's life as a missionary and was acting out to gain attention. The 2002 trial of the case never touched on the religious aspects, and a Tarrant County jury found the Colleyville church and its members liable for abusing and falsely imprisoning the girl. The jury awarded her $300,000, though the 2nd Court of Appeals in Fort Worth later reduced the verdict to $188,000. Justice David Medina wrote that finding the church liable "would have an unconstitutional 'chilling effect' by compelling the church to abandon core principles of its religious beliefs." But Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson, in a dissenting opinion, stated that the "sweeping immunity" is inconsistent with U.S. Supreme Court precedent and extends far beyond the Constitution's protections for religious conduct. |
|
|
|
|
|
NY appeals court upholds death penalty verdict
Court Watch |
2008/06/27 08:57
|
A federal appeals court in Manhattan has upheld the death sentence for Donald Fell, who killed a Vermont supermarket worker as she prayed for her life. It's the first time since the 1960s that the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled on whether to uphold the death penalty for an individual. Fell is on death row in Terre Haute, Ind. He was the first man sentenced to death in Vermont in almost 50 years. He was convicted of carjacking and kidnapping. Terry King was driven to upstate New York, then beaten and kicked to death, in November 2000. Before that, Fell and an accomplice killed his mother and her companion in Rutland, Vt. |
|
|
|
|
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. |
Law Firm Directory
|
|