|
|
|
More US Catholics take complaints to church court
Court Watch |
2012/01/14 09:33
|
Parents upset by the admission policy at a parochial school. Clergy and parishioners at odds over use of their building. A priest resisting a transfer to another parish.
It was once assumed that disagreements like these in the Roman Catholic Church would end one way: with the highest-ranking cleric getting the last word.
But that outcome is no longer a given as Catholics, emboldened following the clergy abuse scandals that erupted a decade ago this month, have sought another avenue of redress.
In recent years, clergy and lay people in the United States have increasingly turned to the church's internal legal system to challenge a bishop's or pastor's decision about even the most workaday issues in Catholic life, according to canon lawyers in academia, dioceses and in private practice. Sometimes, the challengers even win.
In one example cited by veteran canon lawyers, parishioners wanted to bar musical performances in their church that weren't liturgical. Their priest had been renting space to a local band. In another case, a nun filed a petition after a religious superior disclosed the nun's medical information to others — a potential violation of privacy. Regarding bishops' often contentious decisions to close parishes, the liberal reform group FutureChurch posts a guide on its website called "Canonical Appeals for Dummies" on seeking Vatican intervention to stay open. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. man suing Facebook fined $5,000 by court
Court Watch |
2012/01/11 10:42
|
A man who's suing for part ownership of Facebook has been fined $5,000 by a federal judge for failing to fully comply with an order to turn over his e-mail account information.
A man suing for part ownership of Facebook was fined $5,000 for failing to comply with a court order.
Paul Ceglia was also ordered to pay some of Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg's legal expenses.
The sanctions are a setback for Ceglia's claim in U.S. District Court that a 2003 contract he and Zuckerberg signed entitles him to half ownership of the social networking site estimated to be worth more than $50 billion.
The judge issued the sanctions late Tuesday, faulting Ceglia for ordering his lawyers not to fully obey his orders.
Palo Alto, California-based Facebook claims Ceglia's contract is fake. Ceglia's lawyer says his client will pay the penalties.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court weighs policy against curse words on TV
Court Watch |
2012/01/10 09:35
|
The Supreme Court is considering whether government regulators may still police the airwaves for curse words and other coarse content at a time when so many Americans have unregulated cable television, and the Internet is awash in easily accessible adult material.
The justices are hearing arguments Tuesday in a First Amendment case that pits the Obama administration against the nation's television networks. The material at issue includes the isolated use of expletives as well as fines against broadcasters who showed a woman's nude buttocks on a 2003 episode of ABC's "NYPD Blue."
The broadcasters want the court to overturn a 1978 decision that upheld the Federal Communications Commission's authority to regulate both radio and television content, at least during the hours when children are likely to be watching or listening. That period includes the prime-time hours before 10 p.m.
At the very least, the networks say the FCC's current policy is too hard to figure out, penalizing the use of particular curse words on awards programming but not in the airing of the movie "Saving Private Ryan," for example.
The administration said that even with the explosion of entertainment options, broadcast programming remains dominant. It also needs to be kept as a dependable "safe haven" of milder programming, the administration said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Justices criticize EPA's dealings with homeowners
Court Watch |
2012/01/08 10:00
|
Several Supreme Court justices are criticizing the Environmental Protection Agency for heavy-handed enforcement of rules affecting homeowners.
The justices were considering whether to let an Idaho couple challenge an EPA order identifying their land as "protected wetlands." Mike and Chantell Sackett wanted to build their house on the land. But the EPA says the Sacketts can't challenge the order to restore the land to wetlands or face thousands of dollars in fines.
Justice Samuel Alito called EPA's actions "outrageous." Justice Antonin Scalia noted the "high-handedness of the agency" in dealing with private property. Chief Justice John Roberts said that the EPA's contention that the Sacketts' land is wetlands, something the couple disagrees with, would never be put to a test under current procedure. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
CA court to mull expiration date for clergy abuse
Court Watch |
2012/01/05 09:36
|
California's highest court is hearing a precedent-setting case that could expose California's Roman Catholic dioceses to another round of clergy abuse lawsuits.
The case being argued Thursday before the California Supreme Court involves six brothers in their 40s and 50s who allege they were molested by an Oakland priest during the 1970s. The priest, Donald Broderson, was forced to retire amid abuse allegations in 1993.
The Oakland Diocese maintains the men are barred from suing because they did not do so during the one-year window the state Legislature opened in 2003 for such complaints to be filed.
The brothers' lawyers contend the time limit does not apply to them because they did not make the link between their psychological problems as adults and what happened to them as children until 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court delays border-crossing pollution rule
Court Watch |
2012/01/04 09:09
|
A federal court Friday put on hold a controversial Obama administration regulation aimed at reducing power plant pollution in 27 states that contributes to unhealthy air downwind.
More than a dozen electric power companies, municipal power plant operators and states had sought to delay the rules until the litigation plays out. A federal appeals court in Washington approved their request Friday.
The EPA, in a statement, said it was confident that the rule would ultimately be upheld on its merits. But the agency said it was "disappointing" the regulation's health benefits would be delayed, even if temporarily.
Republicans in Congress have attempted to block the rule using legislation, saying it would shutter some older, coal-fired power plants and kill jobs. While those efforts succeeded in the Republican-controlled House, the Senate — with the help of six Republicans — in November rejected an attempt to stay the regulation. And the White House had threatened to veto it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court to hear environmental case from Idaho
Court Watch |
2012/01/02 15:25
|
Mike Sackett remembers what he thought when he saw the eye-popping fines of more than $30,000 a day that the Environmental Protection Agency was threatening to impose on him over a piece of Idaho property worth less than one day's penalty.
"If they do this to us, we're going to lose everything we have," Sackett said.
The EPA said that Sackett and his wife, Chantell, illegally filled in most of their 0.63-acre lot with dirt and rocks in preparation for building a home. The agency said the property is a wetlands that cannot be disturbed without a permit. The Sacketts had none.
They say they considered walking away from the property, near scenic Priest Lake, and a difficult fight with the federal government. Instead, they went to court and now the Supreme Court is hearing their case, with implications well beyond their property.
The justices are considering how and when people can challenge the kind of order the Sacketts got. The EPA issues nearly 3,000 administrative compliance orders a year that call on alleged violators of environmental laws to stop what they're doing and repair the harm they've caused.
Major business groups, homebuilders, road builders and agricultural interests all have joined the Sacketts in urging the court to make it easier to contest EPA compliance orders issued under several environmental laws. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
