|
|
|
Law firm: Carter's AG, Bell, dies in Atlanta at 90
Attorneys in the News |
2009/01/04 09:15
|
| Former President Jimmy Carter's attorney general, Griffin B. Bell, has died in an Atlanta hospital at age 90. Bell was being treated for complications due to pancreatic cancer, and suffered from kidney disease for years. A spokesman for Bell's law firm, Les Zucke, says Bell died at 9:40 a.m. Monday. Bell's firm, King & Spalding, is based in Atlanta. Carter's choice of Bell, a longtime friend, as attorney general was considered the most controversial of his Cabinet picks after the 1976 election. At the time, the NAACP and other civil rights groups complained Bell, as a federal judge, didn't force Southern schools to integrate quickly enough. But Carter called Bell's civil rights record superb, and many black Georgians came forward to support him. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Burris lawyer prods Senate Democratic leaders
Political and Legal |
2009/01/03 09:15
|
A lawyer representing the man appointed to the Senate by embattled Gov. Rod Blagojevich has written to Senate Democratic leaders asking them to seat his client.
Attorney Timothy Wright also tells the Chicago Tribune he plans to go to court if the Senate refuses to seat Roland Burris.
Blagojevich's action has draw criticism because he faces corruption charges that accuse him of trying to profit from the appointment. He denies that. Wright's letter was dated Friday. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada has said that anyone picked by Blagojevich will be turned away. Burris also has asked the Illinois Supreme Court to force Secretary of State Jesse White to certify the appointment. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-year-old Arizona boy guilty in mom's shooting
Court Watch |
2009/01/03 09:14
|
| A 12-year-old boy who fatally shot his mother after an argument over his chores was found guilty of premeditated murder. Judge James Conlogue found the boy guilty after a hearing Friday in Cochise County Superior Court in the southern Arizona town of Bisbee. The boy is not being identified because he was charged as a juvenile. Conlogue ruled that prosecutors had proved the boy acted intentionally and with premeditation when he shot Sara Madrid, 34, eight times on Aug. 1. The shooting happened after the boy had argued with his mother over his chores. Madrid had left the family home after the argument, and the boy got a .22-caliber pistol from her bedroom closet, waited for her to return and then repeatedly shot her, according to court testimony. Madrid's live-in boyfriend of 10 years, Alfonso Munoz, witnessed the shooting and said the boy gave him the empty gun afterward. Munoz, who helped raise the boy, said he had taught the child how to use the weapon for emergencies and self-defense. The boy's lawyer, Sanford Edleman, had argued that the boy did not intend to kill his mother but only wanted to get back at her for abusing him. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Judge rejects class-action status in trailer suits
Insurance |
2009/01/03 02:37
|
| A federal judge on Monday refused to grant class-action status to lawsuits claiming that thousands of Gulf Coast hurricane victims were exposed to potentially toxic fumes while living in government-issued trailers. U.S. District Judge Kurt Engelhardt ruled that a batch of lawsuits on behalf of hundreds of plaintiffs against the federal government and several trailer manufacturers can't be handled as a class action because each person's claim is unique and must be examined individually.
Government tests found elevated levels of formaldehyde in many of the trailers that housed victims of Katrina and Rita after those powerful hurricanes clobbered the Gulf Coast in 2005. Formaldehyde is a preservative that can cause breathing problems and is classified as a carcinogen.
Lawyers for the storm victims accuse trailer makers of using shoddy materials and building methods in a rush to meet the government's demand for emergency housing for the displaced. The attorneys had argued that a class-action lawsuit would efficiently resolve all the cases from Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi and Alabama that Engelhardt is presiding over in New Orleans. But the judge said the cases involve hundreds of trailer models made by dozens of companies and occupied by people with varying medical histories and symptoms. "Each plaintiffs' claims and alleged injuries will require an examination of individual evidence," Engelhardt wrote in a 50-page ruling. Tony Buzbee, one of the lead lawyers for plaintiffs, said he respects the judge's decision but hasn't ruled out an appeal. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Madoff Spinoffs - Another Investment Class Action
Class Action |
2009/01/02 09:22
|
A class action in Manhattan Federal Court claims Tremont Market Neutral Fund was grossly negligent in handing over 27% of its money to Bernard Madoff for his alleged $50 billion Ponzi scheme.
Here are the defendants in the Tremont Funds case: Tremont Market Neutral Fund LP, Tremont Partners Inc., Tremont Group Holdings Inc., Oppenheimer Acquisition Corp., Oppenheimer Funds Inc., Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co., and Ernst & Young LLP.
A class action in Manhattan Federal Court claims these defendants handed over investments in the Rye Select Broad Market Fund to Bernard Madoff for his alleged Ponzi scheme: Rye Select Broad Market Fund LP, Tremont Partners Inc., Tremont Group Holdings Inc., Rye Investment Management, Jim Mitchell, and Robert Schulman.
Three members of the Sciremammano family sued Bernard Madoff, saying he took more than $2 million from them, in Manhattan Federal Court. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
CA Sues to stop Bush's Butchering of Endagered Species Act
Environmental |
2009/01/02 09:16
|
California's Attorney General went into Federal Court Tuesday in an effort to stop a midnight regulation by the Bush Administration that would exempt federal agencies from a key requirement of the Endangered Species Act, saying the move in the waning days of Bush's presidency usurps the power of Congress and is the most significant change to the act in 20 years.
"The Bush Administration is unlawfully trying to make major substantive and procedural revisions to the statute through the regulatory process. This is not something executive agencies are authorized to do. Only Congress can amend the statute" says Abraham Arredondo, a lawyer for the California Attorney General's Office.
The ESA mandated that federal agencies seek independent reviews from scientists on projects that might negatively affect endangered or threatened species.
The Department of the Interior and the Department of Commerce, however, proposed to eliminate this provision and on December 16th it was removed.
Federal agencies now decide for themselves whether mining, logging, and other projects will negatively affect threatened or endangered species. Attorney General Edmund Brown claims these agencies generally lack biological expertise and that they usually have incentive to conclude their projects won't hurt listed species.
Also, the Act no longer mandates that the effects of greenhouse gas emissions on listed species be considered in federal projects. Federal agencies no longer need to consider potential negative affects on species like the polar bear when approving coal-burning power plants or projects which contribute to greenhouse gasses.
Of the 1,327 plant and animal species on the national endangered and threatened species list, 310 of them are in California. The federal government owns millions of acres of land in California in the form of military bases, public lands, and federal water projects, among other things.
California has its own list of endangered species and the federal government must still follow the California Endangered Species Act when operating on California land.
The lawsuit draws attention to the increasing stagnancy of the federal Endangered Species Act. Robert Wayne, a Biology professor at UCLA, explained that it is now very difficult to add species to the federal endangered species list, which results in many species becoming extinct while still being considered for listing.
In 2004, the Washington Post wrote an article detailing the influence of the Bush administration on the ESA. It reported that 9.5 species a year were added to the endangered list under President Bush, compared with 65 a year under President Bill Clinton and 59 a year under President George H.W. Bush. The Paper also reported that the administration recalculated the economic costs of protecting critical habitats and also noted increased difficulty in listing new species.
The Federal ESA understands endangered species to be in danger of extinction within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Threatened species are animals and plants likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of their ranges.
Megan Acevedo is the Deputy Attorney General representing California. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lobbyist Sues NY Times for Defamation
Political and Legal |
2009/01/02 09:14
|
Washington lobbyist Vicki Iseman sued The New York Times on Tuesday, claiming the newspaper defamed her in an article "falsely communicating that Ms. Iseman and Sen. John McCain had an illicit 'romantic' and unethical relationship in breach of the public trust in 1999, while Sen. McCain was chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, and while Ms. Iseman was representing clients as a lobbyist on matters relating to the business of the committee."
Iseman demands $27 million from the Times and its editors and reporters, insisting she "did not engage in any behavior toward (McCain) that was anything other than professional and appropriate."
The lawsuit refers to the Feb. 21 story, "For McCain, Self-Confidence on Ethics Poses Its Own Risk." Iseman sued the four reporters whose bylines are on the story - James Rutenberg, Marilyn Thompson, Stephen Labaton and David Kirkpatrick - and editors Bill Keller and Dean Baquet.
The federal filing quotes more than 30 paragraphs from the Times story, which reported that two of McCain's "associates" were so concerned about his behavior with Iseman that, according to the article as cited in the lawsuit, "they joined in a serried of confrontations with Mr. McCain, warning him that he was risking his campaign and career. Both said Mr. McCain acknowledged behaving inappropriately and pledged to keep his distance from Mr. (sic) Iseman. The two associates, who said they had become disillusioned with the senator, spoke independently of each other and provided details that were corroborated by others.
"Separately, a top McCain aide met with Ms. Iseman at Union Station in Washington to ask her to stay away from the senator," the Times reported, according to the complaint.
Iseman claims the article is "reasonably susceptible of two levels of false and defamatory meanings, constitution 'defamation per se' under Virginia law. ... The first defamatory meaning was that MS Iseman exploited an alleged personal and social friendship with Sen. McCain to obtain favorable legislative outcomes for her clients, engaging in 'inappropriate' behavior that constituted a conflict of interest and a violation of professional and ethical norms in breach of the public trust. This meaning was communicated through the literal words of the article and also by implication, by what was intentionally suggested and implied 'between the lines.'
"The second defamatory meaning was that Ms. Iseman and Sen. McCain had engaged in an illicit and inappropriate romantic while Ms. Iseman was a lobbyist conducting business on behalf of clients before the committee chaired by Sen. McCain. This was also defamation per se under Virginia law. This meaning was also communicated through the literal words of the article and by implication, by what was suggested and implied 'between the lines.'"
The article then cites 1o major media outlets that followed up the Times story.
The Times broke the story of Iseman's lawsuit on its Web site Tuesday afternoon. The newspaper said it stands by its story.
Iseman's 36-page filing claims the Times story is false, that it damaged her reputation and her emotional and mental health, that it was "deliberately and recklessly misleading," and written with negligence and "actual malice."
Iseman claims she is a private figure and thus need prove only negligence to make the defamation claim stick. And she claims, on page 32 of the lawsuit, that the Times rushed the story into print to try to beat a story The New Republic was preparing "about The New York times failed and obsessive pursuit of the story, including its inability to 'nail down' the scandalous accusations," according to the complaint.
Iseman is represented by W. Coleman Allen Jr. of Allen, Allen, Allen & Allen. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
