|
|
|
Breyer Keeps Up Bush Speech Attendance
Law Center |
2008/01/29 08:57
|
Four Supreme Court justices donned their robes to attend this year's State of the Union, but only one among them could boast a perfect attendance record during the Bush presidency. Justice Stephen Breyer, appointed by President Clinton and a one-time aide to Democratic Sen. Edward Kennedy, has been in the House of Representatives for all seven of Bush's State of the Union speeches. On three occasions he was the only justice to cross the street from the court to the Capitol. In addition, Breyer also was the only justice at Bush's first speech to Congress in 2001, a couple months after the justices voted 5-4 to stop Florida's ballot recount and ensure Bush's presidency. Breyer had opposed halting the recount. Breyer was joined Monday by Chief Justice John Roberts and justices Samuel Alito and Anthony Kennedy. Roberts and Alito, Bush's two court appointees, have attended all three speeches since joining the court. The last time Breyer missed the State of the Union was in 2000, in Clinton's last year in office. He had the flu. That speech was the only time in recent memory when no justice was present, other than in 1986, when the speech was rescheduled because of the explosion of the Challenger shuttle. Justices typically have said little about why they do or don't attend the speech. One exception is Justice Antonin Scalia, who hasn't gone in at least nine years. Scalia, commenting in 2000, said the speech has become increasingly partisan — a potential problem for justices who customarily refrain from applauding anything even remotely political. "One side will clap for this, and then the other side will clap for that," Scalia said. "And you know, we sit there like bumps on a log." ___ Put the second woman on the Supreme Court together with the first woman on Great Britain's highest court and what do you get? A conversation about bathrooms, of course. "Everybody's got a bathroom story, haven't they?" said Lady Brenda Hale, the first woman Law Lord, at a recent forum at Georgetown University's law school with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Ginsburg recalled that when she joined the court in 1993, court workers altered the woman's bathroom adjacent to the room where the justices put on their robes to make it as large as the men's room. But it took a letter from advice columnist Dear Abby to get the court to change its tradition and open public women's bathrooms before 9 a.m., she said. Sandra Day O'Connor, named to the Supreme Court in 1981, "had taken care of most of the irrationalities before I got there," Ginsburg said. Hale told her own tale of being informed there was no women's restroom at the Privy Council, the final appeals court for the British empire. The trailblazing judges also discussed recent changes in England that include renaming the high court the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, moving the court from Parliament to its own building and instituting mandatory retirement at 75. Hale, also known as the Baroness Hale of Richmond, said the age limit was a response to colleagues "who went on long beyond it was sensible for them to go on, but were not sufficiently incompetent to be removed." Ginsburg noted with relief that there is no retirement age for U.S. judges. She will turn 75 in March. |
|
|
|
|
|
Kentucky Elk Importation Law Challenged
Law Center |
2008/01/22 01:47
|
A Tennessee elk and bison ranch and a national deer farmers' group are challenging Kentucky's law banning deer or elk from being transported into the state. Two Feathers Elk and Bison Ranch in McMinville, Tenn., and the North American Deer Farmers Association are asking a federal judge to declare Kentucky's law unconstitutional, arguing that it illegally restricts interstate commerce. "We don't believe they are interpreting the law properly," said Shawn Schafer, executive director of the deer farmers association, an 800-member group based in Lake City, Minn. The farm and the group have sued Jonathan Gassett, the commissioner of the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, and Karen J. Alexy, division director of wildlife for the department, on Friday in U.S. District Court in Lexington. Phone calls to Gassett and Alexy after 5 p.m. Friday were not immediately returned. But Morgain Sprague, general counsel for the fish and wildlife department, has sent the attorney for Two Feathers ranch a letter warning that any animals confiscated in Kentucky would be destroyed. He said the law is Constitutional and is being interpreted correctly. "Your clients are free to use the interstates surrounding the Commonwealth of Kentucky to import cervids into Tennessee," Sprague wrote. Kentucky state law bans the importation of elk and deer to protect the state's elk and white-tailed deer herds from chronic wasting disease. State officials have enforced the law to prohibit anyone from bringing deer or elk across state lines, even if the animals are destined for another state. Violating the law is a felony, punishable by up to $10,000 in fines and five years in prison. That has posed problems for Two Feathers ranch, which wants to ship animals to and from Kansas and pass through Kentucky on the interstate, Schafer said. The ranch applied to Kentucky for permits to transport the animals across state lines but was refused, Schafer said. But Schafer said he believes the ban violates the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. The Kentucky law is also discriminatory because it allows deer and elk farmers in the state to move their animals around, he said. Schafer said Kentucky is the only state his group knows of that interprets the law to ban deer and elk from even crossing state lines. "When I take a load of horses down to Florida, I don't have to call ahead and check with all the states in between to make sure it's OK to drive through," Schafer said. In September, Wildlife and Fisheries agents arrested Timothy Cory Looper of Livingston, Tenn., as he passed west of Paducah with a load of elk and deer. The animals were destined for a hunting lodge in Tennessee, but the state destroyed the animals. Looper was charged with six felony counts of illegally importing elk and deer into Kentucky. His case is pending. |
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Judge's Fantasy Tape Isn't Public
Law Center |
2008/01/18 04:51
|
A court has ruled that a judge's audiotape of personal "graphic fantasies" — a recording that shocked investigators — is his private property and should not be made public. Circuit Judge John B. Hagler of Cleveland, Tenn., resigned last month after the local prosecutor, an investigator and the Chattanooga Times Free Press asked him about the tape he had recorded years earlier. The newspaper, The Associated Press and other news organizations had asked that the tape be released, but Hamilton County Chancery Court Judge Frank Brown ruled Thursday that it is not a public record and should be returned to Hagler. "Private documents do not become public just because someone provides them to a law enforcement official," the judge said in the ruling. Hagler's attorney, Roger Jenne, said that while Hagler was "extremely grateful" for the ruling, investigators should "get back and investigate what is really behind" the leak of the tape's existence. Chattanooga police investigated the tape in 2005, after a secretary who had just been fired by Hagler turned it over. She said she found the recording of the judge's voice on a tape that also contained legal dictation. Few details of the tape's content have been made public, but police testified during a court hearing that it was disturbing and sounded like someone being tortured. They said they initially thought the tape might be linked to the unsolved 1997 shooting death of an Episcopal priest, the Rev. Charles Martin "Marty" Davis, 35, in Chattanooga. But Brown said in the decision Thursday that there was no apparent link. Brown disagreed with Chattanooga police who said the tape was needed in their records as exculpatory evidence in the Davis killing. He said it was no more related to the Davis case than "books written about Charles Manson." About two years after the investigation ended, the tape made its way to the prosecutor in Hagler's district, District Attorney Steve Bebb. After the Times Free Press learned about the recording from an unidentified source in December, Hagler confirmed it and resigned. Bebb said in December that the tape "would disturb any human being who heard it," and that he sent a copy to the state Court of the Judiciary, which handles complaints against judges. The court, however, has no jurisdiction because Hagler resigned, a court spokeswoman said. Hagler, who had been a circuit judge in Cleveland since 1990, has said that he did nothing wrong but that the recording had caused great embarrassment to friends, relatives and the courts. He strongly suggested the leak was committed by someone with a grudge against him, perhaps someone he ruled against. In a statement issued last month, he said describing the recording as "graphic fantasies" was "accurate and sufficient ... and all any decent person would want to hear of it." Brown said the newspaper and Chattanooga officials who had previously agreed to release the recording would have 30 days to contest it. The Times Free Press has not decided whether to do so, said its publisher and executive editor, Tom Griscom. Jenne said there is a question as to whether someone "leaked this information in retaliation for decisions he has made in the past." "Find out who the culprit is," he said Jenne said release of the tape by anyone other than the parties in the case would bring a "pretty significant lawsuit." |
|
|
|
|
|
Transit Panel Urges Gas Tax Increase
Law Center |
2008/01/16 05:07
|
Federal gasoline taxes should be increased up to 40 cents per gallon over five years, a divided special commission urged Tuesday in calling for drastic changes to fix aging bridges and roads and reduce traffic deaths. The two-year study by the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission is the first to propose broad changes after the devastating bridge collapse in Minneapolis last August shone a spotlight on the deteriorating state of the nation's infrastructure. Calling for immediate action, the congressionally created panel warned that "applying patches" is no longer acceptable. It said the nation risks tens of thousands of highway casualties each year and millions of dollars lost in economic growth. "The crisis is now," the report said. The 68-page compilation of findings and recommendations, which were supported by nine of the 12 members on the commission, is expected to re-ignite congressional and political debate over raising gasoline taxes. The gas tax has not been increased since 1993, and recent efforts by Congress to increase it have faltered, over the objections of the Bush administration. The commission was expected to present its findings Thursday to the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and to a Senate panel later this month, but House Republican leaders quickly said they would oppose a tax hike. "A dramatic increase in the gas tax does not stand a snowball's chance in hell of passing Congress," said Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., the top Republican on the House Transportation panel. In a 10-page dissent, the commission's chairwoman, Transportation Secretary Mary Peters, and two other members agreed with several aspects of the report but sharply criticized the proposal for higher gasoline taxes. She and the two commissioners are calling instead for sole reliance on tolls and private investment, which Peters said would avoid sending millions of dollars of new tax revenue to Washington that end up as congressional pork. Department spokesman for said the three commissioners opted not to appear at the news conference to avoid a public display of internal division. Under the proposal, the current tax of 18.4 cents per gallon would be increased by 5 cents to 8 cents annually for five years and then indexed to inflation afterward to help fix the infrastructure, expand public transit and highways as well as broaden railway and rural access. The increase is designed to take effect in 2009, after President Bush leaves office. Other sources of revenue could come from tolls, peak-hour "congestion pricing" on highways, freight fees and ticket taxes for passenger rail improvements, the report said. "A failure to act will be catastrophic to this nation," said Jack Schenendorf, the commission's vice chairman. He contended the tax increase would amount to "less than a cost of a candy bar and a fifth of the cost of a cafe latte" for the average U.S. motorist. "We saw what happened with Katrina," he said, referring to the 2005 hurricane which overwhelmed aging levees. "We don't want to see the transportation system to see the same fate of the New Orleans levees." Commissioner Paul Weyrich, a Republican appointee to the commission and chairman of the Free Congress Foundation, said he is philosophically opposed to higher taxes but decided to support it this time in light of the growing transportation problems. The recommendations, if implemented, are expected to cost $225 billion each year for the next 50 years: The commission, established by Congress in 2005, also called for the country to rebuild and expand its rail network to meet a growing demand for alternatives to congested highways and to promote partnerships between the public and private sectors at U.S. ports. Its report comes as state governments and several business groups call on Washington to raise gas taxes to pay for substantial transportation improvements. The Minneapolis bridge collapse, which killed 13 people and injured about 100, also drew new calls for additional spending. "The time is now to work together to find a solution to this complex problem," said John Engler, president and CEO of the National Association of Manufacturers, which is open to a tax increase but isn't formally supporting it. "The U.S. will soon be facing a competitive disadvantage if we don't develop a national plan to improve the quality of our infrastructure system." |
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court rules against investors in fraud case
Law Center |
2008/01/15 09:04
|
The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled against investors seeking to sue businesses for scheming to manipulate stock prices of publicly traded companies. In a 5-3 ruling, the court gave a measure of protection from securities suits to suppliers, banks, accountants and law firms that do business with corporations engaging in securities fraud. The court ruled against investors who alleged that two suppliers colluded with Charter Communications Inc. to deceive Charter's stockholders and inflate the price of the cable TV company's stock. Charter investors do not have the right to sue because they did not rely on the deceptive acts of Charter's suppliers, said the majority opinion by Justice Anthony Kennedy. Kennedy pointed to the Securities and Exchange Commission as a protector of investors in similar cases and that the regulatory agency has used its enforcement power to collect more than $10 billion over the past five years. The decision is likely to have an impact on a similar class-action lawsuit by shareholders who invested in scandal-ridden Enron Corp. Investors in Enron, once the nation's seventh-largest company, are seeking more than $30 billion from Wall Street investment banks, alleging they schemed with Enron to hide its financial problems. In the Supreme Court, the lawsuit against Charter's suppliers has been closely watched by business and industry, which argued that an adverse ruling would clear the way for a flood of lawsuits. In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens said the court is conducting a continuing campaign to undercut investor lawsuits. A liberal Supreme Court in 1971 endorsed investor lawsuits under antifraud provisions of securities law at issue in the current lawsuit. In 1994, a more conservative Supreme Court imposed limits on such lawsuits, prohibiting cases against third parties for aiding and abetting a company's misstatements. The Republican-controlled Congress enacted the restrictions into law the next year. In a scheme allegedly designed to inflate the cable TV company's revenue picture, Charter got Motorola and Scientific-Atlanta to buy advertising with money that Charter provided. Charter supplied the funds by paying a $20 premium on each of hundreds of thousands of cable TV set-top boxes, for a total of $17 million. The amount of the overpayments equaled the amount the two suppliers paid for the ads. Charter reported the advertising payments as revenue, a step that helped Charter meet Wall Street's expectations for the fourth quarter of 2000. Motorola and Scientific-Atlanta allegedly backdated the contracts for the set-top boxes to make the advertising and the set-top boxes transactions appear unrelated. Scientific-Atlanta allegedly submitted documentation to Charter attributing the price increase to increased manufacturing expenses. Justice Stephen Breyer disqualified himself from the case because he owns stock in Cisco Systems Inc., which now owns Scientific-Atlanta. |
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court Declines Pollution Case
Law Center |
2008/01/14 02:48
|
The Supreme Court declined Monday to hear industry complaints that the Environmental Protection Agency should have dropped some old clean air safeguards when it imposed a more stringent air quality standard for ozone. EPA concluded that its existing standard for ozone exposure was inadequate to protect public health and the agency has estimated it will cost $9.6 billion a year in increased costs for polluters to comply with the new one. When regulators relax a standard as opposed to imposing a tougher one, the Clean Air Act contains a section designed to ensure that air quality won't deteriorate in an area. Safeguards, which regulators refer to as "anti-backsliding" requirements, call for control measures on polluters. Industry objected in the case of the revised ozone standard when EPA concluded it could use the "anti-backsliding" requirements, even though the agency was imposing a tougher standard rather than easing one. In raising the ozone standard, regulators had dropped a few of the requirements, but they were reimposed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which ruled against industry. The EPA is imposing requirements, regardless of whether they are needed to attain the new, more stringent ozone standard, industry lawyers wrote in asking the Supreme Court to take the case. Petitioning the court were the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association, the American Chemistry Council, the American Petroleum Institute and the Utility Air Regulatory Group. Separately, businesses in Baton Rouge, La., also asked the Supreme Court to hear their objection to EPA's position on the new ozone standard. Lawyers for the businesses said that if Louisiana is forced to revise its pollution control plan, over 150 Baton Rouge businesses will be forced to pay $65 million to $100 million a year, threatening thousands of jobs in an economy still overwhelmed by the impact of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, local business groups told the court. |
|
|
|
|
|
2 Lawyers Quit High-Profile Bribery Case
Law Center |
2008/01/10 02:07
|
Two members of a law firm that was searched by federal agents last month have resigned as defense attorneys in the high-profile bribery case involving wealthy lawyer Richard "Dickie" Scruggs. Now a third lawyer in the case is asking to do the same. U.S. District Judge Neal Biggers on Tuesday granted the request by Joey Langston and Billy Quin of the Langston Law Firm to withdraw as attorneys for Scruggs, according to court records filed Tuesday in federal court in Oxford. Scruggs, his son Zach and three others were indicted Nov. 28 on charges they conspired to bribe a judge in a case involving disputed fees related to lawsuits from Hurricane Katrina. On Wednesday, Anthony Farese, an attorney for Zach Scruggs, also asked to withdraw from the case. He said in court papers that Zach Scruggs has "terminated his services" and intends to hire a new lawyer. Biggers declined the request because the younger Scruggs has not yet named a replacement for Farese. The elder Scruggs, a brother-in-law of former Sen. Trent Lott, is best known for making millions from tobacco litigation. One of Langston's former law partners, Timothy Balducci, pleaded guilty Dec. 4 to conspiracy in the bribery case and is helping investigators. He had been one of those indicted along with Scruggs and his son. On Dec. 10, the FBI searched the Langston Law Firm. FBI officials would not say what they were looking for, but Farese said at the time that they took records from cases that Balducci had worked on before he left the firm. Quin and Langston did not respond to several messages left Tuesday by The Associated Press. John Keker, another attorney for the elder Scruggs, would not comment on why the two would no longer be working on the case. In a separate case, a judge ruled Wednesday that an insurance company can question Richard and Zach Scruggs about their handling of leaked documents in a Hurricane Katrina insurance case. Richard Scruggs wore "two hats" as the employer and lawyer for two key witnesses in that case, U.S. District Judge L.T. Senter Jr. ruled. After Hurricane Katrina, Scruggs announced that sisters Cori and Kerri Rigsby, former employees of a State Farm contractor, were helping him build cases against insurance companies over their handling of storm claims. The sisters gave him thousands of internal State Farm records. Scruggs hired the Rigsby sisters as consultants for $150,000 a year and served as their lawyer. State Farm wants to know more about those relationships. Scruggs has said the leaked records proved that State Farm fraudulently denied the claim of policyholders Thomas and Pamela McIntosh, whose Biloxi home was destroyed by the storm on Aug. 29, 2005. Also on Wednesday, attorney Kenneth Coghlan notified Biggers that he intended to represent Richard Scruggs in the bribery case. Biggers refused to allow Coghlan, however, because the attorney represented another defendant in the case — former state auditor Steven Patterson — before withdrawing last month. Allowing Coghlan to represent Scruggs could be a conflict of interest if one defendant testifies against the other, Biggers said. |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|