|
|
|
High court OKs Miss. lawsuit on LCD price fixing
Topics in Legal News |
2014/01/16 15:13
|
The Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that Mississippi can pursue claims of price-fixing against a manufacturer of LCD screens in state court.
The justices on Tuesday reversed a lower court ruling that blocked the state-court suit against AU Optronics Corp.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing for the court, said the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was wrong to order that the case be tried in federal court.
The issue was whether the federal Class Action Fairness Act, aimed at taking class-action lawsuits from consumer-friendly state courts to more business-friendly federal courts, also applied to cases filed by a state on behalf of its residents.
Taiwan-based AU Optronics is one of several Asian companies sued for fixing prices for thin film transistor liquid-crystal display panels from 1999 to 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court upholds approval of BP oil spill settlement
Press Release |
2014/01/13 15:21
|
Over BP's objections, a federal appeals court on Friday upheld a judge's approval of the company's multibillion-dollar settlement with lawyers for businesses and residents who claim the massive 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico cost them money.
BP has argued that U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier and court-appointed claims administrator Patrick Juneau have misinterpreted settlement terms in ways that would force the London-based oil giant to pay for billions of dollars in inflated or bogus claims by businesses.
During a hearing in November before a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a BP lawyer argued that Barbier's December 2012 approval of the deal shouldn't stand unless the company ultimately prevails in its ongoing dispute over business payments.
But the divided panel ruled Friday that Barbier did not err by failing to determine more than a year ago whether the class of eligible claimants included individuals who haven't actually suffered any injury related to the spill.
Affirming Barbier's initial ruling in 2012, the court said in its 48-page majority opinion that it can't agree with arguments raised by BP and others who separately objected to the settlement. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
OJ Simpson appeal to Nevada court due in April
Headline Legal News |
2014/01/13 15:20
|
O.J. Simpson's lawyers have been given until mid-April to file their written Nevada Supreme Court appeal for a new trial for the former football star in his Las Vegas armed robbery case, Simpson attorney Patricia Palm said this week.
A state high court order on Dec. 20 set a 120-day schedule for Simpson's claim that his fame stemming from his 1995 acquittal in Los Angeles in the deaths of his ex-wife and her friend meant he couldn't get a fair trial in Las Vegas, and that his trial lawyer botched his case.
The order voided a Monday deadline for what would have been expedited high court review.
Palm said she and Simpson attorneys Ozzie Fumo and Tom Pitaro were encouraged that the seven-member Supreme Court agreed to accept a 30-page appeal.
The full seven-member court has not decided whether to hear oral arguments.
Simpson, 66, already lost an initial appeal to the state Supreme Court, the only appeals court in Nevada.
He's in the fifth year of a nine-to-33 years prison sentence after a jury found him guilty of kidnapping, armed robbery and other charges for leading a group of armed men in a September 2007 confrontation with two sports memorabilia dealers at a Las Vegas casino hotel.
One co-defendant who stood trial and was convicted with Simpson and four former co-defendants who pleaded guilty to felonies before trial and testified against Simpson have served prison time and gone free. Simpson won't be eligible for parole until he is 70.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Defamatory online posts revisited by Texas court
Court News |
2014/01/10 15:51
|
They say nothing on the Internet ever really goes away, but the Texas Supreme Court is considering whether defamatory postings might be worth the effort to try.
Justices on the state's highest civil court on Thursday weighed broader questions about cyberbullying, hate speech and the First Amendment while hearing a case with far lower stakes. At issue is whether a company can be forced to remove from its website damaging personal comments about a fired Austin businessman.
Lower courts already have ruled that Robert Kinney's former company, Los Angeles-based BCG Attorney Search, can't be forced to remove the comments, even if a judge or jury eventually finds it defamed Kinney on the company's website by accusing him of running a kickback scheme. That's because defamatory speech still has protections under the law.
But Kinney's attorneys told the nine-member court that it's time for Texas law to catch up with technology.
"It was a little harder to defame someone before the Internet. Now, on my cellphone, I can walk out of here and in five minutes I can say something defamatory about somebody and hit a button, and it's there worldwide," said Martin Siegel, Kinney's attorney. "And it's potentially there for perpetuity."
Anthony Ricciardelli, an attorney for BCG, said forcing the comments to be removed would "set a dangerous precedent that will have a chilling effect on speech and may lead to a slippery slope."
The court isn't expected to make a ruling for several months.
Justices asked both sides to consider more divisive cases involving cyberbullying or hate speech _ whether a court should be able to issue orders to stop online antagonists from harassing others, for instance, even if no defamation was present. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Lawmakers must expedite education funding
Topics in Legal News |
2014/01/10 15:50
|
The Washington Supreme Court on Thursday ordered lawmakers to submit a complete plan by the end of April to detail how the state will fully pay for basic education.
The 8-1 ruling said that while the state made progress in last year's budget to increase funding for K-12 education, it was "not on target" to hit the constitutionally required funding level by the 2017-18 school year.
"We have no wish to be forced into entering specific funding directives to the State, or, as some state high courts have done, holding the legislature in contempt of court," read the majority opinion, written by Chief Justice Barbara Madsen. "But, it is incumbent upon the State to demonstrate, through immediate, concrete action, that it is making real and measureable progress, not simply promises."
Joining Madsen were Justices Charles Johnson, Debra Stephens, Susan Owens, Charles Wiggins, Mary Fairhurst, Steven Gonzalez and Sheryl Gordon McCloud. Justice Jim Johnson wrote a separate dissent, which was to be released at a later date.
In 2012, the high court ruled that the state is not meeting its constitutional obligation concerning education funding. That ruling was the result of a lawsuit brought by a coalition of school districts, parents and education groups, known as the McCleary case for the family named in the suit. The court has required yearly progress reports from the Legislature on its efforts. Those reports are then critiqued by the group that brought the lawsuit, and by the Supreme Court.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Law Firm Web Design Information |
| Law Promo has worked with attorneys, lawyers and law firms all over the world in designing beautiful law firm websites that look great on all devices, from desktop computers to mobile phones. Law Promo can construct your law firm a brand new responsive law firm website, or help you redesign your existing site to secure your place in the mobile world. Solo Practice Law Firm Website Design |
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
