Today's Date: Add To Favorites
Court to decide if drug use while pregnant is child abuse
Court Watch | 2018/04/04 11:03
Pennsylvania's highest court will decide whether a woman's use of illegal drugs while pregnant qualifies as child abuse under state law.

The Supreme Court recently took up the case of a woman who tested positive for suboxone and marijuana at the time she gave birth early last year at Williamsport Hospital.

A county judge ruled that did not qualify as child abuse under the state's Child Protective Services Law, but the intermediate Superior Court said drug use while pregnant can make bodily injury to a child likely after birth.

Court records indicate the child spent 19 days in the hospital being treated for drug dependence, exhibiting severe withdrawal symptoms.

"Mother's actions were deplorable but this court must follow the law," wrote Clinton County Judge Craig Miller in May, ruling the county child welfare agency had not established child abuse occurred.

The mother's lawyers argue lawmakers never intended the child protection law to apply to acts during pregnancy.

"No one thinks using drugs while pregnant is good, but using the criminal justice system and the civil child abuse system to punish people for doing so just makes a bad situation much, much worse," said the woman's lawyer, David S. Cohen.

Amanda Beth Browning, lawyer for the Clinton County Department of Children and Youth Services, declined comment.

In a filing with Supreme Court, the woman's lawyers said most states, with a few exceptions, "have taken a non-punitive approach to the issue."

"Almost every major medical and public health organization has recognized that punishing women for drug use during their pregnancies is counterproductive to public and private health," wrote lawyers for the mother, identified by initials in court records.


Bolivia takes sea access dispute with Chile to world court
Court Watch | 2018/03/19 14:19
Bolivia made an emotional appeal Monday for the International Court of Justice to order Chile to enter talks over granting the landlocked South American nation access to the Pacific Ocean, saying the dispute will remain a source of conflict if it's not resolved.

Bolivia lost its only seacoast to Chile in a war between from 1879 to 1883, and has been demanding access to the Pacific for generations. Bolivia also accuses Chile of reneging on pledges to negotiate.

"For 139 years, Bolivia has suffered the historical injustice of becoming landlocked," former Bolivian President Eduardo Rodriguez Veltze told judges sitting in the ornate Great Hall of Justice at the world court's headquarters, the Peace Palace. "Restoring Bolivia's sovereign access to the sea would make a small difference to Chile, but it would transform the destiny of Bolivia."

Chile argues that its border with Bolivia was settled in a 1904 treaty and that it's not under any legal obligation to negotiate. Chile's lawyers will present their case later this week.

Prof. Payam Akhavan, a lawyer representing Bolivia, said that despite the treaty, Chile had made repeated pledges to find a solution to the dispute.

"If the 1904 treaty settled all issues for all times, if there was no remaining dispute, why did the parties continue to negotiate sovereign access for more than a century?" he said.

"This case is not an academic exercise. It is not mere political posturing," Akhavan told judges. "The people have suffered real and continuing injury. Chile cannot sweep this dispute under the carpet. It will remain a constant source of conflict until it is resolved."

Rodriguez said that Bolivia's lack of direct access to the sea is holding back its economy.

"It is estimated that if Bolivia had not been stripped of the sea, the annual GDP (gross domestic product) growth could be at least 20 percent higher," he told judges.

Rulings by the court, the United Nations' highest judicial organ, are final and binding. Judges will likely take months to issue a decision.




Supreme Court won't upend Arizona licenses for immigrants
Court Watch | 2018/03/15 14:12
The Supreme Court is rejecting Arizona's plea to stop issuing driver's licenses to young immigrants known as "Dreamers" who are protected from deportation.

The justices did not comment Monday in leaving in place an appeals' court decision in favor of the immigrants who sought licenses.

About 20,000 young immigrants in Arizona are protected from deportation under a 2012 program started by the Obama administration. The Trump administration is trying to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, but has been blocked by federal courts.

The high court recently turned down an administration request to take on the DACA controversy.

Arizona sought to prevent DACA-protected immigrants from getting licenses. Then-Gov. Jan Brewer cited a desire to reduce the risk of licenses being used to improperly access public benefits.


Martin Shkreli cries in court, is sentenced to 7 years for securities fraud
Court Watch | 2018/03/11 11:22
The smirk wiped from his face, a crying Martin Shkreli was sentenced to seven years in prison for securities fraud Friday in a hard fall for the pharmaceutical-industry bad boy vilified for jacking up the price of a lifesaving drug.

Shkreli, the boyish-looking, 34-year-old entrepreneur dubbed the "Pharma Bro" for his loutish behavior, was handed his punishment after a hearing in which he and his attorney struggled with limited success to make him a sympathetic figure

The defendant hung his head and choked up as he admitted to many mistakes and apologized to the investors he was convicted of defrauding. At one point, a clerk handed him a box of tissues.

"I want the people who came here today to support me to understand one thing: The only person to blame for me being here today is me," he said. "There is no conspiracy to take down Martin Shkreli. I took down Martin Shkreli."

In the end, U.S. District Judge Kiyo Matsumoto gave him a sentence that fell well short of the 15 years prosecutors wanted but was a lot longer than the 18 months his lawyer asked for. He was also fined $75,000.

He was found guilty in August of lying to investors in two failed hedged funds and cheating them out of millions. The case was unrelated to the 2015 furor in which he was accused of price-gouging, but his arrest was seen as rough justice by the many enemies he made with his smug and abrasive behavior online and off.

The judge insisted that the punishment was not about Shkreli's online antics or his raising the cost of the drug. "This case is not about Mr. Shkreli's self-cultivated public persona ... nor his controversial statements about politics or culture," Matsumoto said.

But she did say his conduct after the verdict made her doubt the sincerity of his remorse. She cited his bragging after the verdict that he would be sentenced to time served. And she quoted one piece of correspondence in which he wrote: "F--- the feds."

The judge ruled earlier that Shkreli would have to forfeit more than $7.3 million in a brokerage account and personal assets, including a one-of-a-kind Wu-Tang Clan album that he boasted of buying for $2 million.

Defense attorney Benjamin Brafman described Shkreli as a misunderstood eccentric who used unconventional means to make his defrauded investors even wealthier. He told the court that he sometimes wants to hug Shkreli and sometimes wants to punch him , but that his outspokenness shouldn't be held against him.



Delay in Nevada gun buyer law draws protests at court debate
Court Watch | 2018/02/25 19:25
A lawyer seeking a court order to enforce a Nevada gun buyer screening law that has not been enacted despite voter approval in November 2016 blamed the state's Republican governor and attorney general on Friday for stalling the law.

"For either personal or political reasons," attorney Mark Ferrario told a state court judge in Las Vegas, Gov. Brian Sandoval and GOP state Attorney General Adam Laxalt "chose to stand back and really do nothing."

Nevada Solicitor General Lawrence Van Dyke countered that the law was fatally flawed as written because it requires Nevada to have the FBI expend federal resources to enforce a state law.

"State officials here have not tried to avoid implementing the law," Van Dyke said. "They have negotiated (and) talked with the FBI, and the FBI said no, four times."

Clark County District Court Judge Joe Hardy Jr. made no immediate ruling after more than 90 minutes of arguments on an issue that drew about 25 sign-toting advocates outside the courthouse calling for enactment of the measure.

"The people have spoken," said protest speaker Peter Guzman, president of the Las Vegas Latin Chamber of Commerce. "To deny that voice is to deny democracy."

Some speakers, including Democratic state Assemblywoman Sandra Jauregui, cited the slayings of 58 people by a gunman firing assault-style weapons from a high-rise casino shot into an concert crowd on the Las Vegas Strip last Oct. 1. Jauregui was at the concert.

Others pointed to gun-control measures being debated nationally following a shooting that killed 17 people last week at a school in Parkland, Florida.

In the courtroom, Ferrario referred to what he called a "movement toward increasing gun checks," while the Nevada law has stalled.

"This loophole that the citizens wanted to close remains open because the governor has failed to take appropriate action," the plaintiffs' attorney said.

Sandoval spokeswoman Mari St. Martin dismissed the accusations as "political posturing." She said the initiative specifically prohibits the state Department of Public Safety from handling background checks, leaving "no clear path forward" to enactment.


[PREV] [1] ..[37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45].. [106] [NEXT]



All
Legal Business
Headline Legal News
Court News
Court Watch
Legal Interview
Topics in Legal News
Attorney News
Press Release
Opinions
Legal Marketing
Politics
Supreme Court makes it easier to cla..
Trump formally asks Congress to claw..
World financial markets welcome cour..
Cuban exiles were shielded from depo..
Arizona prosecutors ordered to send ..
What to know about the Supreme Court..
Trump Seeks Supreme Court Approval t..
Budget airline begins deportation fl..
Jury begins deliberating in UK trial..
Judge bars deportations of Venezuela..
Judge to weigh Louisiana AG’s chall..
Court won’t revive a Minnesota ban ..
 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


   Lawyer & Law Firm Links
Amherst, Ohio Divorce Lawyer
Sylkatis Law - Child Custody
loraindivorceattorney.com
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Car Accident Lawyers
Sunnyvale, CA Personal Injury Attorney
www.esrajunglaw.com
Family Law in East Greenwich, RI
Divorce Lawyer - Erica S. Janton
www.jantonfamilylaw.com/about
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
San Francisco Trademark Lawyer
San Jose Trademark Lawyer
www.onulawfirm.com
 
 
Disclaimer: The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Romeo Media as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. Blog postings and hosted comments are available for general educational purposes only and should not be used to assess a specific legal situation. Legal Business News for You to Reach America's Legal Professionals. Get the latest legal news and information.