|
|
|
Court rejects cat hoarders' appeal of convictions
Court Watch |
2013/07/08 00:31
|
The Montana Supreme Court has denied the appeal of a northwestern Montana couple's conviction of aggravated cruelty to animals after 116 cats were found living in filthy, snowbound trailers.
The Daily Inter Lake reports the court announced the decision July 2 involving Edwin and Cheryl Criswell.
The cats were found in December 2010 and a jury the following year found the couple guilty. In October 2011 Cheryl Criswell received a two-year sentence deferred over six years. Edwin Criswell received a two-year suspended sentence but later violated his probation by testing positive for marijuana and methamphetamine. In January he was sentenced to two years in prison.
In September 2006, the Criswells entered Alford pleas to 10 counts of misdemeanor animal cruelty in northern Idaho in what officials then called the largest animal hoarding case in state history involving 430 animals.
In the Montana case, the Criswells contended they were wrongly convicted because during the trial Flathead County Deputy Attorney Ken Park called them "professional freeloaders," prejudicing the jury.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Ex-Im Bank needs to explain Air India loan
Court Watch |
2013/06/19 11:33
|
A federal bank that backed a huge airplane loan for Air India will have to explain that the loan didn't hurt U.S. airlines.
A lawsuit by Delta Air Lines Inc. had accused the Export-Import Bank of failing to follow a requirement that it makes sure its loans to foreign companies won't hurt U.S. competitors. The Ex-Im bank guaranteed $3.4 billion in loans in 2011 so that Air India could buy planes from Boeing Co. But Delta competes with Air India on some routes.
The Court of Appeals in Washington did not force the bank to reverse the loan guarantee, as Delta had asked. But the ruling says the bank needs to follow the law and provide more justification for the loan. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: $1M coverage for Conn. fire victim families
Court Watch |
2013/06/11 09:01
|
Families suing the operator of a Hartford nursing home where 16 patients died in a 2003 fire suffered a setback Monday, when the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that the home's insurance coverage was $1 million instead of the $10 million claimed by the victims' relatives.
The justices' 3-2 decision reversed a lower court judge's interpretation of Greenwood Health Center's insurance policy in favor of the families. The high court instead found in favor of Boston-based Lexington Insurance Co., a subsidiary of American International Group Inc.
"It just seems completely inadequate," Van Starkweather, an attorney for one victim's family, said about the lower coverage figure. "I'm disappointed. It was a close decision. Three justices went with AIG. Two justices went with the victims."
A lawyer for Lexington Insurance declined to comment Monday.
The fire at Greenwood Health Center on Feb. 26, 2003, broke out after psychiatric patient Leslie Andino set her bed on fire while flicking a cigarette lighter. Officials at the time said it was the 10th deadliest nursing home fire in U.S. history. Andino was charged with 16 counts of arson murder, but was found incompetent to stand trial and committed to a psychiatric hospital.
Relatives of 13 of the 16 victims sued the nursing home's operator for cash damages, saying it failed to adequately supervise Andino. Hartford Superior Court Judge Marshall K. Berger Jr. ruled in 2009 that Greenwood's insurance policy with Lexington provided $250,000 in coverage for each plaintiff and the policy's maximum coverage was $10 million.
But Lexington Insurance appealed Berger's decision, saying that the $10 million was the total coverage for all seven nursing homes run by Greenwood's operator and that each home was insured up to $1 million.
In a decision written by Chief Justice Chase T. Rogers, the Supreme Court's majority found that each plaintiff actually was eligible for up to $500,000 from the insurance policy if they won their lawsuit, but that the policy's total coverage was limited to $1 million.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maryland Criminal Defense - Gun Offenses Lawyer
Court Watch |
2013/06/10 10:27
|
The state of Maryland has strict rules that prohibit the wearing, carrying, and transporting of guns whether it is hidden or in the open. These rules also apply to any other firearms including but not limited to handguns, rifle, shotgun, short-barreled rifle, short-barreled shotgun, starter gun, or any other firearm, whether loaded or unloaded.
If you are accused of this offense, you may be charged with severe punishments including both fines and time in jail. To avoid these charges involving weapons of any kind, contact a skilled Maryland Criminal Defense or Maryland gun attorney as soon as possible. Weapons charges carry significant and substantial jail time as well as stiff financial penalties and are generally subject to vigorous prosecution by the State.
It is critical in all charges involving weapons of any kind to employ and to engage our MD Criminal Defense lawyer/MD gun lawyer at once. Weapons charges carry significant and substantial jail time as well as stiff financial penalties and are generally subject to vigorous prosecution by the State. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Judge OKs class-action settlement over Skechers
Court Watch |
2013/05/23 11:17
|
A federal judge approved a $40 million class-action settlement Monday between Skechers USA Inc. and consumers who bought toning shoes after ads made unfounded claims that the footwear would help people lose weight and strengthen muscles.
U.S. District Judge Thomas B. Russell in Louisville approved the deal, which covers more than 520,000 claims. About 1,000 people eligible for coverage by the settlement opted not to take part.
Those with approved claims will be able to get a maximum repayment for their purchase _ up to $80 per pair of Shape-Ups; $84 per pair of Resistance Runner shoes; up to $54 per pair of Podded Sole Shoes; and $40 per pair of Tone-Ups.
Russell also awarded $5 million for the attorneys in the case to split. Russell ordered that the money cannot come from the $40 million settlement fund set aside for consumers.
Two people that served as the lead plaintiffs in the case will receive payments of $2,500 each.
Russell considered multiple factors in deciding to approve the settlement and found it provides just compensation to the plaintiffs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 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
