Today's Date: Add To Favorites   
Ohio top court mulls Planned Parenthood files
Court Watch | 2008/10/08 07:19
Ohio Supreme Court justices appeared skeptical Tuesday that an abortion clinic's medical records on other patients are relevant to a lawsuit brought by parents of a 14-year-old girl who had an abortion without their consent.

Lawyers for the girl's family argued that the information they seek is necessary to prove that Planned Parenthood of Cincinnati had a pattern of violating Ohio's parental consent law and failing to report abuse. The unusual case pits a single plaintiff against the privacy interests of a decade's worth of patients.

Planned Parenthood attorney Daniel Buckley says the clinic has a legal obligation to protect the privacy of its clients' records.

Charles Miller, an attorney for the parents, told the justices the plaintiffs seek only three facts about other minors treated at the clinic: the girl's age, whether she had a sexually transmitted disease, and whether she entered the clinic pregnant. He said about 200 cases a year would be involved.

Chief Justice Thomas Moyer questioned how any of those three details would advance the family's case for damages.

"Where's the linkage?" he asked.

The court did not indicate when it would rule.

The case involves a girl who was 14 at the time of her abortion in 2004, when the state's parental consent law had not been completely settled by the courts. She had been impregnated by her 21-year-old youth soccer coach, John Haller.

The family's lawsuit accuses the Planned Parenthood clinic of failing to get parental consent, report suspected abuse or to inform the girl of risks and alternatives. It seeks unspecified damages.

Court records say the girl gave Haller's cell phone number as her father's, and clinic officials thought they had reached the father when they called inquiring about parental consent. Haller was later convicted on seven counts of sexual battery.

An appeals court ruled last year that records on other patients weren't necessary for the family's lawsuit.



High court could block 'light' cigarettes lawsuit
Court Watch | 2008/10/07 07:12
The Supreme Court picked up Monday where it left off last term, signaling support for efforts to block lawsuits against tobacco companies over deceptive marketing of "light" cigarettes.

The first day of the court's new term, which is set in law as the first Monday in October, included denials of hundreds of appeals. Chief Justice John Roberts opened the new session in a crowded courtroom that included retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Last term, the justices handed down several opinions that limited state regulation of business in favor of federal power. Several justices posed skeptical questions in this term's first case, whether federal law prevents smokers from using consumer protection laws to go after tobacco companies for their marketing of "light" and "low tar" cigarettes.

The companies are facing dozens of such lawsuits across the country.

The federal cigarette labeling law bars states from regulating any aspect of cigarette advertising that involves smoking and health.

"How do you tell it's deceptive or not if you don't look at what the relationship is between smoking and health?," Chief Justice John Roberts said during oral arguments on the case.

Three Maine residents sued Altria Group Inc. and its Philip Morris USA Inc. subsidiary under the state's law against unfair marketing practices. The class-action claim represents all smokers of Marlboro Lights or Cambridge Lights cigarettes, both made by Philip Morris.

The lawsuit argues that the company knew for decades that smokers of light cigarettes compensate for the lower levels of tar and nicotine by taking longer puffs and compensating in other ways.

A federal district court threw out the lawsuit, but the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said it could go forward.

The role of the Federal Trade Commission could be important in the outcome. The FTC is only now proposing to change rules that for years condoned the use of "light" and "low tar" in advertising the cigarettes, despite evidence that smokers were getting a product as dangerous as regular cigarettes.



Bailout bill gains momentum on House floor
Headline Legal News | 2008/10/03 07:15
After a week of tumult, an unprecedented government bailout of the financial industry gained ground in the House on Friday and leaders in both political parties expressed optimism the $700 billion measure would clear Congress by day's end for President Bush's signature.

With the economy showing fresh signs of weakness, the measure advanced past a key hurdle on a 223-205 vote.

An Associated Press tally showed 16 lawmakers who sent an earlier bailout bill to unexpected defeat on Monday had changed their minds and would vote in favor of the revised legislation, more than the dozen needed. Officials said changes made to the measure had sparked a far smaller number of defections among previous supporters.

"I'm optimistic about today. We're not going to take anything for granted but it's time to act," said House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio.

"I think it will pass," agreed Rep. Jim Clyburn, the chief Democratic vote-counter, as debate unfolded in the House chamber.

The Senate passed the measure earlier in the week on a bipartisan vote of 74-25.

"No matter what we do or what we pass, there are still tough times out there. People are mad -- I'm mad," said Republican Rep. J. Gresham Barrett of South Carolina, who opposed the measure the first time it came to a vote. Now, he said, "We have to act. We have to act now."

Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., another convert, said, "I have decided that the cost of doing nothing is greater than the cost of doing something."



Ex-Attorney Loses Bid to Access Legislator's Records
Court News | 2008/10/01 07:18
The Ohio Supreme Court denied a retired lawyer's request for access toa state legislator's e-mails, text messages and correspondence.
    JeffreyGlasgow sought a writ of mandamus for access to the correspondence ofRep. Shannon Jones, because he was concerned about the effects of OhioHouse Bill 151 on his public-employee pension.
    The bill would require public investors to divest holdings in companies that do certain business in Iran or Sudan.
    The state Supreme Court ruled that Glasgow's request was overly broad.
    Glasgow'smerit brief focused on e-mails and text messages. Therefore, thejustices disqualified correspondence. Text messages were alsodisqualified because "they do not document work-related matters."
    SinceJones has already delivered the 26 e-mail messages pertaining to HouseBill 151, the justices ruled that Glasgow's request is moot.


Homeowner Get 122K in Hidden Cash, Court Says
Court News | 2008/09/30 07:10
The $122,000 cash that an electrician found hidden in a ceiling belongs to the woman who bought the home, not the seller's estate, the Oregon Court of Appeals ruled.

Helen Sollars bought a home from the estate of Helene Valoff in Milwaukie, Ore. An electrician found the money more than a year after the purchase.

The trial court ruled that the city should release the disputed money to the estate, because the real estate transfer was not intended to include the money.

Judge Ortega disagreed, citing the language the estate was required to remove personal property and leave other items. So, when the estate left Sollars the refrigerator, stove, and window coverings, it also left her the money.

"Nothing in the requirement that the estate remove all personal property provides any exception based on the parties' knowledge of such property," Ortega wrote.


[PREV] [1] ..[560][561][562][563][564][565][566][567][568].. [618] [NEXT]
All
Securities Class Action
Headline Legal News
Stock Market News
Court News
Court Watch
Legal Interview
Securities Lawyers
Securities Law Firm
Topics in Legal News
Attorney News
Legal Focuses
Opinions
Legal Marketing
Law Firm News
Investment Fraud Litigation
Trump asks the Supreme Court..
Rudy Giuliani is in contempt..
Small businesses brace thems..
Appeals court overturns ex-4..
Amazon workers strike at mul..
TikTok asks Supreme Court to..
Supreme Court rejects Wiscon..
US inflation ticked up last ..
Court seems reluctant to blo..
Court will hear arguments ov..
Romanian court orders a reco..
Illinois court orders pretri..
New Hampshire courts hear 2 ..
PA high court orders countie..
Tight US House races in Cali..
North Carolina Attorney Gene..


   Lawyer & Law Firm Links
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
New York Adoption Lawyers
New York Foster Care Lawyers
Adoption Pre-Certification
www.lawrsm.com
Car Accident Lawyers
Sunnyvale, CA Personal Injury Attorney
www.esrajunglaw.com
Oregon Family Law Attorney
Divorce Lawyer Eugene. Family Law
www.mjmlawoffice.com
Family Law in East Greenwich, RI
Divorce Lawyer - Erica S. Janton
Post-Divorce Issues Attorney
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
   Legal Resource Links
Securities fraud, also known as stock fraud and investment fraud, is a practice that induces investors to make purchase or sale decisions on the basis of false information, frequently resulting in losses, in violation of the securities laws. Securities Arbitration. Generally speaking, securities fraud consists of deceptive practices in the stock and commodity markets, and occurs when investors are enticed to part with their money based on untrue statements.
 
 
 

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Securities Law News 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. | Affordable Law Firm Website Design by Law Promo