|
|
|
Woman at center of 1961 Supreme Court case dies
Topics in Legal News |
2014/12/11 13:02
|
A woman who stood up to police trying to search her Ohio home in 1957 and ultimately won a landmark Supreme Court decision on searches and seizures has died.
Dollree Mapp died Oct. 31 in Conyers, Georgia. A relative and caretaker, Carolyn Mapp, confirmed her death Wednesday and said she died on the day after her birthday at the age of 91.
Mapp's Supreme Court case, Mapp v. Ohio, is a staple of law school textbooks and considered a milestone case on the Fourth Amendment, which requires law enforcement officers to get a warrant before conducting a search. The case curbed the power of police by saying evidence obtained by illegal searches and seizures could not be used in state court.
Mapp's path to the U.S. Supreme Court began on May 23, 1957, when three Cleveland police officers arrived at her home. There had just been a bombing at the home of Don King, who later became famous as a boxing promoter, and police believed that a person wanted for questioning was hiding in Mapp's home. The officers demanded to enter, but Mapp refused to let them in without a search warrant. More officers later arrived and police forced open a door, according to a summary of the case in the Supreme Court opinion.
When the officers confronted Mapp, one held up a piece of paper, claiming it was a warrant, and Mapp snatched it away. After a struggle an officer got the paper back, Mapp was handcuffed for being "belligerent," and officers searched her home. They didn't find the person they were looking for, but they did find some pornographic books and pictures. At the time, an Ohio law made having obscene material a crime, and Mapp was convicted, though she said the materials belonged to a former boarder. Prosecutors never produced a search warrant at trial.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court overturned Mapp's conviction in a 6-3 decision, ruling in 1961 that illegally obtained evidence could not be used in state court. The court had previously ruled that this was the case in federal court, but Mapp's case extended the "exclusionary rule" to states where the vast majority of criminal prosecutions take place, broadening the protection. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court rules against FedEx in drivers' labor case
Topics in Legal News |
2014/08/28 12:12
|
A federal court has ruled that FedEx Corp. improperly classified about 2,300 drivers in California as independent contractors instead of employees.
The decision by a three-judge panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday covered drivers who worked for FedEx between 2000 and 2007. Similar lawsuits were filed in about 40 states before 2009.
A lawyer for the drivers estimated that they could receive at least $250 million in back pay and damages if the ruling stands up.
The judges said that under California law, the drivers were employees because FedEx controlled how they did their work. They had to wear company uniforms, drive approved trucks, and follow other company procedures.
FedEx said it will appeal to the full appeals court in San Francisco. FedEx general counsel Cary Blancett said that other courts had upheld contract language with "thousands" of independent contractors.
The Memphis, Tennessee-based company said that since 2011, it has only contracted with incorporated businesses that treat drivers as their employees. It also said it will shift to new service agreements in California, Oregon, Washington and Nevada.
In their lawsuit, the drivers sought back pay for overtime, expenses, punitive damages and attorney costs. That would total more than $75,000 for each of the drivers in the original lawsuit, according to filings. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
California high court tosses death penalty
Topics in Legal News |
2014/07/08 14:29
|
The California Supreme Court has tossed out the murder conviction and death penalty sentence of a Riverside County man because of juror misconduct.
The high court ruled Monday that Fred Lewis Weatherton didn't receive a fair trial in 2002 because one of the jurors decided and discussed the case before the start of deliberations. The court said Weatherton is entitled to a new trial.
Weatherton was convicted of shooting to death two neighbors during a 1998 robbery in Indio. A third neighbor who was seriously wounded identified Weatherton as the shooter. Investigators also matched footprints at the scene to shoes Weatherton was wearing when he was arrested shortly after the incident.
The Riverside County District Attorney's office said it hasn't decided how it will proceed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court rejects appeal of gay jury selection case
Topics in Legal News |
2014/06/25 09:53
|
A federal appeals court on Tuesday refused to reconsider its ruling granting heightened legal protections to gays and lesbians, prompting three dissenting judges to warn of far-reaching implications in same-sex marriage cases in the Western United States.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in January banned the exclusion of potential jurors because of their sexual orientation, saying such action was akin to striking someone from the jury pool because of their race or gender.
An undisclosed majority of the full 29-judge court voted against rehearing the case over the objections of three judges.
The dissenters, led by Judge Diarmuid O'Scannlain argued that the ruling "bears significant implications for the same-sex marriage debate and for other laws that may give rise to distinctions based on sexual orientation."
O'Scannlain argues giving gays and lesbians the same protections as minorities and women prematurely decides the same-sex marriage issue without the U.S. Supreme Court's input. O'Scannlain pointed out that officials in Nevada and Oregon have cited the 9th Circuit opinion to drop official opposition to same-sex marriage.
A week after the Jan. 21 ruling, for instance, Carson City District Attorney Neil Rombardo withdrew opposition to a lawsuit challenging Nevada's gay marriage ban, citing the 9th Circuit juror ruling that he called a "game changer."
O'Scannlain was joined by Judges Jay Bybee and Carlos Bea. All three judges were appointed by Republican presidents.
The ruling is binding in the nine Western states covered by the 9th Circuit, including the four states with pending same-sex marriage cases: Hawaii, Idaho, Oregon and Nevada. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court voids overall contribution limits
Topics in Legal News |
2014/04/04 09:42
|
The Supreme Court struck down limits Wednesday in federal law on the overall campaign contributions the biggest individual donors may make to candidates, political parties and political action committees.
The justices said in a 5-4 vote that Americans have a right to give the legal maximum to candidates for Congress and president, as well as to parties and PACs, without worrying that they will violate the law when they bump up against a limit on all contributions, set at $123,200 for 2013 and 2014. That includes a separate $48,600 cap on contributions to candidates.
But their decision does not undermine limits on individual contributions to candidates for president or Congress, now $2,600 an election.
Chief Justice John Roberts announced the decision, which split the court's liberal and conservative justices. Roberts said the aggregate limits do not act to prevent corruption, the rationale the court has upheld as justifying contribution limits.
The overall limits "intrude without justification on a citizen's ability to exercise 'the most fundamental First Amendment activities,'" Roberts said, quoting from the court's seminal 1976 campaign finance ruling in Buckley v. Valeo.
Justice Clarence Thomas agreed with the outcome of the case, but wrote separately to say that he would have gone further and wiped away all contribution limits. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Investment Fraud Litigation |
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
Legal News RSS Feed
