|
|
|
Court rejects early appeal of surveillance ruling
Legal Topics |
2014/04/08 18:58
|
The Supreme Court has declined an early look at a constitutional challenge to the National Security Agency's bulk collection of millions of Americans' telephone records.
Conservative lawyer Larry Klayman persuaded a federal judge in December to rule that the agency's activities likely violate the Constitution's ban on unreasonable searches. The justices on Monday rejected Klayman's unusual request to bypass the traditional appeals process and hear the case immediately.
Klayman says the case is too important to wait for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to reach a decision. The district court judge granted an injunction against the NSA, but put it on hold pending a government appeal.
The Obama administration has defended the NSA program as a crucial tool against terrorism. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court Refuses To Overturn Arizona Marijuana Ruling
Headline Legal News |
2014/04/03 22:51
|
The Supreme Court has refused to overturn Arizona court rulings ordering the Yuma County sheriff to return marijuana that was seized from a woman with a California medical marijuana authorization honored by Arizona.
The justices' order was issued without comment Monday in the case of Valerie Okun, who had marijuana in her car when a Border Patrol agent stopped her and her husband in Yuma County, Ariz., in 2011. She was charged with marijuana possession crimes, but the charges were dropped when she provided proof she was authorized to possess marijuana under California's medical marijuana program. Arizona's medical marijuana law allows people with authorizations from other states to have marijuana in Arizona.
But the Yuma County sheriff refused to return Okun's marijuana, even after Arizona courts ruled in her favor. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court voids overall contribution limits
Legal Topics |
2014/04/03 22:51
|
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Another Apple-Samsung skirmish heads to court
Headline Legal News |
2014/03/31 23:19
|
The fiercest rivalry in the world of smartphones is heading back to court this week in the heart of the Silicon Valley, with Apple and Samsung accusing each other, once again, of ripping off designs and features.
The trial will mark the latest round in a long-running series of lawsuits between the two tech giants that underscore a much larger concern about what is allowed to be patented.
"There's a widespread suspicion that lots of the kinds of software patents at issue are written in ways that cover more ground than what Apple or any other tech firm actually invented," Notre Dame law professor Mark McKenna said. "Overly broad patents allow companies to block competition."
The latest Apple-Samsung case will be tried less than two years after a federal jury found Samsung was infringing on Apple patents. Samsung was ordered to pay about $900 million but is appealing and has been allowed to continue selling products using the technology.
Now, jury selection is scheduled to begin Monday in another round of litigation, with Apple Inc. accusing Samsung of infringing on five patents on newer devices, including Galaxy smartphones and tablets. In a counterclaim, Samsung says Apple stole two of its ideas to use on iPhones and iPads. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Levin & Curlett LLC
Court Watch |
2014/03/31 23:19
|
New York - Baltimore - Washington, D.C. White Collar Criminal Defense
Levin & Curlett LLC was formed by former prosecutors who created a small, high quality litigation boutique. Levin & Curlett LLC has extensive experience in all facets of criminal and civil litigation. Whether clients are involved in contractual disputes, business litigation, or qui tam whistleblower cases, our trial experience allows the firm to work effectively with clients to achieve their goals. Similarly, extensive prosecutorial backgrounds allow the firm to represent clients who are involved in criminal proceedings as targets, subjects, witnesses, recipients of grand jury subpoenas, or defendants.
The firm puts its skills to work representing: - clients who are targets, subjects, or witnesses in criminal investigations,
- clients who are facing criminal charges
- clients who are involved in complex civil litigation at the trial and appellate levels
- whistleblowers in qui tam and False Claims Act litigation.
The attorneys at Levin & Curlett concentrate their practice representing individuals and businesses in criminal matters and civil litigation, and representing whistleblowers in False Claims Act and Qui Tam litigation.
Our attorneys have decades of combined experience serving as prosecutors in the Department of Justice and the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, and leading practices in complex civil and criminal litigation at a national law firm.
We are uniquely positioned to represent the interests of those confronting the nation’s largest corporations, insurance companies, or the power of the federal government. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Law Offices of Tenecia P. Reid, PLLC
Court Watch |
2014/03/31 23:18
|
The Law Offices of Tenecia P. Reid, located in Northern Virginia and is here to provide you the best legal service to you and your loved one. With years of experience in divorce cases and family matters, Tenecia is both strategic and aggressive. We will give you an honest assessment of your situation and together discuss the ways we could help achieve the goals and outcomes you want.
Specializing in family law for her entire career, Attorney Tenecia P. Reid stands ready to skillfully guide you through the divorce litigation process.
Divorce litigation can be frustrating, confusing, and emotional, so it is imperative to have an attorney who both listens and treats you with respect as you face major life decisions. Widely experienced, Attorney Reid has negotiated and litigated cases that include complex marital assets, tax issues, business valuations, underwater joint mortgages, adultery, abuse, protective orders, and bankruptcy issues.
Attorney Reid is also intimately familiar with the laws governing fault-based divorce cases, and can help you to determine whether you have one or more fault grounds against your spouse and how you may prove them.
Ms. Reid will be able to confidently assess your case and situation to help you obtain the best possible results. Don't hesitate to call today! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
US appeals court upholds new Texas abortion rules
Legal Topics |
2014/03/28 18:21
|
A federal appeals court on Thursday upheld Texas' tough abortion restrictions that have forced the closure of about 20 clinics around the state, saying the new rules don't jeopardize women's health.
A panel of judges at the New Orleans-based 5th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower court judge who said the rules violate the U.S. Constitution and serve no medical purpose. After the lower court's ruling, the appeals court allowed the restrictions to go into effect while it considered the case, which ultimately could end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.
The new law requires abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital and places strict limits on doctors prescribing abortion-inducing pills. More regulations that are scheduled to begin later this year weren't a part of the case.
In its opinion, the appeals court said the law "on its face does not impose an undue burden on the life and health of a woman."
Planned Parenthood, which sued to block the restrictions, called the ruling "terrible" and said that "safe and legal abortion will continue to be virtually impossible for thousands of Texas women to access."
"The latest restrictions in Texas will force women to have abortions later in pregnancy, if they are able to get to a doctor at all," Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood Votes, said in a statement. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Headline Legal News for You to Reach America's Best Legal Professionals. The latest legal news and information - Law Firm, Lawyer and Legal Professional news in the Media. |
|
|
