|
|
|
Intellectual Property Matters and Trademark Attorney
Court Watch |
2014/11/18 00:03
|
If needed, The Firm's Intellectual Property Practice will litigate intellectual property disputes, along with creating and executingplans for the creation of new intellectual properties.
When it comes to everything from transactions and disputes about copywright to counseling about trade secret, trademark, and various intellectual property issues, The Firm is knowledgeable.
Much of our intellectual property practice is involved with protecting, securing, and managing our clients intellectual property. In addition, we also structure, implement, and develop agreements in order to boost the value of our client's intellectual property.
To augment the value of your intellectual property, our Firm can help you secure and manage trademarks and trademark licensing. In addition to that, we will help you protect your trademark as well. All over the United States we are known for guarding and enforcing trademarks with enforcement actions in Federal and State courts, as well as the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Italian court deliberating appeal in quake trial
Legal Topics |
2014/11/11 23:03
|
An appeals court is deliberating the fate of seven experts who were found guilty of failing to adequately warn residents of the risk before an earthquake struck central Italy in 2009, killing more than 300 people.
The guilty verdict and six-year jail sentences handed down two years ago sent shock waves through the scientific community, which argued that the allegations represented a complete misunderstanding about the science behind earthquake probabilities.
An appeals court in L'Aquila is expected to issue a verdict on the appeal later Monday.
The defendants, all prominent scientists or geological or disaster experts, were accused of giving "inexact, incomplete and contradictory information" about whether small tremors felt by L'Aquila residents in the weeks and months before the 6.3-magnitude quake should have been grounds for a warning. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
New York International Criminal Law Attorney
Legal Business |
2014/11/08 16:26
|
International Criminal Law generally includes law that comes from international courts such as the tribunals in Yugoslavia and Rwanda and most recently, the International Criminal Court. These Courts are generally concerned with war crimes, crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, and genocide.
International Criminal Law has a broader reach, however. For example, crimes can routinely cross the borders of different nations. These crimes can be seen as “trans-national crimes” and include drug trafficking, trans-national organized crime, terrorism, and foreign corrupt practices.
These trans-national crimes could include money laundering and computer crimes.
International Criminal Law is generally consensual in nature and is generally stated in the statute of the International Court of Justice and the Rome statute of the International Criminal Court.
Jurisdictional issues have always been central to International Criminal Law and a classic case on jurisdiction is the case of S.S. Lotus (France v. Turkey) 1927 P.C.I.J. (ser.A)10.
A key aspect to resolving international disputes is “customary international law” as described in the Supreme Court case Paquete Habana 175 U.S. 677 (1900).
There are certain key terms in International Law including:
- Comity, meaning customary, or reciprocity.
- Complementarity
- Erga Omnes which refers to a states standing to enforce certain rights that belong to the international community.
- Extraterritoriality, or acts that occur outside the territory of the state.
- Jus Cogens is the “compelling law”, the highest of obligations under law placed upon countries.
- Ne Bis in idem which is the international version of the concept of double jeopardy.
This brief overview will serve to make clear the essential structural basis of international criminal law. If you need legal assistance for your international criminal law case, attorney Andrrew J. Schatkin has the necessary experience to help you. Call 516-932-8120 or fill out our contact form to arrange a consultation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Palm Beach Construction Law
Attorney News |
2014/11/07 20:50
|
Our Principal, Mr. Heitman, has extensive experience with both the law and construction. He is both a Florida Licensed Professional Engineer, as well as a Certified Construction Attorney. This puts him in the unique position to lead on both the jobsite, courtroom, and boardroom.
Much like you on your jobsite, we do everything to legal code and correct the first time. We will be straightforward with you about your case and inform you on all your options. We will not cut corners, paying careful attention to every aspect of your case, from the contracts to the construction disputes. Also like you, we think that no project is too big or too small to be given our utmost attention. We want to make you, your project, and your company is given thorough legal representation.
Heitman Law Firm serves it's clients by first comprehending the specific issues our clients face and then tailoring our representation to those specific needs. Construction law cases often involve legal,technical, engineering, design, constructability and scheduling issues. We speak the language of construction. We understand your business. We know how to read a set of plans. Our client service is based on the idea that the client should not be required to pay to bring us up to speed on the construction issues. Instead, we make it our business to be ahead of the learning curve.
Heitman Law Firm has the technical knowledge to understand the issues you face and the legal acumen to address these issues. With construction law, the cases are often multi-faceted and multidisciplinary. We are well versed in construction, business, and law, resulting in attorneys that are up to speed. You need to spend your time teaching us about construction, because we are already familiar. Instead of getting caught up in jargon, we are able to keep up to speed with both your construction issues and the current laws. This keeps us ahead of the curve and far ahead other attorneys in Palm Beach. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court reaffirms BP is liable in Gulf oil spill
Headline Legal News |
2014/11/07 20:50
|
A federal appeals court panel has reaffirmed its ruling that BP is liable for federal Clean Water Act damages stemming from the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill, the latest loss for the oil giant as it fights court decisions that could ultimately bring $18 billion in penalties.
The three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected arguments that there were errors in its June 4 ruling on BP's Clean Water Act liability. The ruling released Wednesday night is not the final say from the court. BP and its minority partner in the Macondo well, Anadarko Petroleum Corp., have a request pending for the full 15-member court to reconsider the issue.
The June order and Wednesday's follow-up were issued by Judges Fortunato Benavides, Carolyn Dineen King and James Dennis. They upheld U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier's ruling holding the well owners are liable.
BP and Anadarko had argued they were not liable because equipment failure on the leased rig Deepwater Horizon caused the April 2010 disaster. An explosion on the rig killed 11 workers and sent millions of gallons of oil spewing into the Gulf in what became the nation's worst offshore oil disaster.
Barbier has also ruled that BP was "grossly negligent" in the disaster. BP has asked Barbier to reconsider that finding, which, if it stands, would be a factor in whether the water act penalties for the company reach an estimated $18 billion.
Under the Clean Water Act, a polluter can be forced to pay from $1,100 to $4,300 per barrel of spilled oil. The higher limit applies if the company is found grossly negligent — as BP was in Barbier's ruling. But penalties can be assessed at lower amounts.
Government experts estimated that 4.2 million barrels spilled into the Gulf. BP has urged Barbier to use an estimate of 2.45 million barrels in calculating any Clean Water Act penalties.
Barbier has scheduled a trial in January to help decide how much BP owes in federal Clean Water Act penalties. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abortion-rights supporters welcomed the delay Tuesday.
Headline Legal News |
2014/11/05 22:30
|
"Today the Oklahoma Supreme Court handed the women of Oklahoma a crucial victory by protecting their constitutional rights and restoring critical options for those seeking safe and legal abortion services," said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is supporting efforts to fight the laws.
"Time and time again, courts are seeing that the true motive behind these underhanded and baseless restrictions is to push essential reproductive health care services out of reach for as many women as possible," she said.
A message seeking comment from Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt was not immediately returned. A spokesman for Gov. Mary Fallin said the governor was on the road on Election Day and was unsure if she could be reached for comment.
The New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights filed a lawsuit in October on behalf of an Oklahoma doctor who performs nearly half the state's abortions, seeking to block the law requiring admitting privileges law.
The physician, Dr. Larry Burns, said he had applied for admitting privileges at 16 nearby hospitals but had yet to get approval from any facility.
When Burns filed his lawsuit in October, Fallin — who signed the legislation into law in May— said she believed abortion was wrong and that she had been "proud to work with lawmakers in both parties to support legislation that protects the health and lives of both mothers and their unborn children." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appeals court takes on NSA surveillance case
Headline Legal News |
2014/11/04 23:35
|
A conservative gadfly lawyer who has made a career of skewering Democratic administrations is taking his battle against the National Security Agency's telephone surveillance program to a federal appeals court.
Activist attorney Larry Klayman won the first round in December, when U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, a Republican appointee, ruled that the NSA's surveillance program likely runs afoul of the Constitution's ban on unreasonable searches. The government appealed.
In court filings in preparation for Tuesday's argument, the Justice Department told three Republican-nominated appeals judges that collecting the phone data is of overriding and compelling importance to the nation's security.
Former NSA systems analyst Edward Snowden revealed the phone data collection effort a year and a half ago, triggering a debate over privacy rights and surveillance.
In New York, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit recently heard arguments in an appeal of a judge's opinion that found the surveillance program legal.
The three appeals judges in the Washington case have generally come down on the government's side on national security issues. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
