|
|
|
Seattle lawyer left $188 million charitable trust
Legal Business |
2013/12/02 21:21
|
A Seattle lawyer who quietly amassed a fortune by investing his inherited family wealth has left a bequest of nearly $188 million to benefit Seattle Children's Hospital, the University of Washington School of Law and the Salvation Army.
Hospital officials said, in announcing Jack MacDonald's bequest Tuesday, that it was the largest charitable gift in Seattle Children's 106-year history. The Law School said it was also the largest gift in its 114-year history.
The three organizations will receive income earned by the trust each year, with 40 percent, or nearly $4 million a year, going to support pediatric research at the hospital in honor of his mother, a long-time hospital volunteer. Thirty percent of the income goes to support student scholarships and other needs at the law school, where he graduated in 1940, in appreciation of his education.
The remaining 30 percent supports the Salvation Army in honor of MacDonald's father, Frederick MacDonald, who owned MacDonald Meat Co. and wanted to help men and women in need.
Jack MacDonald died in September at age 98. He worked for three decades as an attorney for the Veterans Administration in Seattle. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nevada Supreme Court upholds ethics laws
Headline Legal News |
2013/12/02 21:20
|
The Nevada Supreme Court upheld the state's ethics laws on Wednesday while backing the censure of a Sparks councilman for his 2005 vote on a casino project involving his former campaign manager.
In a 5-2 opinion, justices rejected arguments from Sparks Councilman Michael Carrigan that the conflict of interest laws are overly vague and violate constitutional protections of right of association.
Chief Justice Kris Pickering, writing for the majority, said the law serves to ensure that public officers "avoid conflicts between (their) private interests and those of the general public whom (they) serve."
At issue was whether a catch-all phrase in Nevada law extending defined voting prohibitions — such as in matter involving family members, business partners or employers — to any other substantially similar relationship is vague and unconstitutional.
Carrigan was censured by the state Ethics Commission for voting on the Lazy 8 hotel-casino project. Carlos Vasquez, a lobbyist for the project, had served as Carrigan's campaign manager free of charge and placed media ads for the campaign at cost, according to court documents. He also lobbied for the project before the Sparks City Council.
The Lazy 8 was backed by one-time developer and Nevada political powerhouse Harvey Whittemore, who was convicted this year in federal court on felony charges related to illegal campaign contributions made to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amanda Knox appeals slander case to European court
Headline Legal News |
2013/11/29 18:30
|
Lawyers for Amanda Knox filed an appeal of her slander conviction in Italy with the European Court of Human Rights, as her third murder trial was underway in Florence.
The slander conviction was based on statements Knox made to police in November 2007 when she was being questioned about the slaying of her British roommate, Meredith Kercher, in the house they shared in Perugia.
Knox says she was coerced into making false statements blaming the slaying on bar owner Patrick Lumumba.
"The interrogation took place in a language I barely spoke, without a lawyer present, and without the police informing me that I was a suspect in Meredith's murder, which was a violation of my human rights," Knox said in a statement released Monday as the appeal was filed.
Knox was convicted of slander at her first trial in December 2009. That conviction was upheld during the appeal that resulted in her 2011 murder acquittal.
Knox has returned to Seattle, where she is a student at the University of Washington. She is not attending the third trial being held in an appeals court in Florence.
The European Court for Human Rights is an international court in Strasbourg, France, that oversees the European Convention on Human Rights. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court Will Take up New Health Law Dispute
Areas of Focus |
2013/11/29 18:30
|
The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to referee another dispute over President Barack Obama's health care law, whether businesses can use religious objections to escape a requirement to cover birth control for employees.
The justices said they will take up an issue that has divided the lower courts in the face of roughly 40 lawsuits from for-profit companies asking to be spared from having to cover some or all forms of contraception.
The court will consider two cases. One involves Hobby Lobby Inc., an Oklahoma City-based arts and crafts chain with 13,000 full-time employees. Hobby Lobby won in the lower courts.
The other case is an appeal from Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp., a Pennsylvania company that employs 950 people in making wood cabinets. Lower courts rejected the company's claims.
The court said the cases will be combined for arguments, probably in late March. A decision should come by late June.
The cases center on a provision of the health care law that requires most employers that offer health insurance to their workers to provide a range of preventive health benefits, including contraception.
In both instances, the Christian families that own the companies say that insuring some forms of contraception violates their religious beliefs.
The key issue is whether profit-making corporations can assert religious beliefs under the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act or the First Amendment provision guaranteeing Americans the right to believe and worship as they choose. Nearly four years ago, the justices expanded the concept of corporate "personhood," saying in the Citizens United case that corporations have the right to participate in the political process the same way that individuals do.
"The government has no business forcing citizens to choose between making a living and living free," said David Cortman of the Alliance Defending Freedom, the Christian public interest law firm that is representing Conestoga Wood at the Supreme Court. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spanish court sentences 'Robin Hood' mayor
Areas of Focus |
2013/11/25 23:24
|
A Spanish court has sentenced a town mayor and four others to seven months in prison for occupying unused military land they wanted to be loaned to farmers hard hit by the economic crisis.
The regional court of southern Andalusia on Thursday convicted Marinaleda town mayor Juan Manuel Sanchez Gordillo and the others of serious disobedience for ignoring warnings to leave the "Las Turquillas" ranch land they occupied during the summer of 2012.
Sanchez Gordillo has staged several activities to highlight the plight of Spain's near 6 million unemployed, including "Robin Hood"-style supermarket lootings in 2012 to aid the poor.
His town boasts full employment thanks to its farm cooperatives.
Defendants given sentences of less than two years in Spain are generally not imprisoned unless they have previous convictions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appeals court won't toss NYC stop-frisk rulings
Legal Topics |
2013/11/25 23:21
|
A federal appeals court refused Friday to toss out court rulings finding that New York City carried out its police stop-and-frisk policy in a discriminatory manner, ending what was likely the city's last chance to nullify the decisions before the arrival of a new mayor who has criticized the tactic.
A three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a five-page order Friday, saying the city could make its arguments to toss out the rulings when its appeal of the decisions of U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin is heard next year.
Last month, the same appeals panel had suspended the effects of Scheindlin's rulings and removed her from the case, saying she misapplied a related ruling that allowed her to take the stop-and-frisk case and made comments to the media during a trial that called her impartiality into question.
The city had argued that the panel's decision to remove Scheindlin meant it should also nullify her rulings. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Republicans block nominee to key appeals court
Legal Topics |
2013/11/22 18:13
|
Senate Republicans on Monday blocked President Barack Obama's nomination of Robert L. Wilkins to a key appellate court, continuing a nomination fight that has stoked partisan tensions in the Senate.
Wilkins, a District Court judge in Washington who in 2010 was confirmed by the Senate on a voice vote, was nominated to fill one of three vacancies on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. He is the third straight nominee to the powerful court that Republicans have stopped from being seated.
The Senate voted 53-38 in favor of ending Republican-led delays, falling short of the 60 votes required to advance Wilkins' nomination. Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine voted with Democrats to end debate.
The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is often referred to as the second most powerful court in the country, after the Supreme Court. Informally known as the D.C. circuit, the court's influence stems from its caseload — it rules on administration orders and regulations — and because some of its judges become Supreme Court justices. The D.C. circuit currently has eight active judges evenly divided between Democratic and Republican nominees. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
