|
|
|
Court stays out of Planned Parenthood funding case
Legal Topics |
2013/05/28 16:36
|
Indiana will likely stop defending a law that stripped Medicaid funds from Planned Parenthood after the Supreme Court declined to hear the case Tuesday, an attorney who represents the nation's largest abortion provider said.
Indiana is among more than a dozen states that have enacted or considered laws to prevent taxpayers' money from funding organizations that provide abortion. The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Oct. 23 that the law targeting Planned Parenthood went too far because it denied women the right to choose their own medical providers.
"I assume at this point the state will give up in its claim that that portion of the statue is valid under the Social Security Act," said Ken Falk, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana. The case now returns to U.S. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt, who granted the initial preliminary injunction to temporarily block the law, precipitating the state's appeals.
Neither the state senator who sponsored the bill or the Family and Social Services Administration - the agency tasked with enforcing the law - had immediate comment.
"My office always contended this is ultimately a dispute between the state and federal government, not between a private medical provider and the state," Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller said in a statement. Zoeller's office handled the state's appeal. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court denies second hearing on Medi-Cal rate cut
Legal Topics |
2013/05/25 16:10
|
A federal appeals court on Friday denied a second request by California doctors, pharmacists and hospitals seeking to undo the state's 10 percent provider rate cut for treating the poor.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied an appeal from medical providers to rehear their case, which allows Gov. Jerry Brown to begin implementing the cuts retroactively. A three-judge panel had ruled against them in December on the grounds that trial courts cannot block the state from making cuts that were approved by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Health providers vowed they will continue to press lawmakers to restore the 10 percent reimbursement rate cut to the state's Medicaid program, known as Medi-Cal.
"While we are not surprised by the 9th Circuit Court ruling, we are certainly disappointed, as the 10 percent cut to Medi-Cal will have devastating effects on California's poorest and most vulnerable patients," said Paul Phinney, president of the California Medical Association, in a statement.
Phinney said the state needs competitive Medi-Cal payments as the state prepares to get millions of Californians health coverage under the Affordable Care Act. The association, which represents 35,000 doctors, says ongoing cuts have left doctors with little option but to stop taking qualified patients because the reimbursements do not meet the cost of overhead and supplies to treat them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Judge OKs class-action settlement over Skechers
Legal Topics |
2013/05/23 17:29
|
A federal judge approved a $40 million class-action settlement Monday between Skechers USA Inc. and consumers who bought toning shoes after ads made unfounded claims that the footwear would help people lose weight and strengthen muscles.
U.S. District Judge Thomas B. Russell in Louisville approved the deal, which covers more than 520,000 claims. About 1,000 people eligible for coverage by the settlement opted not to take part.
Those with approved claims will be able to get a maximum repayment for their purchase _ up to $80 per pair of Shape-Ups; $84 per pair of Resistance Runner shoes; up to $54 per pair of Podded Sole Shoes; and $40 per pair of Tone-Ups.
Russell also awarded $5 million for the attorneys in the case to split. Russell ordered that the money cannot come from the $40 million settlement fund set aside for consumers.
Two people that served as the lead plaintiffs in the case will receive payments of $2,500 each.
Russell considered multiple factors in deciding to approve the settlement and found it provides just compensation to the plaintiffs. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: EPA can stop some power plant modifications
Legal Topics |
2013/04/01 06:01
|
A federal appeals court says government regulators can try to halt construction projects at power plants if they think the companies didn't properly calculate whether the changes would increase air pollution.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency sued DTE Energy in 2010 because the company replaced key boiler parts at its Monroe Unit 2 without installing pollution controls that are required whenever a utility performs a major overhaul. DTE said the project was only routine maintenance.
U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman threw out the suit, saying EPA went to court too soon.
But the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned his decision Thursday. In a 2-1 ruling, the court says the law doesn't block EPA from challenging suspected violations of its regulations until long after power plants are modified. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
SC court nixes James Brown estate settlement
Legal Topics |
2013/03/01 07:47
|
The South Carolina Supreme Court on Wednesday overturned a settlement divvying up the multi-million dollar estate of James Brown, saying a former attorney general didn't follow the late soul singer's wishes in putting together the deal.
Attorney General Henry McMaster brokered a settlement in 2009 that split Brown's estate, giving nearly half to a charitable trust, a quarter to his widow Tomi Rae Hynie and leaving the rest to be split among his adult children.
But the justices ruled the deal ignored Brown's wishes for most of his money to go to charity. The court ruled the Godfather of Soul was of sound mind when he made his will before dying of heart failure on Christmas Day 2006 at age 73.
The court sent the estate back to a lower court to be reconsidered.
The justices did agree with the lower court's decision to remove Brown's original trustees. Members of Brown's family said they wanted them gone because the trustees mismanaged the estate until it was almost broke. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Djokovic back on his favorite court in Australia
Legal Topics |
2013/01/17 06:31
|
Same Grand Slam, same court, same result. Only the year was different for Novak Djokovic — and the amount of time he needed on the bright blue hard surface at Rod Laver Arena.
The Australian Open defending champion took his first step toward winning his third consecutive title at Melbourne Park — and fourth overall — with a 6-2, 6-4, 7-5 win over Paul-Henri Mathieu of France on Monday.
The match lasted 1 hour, 42 minutes, more than four hours faster than when the Serbian star was last on center court, his victory in last year's final over Rafael Nadal in a 5-hour, 53-minute marathon.
The win ran Djokovic's winning streak at Melbourne to 15 matches and his overall win-loss record to 33-5. It's no wonder Djokovic calls the Australian Open, site of his first of five Grand Slams in 2008, his favorite major. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Rosen Law Firm Announces Securities Class Action
Legal Topics |
2012/10/13 16:45
|
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. today announced that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased OCZ (OCZ) common stock or call options, or sold OCZ put options, between July 10, 2012 and October 10, 2012, inclusive (the "Class Period").
To join the OCZ class action, visit the firm's website at http://rosenlegal.com, or call Phillip Kim, Esq., toll-free, at 866-767-3653; you may also email pkim@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action.
NO CLASS HAS YET BEEN CERTIFIED IN THE ABOVE ACTION. UNTIL A CLASS IS CERTIFIED, YOU ARE NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL UNLESS YOU RETAIN ONE. YOU MAY CHOOSE TO DO NOTHING AT THIS POINT AND REMAIN AN ABSENT CLASS MEMBER.
The Complaint asserts violations of the federal securities laws against OCZ and certain if its officers and directors for issuing misleading financial information. Namely, the lawsuit asserts that OCZ: (a) was providing extraordinary customer incentives in excess of what was normal and customary in the past; and (b) improperly accounting for customer incentive programs. As a result, OCZ's financial results were misstated during the Class Period and the OCZ lacked adequate internal controls. The Complaint alleges that when this adverse information entered the market investors lost nearly half the value of their investment.
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than December 10, 2012. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. If you wish to join the litigation, or to discuss your rights or interests regarding this class action, please contact Phillip Kim, Esq. of The Rosen Law Firm, toll-free, at 866-767-3653, or via e-mail at pkim@rosenlegal.com.
www.rosenlegal.com. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
