Ninth Circuit upholds school policy on special education children
Legal Topics | 2008/08/20 15:37
The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on Tuesday upheld a California public school district's policy that parents may only observe their disabled children in the classroom for twenty minutes in order to evaluate the school's proposed education plan. The parents of a student with autism filed suit after the psychologist they hired to evaluate the proposed plan was allowed only twenty minutes in the classroom, even though the district's own experts viewed L.M. in his home for three hours. The court rejected the parents' allegations that the district's policy violated the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act by denying their child access to a free and appropriate public education. The court also ruled against the parents' argument that the policy infringed upon their right to due process by interfering with their ability to participate in a placement hearing. The court explained:
The District’s policy...was harmless because Parents nevertheless had a full opportunity to participate in the process to fashion an appropriate educational plan for L.M. with help from an informed and knowledgeable expert. There is no evidence to support a finding that Parents’ right to participate was significantly affected.
The court also denied the parents' request for a "stay put" order which would allow their child to remain in his current private educational program until litigation of the matter concluded, because the program did not constitute "current educational placement" under IDEA.

Earlier this month, the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit found that a district court erred when it refused to grant qualified immunity to school officials who placed a child in a special education program designed to control his repeated outbursts. The child's mother had originally sought relief under IDEA because her child suffered from severe mental and emotional health problems, but this claim was dismissed by a lower court. In 2007, the US Supreme Court held that parents of special needs children have independent, enforceable rights under IDEA, overturning a Sixth Circuit decision holding that rights under IDEA are held only by the child. When US President George W. Bush signed IDEA into law in 2004, he stated that it had been designed to ensure that students with disabilities would have special education teachers with the necessary skills and training. Bush was subsequently criticized for underfunding the related programs.


Businessman Says Joe Arpaio Ruined Him
Legal Topics | 2008/08/18 17:03
 Joe Arpaio, the publicity-hungry sheriff of Maricopa County, staged a media event by bursting into a man's home and accusing him of running an illegal chop shop, though Arpaio was simply serving a warrant for an unpaid traffic ticket, a man claims in Maricopa County Court.

Terry Jorgensen claims Arpaio also seized more than $100,000 in tools and jet skis and refused to return them, driving Jorgensen out of business and making him homeless.

In his pro se, but cogent, complaint, Jorgensen says Arpaio staged the raid on Feb. 6, 2003, then on April 6, 2006, charged him with six felonies, including running a chop shop. Jorgensen claims that in August 2007, "Superior Court Judge Roza Mroz ruled that the search warrant violated the plaintiff's Fourth Amendment rights to be free from unreasonable search, dismissed the case, and ordered the return of plaintiff's property. Although plaintiff has a court order for its return, the MCSO (Maricopa County Sheriff's Office) refuses to return a single item."

Jorgensen says he was earning $100,000 a year when Arpaio staged his raid and ruined his business. He claims Arpaio's stunt cost him more than $500,000 and made him homeless.

Arpaio, the self-proclaimed "Toughest Sheriff in America," has made national news for years by, among other things, putting prisoners to work on chain gangs and housing them in tents.


Pakistani woman alleged to be al-Qaeda appears in US court
Legal Topics | 2008/08/07 16:06
The first woman scheduled to stand trial in the US on charges related to suspected al-Qaeda ties has been extradited to the US and appeared before the District Court for the Southern District of New York Tuesday on terrorism charges. Aafia Siddiqui, who comes from Pakistan, was charged with assault and the attempted murder of a US officer after allegedly opening fire on agents at the Afghan detention facility where she was being held last month. According to the complaint:
   AAFIA SIDDIQUI, the defendant, who will be first brought to and arrested in the Southern District of New York, unlawfully, willfully, and knowingly did use a deadly and dangerous weapon and did forcibly assault, resist, oppose, impede, intimidate, and interfere with a person designated in Title 18, United States Code, Section 1114, namely, officers and employees of the FBI and the United States armed services, while engaged in and on account of the performance of official duties, to wit, SIDDIQUI obtained a United States Army Officer's M-4 rifle and fired it at officers and employees of the FBI and the United States armed services.
If convicted, she could face 20 years in prison on each charge.

Siddiqui's family has insisted that she is not an al-Qaeda agent and that the FBI has publicized misleading information about her. They say that Siddiqui, a former student at Brandeis University and MIT in Boston, may have been a victim of extraordinary rendition after she vanished from Karachi, Pakistan in 2003. Family lawyer Elaine Whitfield Sharp alleged that Siddiqui may have been wrongly detained and tortured at Bagram air base in Afghanistan.


ICE launches voluntary deportation program
Legal Topics | 2008/08/06 17:41
US Immigration and Customs Enforcement launched a new program Tuesday that allows certain illegal immigrants to coordinate their removal from the US with ICE without the risk of home raids, arrest or detention. The Scheduled Departure Program, a pilot program that will run through August 22 in five major cities, is designed for illegal immigrants without criminal records who have ignored official removal orders. According to the ICE press release:
 
The agency recognizes there are those less inclined to accept the intentions of such a compassionately conceived enforcement initiative, but remains committed to providing sensible alternatives that balance the welfare of the individuals and families in question with its clear obligation to uphold the law.

   The Scheduled Departure Program will not alter a participant's immigration status or provide any immigration benefit. The program is not a form of voluntary departure or voluntary return. Participants will continue to have a final order of removal, deportation or exclusion.

ICE stressed that illegal immigrants without formal removal orders, those with criminal records and those who pose a threat to national security would not qualify for the program and would be detained, but said that participation by those who qualified would ease the transition process and the impact on the immigrants' families. ICE also began an ad campaign in the five participating cities, but critics have said the program will be ineffective because eligible immigrants will not voluntarily surrender.

ICE maintains a number of additional initiatives [fact sheet] to combat illegal immigration. In May, 270 illegal immigrants arrested during an ICE-led raid at an Agriprocessors Inc. meatpacking plant in Iowa were each sentenced to five months in prison and 27 more received probation after pleading guilty to the use of false immigration documents. ICE also carried out a raid in California the same month targeting 495 people who had ignored deportation orders, resulting in the arrest of more than 900 illegal immigrants. In general, US immigration prosecutions continued to increase in March 2008, jumping nearly 50 percent from the previous month and nearly 75 percent from the previous year, according to a report released by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University.


Third Circuit rules on confiscation of materials
Legal Topics | 2008/08/01 15:42
The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit on Thursday affirmed a decision to dismiss claims filed by fifteen current and former inmates alleging that various employees of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections violated their constitutional rights when they confiscated inmates' legal materials. After a DOC inmate filed fraudulent liens against a state court judge, a superintendent and the DOC secretary in June 2005, the DOC banned all materials related to the copyrighting of names, the filing of liens, and filings under the Uniform Commercial Code. Upon a search of the plaintiff inmates' cells, prison officials discovered these contraband documents and subsequently confiscated all of the inmates' legal materials, including items that had not been designated as contraband. The inmates filed suit, alleging that the seizures violated the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of Due Process as well as their right to access the courts and possess publications and legal materials under the First Amendment. The Court of Appeals dismissed the inmates' Due Process claims, noting that prison officials provided the inmates with three separate opportunities to reclaim their non-contraband property following the seizures, explaining that:

[A]n unauthorized intentional deprivation of property by prison officials does not violate the Due Process Clause if a meaningful postdeprivation remedy for the loss is available.

In affirming the lower court's determination that the DOC's confiscation did not unreasonably deprive the inmates of their right to possess publications and legal materials, the Third Circuit found that:

In light of the DOC’s experience with the inmate’s June 2005 filing, which demonstrated that fraudulent UCC filings are easy to file but burdensome to remove, along with the research that informed their judgment on this policy, we conclude that the defendants’ decision to engage in preemptive action in this case was reasonable

The court dismissed the inmates' claims that the seizures blocked their access to the courts, ruling that their initial pleadings were insufficient to support a claim. The court found that "the plaintiffs’ claim rested solely on the ground that the defendants confiscated their legal materials, contraband and non-contraband alike" and did not show an actual injury or that the inmates possessed no other remedy to compensate them for their lost claims.

Jurisdictions across the country have seen an increase in the malicious filing of fraudulent liens, which can cause great hardship for the affected parties. Some experts attribute the rise in such filings to a bizarre and convoluted new scam known as "redemption", in which participants are told that every American has a "strawman" account created by the the US government. Participants pay large sums to obtain fraudulent instructions said to be grounded in the UCC. These materials claim to show how to access the government money in that strawman account, and participants are encouraged to exact financial revenge against government officials. In February, a Texas inmate was sentenced to 12 years in prison after he filed fraudulent liens against a US District Judge and Assistant US Attorney involved in the prosecution of his initial drug convictions.


United Airlines Takes on Pilots Union
Legal Topics | 2008/07/31 16:18
United Airlines wants to put an end to a pilot union's campaign to pressure the airline into reopening union negotiations by urging pilots to refuse voluntary flight assignments and to participate in an organized "sick-out," which forced United to cancel 329 flights between July 19 and July 27.

"United simply cannot afford a repeat of the summer of 2000 and its impact on the Company's customers and employees," the airline claims in Federal Court, referring to a widely publicized slowdown in 2000 that inconvenienced customers and took a toll on United's reputation.

United seeks an injunction barring the Air Line Pilots Association International and its members "from advocating or engaging in any form of job action designed to put economic pressure on United or disrupt its operations."


Bush Approves Military Death Sentence
Legal Topics | 2008/07/30 16:15
President Bush approved the death sentence of Pvt. Ronald Gray, thefirst execution by the military since 1961. The former Army cook wasconvicted by court-martial of two murders and an attempted murder,among other offenses, while serving at Fort Bragg, N.C., in themid-1980s.
    Gray had been charged with four counts of murderand eight counts of rape, and pleaded guilty to two murders and fiverapes in North Carolina state court.
    In a separateproceeding, a court-martial panel convicted him of two counts ofmurder, one count of attempted murder and a slew of other charges,including rape, forcible sodomy and robbery.
    An appeals courtfor the Armed Services rejected Gray's appeal in 1999, and Bushapproved his death sentence on Monday under the Uniform Code ofMilitary Justice.
    "While approving a sentence of death for amember of our armed forces is a serious and difficult decision for acommander-in-chief, the president believes the facts of this case leaveno doubt that the sentence is just and warranted," White House PressSecretary Dana Perino said in a statement.
    The last militaryexecution was ordered by President Dwight Eisenhower in 1957, and wascarried out by hanging in 1961. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld themilitary's use of the death penalty in 1996, but no one in the servicehas been executed since the Eisenhower administration. President JohnF. Kennedy chose to commute a death sentence to life in prison in 1962.
    Currently, six people sit on military's death row at FortLeavenworth, Kan. The president has the final say whether they live ordie.


[PREV] [1] ..[81][82][83][84][85][86][87][88][89].. [93] [NEXT]
All
Headline Legal News
Legal Topics
Legal Business
Attorney News
Court News
Court Watch
Areas of Focus
Legal Interview
Opinions
Former Georgia insurance commissi..
Spanish court grants bail to Dani..
A Supreme Court ruling in a socia..
Prosecutors seek from 40 to 50 ye..
Trump wants N.Y. hush money trial..
Sen. Bob Menendez enters not guil..
Hong Kong court affirms landmark ..
Prosecutors Drop Charges During ..
Supreme Court temporarily blocks ..
Prince Harry loses a court challe..
Witness at trial recounts fatal s..
Court rejects appeal from 3 GOP H..
Ex-Illinois lawmaker abruptly ple..
North Carolina voter ID trial res..
Republicans urge state Supreme Co..
Nevada Supreme Court sides with A..
Court says GOP lawmakers who stag..
Donald Trump must pay an addition..
Supreme Court could overturn Okla..
Illinois high court hands lawmake..




St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Chicago Truck Drivers Lawyer
Chicago Workers' Comp Attorneys
www.krol-law.com
Raleigh, NC Business Lawyer
www.rothlawgroup.com
Bar Association Website Design
Bar Association Member Management
www.lawpromo.com
Sunnyvale, CA truck accident Attorney
www.esrajunglaw.com
Raleigh, NC Business Lawyer
www.rothlawgroup.com
San Francisco Trademark Lawyer
San Francisco Copyright Lawyer
www.onulawfirm.com
Lorain Elyria Divorce Lawyer
www.loraindivorceattorney.com
Web Design For Korean American Lawyers
Korean American Lawyer Website Design
romeoproduction.com
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
Family Lawyer Rockville Maryland
Rockville Divorce lawyer
familylawyersmd.com
   Legal Resource
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.
 
 
 
Copyright © ClickTheLaw.com. All Rights Reserved.The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Click The Law. 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 or circumstance. By using the www.clickthelaw.com you agree to be bound by these Terms & Conditions.

A LawPromo Web Design