|
|
|
SC Supreme Court hears appeal in fatal dog attack
Headline Legal News |
2014/04/15 13:59
|
Prosecutors want South Carolina's highest court to reinstate the conviction of a Dillon County man whose dogs attacked and killed a 10-year-old boy in 2006.
The state Supreme Court on Tuesday hears an appeal in the case of Bentley Collins. In 2012, the state Court of Appeals overturned Collins' involuntary manslaughter conviction and prison sentence, ruling a judge shouldn't have allowed prosecutors to show pictures of the boy taken before his autopsy.
The photographs showed the extent of the boy's injuries, including how the dogs mauled him so badly his bones were exposed and his ears and nose were eaten.
The judges said the pathologist testified to the injuries, so the photographs did nothing more than rile the jury's emotions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court rejects early appeal of surveillance ruling
Topics in Legal News |
2014/04/08 10:49
|
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 to hear class-action dispute
Press Release |
2014/04/08 10:49
|
The Supreme Court will consider the requirements for transferring class-action lawsuits from state courts to federal courts.
The justices on Monday agreed to hear an appeal from a Michigan energy company that asserts it should be allowed to move a class-action case from Kansas state court to federal court. Federal law allows such transfers in cases involving more than $5 million.
A group of royalty owners sued the Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co. alleging they were underpaid royalties on oil and gas wells. The plaintiffs did not seek a specific damage amount, but the company claimed it would far exceed $5 million.
Video: Supreme Court Won’t Hear NSA Case Now
A federal judge rejected the transfer request because the company did not offer any evidentiary support. The company says the law does not require detailed evidence. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court voids overall contribution limits
Headline Legal News |
2014/04/03 14:48
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Law Offices of Tenecia P. Reid, PLLC
Law Firm News/Virginia |
2014/04/03 14:45
|
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! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court takes up drug company dispute
Topics in Legal News |
2014/03/31 15:23
|
The Supreme Court is wading into a patent dispute between rival pharmaceutical companies over a multiple sclerosis treatment.
The justices agreed Monday to hear an appeal from Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., which claims the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit wrongly overturned five of its patents for the drug Copaxone.
The appeals court ruling would allow rivals Mylan Inc., Momenta Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Sandoz, Inc., to start selling generic versions of the drug later this year, after the remaining patents on the drug expire.
A federal district court had earlier ruled in Teva's favor and upheld the patents. Teva says the Federal Circuit should have deferred to factual findings made in the district court.
The justices will hear the case in the fall. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
