|
|
|
California high court to decide defibrillator case
Headline Legal News |
2014/06/23 12:53
|
The California Supreme Court will decide whether large retailers in the state are required to have defibrillators on hand to help treat customers and workers who suffer sudden cardiac arrest.
The high court said it will issue an opinion Monday morning. The devices deliver a jolt of electricity to a stalled heart and help victims recover.
For two decades, an increasing number of public places in the U.S. have been required to have automated external defibrillators on hand, including government buildings, airports and many other public places. A Los Angeles-area family who lost a relative to sudden cardiac arrest while shopping in Target filed a lawsuit to require large retailers to join the list.
During oral arguments in May, a majority of the seven-judge court appeared cool to the idea. |
|
|
|
|
|
Iowa high court reinstates major pollution lawsuit
Headline Legal News |
2014/06/16 15:15
|
In a major environmental case, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled Friday that residents can bring a nuisance lawsuit against a Muscatine manufacturer accused of routinely blanketing their properties with soot and chemicals. The court reinstated the class-action lawsuit against Grain Processing Corp., which operates a plant that turns corn kernels into products ranging from corn syrup to ethyl alcohol. The plaintiffs' claims of nuisance, negligence and trespass are not barred by the federal Clean Air Act or state rules governing air emissions, Justice Brent Appel wrote in a 6-0 decision that was applauded by environmentalists but criticized by business interests. A regional economic force, the company buys $400 million in corn from farmers annually and is one of the area's largest employers. But Muscatine residents have complained for years that it spews harmful chemicals into the environment that get blown onto their homes, yards and cars. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of up to 17,000 residents who live within a 3-mile radius of the plant, contends the pollution undermines their ability to enjoy their property and causes metals in everything from swing sets to air conditioning systems to corrode. |
|
|
|
|
|
High Court Refuses to Block Oregon Gay Marriage
Headline Legal News |
2014/06/06 14:37
|
The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to halt same-sex weddings in Oregon while a federal appeals court considers whether a group opposed to gay marriage can intervene in the case.
The order follows an emergency appeal by the National Organization for Marriage, which seeks to overturn U.S. District Judge Michael McShane's May 19 ruling that declared Oregon's same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional. The group had unsuccessfully tried to intervene in the lower court proceeding after Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum declined to defend the same-sex ban.
The group filed its request with Justice Anthony Kennedy and he referred it to the full court. The justices denied it without comment.
Hundreds of same-sex couples have obtained marriage licenses since McShane's order, including 245 in Multnomah County, the state's largest.
The Oregon case differs from others where the Supreme Court or federal appeals judges have temporarily blocked lower-court rulings, halting same-sex unions while appeals proceed.
In Oregon, the appeal is focused on whether an outside group can intervene in the case, not on the constitutionality of the same-sex marriage ban, so it raises a different set of legal questions.
Lawyers for the attorney general's office have said they won't appeal McShane's ruling and are fighting the National Organization for Marriage's appeal in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Rosenblum, the attorney general, said there were no legal arguments she could offer in defense of the marriage ban that would be consistent with decisions last year by the U.S. Supreme Court and with state laws.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Casino law hinges on Massachusetts high court case
Headline Legal News |
2014/05/05 15:10
|
The fate of casino gambling in Massachusetts may hinge on a case before the state's highest court Monday.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court is set to hear arguments in a case centered on whether a question should be allowed on the November ballot asking voters if they want the state's 2011 casino law repealed. The court is expected to issue a decision by July.
If allowed on the ballot, the referendum could upend the state's ongoing casino licensing process.
Gambling giants MGM, Wynn, Mohegan Sun and others have expressed concern they could lose millions of dollars they've invested in the planning, development and promotion of their proposals if the referendum prevails. They also argue the state risks losing much more.
"Jobs certainty and billions of dollars in economic development hang in the balance," said Carole Brennan, a spokeswoman for MGM, which has proposed an $800 million casino project in downtown Springfield. "The Gaming Act allows for the creation of more than 10,000 jobs and the recapture of billions of dollars in tax revenues that are currently leaving the state. It doesn't make sense to forgo those opportunities."
State Attorney General Martha Coakley, a Democrat running for governor this year, has ruled that the question violates the state constitution and shouldn't be allowed on the ballot. |
|
|
|
|
|
Court considers whistleblower free speech rights
Headline Legal News |
2014/04/29 16:12
|
When Edward Lane testified about corruption at a community college program he headed in Alabama, he was fired.
The Supreme Court on Monday considered whether the First Amendment protects Lane and millions of other public employees from job retaliation when they offer testimony about government misconduct in court.
The high court has previously ruled that the constitutional right to free speech protects public workers only when they speak out as citizens, not when they act in their official roles.
Most justices appeared to side with Lane's view that court testimony revealing official misconduct should be constitutionally protected even if it covers facts a government employee learned at work.
But the justices struggled over whether that protection should automatically cover all public workers, even police officials or criminal investigators whose job duties require them to testify in court about specific cases. |
|
|
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
|
|