|
|
|
Court asked to uphold BP settlement approval
Top Legal News |
2013/09/09 19:18
|
Plaintiffs' attorneys who brokered a multibillion-dollar settlement with BP following the company's 2010 Gulf oil spill have asked a federal appeals court to uphold a judge's approval of the deal.
Only a "paltry few objectors" have raised the "narrowest of concerns" about the settlement that U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier approved in December 2012, private lawyers said in a filing Tuesday with the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
"None of them complain of their compensation calculations, identify what compensation they are entitled to under the Settlement, or define what other or greater compensation they believe they should receive," the attorneys wrote.
On Friday, BP attorneys argued that a three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit should overturn Barbier's approval order if the company's separate appeal of more recent rulings on settlement terms is unsuccessful. BP argues that Barbier misinterpreted the settlement and has allowed businesses to receive hundreds of millions of dollars for inflated or fictitious claims.
A different 5th Circuit panel heard the company's appeal in July but hasn't ruled yet. BP said it would still support Barbier's approval of the settlement if its appeal is successful.
Although Tuesday's brief doesn't explicitly address that dispute, plaintiffs' lawyers said BP initially was "thrilled" with how claims were being processed. They previously have argued that BP undervalued the settlement and underestimated how many claimants would qualify for payments.
Court-supervised claims administrator Patrick Juneau's office has made more than $4.5 billion in settlement offers to more than 55,000 Gulf Coast businesses and residents who claim the spill cost them money. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court won't reconsider judicial elections ruling
Top Legal News |
2013/08/19 22:52
|
An appellate court panel's decision to allow political parties to endorse candidates and make expenditures in Montana's nonpartisan judicial elections will stand, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday.
None of the 9th Circuit judges voted to rehear the three-judge panel's June decision, so the appellate court denied the state attorney general's petition.
The panel said in June the state's ban on party endorsements and expenditures in judicial races is unconstitutional, but ruled that candidates can't receive direct contributions from parties.
The state filed a petition for rehearing, calling it a matter of exceptional importance in Montana's authority to determine how to maintain an impartial and nonpartisan judiciary.
Montana's system of judicial elections reflects a deeply ingrained and repeatedly confirmed sovereign decision by the state and its voters, Assistant Attorney General Michael Black wrote in the petition.
A decision has not been made whether to take the appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, attorney general spokesman John Barnes said.
"We're looking at our options and will be making a decision on how to proceed from here," Barnes said in an emailed response to an Associated Press query. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appeals court allows capital retrial of Wolfe
Top Legal News |
2013/05/21 18:45
|
A federal appeals court will allow a capital murder case to proceed against an accused drug kingpin from northern Virginia.
In a 2-1 ruling, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond overturned a federal judge in Norfolk who had ordered a halt to the prosecution of Justin Wolfe and his immediate release.
That judge said misconduct by prosecutors in Prince William County made it impossible for Wolfe to get a fair trial.
But a majority on the appellate court disagreed. The judges ruled that a new trial can be done fairly. A dissenting judge said the misconduct was so bad that freeing Wolfe was the only proper outcome.
Wolfe was sent to death row in 2002 for a drug-related murder, but his original conviction and sentence were overturned. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top prosecutor in Del Norte County suspended
Top Legal News |
2013/04/12 22:56
|
The top prosecutor in Northern California's remote Del Norte County has been suspended without pay after a judge recommended he be disbarred.
The Del Norte Board of Supervisors voted unanimously in a closed session Friday to suspend District Attorney Jon Alexander.
The suspension comes after State Bar Judge Lucy Armendariz recommended that Alexander be disbarred after concluding Alexander had violated three rules of prosecutorial conduct - communication with a represented party, moral turpitude and suppression of evidence.
The judge ordered Alexander placed on inactive status, meaning he will not be able to practice law in California as of Sunday, pending a possible appeal. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court won't allow challenge to surveillance law
Top Legal News |
2013/03/04 23:35
|
A sharply-divided Supreme Court on Tuesday threw out an attempt by U.S. citizens to challenge the expansion of a surveillance law used to monitor conversations of foreign spies and terrorist suspects.
With a 5-4 vote, the high court ruled that a group of American lawyers, journalists and organizations can't sue to challenge the 2008 expansion of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) because they can't prove that the government will monitor their conversations along with those of potential foreign terrorist and intelligence targets.
Justices "have been reluctant to endorse standing theories that require guesswork," said Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote for the court's majority.
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, was enacted in 1978. It allows the government to monitor conversations of foreign spies and terrorist suspects abroad for intelligence purposes. The 2008 FISA amendments allow the government to obtain from a secret court broad, yearlong intercept orders, raising the prospect that phone calls and emails between those foreign targets and innocent Americans in this country would be swept under the umbrella of surveillance.
Without proof that the law would directly affect them, Americans can't sue, Alito said in the ruling.
Despite their documented fears and the expense of activities that some Americans have taken to be sure they don't get caught up in government monitoring, they "have set forth no specific facts demonstrating that the communications of their foreign contacts will be targeted," he added. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
NY dismemberment defendant dons trash bag in court
Top Legal News |
2013/03/01 07:45
|
A New York City man accused of killing and dismembering his mother has appeared at his arraignment on a murder charge wearing a large garbage bag.
Bahsid McLean was held without bail following his Bronx court appearance Thursday.
His attorney says his client had been urinating on himself and had no other clean clothing. He says he is off medication, and will undergo a psychiatric evaluation.
The criminal complaint says McLean stabbed Tanya Byrd and then cut up her body with help from another man.
A resident walking his dog came across the remains early Tuesday. Police say they were stuffed in four bags and scattered along four blocks.
The second suspect, William Harris, was arraigned on charges that include hindering prosecution. There was no immediate information on his attorney. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
SUPREME COURT NOTEBOOK: Sitting out the speech
Top Legal News |
2013/02/15 22:53
|
While his colleagues got ready to go to the Capitol, Justice Antonin Scalia sat on a stage across town and held forth about why, for the 16th consecutive year, he would not be joining them for the State of the Union.
He doesn't go when a Democrat is president. He stays away when the president is Republican.
"It has turned into a childish spectacle. I don't want to be there to lend dignity to it," Scalia said, with a certain amount of mischief.
The 76-year-old justice has previously made clear his disdain for the event, but Tuesday may have been the first time he did so at nearly the same time as the speech.
The occasion was a talk sponsored by the Smithsonian Associates and moderated by National Public Radio's Nina Totenberg, one of many public appearances by the justices during their winter recess. They will meet in private on Friday and return to the bench on Tuesday.
Lest anyone think the timing of his talk was anything other than a coincidence, Scalia tried to put those thoughts to rest. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
