Law Firm News
Today's Legal News Bookmark Page
Swiss Bank Drops Wikileaks Lawsuit
Top Legal News | 2008/03/05 18:02
A Swiss bank quietly dropped its lawsuit against renegade Web site Wikileaks.org on Wednesday, days after a judge reversed his order to disable the site for posting confidential bank documents.

In court papers, Bank Julius Baer didn't give a reason for dropping the suit and reserved the right to refile it later. Bank lawyer William Briggs didn't return a telephone call seeking comment.

Last month, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White ordered the Web site shut down after Bank Julius Baer sued Wikileaks and the San Mateo company Dynadot. The bank argued it was trying to halt "the unlawful dissemination of stolen bank records and personal account information of its customers."

Dynadot, which provided the site's U.S. domain name, agreed to disable Wikileaks in exchange for the bank removing it from the lawsuit.

The judge's order, however, backfired for Bank Julius Baer because it only led to bank's information being spread further across the Internet. Several other Web sites posted the same material out of solidarity with Wikileaks, and Wikileaks posted the documents on "mirror" Web sites it owns outside the U.S.

After enduring criticism from free speech advocates and media organizations, including The Associated Press, White reversed himself on Friday and ruled the Web site could reopen and continue to post the documents until the lawsuit was resolved.

Wikileaks, which bills itself as an activist organization that urges the posting of leaked government and corporate documents to expose corruption, wasn't represented at that hearing. White, however, said he agreed with the dozen lawyers representing the critics that his initial ruling probably violated free speech laws.

The Wikileaks site claims to have posted 1.2 million leaked government and corporate documents that it says expose unethical behavior, including a 2003 operation manual for the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.



Judge Wants Shipwreck Evidence Worked On
Top Legal News | 2008/03/05 12:18
A judge wants Florida shipwreck explorers and the Spanish government to settle their differences over sharing evidence related to an estimated $500 million in treasure the company recovered last year.

In Tampa, U.S. Magistrate Judge Mark Pizzo told lawyers for Odyssey Marine Exploration and Spain to agree by Friday _ or he will be forced to intervene.

Spain believes it has a claim to the 17 tons of colonial-era coins Odyssey raised from an Atlantic Ocean shipwreck. But Odyssey has kept most details of the find secret to protect the site from competitors.

The two sides bickered in a hearing Wednesday over whether Tampa-based Odyssey has handed over sufficient information about the wreck site and treasure for Spain to determine the extent of a possible claim.



Lawsuit Dropped in Pain Doctor Case
Top Legal News | 2008/03/04 22:21
A patient-advocacy group is dropping its lawsuit over the prosecution of a doctor accused of running a "pill mill" linked to 56 overdose deaths, just days after a stinging rebuke from a federal judge.

The Pain Relief Network had attempted to intervene to keep Dr. Stephen Schneider's clinic open. It claimed the clinic's 1,000 patients have been unable to find adequate care since Schneider's license was suspended in January.

But a judge refused Friday to grant a request by the advocacy group for a temporary restraining order preventing the Justice Department from taking action against Schneider's clinic.

On Tuesday, the group filed a voluntary motion for dismissal without prejudice of its civil lawsuit against the Department of Justice and the state of Kansas.

If U.S. District Judge Wesley Brown agrees to dismiss the action without prejudice, it could be refiled later.

The Pain Relief Network said in its motion it was seeking the dismissal "after reviewing the current posture of the case."

Schneider, who is jailed without bond, faces 34 federal charges, including four counts of unlawful distribution of a controlled substance resulting in death. He has vehemently proclaimed his innocence.

The Pain Relief Network filed the civil suit on behalf of Schneider's patients.

At the earlier hearing, Brown told a room crowded with about 40 of Schneider's patients, some of them on crutches, that if they needed care they should go to the emergency room, not the court.

In its lawsuit, the Pain Relief Network challenged the constitutionality of the Controlled Substances Act, arguing that it allows the federal government to improperly intrude in the physician-patient relationship.



Ciolli Sues Yale Law Students in AutoAdmit Scandal
Top Legal News | 2008/03/04 22:06
Penn Law grad Anthony Ciolli — the former administrator of AutoAdmit who was named in a lawsuit filed in June by two Yale Law students against anonymous posters on the law-school discussion board and then subsequently dropped from the suit — is now returning fire. For backstory, click here, here and here.

In this complaint, which was filed today in state court in Philadelphia, Ciolli is suing the two Yale students as well as their lawyers, on eight counts, including abuse of process, libel, publicity placing plaintiff in a false light and tortious interference with contract. This fall, after being named in the original suit by the Yale women and accused of running a website called T14 Talent (now shuttered), which ranked women at the top 14 law schools based on their looks, Ciolli subsequently lost an offer for a full-time associate job at Boston firm Edwards, Angell, Palmer & Dodge.

In defending the action filed against him, Ciolli was represented by Marc Randazza. But this complaint is signed by Mark Jakubik.

We’ve reached out to Mark Lemley, a named defendant and the lawyer for the two women, as well as the other individuals named in the suit. We’ll let you know if we hear back.



Lawyer in Bribery Case Says Witness Lied
Top Legal News | 2008/03/04 03:22
A key government witness lied to the grand jury that indicted several attorneys on charges they conspired to bribe a state judge, one of the accused lawyers said in court papers filed Monday.

Zach Scruggs, an attorney whose well-known father and law partner also face bribery charges in the case, is asking a federal judge to dismiss his indictment due to alleged government misconduct.

Scruggs' lawyers say grand jurors heard false and misleading testimony from an FBI agent and from former attorney Timothy Balducci, who has already pleaded guilty to conspiring with Scruggs and others to bribe state Circuit Judge Henry Lackey.

Scruggs' indictment is a product of their "patently false and misleading" testimony, his lawyers argue.

"It has been clear since the filing of this indictment that the government has no credible evidence that (Zach Scruggs) knowingly participated in any scheme to bribe a judge," the defense lawyers wrote.

U.S. Attorney Jim Greenlee didn't immediately return a call for comment Monday. Balducci has represented himself in the criminal matter. His office number has been disconnected.

A trial for Scruggs; his father, prominent plaintiffs lawyer Richard "Dickie" Scruggs; and fellow Scruggs Law Firm attorney Sidney Backstrom, is scheduled to start March 31 in Oxford.

Richard Scruggs, a brother-in-law of former U.S. Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., made tens of millions of dollars from tobacco and asbestos litigation. His role in a landmark settlement with tobacco companies was depicted in the 1999 film "The Insider," starring Al Pacino and Russell Crowe.

Last week, U.S. District Judge Neal Biggers Jr. rejected a different motion by the three defendants to dismiss the charges based on the government's "outrageous conduct." However, Zach Scruggs' attorneys didn't see transcripts of grand jury proceedings until last week.

Zach Scruggs claims the transcripts, when compared to wiretap evidence, show Balducci lied to the grand jury and mischaracterized Scruggs' knowledge of and participation in the alleged conspiracy.

Prosecutors say Balducci was acting on Richard Scruggs' behalf when he allegedly tried to bribe Lackey for a favorable ruling in a dispute with other lawyers over $26.5 million in fees from a mass settlement of Hurricane Katrina insurance lawsuits.

The FBI arrested Balducci Nov. 1 and sent him into the Scruggs Law Firm wearing a body wire. Balducci later testified that he met with Zach Scruggs and Backstrom that day and told them Lackey wanted $10,000 for the favorable ruling.

However, Zach Scruggs' lawyers say a recording of that Nov. 1 conversation shows that Balducci used confusing, coded language while their client "only participated in an ordinary conversation about how a judge's order reads."

Zach Scruggs' lawyers also accuse FBI Special Agent William Delaney of giving grand jurors a misleading account of taped conversations between the suspects in the case.

"The Government seeks to convict (Scruggs) on coded words uttered after he is disengaged from a conversation and on actions perceived through a presumptuous lens; yet they indicted a man relying on testimony they knew was facially false and wholly inaccurate," they wrote.



Supreme Court May Re-examine What Is "Indecent"
Top Legal News | 2008/03/04 03:21

This week, after more than 30 years, the Supreme Court may reopen the debate over what constitutes an "indecent" broadcast. The issue before the court is the usually accidental, so-called "fleeting expletive" that sneaks into an over-the-air broadcast, such as Bono's "This is really, really f---ing brilliant" comment at the 2003 Golden Globes, which was broadcast on NBC.

After receiving complaints from viewers, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) moved to crack down on broadcasters who air "isolated or fleeting expletives" during daytime and early evening hours. Last year, Fox and other television networks sued to block the new policy, and an appeals court in New York put it on hold. Now, the FCC is asking the Supreme court to clear the way for the crackdown to be enforced. The justices may act on the agency's appeal as soon as today, and if they vote to hear FCC vs. Fox TV, arguments will be heard in the fall, reports the Los Angeles Times.

The appellate judges in New York felt that the FCC's new policy was arbitrary and vague, as it does not specify that all expletives will trigger fines regardless of the circumstances. At the same time, the appellate judges hinted that a true ban on all broadcast expletives would violate the 1st Amendment's free-speech guarantee. At the same time, broadcasters have said they have no desire to air expletives, but they're just trying to make sure that when an unscripted expletive is used - most often by a celebrity who is not a network employee - it does not result in a large fine. To help monitor the situation, broadcasters have instituted five-second delays on awards shows and some other live programming, but an occasional expletive can still slip through.

"It's like the Maytag repairman," said Rick Cotton, general counsel for NBC Universal, according to the LA Times. "You're expecting that after sitting in front of a console for literally thousands of hours that at a particular moment, on a completely unexpected basis, a person will hear it and will react in time."



[PREV] [1] ..[29][30][31][32][33] [NEXT]
All
Legal News
Law Firm Business
Headline News
Court Center
Legal Watch
Legal Interview
Top Legal News
Attorneys News
Press Releases
Opinions
Lawyer Blogs
Firm Websites
Politics & Law
Firm News
UK Supreme Court declines ap..
Constitutionality of murder ..
Trump's personal attorney ha..
Greek court limits travel fo..
Supreme Court upholds audit ..
Dayton appoints Democratic R..
High court worries about aba..
Supreme Court hearing case a..
Indian court grants bail to ..
Democrats Claim Victory In W..
Brazil's top court: Lula can..
Liberal Dallet easily takes ..
Drug companies want Supreme ..
Court: Government can't bloc..
Trump administration backs P..
Large Midwest energy project..
Court hears case alleging un..
Lohan fails to convince cour..
   Law Firm News



Cobb County Criminal Attorney
Georgia Criminal Defense Lawyer
www.andrewschwartzlaw.com
San Francisco Trademark Lawyer
San Francisco Copyright Lawyer
www.onulawfirm.com
Immigration Law Office Web Designs
Immigration Attorney Website Templates
webpromo.com
Santa Ana Workers' Compensation Lawyers
www.gentryashtonlaw.com
New York Elder Law
www.kboattorneys.com
 
 
© Legal World News Center. All rights reserved.

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Legal World News Center 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. Legal Blog postings and hosted comments are available for general educational purposes only and should not be used to assess a specific legal situation. Law Firm Web Design by Law Promo