|
|
|
Supreme Court won't reinstate case of man who went missing
Court Center |
2015/02/25 19:09
|
Bobby Chen's legal luck has finally run out. The Supreme Court on Monday refused to reinstate Chen's appeal in a legal dispute with the city of Baltimore.
Chen beat long odds last year when he convinced the court — without the help of an attorney — to hear his case. But then he disappeared for two months and court officials couldn't reach him. The court dismissed the case last month after he missed a filing deadline.
Chen later re-emerged with a high-powered lawyer who said his client was traveling, experienced a slip-and-fall injury, and was unaware his case had been granted.
But the court declined to give him a second chance.
Chen had been fighting Baltimore officials for years, claiming the city illegally demolished his row house. |
|
|
|
|
|
Philippine court enters not guilty plea for US Marine
Headline News |
2015/02/25 19:08
|
A Philippine court entered a not guilty plea Monday for a U.S. Marine charged with murdering a transgender Filipino, allegedly after he discovered her gender when they checked into a hotel.
Marine Pfc. Joseph Scott Pemberton refused to enter a plea in the brief proceeding in a court in Olongapo city northwest of Manila, according to Justice Secretary Leila de Lima. Journalists were barred from the courtroom.
Dozens of left-wing protesters waved red flags outside the courthouse, demanding justice and an end to the U.S. military presence in the former American colony. Gay and lesbian groups have also staged protests denouncing the killing of Jennifer Laude, whose former name was Jeffrey, as a hate crime.
Monday's arraignment paves the way for Pemberton's trial, which lawyers of the victim's family said is scheduled to start next month.
"Finally justice can be attained for our sibling," Marilou Laude, the victim's sister, told reporters. She said she was shaking in anger when she saw the handcuffed suspect, who was guarded by several security escorts in the courtroom.
Pemberton has been charged by prosecutors in the Oct. 11 killing. They say the U.S. Marine strangled her and then drowned her in a hotel toilet after discovering she was a transgender woman. They had checked into the hotel after meeting in a bar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court says Chuck Yeager can sue Utah gun safe company
Top Legal News |
2015/02/16 20:55
|
A federal appeals court says record-setting test pilot Chuck Yeager can sue a Utah gun safe company that named a line of safes after him.
The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver ruled Tuesday that the 91-year-old can sue Fort Knox Security Products over an oral agreement from the 1980s that allowed the use of his name and picture in exchange for free safes.
The decision says the arrangement ended around 2008, after Yeager's wife started asking questions about it.
The court dismissed some claims but ruled that Yeager can sue over claims that the company kept using his likeness after the agreement ended. The company disputes that accusation.
Yeager served during World War II and became the first person to break the sound barrier in 1947. |
|
|
|
|
|
Court nixes faith-based birth control mandate challenge
Headline News |
2015/02/16 20:55
|
An appeals court has ruled that the birth control coverage required by federal health care reforms does not violate the rights of several religious groups because they can seek reasonable accommodations.
Two western Pennsylvania Catholic dioceses and a private Christian college had challenged the birth control coverage mandates and won lower-court decisions. However, the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court ruling Wednesday said the reforms place "no substantial burden" on the religious groups and therefore don't violate their First Amendment rights.
All three groups — the college and the Pittsburgh and Erie dioceses — are mulling whether to appeal to the entire 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals or the U.S. Supreme Court.
"Such a ruling should cause deep concern for anyone who cares about any First Amendment rights, especially the right to teach and practice a religious faith," Pittsburgh Bishop David Zubik said in a statement. "This decision says that the church is no longer free to practice what we preach."
At issue is an "accommodation" written into the Affordable Care Act that says religious organizations can opt out of directly providing and paying to cover medical services such groups would consider morally objectionable. In this case, that refers to all contraceptive and abortion services for the Catholic plaintiffs, and contraceptive services like the "week-after" pill and other medical coverage that Geneva College contends violate its anti-abortion teachings. The school in Beaver Falls is affiliated with the Reformed Presbyterian Church.
Justice Department lawyers have argued the accommodation solves the problem because it allows religious groups to opt out of directly providing such coverage. But the plaintiffs contend that merely filing the one-page form, which puts a religious group's objections on record with the government, violates their rights because it still "facilitates" or "triggers" a process that then enables third-party insurers to provide the kind of coverage to which they object. |
|
|
|
|
|
Brother of murder victim attacks defendant in court
Top Legal News |
2015/02/04 18:43
|
The brother of a murder victim has been arrested after authorities say he attacked his sister's killer in Onslow County court.
Authorities say 26-year-old Alfonso Law of Acworth, Georgia, has been charged with contempt of court, assault on a government official, simple assault, and disorderly conduct.
News outlets report that Law charged at 26-year-old Pernell Jones on Monday as Jones pleaded guilty to second-degree murder in the death of 15-year-old Anita Law.
After Jones admitted to killing the teenager, Law rushed at him and both men ended up on the floor before deputies pulled them apart,
Jones was sentenced to between 16 and 20 years in prison.
Alfonso Law goes before Judge Charles Henry on the contempt charge Thursday. It was not immediately known if he had an attorney. |
|
|
|
|
|
Anxiety over Supreme Court's latest dive into health care
Attorneys News |
2015/02/04 18:43
|
Nearly five years after President Barack Obama signed his health care overhaul into law, its fate is yet again in the hands of the Supreme Court.
This time it's not just the White House and Democrats who have reason to be anxious. Republican lawmakers and governors won't escape the political fallout if the court invalidates insurance subsidies worth billions of dollars to people in more than 30 states.
Obama's law offers subsidized private insurance to people who don't have access to it on the job. Without financial assistance with their premiums, millions of those consumers would drop coverage.
And disruptions in the affected states don't end there. If droves of healthy people bail out of HealthCare.gov, residents buying individual policies outside the government market would face a jump in premiums. That's because self-pay customers are in the same insurance pool as the subsidized ones.
Health insurers spent millions to defeat the law as it was being debated. But the industry told the court last month that the subsidies are a key to making the insurance overhaul work. Withdrawing them would "make the situation worse than it was before" Congress passed the Affordable Care Act.
The debate over "Obamacare" was messy enough when just politics and ideology were involved. It gets really dicey with the well-being of millions of people in the balance. "It is not simply a function of law or ideology; there are practical impacts on high numbers of people," said Republican Mike Leavitt, a former federal health secretary.
The legal issues involve the leeway accorded to federal agencies in applying complex legislation. Opponents argue that the precise wording of the law only allows subsidies in states that have set up their own insurance markets, or exchanges. That would leave out most beneficiaries, who live in states where the federal government runs the exchanges. The administration and Democratic lawmakers who wrote the law say Congress' clear intent was to provide subsidies to people in every state. |
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court halts 3 upcoming executions in Oklahoma
Top Legal News |
2015/01/30 20:46
|
The Supreme Court has ordered Oklahoma to postpone lethal injections executions using a controversial sedative until the court rules in a challenge involving the drug.
The court's order Wednesday came as little surprise after both the state and the lawyers for three inmates who faced execution between now and March requested the temporary halt. The justices agreed on Friday to take up the challenge to the use of the sedative midazolam, which has been used in problematic executions in Arizona, Ohio and Oklahoma.
The case will be argued in April and decided by late June.
Left open by the court's order is whether Oklahoma can carry out an execution that does not involve midazolam. |
|
|
|
|