|
|
|
Bogus court filings spotlight little-known sect
Headline News |
2011/07/27 11:37
|
From New Jersey to California, police, courthouse officials and real estate agents are being confronted with a baffling new problem: bogus legal documents filed by people claiming to follow an obscure religion called Moorish Science. Their motives range from financial gain to simply causing a nuisance. No one is more exasperated by the phenomenon than the leaders of the century-old Moorish Science Temple of America, who say the growing crop of "paperwork terrorists" has nothing to do with their faith or its teachings. "It's just distressing that some individuals would take something as pure and righteous as this organization and try to tarnish it," said Christopher Bennett-Bey, grand sheikh of the group's temple in Charlotte, one of more than 30 located around the country. It's not clear why the flimflam artists are invoking the group. But one expert said divisions dating back to the death of the sect's founder have resulted in small pockets of people who claim to be followers but have little understanding of the faith. The bad filings include deeds, liens and other documents, often written in confusing pseudo-legal jargon and making outlandish claims about being exempt from U.S. law. In some cases, filers have actually moved into foreclosed houses and changed the locks. Other times, people seeking to slip their mortgages have used bogus documents to waste the time and money of their banks. Fake liens have also been maliciously filed to target enemies. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conn. court: church can't be sued by ex-principal
Lawyer Blog News |
2011/07/26 16:01
|
The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled Monday that a former Catholic school principal cannot sue the Archdiocese of Hartford on claims she was wrongly fired for not retaliating against a student, who complained about sexual remarks allegedly made by a priest now accused of abusing children.
The high court unanimously overturned a lower court ruling in favor of Patricia Dayner, former principal of St. Hedwig's School in Naugatuck. Justices said Dayner's lawsuit against the archdiocese was barred under the "ministerial exception" to state courts' authority to decide employment cases. The exception is based on the First Amendment right to freedom of religion, and the right of religious organizations to control their own internal affairs.
But the state Supreme Court, in its first ruling on the issue, didn't ban all labor-related lawsuits against religious institutions. Justices adopted the view of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York, which ruled in 2008 that courts can decide to step into church employment disputes based on the nature of the complaints and whether court action would intrude on churches' right to decide issues related to doctrine or internal governance.
Federal appeal courts have issued conflicting rulings in ministerial exception cases. The U.S. Supreme Court will take up the issue later this year, when it hears a case involving a teacher at a church-run school in Michigan and decides whether ministerial exception applies to the Americans with Disabilities Act in cases where church workers are deemed secular, and not religious, employees. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lawyer: Massacre defense is to protect democracy
Legal World News |
2011/07/26 11:00
|
The defense lawyer for the man who confessed to the Norway massacre said he agreed to take the case because he felt the tragedy underscored the need to safeguard democratic traditions like the right to defense counsel.
Geir Lippestad said at his first news conference that he considered the case for 10 or 12 hours before finally agreeing to take it.
Later, Lippestad told The Associated Press that he did not know why his client chose him. He once worked in the same building as Breivik and Norwegian media have reported that he has defended neo-Nazis.
"My first reaction was of course that this is too difficult, but when I sat down with my family and friends and colleagues, we talked it through and we said that today it's time to think about democracy," Lippestad said.
He added: "Someone has to do this job, the police has to do their job and the judges do their job." He was speaking in English.
"My job is not to be his friend," he said. "He will get a fair trial, that's my job to secure."
Breivik has confessed to last week's bombing in the capital and a rampage at a Labor Party retreat for young people, but he has pleaded not guilty to the terrorism charges he faces, claiming he acted to save Europe from what he says is Muslim colonization. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indiana Court of Appeals Disagrees Over Effect of Admissions
Attorney Blogs |
2011/07/26 09:59
|
Today, the Indiana Court of Appeals issued a memorandum decision, uncitable as authority under App. R. 65(D), in which the Court disagreed over the extent to which admissions could be used against a party in a motion for summary judgment in Clark v. Clark, Cause No. 01A02-1007-CT-759. While the decision itself cannot be used as precedent, the disagreement is informative.
In this case, a father and son traveled in a car together to the home of another person. When they arrived, the son got out of the car to help the father parallel park. The son positioned himself in front of his father's vehicle, between it and another vehicle parked in the alley. When the father's vehicle was in the appropriate position, the son signaled for the father to stop by putting his hand up. The father hit the gas pedal instead of the brake, and the son was pinned between his father's vehicle and the parked vehicle. The son sustained serious injuries to his leg. He brought suit against his father for his injuries and the father asserted the Indiana Guest Statute as an affirmative defense.
The Indiana Guest Statute provides that people with certain types of relationships, such as father-son, cannot sue each other for injuries arising out of the operation of a motor vehicle if the person is "in or upon" the vehicle at the time of the injuries. During the course of the litigation, the son sent requests for admissions to the father. Two of those requests and responses are reproduced below.
19. On September 5, 2007, at the time of the collision, Robert L. Clark, Jr. was not in the Chevrolet.
RESPONSE: At the moment of impact the plaintiff was not in the Chevrolet, whether he was a pedestrian is genuine issue for trial and therefore denied.
20. On September 5, 2007, at the time of the collision, Robert L. Clark, Jr. was not upon the Chevrolet.
RESPONSE: At the moment of impact the plaintiff was not upon the Chevrolet, whether he was a pedestrian is genuine issue for trial and therefore denied.
Based on those responses, the son moved for summary judgment. The father filed a cross-motion and the trial court granted the father's motion.
On appeal, the father argued that the admissions were not dispositive of whether the son was in or upon the vehicle at the time of his injuries because that is a legal conclusion that the Court would have to make after applying the law to the facts. The Court disagreed, holding that admissions can be directed to legal conclusions, not merely facts.
The dissent found the admissions ambiguous, because of the qualification about whether the son was a pedestrian and because there were questions concerning whether "in" and "upon" have the same generic meaning as they do as a legal term of art.
The lesson here is that requests for admissions can be powerful litigation tools and we lawyers must be careful when responding to them. You may find out that you have admitted something inadvertently.
Lesson:
1.Even a qualified response to a request for admission can count as an admission.
Brad A. Catlin
Price Waicukauski & Riley, LLC
http://www.indianalawupdate.com/entry/Indiana-Court-of-Appeals-Disagrees-Over-Effect-of-Admissions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trial won't feature unreleased Jackson footage
Criminal Law Updates |
2011/07/26 09:00
|
Jurors in the Michael Jackson manslaughter case will not watch previously unseen footage from the singer's final rehearsals to determine the state of his health before his death, a judge ruled Monday.
Superior Court Judge Michael Pastor agreed with the characterization of a defense attorney for Dr. Conrad Murray that more than 100 hours of rehearsal footage condensed into the film "This Is It" did not show the singer in poor health.
Pastor also agreed with attorneys for Sony Pictures Entertainment that the clips have significant value and should not be publicly shown without a good reason.
"There is absolutely nothing in those materials that could have been of assistance to the defense," Pastor said.
The judge reviewed several hours of the footage last week then canceled plans to travel to Sony Studios over the weekend to finish watching the rest of the film that attorneys wanted to use during the upcoming trial of Murray. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Judge wants agency to investigate Meijer lawyer
Headline News |
2011/07/25 13:57
|
A judge believes a lawyer committed perjury when he denied knowing anything about the role of Meijer Inc. in a 2007 recall election of township officials in northern Michigan's Grand Traverse County.
Judge Philip Rodgers said he has referred the matter involving Timothy Stoepker to the Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission, a watchdog agency.
"I believe it occurred, and I have an ethical responsibility to report it," Rodgers told the Traverse City Record-Eagle.
Stoepker, an attorney at the firm Dickinson Wright in Grand Rapids, represented Meijer during a dispute over a new store in Acme Township. Voters rejected the store in 2005, and township officials were targeted for recall in 2007.
Meijer, a major Midwestern retailer, later acknowledged illegally financing the recall effort and subsequently paid a $190,000 fine.
During a deposition in a civil lawsuit by a township official, Stoepker was asked what he knew about Meijer's role. "I have no knowledge of that at all," he replied. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recent Lawyer News Updates |
|
|
Lawyer News RSS
