|
|
|
Court will hear appeal by Tenn. death row inmate
Lawyer Blog News |
2008/06/23 15:44
|
The Supreme Court is stepping into the case of a convicted murderer who claims authorities concealed evidence that might have spared him a death sentence. The justices have twice before reinstated the death sentence for Gary Bradford Cone, who was convicted of beating an elderly couple to death in Memphis during a robbery. Cone acknowledged that he killed the couple, but said he was temporarily insane because of drugs and the stress of his wartime Vietnam experiences. He argued that state and federal courts never considered his claims that the state withheld evidence of his drug use. A panel of the Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that Cone's plea had no merit. The dissenting judge said Cone's claims were never fairly considered by either state or federal courts. The appeals court had twice before issued rulings favorable to Cone, but was overruled each time by the Supreme Court. |
|
|
|
|
|
SF court protects privacy of work communications
Lawyer Blog News |
2008/06/20 17:21
|
A federal appeals court has made it more difficult for employers to legally snoop on their workers' e-mails and text messages sent on company accounts. Under a Wednesday ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, employers that contract an outside business to transmit text messages can't read them unless the worker agrees. Users of text messaging services "have a reasonable expectation of privacy" in their messages stored on the service provider's network, Judge Kim Wardlaw wrote in the three-judge panel's unanimous opinion. The ruling also lets employers access employee e-mails only if they are kept on an internal server. The text message part of the ruling will affect more employers. According to analysts, the majority of U.S. companies pay outside parties to transmit their workers' text messages but most keep their workers' e-mail on internal servers. |
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court voids California union law
Court Feed News |
2008/06/20 17:21
|
In a defeat for the union movement, the Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a first-in-the-nation law adopted in California that would have barred companies from speaking out against unions if they received state funds.
The justices in a 7-2 decision said the state measure conflicts with the free-speech zone created by federal labor law.
The ruling is likely to benefit especially companies in the healthcare industries, such as nursing homes, that receive some state funds and have low-level employees who are not unionized. It is a sharp setback for unions seeking to organize janitors, nurses, clerical workers and other employees in those areas.
Labor organizers may encourage workers to join unions, the high court said, but the employers also are free to try to persuade them against unionizing. Employers do not lose this right simply because they take the government's money, the justices said.
The California law was triggered by a campaign to organize janitors in the Los Angeles area. Mike Garcia, a union leader, complained to lawmakers that some companies were using state money "to pay for aggressive anti-union tactics."
State lawmakers, led by Sen. Gil Cedillo (D-Los Angeles), won approval of a bill to stop this practice. The measure, known as AB 1889, said state contractors and other private employers may not use state money "to assist, promote or deter union organizing."
The sponsors described this as the "nation's first state neutrality law" on labor organizing. |
|
|
|
|
|
Italy's high court says US soldier can't be tried
Legal World News |
2008/06/20 15:21
|
Italy's top criminal court ruled Thursday that a U.S. soldier cannot be tried for the 2005 slaying of an Italian intelligence agent in Iraq. Spc. Mario Lozano was accused in connection with the fatal shooting of Italian military intelligence agent Nicola Calipari, who had been driving to Baghdad airport after securing the release of kidnapped Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena. The journalist was wounded in the shooting at a checkpoint near Baghdad. Lozano was being tried in absentia on charges of murder and attempted murder. But the Court of Cassation in Rome on Thursday confirmed a lower court ruling last year that said Italy has no jurisdiction in the case, according to lawyers for the victim and for an Italian who was wounded in the shooting. Sgrena lawyer Alessandro Gamberini did not rule out the possibility of taking the case to an international body, such as the International Court of Justice. But he said there probably "isn't much that can be done." Calipari family lawyer Franco Coppi said the latest court ruling "leaves a bitter taste in the mouth" as it denied "the possibility of better understanding the dynamics of what happened, the how and the why of this death," according to the Italian news agency ANSA. |
|
|
|
|
|
Court sides with employee in benefits case
Lawyer Blog News |
2008/06/19 18:24
|
The Supreme Court said Thursday that courts should consider an insurance company's potential conflict of interest when reviewing the denial of an employee's health or disability benefits claim. The court ruled 6-3 in the case of an Ohio woman who sued MetLife Inc. over a disability claim. She contended insurance companies have a financial incentive to deny claims and that conflict of interest should weigh heavily in employees' favor when they challenge benefit claims in court. A federal appeals court ordered Wanda Glenn's benefits reinstated. The Supreme Court upheld that ruling. Writing for the majority, Justice Stephen Breyer said federal law imposes a special standard of care on insurers requiring full and fair review of claim denials. Breyer noted that MetLife had emphasized a medical report that favored denial, de-emphasized other reports suggesting benefits should be granted and failed to provide MetLife's vocational and medical experts with all relevant evidence. Dissenting, Justice Antonin Scalia said the court is using the wrong standard in dealing with potential conflicts of interest. Scalia said there must be evidence that a conflict improperly motivated a denial of benefits. In the MetLife case, there was no such evidence, Scalia said. Justices Clarence Thomas and Anthony Kennedy also dissented. MetLife administered a disability plan for Sears, where Glenn worked for 14 years. The insurance company paid benefits for two years but in 2002 said her condition had improved and refused to continue the benefit payments. MetLife saved $180,000 by denying Glenn disability benefits until retirement, her lawyers said in court filings. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered Glenn's benefits reinstated in September 2006, ruling that MetLife acted under a conflict of interest and made a decision that was not the product of a principled and deliberative reasoning process. MetLife argued that the standard used by the 6th Circuit would encourage participants with dubious claims to file suit, which in turn would raise the costs of benefit plans to both companies and employers. |
|
|
|
|
|
JC law firm, state reach pension suit settlement
Headline News |
2008/06/19 18:15
|
A Johnson City law firm will pay $100,000 to the state and has agreed to help authorities in their probe of the firm's founder, John Hogan, to end an investigation by Attorney General Andrew Cuomo into whether lawyers were inappropriately receiving state pensions.
While agreeing to the settlement, the firm of Hogan, Sarzynski, Lynch, Surowka & DeWind LLP denied any impropriety. Cuomo announced settlements Wednesday with the local firm and an Albany firm over private attorneys who were listed as school employees in order to receive public pensions and other benefits. Overall, the deal includes a $600,000 settlement with Hogan, Sarzynski, as well as the Albany firm of Girvin & Ferlazzo. Cuomo said the settlement is the largest he has reached with private attorneys in his ongoing probe. |
|
|
|
|
Recent Lawyer News Updates |
|
|