|
|
|
Supreme Court Takes Indian Land Case
Lawyer Blog News |
2008/02/25 16:33
|
The Supreme Court agreed Monday to resolve a dispute over the federal government's ability to take land into trust for American Indian tribes. Indian rights groups fear that the case involving the Narragansett Tribe in Rhode Island could undermine tribal land across the country. The justices will hear the case in the fall. The state argued that a 1934 federal law prevents the government from taking land into trust for tribes recognized after the law took effect, unless Congress specifically authorized it. The Narragansetts became a federally recognized tribe in 1983. The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston rejected the state's claim. At issue is whether a 31-acre lot in Charlestown purchased by the Narragansetts should be subject to Rhode Island law, including a prohibition on casino gambling, or whether the parcel should be governed by tribal and federal law. The dispute dates to 1991, when the Narragansetts purchased the land to build an elderly housing complex, which remains incomplete. The state objected when the tribe asked the U.S. Department of the Interior to take the land into federal trust, which would place it largely under tribal and federal control. |
|
|
|
|
|
Court Rules Against Tobacco Companies
Court Feed News |
2008/02/25 15:33
|
The Supreme Court on Monday rejected a tobacco industry request to intervene in a lawsuit by over a thousand West Virginia smokers. The justices declined to examine a trial procedure in which a jury first determines whether smokers as a group are entitled to punitive damages before establishing whether any single smoker is entitled to compensation. Later, a new jury addresses issues unique to each alleged smoking victim who sued. West Virginia courts are allowing the approach, which has been used in other types of lawsuits, including claims for asbestos exposure. The second phases of such trials rarely occur, because the two sides usually settle once they know the value of the case. Tobacco companies oppose use of the legal device, which lawyers call "reverse bifurcation." The tobacco industry said a jury doesn't know until later in a case whether any smoker was actually harmed or how serious any injury was; which defendants if any were responsible; or the amount of compensatory damages any defendant owes to smokers. In addition to helping resolve suits over asbestos exposure, reverse bifurcation has been applied to claims against makers of the dangerous diet drug fen-phen. In asking the justices not to take the case, lawyers for the smokers said further delay would mean that most of their clients would die before their cases could be tried, "thus affording the defendants a free pass" for their alleged misconduct. The smokers say the companies secretly agreed not to market a truly safer cigarette while publicly proclaiming the safety of their own particular brands. The first phase of the trial was scheduled to begin March 18. |
|
|
|
|
|
Lawyer: Japan Should Avoid Slay Case
Criminal Law Updates |
2008/02/25 14:34
|
The lawyer for a Japanese businessman arrested on suspicion of fatally shooting his wife here in 1981 said Monday he would formally urge the Japanese government not to cooperate with American investigators. The businessman, Kazuyoshi Miura, was arrested Friday in the U.S. territory of Saipan as he tried to pass through immigration control at the airport to take a flight home. Miura, 60, was convicted in Japan in 1994 of killing his wife, Kazumi Miura, but the verdict was overturned 10 years ago. "Given that this case has been closed in Japan, the Justice Ministry and Japanese police should no longer have to respond to requests from the police for evidence or to cooperate with the investigation," said Miuri's lawyer, Shinichiro Hironaka. Miura and his wife were visiting Los Angeles on Nov. 18, 1981, when they were shot in a parking lot. Miura was hit in the right leg, while his 28-year-old wife was shot in the head. The shooting caused an international uproar, in part because he blamed the attack on robbers, reinforcing Japanese perceptions of America as violent. The arrest came after cold-case detectives from the Los Angeles Police Department worked with authorities in Saipan and in Guam, police said in a statement. Police did not make details on the arrest available. At a bail hearing Monday in Saipan, Miura told the court the killing "took place several decades ago, and it is unlikely that I will destroy evidence or run away," according to the Kyodo News Agency. The court, however, denied him bail. A preliminary hearing was set for March 5, said Rosie Ada, deputy clerk at Superior Court. An arraignment was also slated for March 10, she said. |
|
|
|
|
|
NYPD Trio Set for Trial in Groom's Death
Lawyer Blog News |
2008/02/25 13:35
|
On the morning of her wedding day, Nicole Paultre Bell learned her groom-to-be was dead. Sean Bell, who had been spending his last night as a single man partying, was killed in a barrage of 50 police bullets outside a strip club. The three police officers indicted in the shooting were to go on trial Monday in a case that has sparked protests and debate over excessive force and police conduct in New York City. Bell's fiancee was expected to be the first witness at the trial, and she has said she plans to be in court every day. "I feel like I need to know. I need to know why this happened," said Paultre Bell, who had her maiden name legally changed after her fiance's death. "I wake up one day and my world is turned upside down. I have to know why this happened; my family deserves to know." Sean Bell, 23, was killed Nov. 25, 2006, hours before he was to marry the mother of his two children. He and two friends were confronted by undercover officers investigating reports of drugs and prostitution. Detective Michael Oliver fired 31 shots, including the one that killed Bell. Detective Gescard Isnora squeezed off 11 rounds, and Detective Marc Cooper fired four times. Oliver and Isnora have pleaded not guilty to manslaughter; Cooper has pleaded not guilty to reckless endangerment. Police union officials and defense lawyers have said the detectives believed Bell and his friends were going to get a gun, though no weapon was found. The officers opened fire after the car the three men were in lurched forward, bumped Isnora and slammed into an unmarked police minivan, authorities said. |
|
|
|
|
|
Raul Castro named Cuba's new president
Legal World News |
2008/02/25 13:31
|
Cuba's parliament named Raul Castro president to replace his ailing brother Fidel, prompting a guarded response Monday from countries looking for signs of reform on the Communist-ruled island. After years in Fidel's charismatic shadow as Cuba's number two and defense minister, Raul Castro faces massive challenges, including preparing the transition of power to a newer generation and reforming the economy. "Fidel is irreplaceable; the people will continue his work when he is no longer with us physically, though his ideas always will be here," Raul Castro, 76, told lawmakers in his acceptance speech late Sunday. In the 19 months since he took over as temporary leader, Raul Castro has made some minor adjustments in the economy, while promising bigger changes. But he has made it clear that everything will take place "within socialism" and that solutions to the country's problems will come "little by little." People in the street voiced hopes that the new president would usher in long-sought economic reforms to improve their daily lives. "This is the best that could have happened to Cuba," Carlos Muguercia, a 78-year-old craftsman said. "Raul already knows the situation. He knows how to solve problems, in any case the most serious ones." Others were less enthusiastic at the dynastic succession. "Raul is Fidel without a beard," argued one young man enjoying a beer at a bar in Havana's historic center. In a sign that change may take time, Raul Castro said he would consult with his brother on major issues. And he vowed to be on guard against Cuba's powerful northern neighbor the United States. |
|
|
|
|
|
NYC Court Rejects Agent Orange Claims
Lawyer Blog News |
2008/02/24 21:17
|
A federal appeals court on Friday rejected an effort by Vietnamese victims of Agent Orange to reinstate claims that U.S. companies committed war crimes by making the toxic chemical defoliant used in the Vietnam War. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan said it agreed with U.S. District Judge Jack B. Weinstein, who ruled in March 2005 in Brooklyn that Agent Orange was used to protect U.S. troops against ambush and not as a weapon of war against human populations. "It is significant that plaintiffs nowhere allege that the government intended to harm human beings through its use of Agent Orange," the three-judge panel said. Jonathan C. Moore, a lawyer for the Vietnamese plaintiffs, said he was deeply disappointed. "It's both an unjust and an immoral outcome," he said, and promised to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. A lawyer for the companies did not immediately return a telephone call seeking comment. Monsanto, Dow Chemical and more than a dozen other companies, including Hercules Inc., Occidental Chemical Corp, Thompson Hayward Chemical Co., Harcros Chemicals Inc. and Uniroyal Chemical Co. Inc., were named in the case. In November 1961, President Kennedy approved the launch of Operation Trail Dust, a campaign of military herbicide operations in Vietnam designed to prevent the enemy from using vegetation for cover and sustenance. Lawyers for Vietnamese people sued U.S. companies, saying the program caused miscarriages, birth defects, breast cancer, ovarian tumors, lung cancer, Hodgkin's disease and prostate tumors. They said the military's use of Agent Orange violated international, domestic and Vietnamese law and that companies aided the violations or committed their own by helping the military. They sought unspecified compensatory and punitive damages and an environmental cleanup program. Lawyers for the companies and the U.S. government had argued that there was no evil intent when Agent Orange was used to clear the Vietnamese landscape for troops. Agent Orange has been linked to cancer, diabetes and birth defects among Vietnamese soldiers and civilians and American veterans. In 2002, the United States and Vietnam signed a memorandum of understanding providing for scientists from both governments to work together to determine the effects of Agent Orange on people and ecosystems, along with methods and costs of treatment and environmental remediation. The United States, though, has never agreed it has a legal duty to provide funds or assistance to remediate harms allegedly caused by Agent Orange. In a separate opinion, the appellate court also said companies are protected from lawsuits brought by U.S. military veterans or their relatives because the law protects government contractors in certain circumstances who provide defective products. |
|
|
|
|
Recent Lawyer News Updates |
|
|