|
|
|
Drug-maker Faces Class Action Over Zimulti
Class Action News |
2008/01/09 11:49
|
A class action lawsuit has been filed against pharmaceutical powerhouse Sanofi-Aventis alleging that the company hid data concerning adverse events associated with their obesity medication Zimulti. The French company allegedly concealed data showing Zimulti's propensity to cause depression. Zimulti has also been shown to increase suicidal ideation and action in some cases. In June the FDA unanimously decided that Zimulti could not be recommended for approval in the U.S.; however, the drug can be purchased through online pharmacies based in other countries. |
|
|
|
|
|
High Court to Announce Opinions Tuesday
Lawyer Blog News |
2008/01/08 20:54
|
Several Supreme Court justices indicated yesterday that it may be difficult for them to definitely answer whether or when lethal injections violate the Constitution's protection from cruel and unusual punishment.
The morning arguments before the court came in a Kentucky case that has led to a halt to executions across the country. A lawyer arguing on behalf of two Kentucky death row inmates told the court that the three-drug protocol used by states and the federal government carries the potential to cause unnecessary and excruciating pain during executions.
"The risk here is real. That is why in the state of Kentucky it is unlawful to euthanize animals in the way it carries out its executions," said Washington lawyer Donald B. Verrilli Jr., who is representing Ralph Baze and Thomas Bowling in the case, Baze v. Rees.
The main problem, the court was told, is the second drug in the sequence, which paralyzes the muscles. If the inmate is not properly anesthetized, the paralytic could mask whether the condemned is in tortuous pain.
Justice John Paul Stevens said he was "deeply troubled" by the use of the second drug, but that there was nothing in the record in the Kentucky case that raised the issue in a way for the Supreme Court to make a definitive ruling. Kentucky, he said, seemed to have done a good job of administering the drugs in the state's only execution by lethal injection.
Justices David Souter and Stephen Breyer also said it might be better to send the case back to lower courts for a comparative analysis of whether the three-drug process carries more risk than an alternative, which uses only a massive dose of a barbiturate. |
|
|
|
|
|
Ga. Court Examines Banishment Policy
U.S. Legal News |
2008/01/08 18:54
|
An unusual question is before the Georgia Supreme Court: Should banishment of criminals be banned? Though Georgia's judges are technically outlawed from banishing offenders, some have skirted the rule by restricting them from all but one of the state's 159 counties. Now, one convict is challenging the practice, claiming it is unconstitutional. "It's a throwback to the dark ages," McNeill Stokes, the defense attorney who argued the case Monday, said in an interview. "The whole point behind this is zealous prosecutors wanting to get rid of problems in their counties." State attorneys contend the orders are a way to rid criminals from populous areas and protect victims from repeat offenses. But some defense attorneys see them as thinly disguised efforts to evade a Georgia constitutional provision that explicitly forbids courts from "banishment beyond the limits of the state." The case revolves around Gregory Mac Terry, who pleaded guilty to assault and stalking charges. According to court documents, he violated a restraining order by sneaking into his estranged wife's home, forced her into his car and then threatened her with scissors. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison and 10 more years on probation, and a judge added a condition that he be banned from all Georgia's counties except Toombs County in southeast Georgia. His attorney says that condition kept him in prison longer, because he couldn't complete a work-release program in another county. State attorney Paula Smith Sr. said the ban is reasonable, because Terry wrote a letter saying he wouldn't forget his wife when he was released. "What we're losing sight of here is the purpose, and that was to help Mr. Terry's wife from his documented obsession of her," Smith said, adding that the court was "trying to safeguard this woman." The banished rarely move to the remote counties where they are sent, and lawyers say some flee the state altogether. DeKalb County alone has banished dozens of offenders to Echols County, which sits on the Florida border. During arguments Monday, justices peppered attorneys with questions about how the policy works logistically. For example, they asked, how would an offender even get to the county where he was supposed to live without passing through counties he was banned from? |
|
|
|
|
|
Darden settles 2 class-action lawsuits for $4 million
Class Action News |
2008/01/08 17:56
|
Darden Restaurants paid $4 million to settle two class-action lawsuits that had been brought by California employees of Red Lobster and Olive Garden, the Orlando-based company reported in a government regulatory filing late last week.
Settlement of the wage dispute, which was paid out during the company's fiscal second quarter that ended in November, trimmed earnings for the quarter by 2 cents a share, the company reported.
In its quarterly earnings report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Darden said the class-action suits, alleging wage-and-hour violations, were filed in 2004 involving the Red Lobster restaurants and in January 2007 involving the Olive Garden outlets.
In each case, several restaurants were accused of violating a California law that prohibits restaurant managers from requiring servers and bartenders to make up for cash shortages at the end of their shifts.
Darden has a nationwide policy that prohibits the practice, company spokesman Bob McAdam said. The company admitted no wrongdoing in settling the lawsuits, McAdam said, but decided they were too costly to pursue further in court. The allegations, he added, "are almost impossible to prove one way or the other."
Darden has "redoubled" its management training to ensure compliance with the company's policy, he said. |
|
|
|
|
|
Attorney Margaret Mann Joins Sheppard Mullin
Law Firm News |
2008/01/08 17:08
|
Margaret M. Mann hasjoined the San Diego office of Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP aspartner in the firm's Finance and Bankruptcy practice group. Mann most recently led Heller Ehrman'sRestructuring and Insolvency practice and was the firm’s National Hiring Chair. Mann has significantexperience in large, complex domestic and international insolvency proceedingson behalf of creditors, fiduciaries, borrowers and other interested parties,with expertise in the franchise and tax credit syndication industries. She is skilled in negotiating, documenting andlitigating complicated financial transactions, particularly in the technologyfield and in regard to financial contracts such as swaps, repo agreements andforward contracts. "Margaret is oneof the preeminent bankruptcy attorneys in San Diego and is well known inbankruptcy circles nationally. She issmart, affable and industrious," said Guy Halgren, chairman of the firm. "The timing of Margaret joining us isperfect, as San Diego partner Laura Taylor was recently appointed to the U.S.Bankruptcy Court." "With more than25 years of experience, Margaret adds significantly to our bankruptcy practice,"commented Alan Martin, the head of the firm's Finance and Bankruptcy practicegroup. "In the current businessclimate where restructurings and insolvencies are on the upswing, Margaret'scommercial litigation and bankruptcy expertise is of even greater value toclients." Commented Mann, "SheppardMullin occupies a strategic position in California and beyond, and offers thesupport needed to handle sophisticated bankruptcy matters. I am greatly impressed by the firm'sdedication to client service and its reputation as a 'go-to' firm for bankingand restructuring clients." Mann's recent, representative matters include: In re First Magnus(represented agent for syndicate on $100 million repurchase facility), WashingtonMutual Capital Corporation (represented in repurchase trades), enforcedrights for major tax credit syndicator in In re 500 West Broadway and Inre St Casimir Development LLP, In re Magis Networks (debtor's counsel inwireless video Chapter 11 with technology sold in 45 days), In re PinnFund (representedpreference recipient and obtained $4 million summary judgment), CommercialMoney Center (creditor counsel in $400 million failed pooled investmentfund), and In re Cimm’s, Inc. Consolidated Case (debtors’ counsel in$100 million franchise case, successfully reorganized in one year). Sheppard Mullin has 80attorneys based in its San Diego offices. The firm's Finance and Bankruptcy practice group includes more than 70attorneys firmwide. Mannearned a J.D. from the University of Southern California School of Law in 1981and was a member of the Hale Moot Court Honors Program. She received a B.A. in finance, withdistinction, from University of Illinois in 1978. Mann is a fellow in the American College ofbankruptcy. About Sheppard Mullin Richter &Hampton LLP Sheppard Mullin is a full service AmLaw 100 firm with more than 520attorneys in 10 offices located throughout California and in New York,Washington, D.C. and Shanghai. Thefirm's California offices are located in Los Angeles, San Francisco, SantaBarbara, Century City, Orange County, Del Mar Heights and San Diego. Founded in 1927 onthe principle that the firm would succeed only if its attorneys deliveredprompt, high quality and cost-effective legal services, Sheppard Mullinprovides legal counsel to U.S. and international clients. Companies turn toSheppard Mullin to handle a full range of corporate and technology matters,high stakes litigation and complex financial transactions. In the U.S., the firm's clients include morethan half of the Fortune 100 companies. Formore information, please visit www.sheppardmullin.com. |
|
|
|
|
|
SKorea court to rule on probe into president
Legal World News |
2008/01/08 14:55
|
The Constitutional Court will issue a ruling this week on whether the scheduled special investigation into President-elect Lee Myung-bak's alleged involvement in a 2001 financial scam is unconstitutional or not.
President Roh Moo-hyun appointed Chung Ho-young, a former chief of the Seoul High Court, as special counsel Monday to lead the probe of the President-elect. But the launch of an investigation, which is expected to start Jan. 14, depends on the court's ruling.
Chung, 60, currently serves as a lawyer for the Seoul-based law firm, Bae, Kim & Lee LLC.
Under a special bill initiated by the pro-government United New Democratic Party (UNDP) and approved by the National Assembly last month, Chung is to conduct an investigation into allegations of the alleged past misdeeds of Lee until shortly before his inauguration on Feb. 25.
Hours after the appointment, the Ministry of Justice submitted its opinion to the Constitutional Court that the law on special investigation of Lee contained unconstitutional clauses.
But the Supreme Court, which was also asked to submit am opinion on the probe, has declines to do so, court officials said, citing possible conflicts of interest.
Last week, six plaintiffs, including the President-elect's brother and brother-in-law, filed a petition with the Constitutional Court, claiming that the scope of the law contravenes the Constitution.
Two days before his election on Dec. 19, the prosecution cleared the CEO-turned presidential candidate of any wrongdoing, but pro-government and minor opposition party lawmakers passed a bill requiring an independent investigation into the allegations.
The Justice Ministry said that the law goes against the Constitution, which bans multiple investigations into the same allegations against a suspect.
It also said the law, which empowers the chief judge of the Supreme Court to name a special prosecutor, could be unconstitutional, citing the principle of the separation of power between the judiciary and the prosecution.
Constitutional Court officials said no schedule for a verdict has been fixed yet. ``But considering the urgency of the issue, we have decided to issue a ruling as early as possible,'' an official said.
Cheong Wa Dae downplayed the ministry's petition. ``Is there any past case that the Justice Ministry supported a special probe? Some critics have always called the planned special probe unconstitutional,'' Roh's spokesman Cheon Ho-seon said.
Asked about the next move of the presidential office under a possible ruling of ``unconstitutional,'' the spokesman said, ``We will state our official position if the court declares it to be so.''
Cheon added that the presidential office's internal belief was that the investigation was legitimate. |
|
|
|
|
Recent Lawyer News Updates |
|
|