|
|
|
Former Gov. Pataki joins New York City law firm
Headline News |
2007/03/07 18:56
|
Former Gov. George Pataki, after a two-month break, announced Wednesday that he is joining a New York City law firm and will specialize in environmental issues, particularly renewable energy. Pataki, who has been eyeing a possible run for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, will be joined at Chadbourne & Parke by his former chief of staff, John Cahill. Pataki spokesman David Catalfamo said the governor is not ruling out a possible later jump into the presidential campaign, although Pataki has lately cut back on campaign-like activities. "I am thrilled to be joining Chadbourne," said Pataki in a news release issued by the law firm. "This is one of the great New York firms, and I look forward to participating in its growth." Chadbourne's managing partner, Charles O'Neill, said the addition of Pataki and Cahill to the firm "will build upon Chadbourne's growing renewable energy practice." Cahill is a former state environmental conservation commissioner. Pataki was praised by environmental groups throughout his 12 years in office, particularly for his efforts to add 1 million acres of preserve land to the state. Pataki, who ousted Democratic Gov. Mario Cuomo in 1994, did not seek re-election last year to a fourth, four-year term.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Turkish court shuts down YouTube
Legal World News |
2007/03/07 18:51
|
Turkey’s largest internet services provider shut down access to the YouTube video-sharing web site on Wednesday after a court ruling that some of its content insulted Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkey. The decision followed days of furious insult-sharing among Turkish and Greek users of the popular and controversial site. The result was a flood of complaints to the site and to the media from Turkish users angered by what one newspaper said were “fanatic Greeks broadcasting videos” insulting Ataturk. Turk Telekom acted first by removing the offending items, but a court ordered access to the site to be blocked late on Tuesday after prosecutors brought a case against YouTube. A message posted on the site late on Wednesday said access had been suspended following a decision by an Istanbul court. One video posted on the site allegedly claimed that Ataturk and Turks were “homosexuals”. Ataturk, who died in 1938, is a revered figure in Turkey and it is a crime to “insult” him or state institutions. Many writers, including the Nobel literature laureate Orhan Pamuk, have faced trial for work that allegedly breaches this law. Paul Doany, chief executive of Turk Telekom, said the company had received a faxed copy of the court’s decision on Tuesday. “YouTube’s services have been suspended in Turkey in accordance with this decision,” he said. The site would remain blocked until the court decided otherwise. The decision to shut off access to the site was not a judgement on the material broadcast, he added, but a response to a legal decision. The government has promised to look at ways of amending article 301 of Turkey’s penal code, under which prosecutions of writers can be brought. But it appears unlikely that the article will be abolished, as campaigners have urged. |
|
|
|
|
|
Blagojevich offers big plans, big tax hikes
Law & Politics |
2007/03/07 17:02
|
Gov. Rod Blagojevich today called on lawmakers to "seize the moment" and enact new taxes on business, lease the state lottery and borrow money to fund a massive expansion of health care, pump new money into education and relieve the state's growing pension debt. Delivering a combined budget address and State of the State message to the General Assembly, Blagojevich said he stood with the middle class against business interests who have failed to "simply pay their fair share" of the state's tax burden. "For decades, it's been the middle class and the working families of Illinois that have shouldered more and more of the tax burden. And while they've paid more, the wealthiest corporations in our state have paid less and less. The impact of this imbalance weakens our economy, burdens our families and holds our state back," Blagojevich said. "And the saddest irony of all, the very people burdened by an unfair tax system, middle class families and working families were hurt by the underfunding of education, health care and pension funds," he said. Telling lawmakers the choice was theirs to make, Blagojevich said, "To me, the choice is simple. I stand with the people." |
|
|
|
|
|
Failed Abortion Sparks Child Care Lawsuit
Court Feed News |
2007/03/07 13:53
|
A woman who had an abortion but still gave birth has filed a lawsuit against two doctors and a family planning organization seeking the costs of raising her child.
The complaint was filed by Jennifer Raper, 45, last week in Suffolk Superior Court and still must be screened by a special panel before it can proceed to trial.
Raper claimed in the suit that she found out she was pregnant in March 2004 and decided to have an abortion for financial reasons, The Boston Globe reported in its Wednesday editions.
Dr. Allison Bryant, a physician working for Planned Parenthood at the time, performed the procedure on April 9, 2004, but it "was not done properly, causing the plaintiff to remain pregnant," according to the complaint.
Raper then went to see Dr. Benjamin Eleonu at Boston Medical Center in July 2004, and he failed to detect the pregnancy even though she was 20 weeks pregnant at the time, the lawsuit alleges.
It was only when Raper went to the New England Medical Center emergency room for treatment of pelvic pain in late September that year that she found out she was pregnant, the suit said.
She gave birth to a daughter on Dec. 7, 2004.
Raper and her lawyer, Barry C. Reed Jr., refused comment when contacted by the newspaper, and a spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood said the organization does not comment on pending litigation.
Massachusetts' high court ruled in 1990 that parents can sue physicians for child-rearing expenses, but limited those claims to cases in which children require extraordinary expenses because of medical problems, medical malpractice lawyer Andrew C. Meyer Jr. said.
Raper's suit has no mentions of medical problems involving her now 2-year-old daughter. |
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court rejects Ebbers fair-trial
Court Feed News |
2007/03/06 17:40
|
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected an appeal by the ex-WorldCom Inc. chief of his federal fraud and conspiracy conviction in the $11 billion accounting scandal that destroyed his former Clinton-based company and cost investors thousands of dollars. A former P.E. coach-turned-telecommunications king, Ebbers had challenged two facets of his federal trial that resulted in a 25-year prison sentence. The justices rejected without comment Ebbers' bid for review of his 2005 conviction based on his contention that he was denied a fair trial. Hearing the news, Thomas Harris of Brandon, a former WorldCom accountant, who at one time thought he might be able to retire at age 40, said, "I don't harbor any ill feelings against Bernie, but when we make decisions we have to live by them." Harris, a 13-year employee, left the company, then known as MCI, to open a business with his wife when it appeared he would have to move to stay with the company. "Hopefully all of this will be a deterrent to other executives making decisions not good for a company," Harris said. Ebbers began serving his sentence in the Federal Correctional Institution in Oakdale, La., in September, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons Web site lists July 4, 2028, as the 65-year-old Ebbers' projected release date. Absent a presidential pardon -which was less likely than Supreme Court intervention - Ebbers will serve his sentence, said Matt Steffey, a professor at Mississippi College School of Law. Steffey said he wasn't surprised the Supreme Court rejected Ebbers' appeal. "Other than Mr. Ebbers' status as a businessman, there was nothing noteworthy from a legal perspective," he said. "It seems he got a fair trial, he was ably represented and he had his conviction reviewed by the Court of Appeals. Everything went according to form. "Cases like this rarely get reviewed by the Supreme Court. If Mr. Ebbers weren't famous, there would be little public interest." Ebbers argued in court papers the trial judge improperly allowed prosecutors to use testimony from witnesses who had been given immunity but denied immunity to potential defense witnesses. The judge also instructed jurors they could find Ebbers guilty if they believed he suspected a crime was being committed but intentionally looked the other way. A federal appeals court upheld the conviction last year while acknowledging Ebbers' sentence for a white-collar crime was longer than sentences routinely imposed by many states for violent crimes. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Ebbers' actions to hide WorldCom's financial problems were substantial and had cost investors dearly. Stacey Wall, president and chief executive officer at Pinnacle Trust Wealth Management in Ridgeland, said he sympathizes with investors who lost money but thinks Ebbers' sentence was too harsh. "Relative to other corporate scandals and executives involved, he got very unfair treatment," he said. Ebbers was convicted of fraud and conspiracy in March 2005 for his role in the scheme that drove the former telecommunications giant into bankruptcy in 2002. Investigators uncovered $11 billion in fraud, much of it because accountants were classifying regular expenses as long-term capital expenditures. The company re-emerged under the name MCI and moved the headquarters to Virginia. Verizon later bought MCI. |
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court rules in Colorado redistricting
Legal Career News |
2007/03/06 17:29
|
The US Supreme Court handed down decisions in two cases Monday, including Lance v. Coffman, where the Court concluded that four Republican voters in Colorado did not have standing to challenge a court-ordered congressional redistricting plan. A state judge in Colorado drew up a redistricting plan in 2002 when the state legislature was unable to agree on a plan in time for elections that year. The legislature drew up a plan in 2003, but that plan was rejected by the Colorado Supreme Court because the state constitution allows for a new plan only once per decade. The state supreme court held that "judicially-created districts are just as binding and permanent as districts created by the General Assembly." The redistricting plan was subsequently challenged by four voters, who argued that their rights had been violated under the Elections Clause of the US Constitution, which states that the "Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of choosing Senators." The US Supreme Court ruled that the plaintiffs did not have standing, writing:
The only injury plaintiffs allege is that the law - specifically the Elections Clause - has not been followed. This injury is precisely the kind of undifferentiated, generalized grievance about the conduct of government that we have refused to countenance in the past. It is quite different from the sorts of injuries alleged by plaintiffs in voting rights cases where we have found standing. Because plaintiffs assert no particularized stake in the litigation, we hold that they lack standing to bring their Elections Clause claim. |
|
|
|
|
Recent Lawyer News Updates |
|
|