|
|
|
NC Supreme Court to hear child killer's case
Class Action News |
2015/01/13 21:18
|
The state Supreme Court will hear arguments in the case of a man convicted of first-degree murder in the death of his 10-month-old stepdaughter, whom he admitted abusing and killing in a drunken rage.
The court will hold the hearing Monday in the case of Joshua Stepp, who was convicted of killing Cheyenne Yarley in November 2009. The jury's finding that Stepp sexually abused the child was key to convicting him of first-degree murder instead of second-degree murder. He's serving a life sentence without parole.
Stepp said he didn't sexually abuse the girl but instead aggressively cleaned her during a diaper change.
In a 2-1 decision last year, the Appeals Court said jurors should have been told Stepp's cleaning of the child was an accepted medical practice under state law. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appeals court: Judge has no place in school grades
Class Action News |
2014/06/03 20:31
|
Judges should stay out of school districts' decisions about how to calculate South Carolina students' grades, an appellate court ruled on Friday.
According to a three-judge panel of the state Court of Appeals, a trial judge should have dismissed a student's lawsuit challenging district officials' recalculation of his grade.
When a student transferred to a Greenville County school from out of state, district officials in 2012 calculated his grade-point average and ranked him first in his class for his junior year.
But another student's parents challenged that ranking, saying that the new student's grade-point average was getting the benefit of extra weight given by both schools to honors and advanced placement courses. The district recalculated the GPA, subsequently ranking the new student as sixth in his class.
The new student sued, saying the school district was wrong to recalculate his grades at all. A trial judge agreed and ordered the district to restore his No. 1 ranking.
In their ruling, the appellate judges said courts shouldn't interfere with districts' internal decisions if no obvious misdeeds have been committed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Toal seeking millions to safeguard SC court info
Class Action News |
2014/03/14 22:28
|
The head of South Carolina's judicial system says she needs more money to safeguard digital information for courts around the state.
Chief Justice Jean Toal told a Senate panel Wednesday that it would take about $5.5 million to set up a site at Clemson University that could serve as a backup for digital court records now stored in Columbia.
Toal says she also needs about $500,000 to train staff on data security measures.
The House budget approved Wednesday doesn't include that money. But Toal says the state's courts would be crippled if the information were wiped out and not backed up.
Toal is also asking for the money to fund new circuit court and family court judges, as well as staff attorneys for both appellate courts. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
French court blocks secret recordings of Sarkozy
Class Action News |
2014/03/14 22:28
|
A French court has ordered an ex-aide of Nicolas Sarkozy to pay 10,000 euros ($14,000) in damages and costs to the former French president over secret recordings that were published in an online journal, and instructed the publication to pull down the links.
Sarkozy and his pop-star-supermodel wife, Carla Bruni, had demanded an emergency injunction blocking publication of their conversation, which surfaced in the online publication Atlantico. The court Friday ordered Atlantico to take down the audio files.
Once-trusted aide Patrick Buisson was ordered to pay 10,000 euros in damages to Sarkozy for making the recordings, and Atlantico and Buisson were each ordered to pay 1,000 euros in court costs.
Atlantico has already pulled the playful exchange between Sarkozy and Bruni. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court allows Stanford Ponzi scheme suits
Class Action News |
2014/03/01 00:06
|
The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that victims of former Texas tycoon R. Allen Stanford's massive Ponzi scheme can go forward with class-action lawsuits against the law firms, accountants and investment companies that allegedly aided the $7.2 billion fraud.
The decision is a loss for firms that claimed federal securities law insulated them from state class-action lawsuits and sought to have the cases thrown out. But it offers another avenue for more than 21,000 of Stanford's bilked investors to try to recover their lost savings.
Federal law says class-action lawsuits related to securities fraud cannot be filed under state law, as these cases were. But a federal appeals court said the cases could move forward because the main part of the fraud involved certificates of deposit, not stocks and other securities.
The high court agreed in a 7-2 decision, with the two dissenting justices warning that the ruling would lead to an explosion of state class-action lawsuits. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court Refuses to Block Texas Abortion Law
Class Action News |
2013/11/22 18:23
|
A sharply divided Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed Texas to continue enforcing abortion restrictions that opponents say have led more than a third of the state's clinics to stop providing abortions.
The justices voted 5-4 to leave in effect a provision requiring doctors who perform abortions in clinics to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital.
The court's conservative majority refused the plea of Planned Parenthood and several Texas abortion clinics to overturn a preliminary federal appeals court ruling that allowed the provision to take effect. The four liberal justices dissented.
The case remains on appeal to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans. That court is expected to hear arguments in January, and the law will remain in effect at least until then.
Justice Stephen Breyer, writing for the liberal justices, said he expects the issue to return to the Supreme Court once the appeals court issues its final ruling.
The Texas Legislature approved the requirement for admitting privileges in July.
In late October, days before the provision was to take effect, a trial judge blocked it, saying it probably is unconstitutional because it puts a "substantial obstacle" in front of a woman wanting an abortion.
But a three-judge appellate panel moved quickly to overrule the judge. The appeals court said the law was in line with Supreme Court rulings that have allowed for abortion restrictions so long as they do not impose an "undue burden" on a woman's ability to obtain an abortion. Writing for the appeals court, Judge Priscilla Owen noted that the Texas law would not end the procedure, only force women to drive a greater distance to obtain one.
Justice Antonin Scalia, writing in support of the high court order Tuesday, said the clinics could not overcome a heavy legal burden against overruling the appeals court. The justices may not do so "unless that court clearly and demonstrably erred," Scalia said in an opinion that was joined by Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy did not write separately or join any opinion Tuesday, but because it takes five votes to overturn the appellate ruling, it is clear that they voted with their conservative colleagues. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recent Lawyer News Updates |
|
|
Lawyer News RSS
