|
|
|
Court: Lawyers will be disbarred over child porn
Headline News |
2014/01/24 22:27
|
Lawyers convicted of child pornography charges will automatically be disbarred and prohibited from practicing law in California, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
Deciding the fate of an Orange County lawyer whose license was suspended after he pleaded guilty to having child porn at his home, the court said that keeping sexual images of children constitutes an act of moral turpitude that makes an attorney unfit for the legal profession.
"The knowing possession of child pornography is a serious breach of the duties of respect and care that all adults owe to all children, and it shows such a flagrant disrespect for the law and for societal norms, that continuation of a convicted attorney's State Bar membership would be likely to undermine public confidence in and respect for the legal profession," Justice Carol Corrigan wrote in the opinion.
The unanimous ruling came in the case of Gary Douglass Grant, a former Army lawyer at the Los Alamitos Army Reserve Base in Orange County. Grant pleaded guilty to one count of knowingly possessing child pornography in 2009 after sheriff's deputies found videos and photographs of underage girls mixed in with a large adult pornography collection on his computers and data discs. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Bloggers have First Amendment protections
Headline News |
2014/01/20 22:30
|
A federal appeals court ruled Friday that bloggers and the public have the same First Amendment protections as journalists when sued for defamation: If the issue is of public concern, plaintiffs have to prove negligence to win damages.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered a new trial in a defamation lawsuit brought by an Oregon bankruptcy trustee against a Montana blogger who wrote online that the court-appointed trustee criminally mishandled a bankruptcy case.
The appeals court ruled that the trustee was not a public figure, which could have invoked an even higher standard of showing the writer acted with malice, but the issue was of public concern, so the negligence standard applied.
Gregg Leslie of the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press said the ruling affirms what many have long argued: Standards set by a 1974 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Gertz v. Robert Welch Inc., apply to everyone, not just journalists.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court refuses to reopen oyster farm case
Headline News |
2014/01/16 23:13
|
A federal appeals court has refused to reconsider a decision that shutters a popular Northern California oyster farm in the Point Reyes National Seashore.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday said it wouldn't appoint a special 11-judge panel to reconsider the ruling of a three-judge panel.
The three-judge panel ruled in September that the federal government had legal authority to deny Drakes Bay Oyster Co. a new lease so the waters of the Drakes Estero could be returned to wilderness.
The small oyster farm's last remaining legal option is to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. A lawyer for Drakes Bay didn't immediately return a phone call. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court upholds approval of BP oil spill settlement
Headline News |
2014/01/13 23:17
|
Over BP's objections, a federal appeals court on Friday upheld a judge's approval of the company's multibillion-dollar settlement with lawyers for businesses and residents who claim the massive 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico cost them money.
BP has argued that U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier and court-appointed claims administrator Patrick Juneau have misinterpreted settlement terms in ways that would force the London-based oil giant to pay for billions of dollars in inflated or bogus claims by businesses.
During a hearing in November before a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a BP lawyer argued that Barbier's December 2012 approval of the deal shouldn't stand unless the company ultimately prevails in its ongoing dispute over business payments.
But the divided panel ruled Friday that Barbier did not err by failing to determine more than a year ago whether the class of eligible claimants included individuals who haven't actually suffered any injury related to the spill.
Affirming Barbier's initial ruling in 2012, the court said in its 48-page majority opinion that it can't agree with arguments raised by BP and others who separately objected to the settlement. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ohio courts must report mental health info
Headline News |
2014/01/06 19:51
|
Courts in Ohio must now report certain mental health information about people convicted of violent crimes for inclusion in a law enforcement database.
A rule approved by the Ohio Supreme Court requiring that notification took effect Jan. 1. The court devised the form to be submitted to law enforcement after legislation was approved last year.
The law requires judges to report ordering mental-health evaluations or treatment for people convicted of a violent crime or approving conditional release for people found incompetent to stand trial or not guilty by reason of insanity.
The legislation was introduced after a Clark County sheriff's deputy was fatally shot in 2011 by a man with a criminal history who was conditionally released from a mental health institution. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Serial rapist Coe appeals confinement in US court
Headline News |
2014/01/02 22:55
|
Kevin Coe, who was arrested in 1981 after dozens of women were raped in Spokane, is appealing his confinement as a sexually violent predator to federal court.
Coe was suspected in the rapes, attributed to the "South Hill Rapist," but only one conviction stood against him. He served 25 years in prison, and was confined at the state's Special Commitment Center on McNeil Island in 2008, following a monthlong civil trial.
Coe argues that the jurors at his civil trial should not have been asked to determine that he suffered from a "personality disorder" without having that term defined for them. He also says the jury should not have heard evidence of the other cases linked to the South Hill rapist because he was never convicted of them and because he was not allowed to challenge some of the victims through cross-examination.
The state Supreme Court rejected those arguments in 2012.
On Monday, a federal magistrate judge recommended that Coe's request to proceed as an indigent plaintiff be rejected. The judge found that Coe can afford to pay the fee required to file the case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recent Lawyer News Updates |
|
|
Lawyer News RSS
