|
|
|
Court says police cannot be sued over warrant
Lawyer Blog News |
2012/02/22 17:38
|
The Supreme Court said Wednesday that California police officers cannot be sued because they used a warrant that may have been defective to search a woman's house.
The high court threw out the lawsuit against Los Angeles County Sheriff's Detective Curt Messerschmidt and other police officials, who were being sued personally by Augusta Millender for the search on her house and confiscation of her shotgun.
Police were looking for her foster son, Jerry Ray Bowen, who had recently shot at his ex-girlfriend with a black sawed-off shotgun. She told police that he may be at his foster mother's house, so Messerschmidt got a warrant to look for any weapons on the property and gang-related material, since Bowen was supposed to be a member of the Mona Park Crips and the Dodge Park Crips. The detective had his supervisors approve the warrant before submitting to the district attorney and a judge, who also approved the warrant. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court to take new look at affirmative action
Lawyer Blog News |
2012/02/21 17:54
|
The Supreme Court will once again confront the issue of race in university admissions in a case brought by a white student denied a spot at the flagship campus of the University of Texas.
The court said Tuesday it will return to the issue of affirmative action in higher education for the first time since its 2003 decision endorsing the use of race as a factor in admissions. This time around, a more conservative court is being asked to outlaw the use of Texas' affirmative action plan and possibly to jettison the earlier ruling entirely.
A broad ruling in favor of the student, Abigail Fisher, could threaten affirmative action programs at many of the nation's public and private universities, said Vanderbilt University law professor Brian Fitzpatrick.
A federal appeals court upheld the Texas program at issue, saying it was allowed under the high court's decision in Grutter vs. Bollinger in 2003 that upheld racial considerations in university admissions at the University of Michigan law school.
The Texas case will be argued in the fall, probably in the final days of the presidential election campaign, and the changed makeup of the Supreme Court could foretell a different outcome. For one thing, Justice Samuel Alito appears more hostile to affirmative action than his predecessor, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. For another, Justice Elena Kagan, who might be expected to vote with the court's liberal-leaning justices in support of it, is not taking part in the case. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Student bra search case goes to NC Supreme Court
Lawyer Blog News |
2012/02/13 18:03
|
The North Carolina Supreme Court is hearing arguments over whether school officials should be allowed to search students' bras for drugs.
A student at an alternative school sued after students had to untuck their shirts and pull out their bras with their thumbs in front of two men in 2008. The searches were done after the principal at Brunswick County Academy received a tip that pills were being brought into the school.
An appeals court ruled last year the searches were "degrading, demeaning and highly intrusive."
The attorney general's office is representing the school. The office says no skin was shown during the search, and students who are assigned to an alternative school because of disciplinary problems have a lesser expectation of privacy than other students. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
US Supreme Court won't permit Ohio execution
Lawyer Blog News |
2012/02/08 17:25
|
The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday added another wrinkle to Ohio's debate over how strictly the state's lethal injection procedures should be followed.
The court without comment refused to allow the execution of a condemned killer of an elderly couple to proceed, an execution delayed by federal courts over concerns that the state continues to deviate too often from its written rules for lethal injection.
Both the state and the inmate's attorneys were trying Wednesday to determine what comes next, but the decision is likely to further delay executions even though Ohio's procedures have never been ruled unconstitutional.
The court denied the state's appeal of decisions in inmate Charles Lorraine's case that said Ohio had strayed too far from its execution policies to be trusted to carry out the death sentence for now.
Federal courts must monitor every Ohio execution "because the State cannot be trusted to fulfill its otherwise lawful duty to execute inmates sentenced to death," the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last month.
The court upheld an earlier decision by U.S. District Court Judge Gregory Frost that chided Ohio for not following his warnings to adhere strictly to their policies. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appeals court: Seniors can't reject Medicare right
Lawyer Blog News |
2012/02/07 16:52
|
A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that seniors who receive Social Security cannot reject their legal right to Medicare benefits, in a rare case of Americans suing to get out of a government entitlement.
Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey is among the five senior citizens who sued to stop their automatic eligibility for Medicare. But the appeals court ruled in a split decision that the law gives them no way to opt out of their eligibility if they want to keep their Social Security benefits.
Armey, a Texas Republican, and his co-plaintiffs say their private insurers limit their coverage because they are eligible for Medicare, but they would prefer the coverage from their private insurers.
"We understand plaintiffs' frustration with their insurance situation and appreciate their desire for better private insurance coverage," Judge Brett Kavanaugh wrote in a majority opinion joined by Douglas Ginsburg, both Republican appointees. But they agreed with the Obama administration that the law says those over age 65 who enroll in Social Security are automatically entitled to Medicare Part A, which covers services including hospital, nursing home care, hospice and home health care.
The case is being funded by a group called The Fund For Personal Liberty, which says its purpose is to take on burdensome government regulations. Attorney Kent Brown, who argued the case for the plaintiffs, say they want to keep their Social Security because they believe they earned it, but none of them want Medicare Part A. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court rules against abortion protester's lawsuit
Lawyer Blog News |
2012/02/03 17:51
|
A federal appeals court in Philadelphia has ruled that an anti-abortion protester arrested near the Liberty Bell in 2007 can't collect damages from park rangers who detained him.
The three-judge panel on Thursday upheld a lower-court ruling to dismiss 32-year-old Michael Marcavage's lawsuit against two Independence National Historic Park rangers. The Philadelphia Daily News reported on the panel's decision.
The suit stemmed from Marcavage's arrest after he refused to move his protest to another area of the park. A federal magistrate convicted the Lansdowne resident of two misdemeanors.
Marcavage appealed and claimed rangers violated his constitutional rights. In 2010, a federal appeals court threw out the misdemeanor convictions. Then Marcavage filed an amended complaint arguing that park rangers were liable for unspecified damages. The court ruled against him. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recent Lawyer News Updates |
|
|
Lawyer News RSS
