Tully Rinckey PLLC is pleased to announce the addition of attorney J.E. Yancey Ellis as an Associate in its Washington, D.C. law office. Ellis joins Tully Rinckey PLLC after serving in the U.S. Marine Corps for over four years, including a year long deployment in Iraq. Ellis will provide representation to military servicemembers in all aspects of military criminal and administrative law.

As a former Marine Corps Judge Advocate and assistant advisor to a Commanding Officer in Iraq, Ellis earned a reputation as an aggressive, thorough, and highly admired attorney familiar with the legal complexities under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. At Tully Rinckey PLLC, Ellis will specialize in providing all members of the military with high quality legal services including officer misconduct, Non-Judicial Punishment proceedings, Article 32 investigations, desertion and AWOL instances, as well as violent crimes. He will also focus on handling administrative matters relating to the correction of military records.

While on active duty in the U.S. Marine Corps, Ellis served as both a military prosecutor and defender at Camp Pendleton in California as well as a Deputy Legal Advisor while stationed in Iraq. During his time as a military prosecutor, Ellis prosecuted over 100 Marines accused of violating federal or military law, or state law under the Federal Assimilative Crimes Act. In his role as defender, Ellis represented Marines accused under federal and military law of felony and misdemeanor crimes earning Defense Counsel of the Year for the Western United States in 2009.

Ellis earned his Juris Doctorate from George Mason University School of Law, graduating Cum Laude, and earned a Bachelor of Science degree from West Virginia University, graduating Magna Cum Laude.

For more information about J.E. Yancey Ellis’ addition to Tully Rinckey PLLC or the firm’s military and national security practice, please contact Ali Skinner at (202) 787-1900 or at askinner@fedattorney.com

A federal judge in New York issued an injunction yesterday that will essentially shut down LimeWire, the big music file-sharing service that has been mired in a four-year legal struggle with the music industry. The case has already resulted in the company and its founder, Mark Gorton, being found liable for potentially hundreds of millions of dollars in damages.

Although the file-sharing service is on the verge of vanishing in its current form, the company will continue negotiations with the major music companies about a deal to offer music for sale legally.

In her ruling, Judge Kimba M. Wood of US District Court in Manhattan forced the company to disable “searching, downloading, uploading, file trading and/or file distribution functionality’’ of the company’s file-sharing software.

The court is scheduled to decide early next year the amount the company and Gorton will be forced to pay.
.

The Federal Reserve won’t join a banking industry trade group in asking the U.S. Supreme Court to let the government continue to withhold details of emergency loans made to financial firms in 2008.

The Clearing House Association LLC, a group of the biggest commercial banks filed the appeal today. The Federal Reserve won’t file its own appeal, according to Kit Wheatley, an attorney for the central bank.

The banks are appealing a lower court order requiring the Federal Reserve to disclose lending records to Bloomberg LP, parent company of Bloomberg News. A federal judge ruled in August 2009 that the Fed had to disclose the names of banks that borrowed from its emergency lending programs.

“Greater transparency results in more accountability, and the banks’ fight continues to engender suspicion among taxpayers about the bailouts,” said Matthew Winkler, Bloomberg News editor-in-chief. “The banks’ move to appeal will deepen the public’s skepticism and defend a position that every other court has disagreed with. The public has the right to know.”

The Fed is facing unprecedented oversight by Congress. The Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, known as Dodd- Frank, mandates a one-time audit of the Fed as well as the release of details on borrowers from Fed emergency programs. The Discount Window, which provides short-term funding to financial institutions, would have to disclose loans made after July 21, 2010, following a two-year lag. The Bloomberg lawsuit asks for information on that facility.

A federal appeals court is wrestling with whether the Bush administration's former top procurement official got a fair trial the second time around in the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal.

On Friday, a Justice Department lawyer and an attorney for David Safavian (suh-FAY'-vee-uhn) underwent intense questioning by two of three judges hearing the former White House official's appeal.

Safavian's lawyers say he was the victim of vindictive prosecution at his second trial, in which he was convicted of obstructing justice and making false statements to investigators.

Safavian's convictions rest in part on new charges that the government added after Safavian's successful appeal following conviction at his first trial in 2006.

New York state courts will require lawyers in residential foreclosure actions to certify they have taken “reasonable” steps to verify the accuracy of documents submitted to the court.

The new rule, released in a statement by the New York state Unified Court System, is effective immediately.

Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman introduced the requirement in response to disclosures of deficiencies in residential foreclosure filings nationwide, including notarization and “robo-signing” and affidavits that falsely state the signer has knowledge of the facts, the statement said.

“We cannot allow the courts in New York State to stand by idly and be party to what we now know is a deeply flawed process, especially when that process involves basic human needs -- such as a family home -- during this period of economic crisis,” Lippman said in the statement.

The Supreme Court will consider an appeal by former Attorney General John Ashcroft to throw out a lawsuit seeking to hold him personally responsible for improperly arresting a Muslim U.S. citizen after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

The justices on Monday stepped into a dispute that, at its roots, concerns the Bush administration's aggressive moves against Muslims and Arabs in the United States following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Abdullah al-Kidd was one of at least 70 people detained under a law aimed at insuring that witnesses would be available to appear in court and testify at trial, according to a study by civil liberties groups. Like many others, al-Kidd was never called to testify before a grand jury or in open court and was not charged with a crime.