|
|
|
Salvatore Scanio – Ludwig & Robinson PLLC.
Law & Politics |
2014/04/13 22:52
|
Salvatore Scanio, Attorney Mr. Scanio has extensive experience in complex domestic and international litigation and regulatory matters, involving federal and state banking, financial transactions, insurance coverage, and contract and other commercial disputes. Mr. Scanio represents banks, insurers and other companies in cases involving negotiable instruments under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), electronic bank payments, fraud, fiduciary duty, accounting, lender liability, loan losses, lost profits, statutory and regulatory violations, professional liability, class actions, and claims against the federal government. He advises clients as to liability, defenses and loss recovery on a wide range of bank fraud and corporate fraud schemes, including check fraud, credit and debit card fraud, unauthorized electronic funds transfers (EFT) including fraudulent wire transfers and ACH transactions, identity theft, check kiting, deposit account fraud, malware attacks, cybercrime, account takeovers, loan and mortgage fraud, embezzlement, and bank insider fraud. Selected Professional Awards and Associations- American Bar Association: Business Law Section, Committees on Banking Law, Business and Corporate Litigation, Consumer Financial Services, Uniform Commercial Code; Tort, Trial and Insurance Practice Section, Committees on Business Litigation, Fidelity and Surety Law, Insurance Coverage Litigation
- Defense Research Institute: Committees on Commercial Litigation, Electronic Discovery, Fidelity and Surety, Insurance Law
- National Institute for Trial Advocacy, Trial Skills
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EU court nixes government bulk data collection
U.S. Legal News |
2014/04/08 19:20
|
The European Union's top court says key legislation allowing governments to collect data on citizens' communications for law-enforcement purposes is invalid.
The European Court of Justice in Luxembourg on Tuesday ruled the so-called data retention directive is too far-reaching and offers too few safeguards to protect people's right to privacy, creating an impression that "private lives are the subject of constant surveillance."
The legislation allows the storage of phone calls or online communication records for at least six months to help prevent serious crimes such as terrorism. The data typically reveal who was involved in the communication, when and how often, but not its content.
The court says the 2006 legislation represents a "particularly serious interference with fundamental rights." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court rejects early appeal of surveillance ruling
Headline News |
2014/04/08 19:20
|
The Supreme Court has declined an early look at a constitutional challenge to the National Security Agency's bulk collection of millions of Americans' telephone records.
Conservative lawyer Larry Klayman persuaded a federal judge in December to rule that the agency's activities likely violate the Constitution's ban on unreasonable searches. The justices on Monday rejected Klayman's unusual request to bypass the traditional appeals process and hear the case immediately.
Klayman says the case is too important to wait for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to reach a decision. The district court judge granted an injunction against the NSA, but put it on hold pending a government appeal.
The Obama administration has defended the NSA program as a crucial tool against terrorism. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Private email exempt from open records law
Court Feed News |
2014/04/03 23:29
|
A California appeals court has ruled that private text messages, emails and other electronic communications sent and received by public officials on their own devices are not public records regardless of the topic.
The 6th District Court of Appeal in San Jose ruled last week that the state's Public Records Act doesn't extend to officials' private devices.
The California Supreme Court is expected to be asked to step in and settle this long-simmering debate.
State laws do require the communications of elected officials and other officials involving public issues to be retained and turned over upon request.
Since the coming of email, activists and others in the state have been battling at all levels of government over whether public issues discussed on private devices with personal accounts are covered by the Public Records Act. Similar legal battles and political debates have sprung up across the country as well.
The March 27 ruling reverses a lower court decision in favor of environmental activist Ted Smith, who sought access to messages sent on private devices through private accounts of the San Jose mayor and City Council members
Smith's attorney James McManis said he will ask the state Supreme Court to review the case. If the high court refuses to take it, the appeals court ruling will stand. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Supreme Court voids overall contribution limits
Headline News |
2014/04/03 23:29
|
The Supreme Court struck down limits today in federal law on the overall campaign contributions the biggest individual donors may make to candidates, political parties and political action committees.
The justices said in a 5-4 vote that Americans have a right to give the legal maximum to candidates for Congress and president, as well as to parties and PACs, without worrying that they will violate the law when they bump up against a limit on all contributions, set at $123,200 for 2013 and 2014. That includes a separate $48,600 cap on contributions to candidates.
But their decision does not undermine limits on individual contributions to candidates for president or Congress, now $2,600 an election.
Chief Justice John Roberts announced the decision, which split the court's liberal and conservative justices. Roberts said the aggregate limits do not act to prevent corruption, the rationale the court has upheld as justifying contribution limits.
The overall limits "intrude without justification on a citizen's ability to exercise 'the most fundamental First Amendment activities,'" Roberts said, quoting from the court's seminal 1976 campaign finance ruling in Buckley v. Valeo.
Justice Clarence Thomas agreed with the outcome of the case, but wrote separately to say that he would have gone further and wiped away all contribution limits. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pakistani court indicts Musharraf in treason case
Attorneys News |
2014/03/31 23:49
|
A special Pakistani court on Monday indicted former military ruler Pervez Musharraf on five counts of high treason, a charge that potentially carries the death penalty and delivers a sharp blow to the country's powerful military.
The development is the first time that an acting or former army chief has been indicted for treason in Pakistan, where the military has taken power in three coups since the country was founded in 1947.
It's unclear whether the case will ever get to the verdict stage, however. Musharraf's lawyers are pushing for him to be allowed to go abroad to see his ailing mother.
The indictment — the latest high drama in a series of legal cases Musharraf has faced since returning to Pakistan a little over a year ago — showcases the tensions between a civilian government that initiated the case and the military, which has generally been above the law.
Musharraf, who appeared in court on Monday for only the second time since court proceedings began in December, pleaded not guilty and delivered a nearly 30-minute defense of his time in office.
The former general, who has been at a hospital in the nearby city of Rawalpindi since January, said he was appearing in the proceeding against the advice of his medical team.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recent Lawyer News Updates |
|
|
Lawyer News RSS
