|
|
|
Senate rejects GOP effort on terrorist trials
Topics |
2011/10/20 09:15
|
The Senate voted early Friday to reject a Republican effort to prohibit the United States from prosecuting foreign terrorist suspects in civilian courts, handing a victory to President Barack Obama.
By 52-47, senators turned aside a proposal by Sen. Kelly Ayotte (AY-aht), R-N.H., that would have forced such trials to occur before military tribunals or commissions. The Obama administration has fought to continue bringing such cases in federal courts, with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Attorney General Eric Holder writing Senate leaders on Thursday that the measure would deprive them of a potent weapon against terrorism and increase the risk of terrorists escaping justice.
Obama has had numerous clashes with Congress over the handling of war on terror detainees. Congress has voted to prevent the transfer of detainees from the naval prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to the U.S. Obama has sought to close that detention facility but has been opposed by Republicans and some Democratic lawmakers.
Ayotte said it would be dangerous to let terrorists exercise the protections against self-incrimination and other rights of civilian courts that they might use to avoid surrendering critical information to investigators. Republicans cited last November's acquittal by a federal jury in New York of all but one of hundreds of charges brought against Ahmed Ghailani for his role in destroying two U.S. embassies in Africa, in which 224 people were killed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arpaio to testify about failed investigations
Law Firm News |
2011/10/18 10:32
|
The self-proclaimed toughest sheriff in America will appear in court Tuesday to testify about his failed corruption investigations against three public officials who claim the cases were trumped up.
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio will testify at an ally's attorney discipline hearing at a time when a federal grand jury is investigating abuse-of-power allegations against him and the U.S. Justice Department is conducting a civil rights investigation of his immigration patrols.
The politically powerful sheriff, who is being courted by four Republican presidential hopefuls for his endorsement, will testify at former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas' attorney discipline hearing.
Arpaio wouldn't face any punishment if Thomas is found to have violated ethical rules, but the hearing could provide the first official comment from the state's legal establishment on whether the investigations were valid.
Lawyers pressing the discipline case said that the officials, judges and attorneys who crossed Arpaio and Thomas in political disputes were often targeted for investigations and, in some cases, were criminally charged. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top Europe court bans stem cell technique patents
Topics |
2011/10/18 10:31
|
The European Union's top court ruled Tuesday that scientists cannot patent stem cell techniques that use human embryos for research purposes, a ruling some scientists said threatens important research since no one could profit from it.
The European Court of Justice in Luxembourg said the law protects human embryos from any use that could undermine human dignity.
Embryonic stem cells can develop into any type of cell in the body, which one day might be used to replace damaged tissue from ailments such as heart disease, Parkinson's and stroke. But using stem cells from embryos has been controversial — opposed by some groups for religious and moral reasons.
Despite such concerns, there are no such restrictions on obtaining patents on stem cell techniques in the U.S. and many other countries.
The European ruling centered on the case of Oliver Bruestle at the University of Bonn, who filed a patent on a technique to turn embryonic stem cells into nerve cells in 1997. Greenpeace filed a challenge to Bruestle's patent, arguing that it allows human embryos to be exploited.
The court said patents would be allowed if they involved therapeutic or diagnostic techniques that are useful to the embryo itself, like correcting defects. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minn. appeals court upholds $1M U verdict
Law Firm News |
2011/10/18 10:31
|
The Minnesota Court of Appeals has upheld a $1 million civil verdict against the University of Minnesota and men's basketball coach Tubby Smith, denying their request for a new trial.
The ruling Monday says the school must pay $1 million to Jimmy Williams, a former Oklahoma State assistant coach who quit in 2007 because he believed Smith had offered him an assistant coaching job. The offer was apparently withdrawn after the university's athletic director discovered Williams had NCAA recruiting violations in his past.
Last year, a Hennepin County jury found Smith misrepresented his authority by offering Williams the post. A district court judge later reduced the jury's award to Williams from $1.25 million to $1 million. The state Appeals Court also denied Williams' request to reinstate the initial jury award. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann Bernstein, LLP Announces Class Action
Legal Focuses |
2011/10/17 09:35
|
The law firm of Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann amp; Bernstein, LLP is investigating potential securities law violations as alleged in a securities class action lawsuit filed on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of Imperial Holdings, Inc. pursuant and/or traceable to the Company’s initial public offering on or about February 7, 2011 through September 27, 2011, inclusive.
Imperial Holdings shareholders, or individuals with information relating to this investigation, who wish to learn more about the action should click here or contact Sharon M. Lee of Lieff Cabraser toll free at (800) 541-7358.
Background on the Imperial Holdings Securities Class Litigation
The action is brought against Imperial Holdings, certain of its officers and directors, and the underwriters of the IPO for violations of the Securities Act of 1933. Imperial Holdings is a specialty finance company that focuses on providing premium financing for individual life insurance policies.
The action alleges that the Company’s registration statement and prospectus for the IPO, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, were materially false and misleading because they failed to disclose that Imperial Holdings had engaged in wrongdoing with respect to its life insurance finance business that would expose the Company and certain of its employees to government investigations.
On September 27, 2011, Imperial Holdings announced that federal investigators had served the Company with a search warrant and that it and certain of its employees, including its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and its President and Chief Operating Officer, were under investigation in connection with the Company’s life insurance business. In response to this announcement and news of the raid on the Company's headquarters, the price of Imperial Holdings stock declined from $6.30 per share to close at $2.19 per share on September 28, 2011, on extremely heavy trading volume.
About Lieff Cabraser
Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann amp; Bernstein, LLP, with offices in San Francisco, New York and Nashville, is a nationally recognized law firm committed to advancing the rights of investors and promoting corporate responsibility. Since 2003, the National Law Journal has selected Lieff Cabraser as one of the top plaintiffs’ law firms in the nation. In compiling the list, the National Law Journal examined recent verdicts and settlements in addition to overall track records. Lieff Cabraser is one of only two plaintiffs’ law firms in the United States to receive this honor for the last nine consecutive years. For more information about Lieff Cabraser and the firm’s representation of investors, please visit http://www.lieffcabraser.com. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
US House group files motion in gay marriage suit
Law Center |
2011/10/17 09:35
|
Gays and lesbians are not entitled to the same heightened legal protection and scrutiny against discrimination as racial minorities and women in part because they are far from politically powerless and have ample ability to influence lawmakers, lawyers for a U.S. House of Representatives group said in a federal court filing.
The filing Friday in San Francisco's U.S. District Court comes in a lesbian federal employee's lawsuit that claims the government wrongly denied health insurance coverage to her same-sex spouse. Karen Golinski says the law under which her spouse was denied benefits — the Defense of Marriage Act — violates the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal protection.
But attorneys representing the House's Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group counter that DOMA is subject to a lower level of court scrutiny because gays and lesbians don't meet the legal criteria for groups who receive heightened protection from discrimination. Under that lower standard, DOMA is constitutional, they argue. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
