|
|
|
Court: $1M coverage for Conn. fire victim families
Headline Topics |
2013/06/14 18:37
|
Families suing the operator of a Hartford nursing home where 16 patients died in a 2003 fire suffered a setback Monday, when the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that the home's insurance coverage was $1 million instead of the $10 million claimed by the victims' relatives.
The justices' 3-2 decision reversed a lower court judge's interpretation of Greenwood Health Center's insurance policy in favor of the families. The high court instead found in favor of Boston-based Lexington Insurance Co., a subsidiary of American International Group Inc.
"It just seems completely inadequate," Van Starkweather, an attorney for one victim's family, said about the lower coverage figure. "I'm disappointed. It was a close decision. Three justices went with AIG. Two justices went with the victims."
A lawyer for Lexington Insurance declined to comment Monday.
The fire at Greenwood Health Center on Feb. 26, 2003, broke out after psychiatric patient Leslie Andino set her bed on fire while flicking a cigarette lighter. Officials at the time said it was the 10th deadliest nursing home fire in U.S. history. Andino was charged with 16 counts of arson murder, but was found incompetent to stand trial and committed to a psychiatric hospital.
Relatives of 13 of the 16 victims sued the nursing home's operator for cash damages, saying it failed to adequately supervise Andino. Hartford Superior Court Judge Marshall K. Berger Jr. ruled in 2009 that Greenwood's insurance policy with Lexington provided $250,000 in coverage for each plaintiff and the policy's maximum coverage was $10 million
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maryland DWI (driving while impaired) as Maryland DUI
Court Watch News |
2013/06/10 10:06
|
Charges made against an individual for drinking and driving in Maryland have two common names: Maryland DUI and Maryland DWI. To be considered for a DUI charge, your blood alcohol level minimum is .08 or higher. All other alcohol levels, such as .07, could get you arrested for a DWI. These arrests are made depending on how impaired your driving abilities are due to alcohol consumption.
There are many consequences in getting charged with a DUI. These include but are not limited to 45 days of a suspended license, and a fine of up to $1,000.00 in addition to one year in jail for a first DUI conviction, and $2,000.00 and two years in jail for a second offense DUI. It is also extremely severe for your driving record because a DUI conviction will result in 12 points for the state of Maryland.
Maryland DWI (driving while impaired) is the lesser offense in comparison with a DUI; however, it still has very harsh punishments, including a driver's license suspension of up to 60 days, 8 points on the Maryland Driver's License record, up to $500 and two months in jail for a first offense, and up to $500.00 and one year in jail for a second offense.
It is crucial to act upon your DUI or DWI arrest in Maryland and to be sure a MVA administrative hearing is requested in writing within 10 days. The driving privileges are automatically suspended unless the hearing is requested. A refusal to take the breathalyzer test is admissible in court as evidence of guilt and also may result in 120 days of driving privileges being suspended.
With the help of a Maryland DUI/DWI attorney, you can outset to scrutinize the legality of the arrest, validity of the charges, and to assert all viable defenses in court. Our Maryland Criminal Lawyers have an extensive experience and expertise in litigating successfully a Maryland DUI or a Maryland DWI charge obtaining dismissals, diversions or probation before Judgment when appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court Upholds Rifle Sales Reporting Requirement
Network News |
2013/06/02 11:06
|
A federal appeals court panel has unanimously upheld an Obama administration requirement that dealers in southwestern border states report when customers buy multiple high-powered rifles.
The firearms industry trade group, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, and two Arizona gun sellers argued that the administration overstepped its legal authority in the 2011 regulation, which applies to gun sellers in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas.
But the three-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia said that the requirement was "unambiguously" authorized under the Gun Control Act of 1968.
The challengers argued that the requirement unlawfully creates a national firearms registry, but the court said because it applies to a small percentage of gun dealers, it doesn't come close to creating one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court date set for case involving dress code
Legal Business |
2013/06/01 11:07
|
A federal judge has set a trial date for a case challenging how three school administrators enforced the dress code at a Sumter County middle school.
The Item of Sumter reports that U.S. District Judge Joseph Anderson has set the trial for March.
In the lawsuit, Charles Smith alleges the enforcement of the dress code at Furman Middle School was arbitrary and caused humiliation for students.
The lawsuit alleges Smith's son was targeted by administrators after Smith started a petition campaign to have the school's principal removed. The lawsuit says the boy, who now attends a private school, was suspended for wearing a jacket with a Columbia logo.
The suit names the principal and two assistants. The district says the dress code enforcement was proper.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wal-Mart pleads guilty in hazardous waste
Headline Topics |
2013/06/01 11:07
|
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. will pay $81.6 million after pleading guilty on Tuesday to criminal charges of improperly disposing of fertilizer, pesticides and other hazardous products that were pulled from stores in California and Missouri because of damaged packaging and other problems.
The retail giant entered the plea in federal court in San Francisco to misdemeanor counts of violating the Clean Water Act and another environmental law regulating pesticides. The fine also settled Environmental Protection Agency allegations.
In Kansas City, Mo., the company pleaded guilty to improperly handling pesticides.
The plea agreements ended a nearly decade-old investigation involving more than 20 prosecutors and 32 environmental groups that has cost Wal-Mart a total of $110 million.
Court documents show illegal dumping occurred in 16 California counties from Del Norte to Orange between 2003 and 2005. Federal prosecutors said the company didn't train its employees on how to handle and dispose hazardous materials at its stores.
The result, prosecutors say, was that waste was tossed into trash bins or poured into sewer systems. The waste also was improperly taken to one of several product return centers throughout the U.S. without proper safety documentation, authorities said. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Calif. erred in new lethal injection regs
Network News |
2013/06/01 11:06
|
Executions in California will remain suspended after a state appeals court ruled that corrections officials made several "substantial" procedural errors when they adopted new lethal injection rules.
The 1st District Court of Appeals said the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation failed to explain, as required by state law, why it was switching from a three-drug injection method to a single drug.
The court's opinion, which affirmed a lower court ruling, also said the agency misled the public by not providing the documents and information it used to reach its decision.
Corrections spokeswoman Deborah Hoffman said in an email that the agency was reviewing the ruling.
"In the meantime, at the governor's direction, CDCR is continuing to develop proposed regulations for a single-drug protocol in order to ensure that California's laws on capital punishment are upheld," Hoffman said.
California has not executed an inmate since 2006, when a federal judge halted the practice, finding that the three-drug mixture amounted to cruel and unusual punishment. The state was ordered to redo its capital punishment system.
Since then, California has built a new death chamber at San Quentin State Prison and trained a new team to carry out executions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chicago man pleads guilty in NY hacking case
Legal Business |
2013/05/31 11:06
|
A self-described anarchist and "hacktivist" from Chicago pleaded guilty Tuesday to charges he illegally accessed computer systems of law enforcement agencies and government contractors.
"As part of each of these hacks, I took and decimated confidential information stored on computer systems websites used by each of the entities," Jeremy Hammond told a judge in federal court in Manhattan. "For each of these hacks, I knew what I was doing was against the law."
Prosecutors had alleged the cyber-attacks were carried out by Anonymous, the loosely organized worldwide hacking group that stole confidential information, defaced websites and temporarily put some victims out of business. Hammond was caught last year with the help of Hector Xavier Monsegur, a famous hacker known as Sabu who later helped law enforcement infiltrate Anonymous.
A criminal complaint had accused Hammond of pilfering information of more than 850,000 people via his attack on Austin, Texas-based Strategic Forecasting Inc., a publisher of geopolitical information also known as Stratfor. He also was accused of using the credit card numbers of Stratfor clients to make charges of at least $700,000. He allegedly bragged he even snared the personal data of a former U.S. vice president and one-time CIA director. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
