The Nevada Supreme Court on Tuesday denied a request to block a judge's hearings into the health risks of a mentally impaired woman's pregnancy.
The court's unanimous ruling allowed Washoe County District Judge Egan Walker to resume the evidentiary hearings Tuesday morning in a case that has drawn the attention of national anti-abortion groups.
The 32-year-old woman's parental guardians asked the court Friday to halt the hearings, saying Walker lacks the authority to terminate the pregnancy of their daughter, who has the mental capacity of a 6-year-old.
They claim they have exclusive authority over her health care decisions, and they want their daughter to carry the baby to term in line with their Catholic religious beliefs.
But the high court sided with Walker, saying he has the authority to monitor the woman's welfare and hold the hearings.
Justices noted the guardians failed to file an annual report regarding their daughter's condition and their performance of duties as required by state law. They also said the court obtained information about concerns over the woman's medical condition.
"The purpose of the evidentiary hearings at this time is merely to obtain information in order to make well-reasoned and informed decisions regarding the ward's medical care," justices wrote. "Under these circumstances, we conclude that the district court has not exceeded its jurisdiction or arbitrarily or capriciously exercised its discretion."
Attorney Jason Guinasso, who represents the guardians, was tied up in Tuesday's hearing and unavailable for immediate comment, according to his secretary.
Guinasso has said he's aware of only one similar case in the country. It involved a Massachusetts judge who ordered a mentally ill 31-year-old woman to have an abortion and to be sterilized against her wishes. The state Appeals Court overturned the decision Jan. 17.
The Nevada couple said that while the pregnancy poses health risks to their daughter and the baby, medical experts back them in their decision to continue the pregnancy. The woman suffers from epilepsy and is on medication.
Thursday, November 8, 2012
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Estate Planning Lawyers
Regardless of age or the size of an estate, everyone needs to do an estate plan. We provide tools to enable you to deal with the management and transfer of assets upon your death or incapacity. This can include naming a guardian of your children and managing your estate for their benefit until you think they are old enough to manage assets on their own.
With nearly 40 years of experience in the field, we can and do create estate planning documents that will implement your wishes, minimize taxes and provide effective management tools in the event you become incapacitated or upon your death.
We create documents which are tailored to your desires and your estate. We help you administer them as the need arises. This often can avoid the involvement of expensive court proceedings and expedite the administration process. Our goal is to make management of assets upon incapacity and death of a loved one as efficient, economical and pain-free as possible.
Please contact our Torrance office for consultation with an attorney regarding your legal matter.
With nearly 40 years of experience in the field, we can and do create estate planning documents that will implement your wishes, minimize taxes and provide effective management tools in the event you become incapacitated or upon your death.
We create documents which are tailored to your desires and your estate. We help you administer them as the need arises. This often can avoid the involvement of expensive court proceedings and expedite the administration process. Our goal is to make management of assets upon incapacity and death of a loved one as efficient, economical and pain-free as possible.
Please contact our Torrance office for consultation with an attorney regarding your legal matter.
Visit us on the web for more information http://www.pettlermillerlaw.com/practice-areas/estate-planning
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
Tech titans face off in court over iPhone, iPad
Two tech titans will square off in federal court Monday in a closely watched trial over control of the U.S. smartphone and computer tablet markets.
Apple Inc. filed a lawsuit against Samsung Electronics Co. last year alleging the world's largest technology company's smartphones and computer tablets are illegal knockoffs of its popular iPhone and iPad products. The Cupertino-based company is demanding $2.5 billion in damages, an award that would dwarf the largest patent-related verdict to date.
Samsung counters that Apple is doing the stealing and that some of the technology at issue — such as the rounded rectangular designs of smartphones and tablets — has been industry standards for years.
The U.S. trial is just the latest skirmish between the two over product designs. A similar trial began last week, and the two companies have been fighting in courts in the United Kingdom and Germany. The case is one of some 50 lawsuits among myriad telecommunications companies jockeying for position in the burgeoning $219 billion market for smartphones and computer tablets.
In the United States, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose last month ordered Samsung to pull its Galaxy 10.1 computer tablet from the U.S. market pending the outcome of the trial, though the judge barred Apple attorneys from telling the jurors about the ban.
Apple Inc. filed a lawsuit against Samsung Electronics Co. last year alleging the world's largest technology company's smartphones and computer tablets are illegal knockoffs of its popular iPhone and iPad products. The Cupertino-based company is demanding $2.5 billion in damages, an award that would dwarf the largest patent-related verdict to date.
Samsung counters that Apple is doing the stealing and that some of the technology at issue — such as the rounded rectangular designs of smartphones and tablets — has been industry standards for years.
The U.S. trial is just the latest skirmish between the two over product designs. A similar trial began last week, and the two companies have been fighting in courts in the United Kingdom and Germany. The case is one of some 50 lawsuits among myriad telecommunications companies jockeying for position in the burgeoning $219 billion market for smartphones and computer tablets.
In the United States, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose last month ordered Samsung to pull its Galaxy 10.1 computer tablet from the U.S. market pending the outcome of the trial, though the judge barred Apple attorneys from telling the jurors about the ban.
Wednesday, June 13, 2012
Ex-DC Council chairman pleads guilty to 2 charges
The former chairman of the District of Columbia Council pleaded guilty Friday to lying about his income on bank loan applications, the latest blow to a city government rocked by scandal.
Kwame Brown also admitted to a misdemeanor campaign finance violation, capping a tumultuous week in which he forfeited his position as one of the city's most influential powerbrokers. His departure creates more turnover on the city's governing body and follows the resignation of another councilmember who admitted to stealing public funds earmarked for youth sports programs.
Their departures this year — coupled with a federal probe of Mayor Vincent Gray's 2010 campaign that has already produced guilty pleas from two campaign aides — have sent the district government into a tailspin. And the scandals likely aren't helping efforts to gain greater budget autonomy, much less win more voting power for the district's delegate to Congress or to secure the long-sought goal of statehood.
Kwame Brown also admitted to a misdemeanor campaign finance violation, capping a tumultuous week in which he forfeited his position as one of the city's most influential powerbrokers. His departure creates more turnover on the city's governing body and follows the resignation of another councilmember who admitted to stealing public funds earmarked for youth sports programs.
Their departures this year — coupled with a federal probe of Mayor Vincent Gray's 2010 campaign that has already produced guilty pleas from two campaign aides — have sent the district government into a tailspin. And the scandals likely aren't helping efforts to gain greater budget autonomy, much less win more voting power for the district's delegate to Congress or to secure the long-sought goal of statehood.
Friday, May 25, 2012
Lawyer enters not guilty plea for shooting suspect
A California man accused of committing the nation's deadliest school shooting rampage since the 2007 attack at Virginia Tech pleaded not guilty Monday to murder charges.
One L. Goh, 43, entered his plea through his lawyer, Deputy Public Defender David Klaus in Alameda County Superior Court.
Goh is charged with seven counts of murder and three counts of attempted murder in the April 2 attack at Oikos University in Oakland.
Klaus declined to comment after the hearing.
Goh also faces the special circumstance of committing multiple murders that makes him eligible for the death penalty.
Authorities said Goh planned the shootings and opened fire at the small Christian college founded to cater to Korean immigrants after becoming angry over a tuition dispute with school officials.
Those killed were students Doris Chibuko, 40; Judith Seymour, 53; Grace EunHea Kim, 23; Lydia Sim, 21; Bhutia Tshering, 38; Sonam Choedon, 33; and secretary Katleen Ping, 24.
Choedon's brother, Wangchen Nyima, attended Monday's hearing and said he wanted to see Goh in person.
"I just want to know why this happened," Nyima said. "He seems like he has his own problems. He seems like he's a psycho."
Shackled and wearing a red jumpsuit, Goh appeared somewhat calm during his brief court hearing and was noticeably thinner than he was during his previous court appearance.
A once heavyset man, Goh lost about 20 pounds in jail after he went on a self-imposed hunger strike, said sheriff's Sgt. J.D. Nelson. Goh inexplicably began eating again on Saturday, Nelson said.
One L. Goh, 43, entered his plea through his lawyer, Deputy Public Defender David Klaus in Alameda County Superior Court.
Goh is charged with seven counts of murder and three counts of attempted murder in the April 2 attack at Oikos University in Oakland.
Klaus declined to comment after the hearing.
Goh also faces the special circumstance of committing multiple murders that makes him eligible for the death penalty.
Authorities said Goh planned the shootings and opened fire at the small Christian college founded to cater to Korean immigrants after becoming angry over a tuition dispute with school officials.
Those killed were students Doris Chibuko, 40; Judith Seymour, 53; Grace EunHea Kim, 23; Lydia Sim, 21; Bhutia Tshering, 38; Sonam Choedon, 33; and secretary Katleen Ping, 24.
Choedon's brother, Wangchen Nyima, attended Monday's hearing and said he wanted to see Goh in person.
"I just want to know why this happened," Nyima said. "He seems like he has his own problems. He seems like he's a psycho."
Shackled and wearing a red jumpsuit, Goh appeared somewhat calm during his brief court hearing and was noticeably thinner than he was during his previous court appearance.
A once heavyset man, Goh lost about 20 pounds in jail after he went on a self-imposed hunger strike, said sheriff's Sgt. J.D. Nelson. Goh inexplicably began eating again on Saturday, Nelson said.
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
The Law Offices of Dennis R. Wheeler
The Law Offices of Dennis R. Wheeler specializes in bankruptcy & debt relief. Automatic stay and the discharge injunction are the two most important components of bankruptcy. These two powers work in conjunction to protect you from the actions of creditors while your case is pending. Our law firm invokes the automatic stay by filing your case automatically and this will stop creditors from harassing calls and lawsuits. In addition it stops foreclosures and repossessions. As soon as your case comes to a conclusion, the bankruptcy court can decide to enter a discharge injunction which will erase all debts that are subject to discharge.
My closing thoughts: The Law Offices of Dennis R. Wheeler know what it's like for individuals experiencing financial difficulties. They are here to help and encourage you to review all options, including bankruptcy. Their law firm offers debt relief options outside bankruptcy including Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 bankruptcy options. With a high reputation of an experienced bankruptcy attorney in the San Francisco area, Mr. Wheeler has served Bay area residents of the San Francisco and San Mateo counties
My closing thoughts: The Law Offices of Dennis R. Wheeler know what it's like for individuals experiencing financial difficulties. They are here to help and encourage you to review all options, including bankruptcy. Their law firm offers debt relief options outside bankruptcy including Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 bankruptcy options. With a high reputation of an experienced bankruptcy attorney in the San Francisco area, Mr. Wheeler has served Bay area residents of the San Francisco and San Mateo counties
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Houston Motorcycle Accident Law Firm
The Salazar Law Firm, PLLC
Motorcycle accidents happen for a variety of reasons, but statistics consistently show that they are now happening with alarming regularity. Approximately 25,000 people are injured and over 1,000 killed every year as a result of motorcycle accidents. A motorcycle accident can cause catastrophic injuries, leaving the victim partially or completely paralyzed. Motorcycle accidents that result in a wrongful death often leave the victim's family to deal with the sudden and unexpected loss. The most common causes are: driver error, reckless driving by another, dangerous road conditions, mechanical failure, and faulty motorcycle design.
The Salazar Law Firm is committed to providing clients involved in motorcycle accidents with the aggressive advocacy and knowledgeable support they need to get back on their feet. Their team of attorney aim to help the victims obtain a reasonably fair compensation for their losses and suffering. They are there for every step of the way, starting with the investigation site. See http://www.hurtinhouston.com for more information.
Motorcycle accidents happen for a variety of reasons, but statistics consistently show that they are now happening with alarming regularity. Approximately 25,000 people are injured and over 1,000 killed every year as a result of motorcycle accidents. A motorcycle accident can cause catastrophic injuries, leaving the victim partially or completely paralyzed. Motorcycle accidents that result in a wrongful death often leave the victim's family to deal with the sudden and unexpected loss. The most common causes are: driver error, reckless driving by another, dangerous road conditions, mechanical failure, and faulty motorcycle design.
The Salazar Law Firm is committed to providing clients involved in motorcycle accidents with the aggressive advocacy and knowledgeable support they need to get back on their feet. Their team of attorney aim to help the victims obtain a reasonably fair compensation for their losses and suffering. They are there for every step of the way, starting with the investigation site. See http://www.hurtinhouston.com for more information.
Eugene and Portland Criminal Defense - Coit & Associates, P.C.
Coit & Associates, P.C.,
with offices in Eugene and Portland, have criminal defense lawyers
acknowledged for providing the highest quality representation in the
greater Eugene and Portland metropolitan locations. No matter the size
or seriousness of your case, a lawyer at Coit & Associates, P.C.
will aggressively tackle the case and understand its importance to you
and your family.
Our attorneys at Coit & Associates, P.C. not only have the experience to represent you but we will not b ack down from anyway. Our goal is to provide our clients with efficient, aggressive, and affordable criminal defense that is effective. We care for our defendents charged with or suspected of committing crimes and will fight for you.
Call us at (541) 685-1288 to schedule an appointment or visit us on http://www.criminaldefenseoregon.com for more information.
Our attorneys at Coit & Associates, P.C. not only have the experience to represent you but we will not b ack down from anyway. Our goal is to provide our clients with efficient, aggressive, and affordable criminal defense that is effective. We care for our defendents charged with or suspected of committing crimes and will fight for you.
Call us at (541) 685-1288 to schedule an appointment or visit us on http://www.criminaldefenseoregon.com for more information.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Supreme Court: Inmate cannot change court-appointed lawyer
The Supreme Court says a death row inmate can't change his court-appointed appeals lawyer because he didn't like the lawyer's defense tactics.
The justices on Monday turned away the appeal from Kenneth Clair, who was sentenced to death in California in 1987 for burglary and murder.
Clair wanted to change his federal public defender in 2005 because he says they were trying to stop his execution instead of trying to prove his innocence. A federal judge denied his request but the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that decision.
The justices ruled unanimously that the appeals court's decision was incorrect
Justice Elena Kagan wrote that Clair's request came just as a judge was about to make a final ruling so any change would have been too late.
The justices on Monday turned away the appeal from Kenneth Clair, who was sentenced to death in California in 1987 for burglary and murder.
Clair wanted to change his federal public defender in 2005 because he says they were trying to stop his execution instead of trying to prove his innocence. A federal judge denied his request but the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that decision.
The justices ruled unanimously that the appeals court's decision was incorrect
Justice Elena Kagan wrote that Clair's request came just as a judge was about to make a final ruling so any change would have been too late.
Conn. high court rules prisoners can be force-fed
Connecticut prison inmates who go on hunger strikes can be restrained and force-fed to protect them from life-threatening dehydration and malnutrition, the state Supreme Court ruled Monday.
The 7-0 decision came in the case of 51-year-old prisoner William Coleman, a Liverpool, England, native who stopped eating in September 2007 to protest his conviction on what he claimed was a fabricated rape charge by his ex-wife. The court rejected Coleman's claims that force-feeding violated his free speech rights and international law.
Coleman's weight dropped from 237 pounds to 129 pounds by October 2008, and a prison doctor who believed Coleman was at risk of dying or developing irreversible health problems determined it was necessary to force-feed him by inserting a feeding tube through his nose and into his stomach.
The first of what Coleman's lawyers say was about a dozen forced feedings was performed on Oct. 23, 2008, after prison officials had obtained permanent authority to force-feed him after a trial in Superior Court. Coleman appealed the Superior Court judge's ruling to the Supreme Court.
Coleman resumed taking liquid nutrition voluntarily in late 2008 and returned to a normal weight, court records say, but the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut says he went back on the hunger strike last week.
The 7-0 decision came in the case of 51-year-old prisoner William Coleman, a Liverpool, England, native who stopped eating in September 2007 to protest his conviction on what he claimed was a fabricated rape charge by his ex-wife. The court rejected Coleman's claims that force-feeding violated his free speech rights and international law.
Coleman's weight dropped from 237 pounds to 129 pounds by October 2008, and a prison doctor who believed Coleman was at risk of dying or developing irreversible health problems determined it was necessary to force-feed him by inserting a feeding tube through his nose and into his stomach.
The first of what Coleman's lawyers say was about a dozen forced feedings was performed on Oct. 23, 2008, after prison officials had obtained permanent authority to force-feed him after a trial in Superior Court. Coleman appealed the Superior Court judge's ruling to the Supreme Court.
Coleman resumed taking liquid nutrition voluntarily in late 2008 and returned to a normal weight, court records say, but the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut says he went back on the hunger strike last week.
Federal Law Entitles You to an Accurate Credit Report
The Fair Credit Reporting Act (the FCRA), a federal statute passed in 1970 to regulate the collection and use of consumer credit information, requires consumer reporting agencies (also known as credit reporting agencies or credit bureaus) to maintain the “maximum possible accuracy” of the credit information they collect and use to create consumer reports (also known as credit reports). When a consumer reporting agency fails to maintain this level of accuracy and errors occur, this federal law gives consumers the right to dispute information in their credit files and, when necessary, bring suit against those agencies and the furnishers of credit information to those agencies, to recover damages for those inaccuracies and errors.
Riley Bennett & Egloff Law combines experience and efficiency in credit reporting law to render their clients high quality legal representation. Their attorneys represents cosumers whose rights have been violated by the credit reporting agencies and runishers of credit information. Having represented a number of parties involved with these kinds of claims in federal court, their work has been acknowledged throughout the Indianapolis area.
www.rbelaw.com.
Riley Bennett & Egloff Law combines experience and efficiency in credit reporting law to render their clients high quality legal representation. Their attorneys represents cosumers whose rights have been violated by the credit reporting agencies and runishers of credit information. Having represented a number of parties involved with these kinds of claims in federal court, their work has been acknowledged throughout the Indianapolis area.
www.rbelaw.com.
Ryan & Maniskas, LLP Announces Class Action Lawsuit
Ryan & Maniskas, LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed in United States District Court for the District of Colorado on behalf of purchasers of Molycorp, Inc. common stock during the period between March 9, 2011 and November 10, 2011.
For more information regarding this class action suit, please contact Ryan & Maniskas, LLP toll-free at (877) 316-3218 or by email at rmaniskas@rmclasslaw.com or visit: www.rmclasslaw.com/cases/mcp.
The complaint alleges that defendants’ false and misleading statements about the capability of the Company’s “Mountain Pass” mining operation and the Company’s earnings caused Molycorp common stock to trade at artificially inflated prices throughout the Class Period. Specifically, defendants misrepresented and/or failed to disclose the following adverse facts during the Class Period: (a) Molycorp’s development and expansion of the Mountain Pass mine was not progressing on schedule and would not allow the Company to reach rare earth oxide production rates at the end of calendar 2012 and 2013; and (b) end users had been reducing demand for the Company’s products as prices for rare earth elements increased.
On November 10, 2011, the Company reported disappointing third quarter 2011 revenues and earnings results below analysts’ estimates and announced a reduction in Mountain Pass production guidance for the fourth quarter of 2011 due to expected equipment downtime relating to Mountain Pass engineering and expansion issues. The Company’s stock price fell, dropping from $38.70 per share on November 10, 2011 to $33.45 per share on November 11, 2011, or 13.6%, on heavy trading volume.
If you are a member of the class, you may, no later than April 3, 2012, request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff of the class. A lead plaintiff is a representative party that acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member's claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Under certain circumstances, one or more class members may together serve as "lead plaintiff." Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. You may retain Ryan & Maniskas, LLP or other counsel of your choice, to serve as your counsel in this action.
www.rmclasslaw.com.
For more information regarding this class action suit, please contact Ryan & Maniskas, LLP toll-free at (877) 316-3218 or by email at rmaniskas@rmclasslaw.com or visit: www.rmclasslaw.com/cases/mcp.
The complaint alleges that defendants’ false and misleading statements about the capability of the Company’s “Mountain Pass” mining operation and the Company’s earnings caused Molycorp common stock to trade at artificially inflated prices throughout the Class Period. Specifically, defendants misrepresented and/or failed to disclose the following adverse facts during the Class Period: (a) Molycorp’s development and expansion of the Mountain Pass mine was not progressing on schedule and would not allow the Company to reach rare earth oxide production rates at the end of calendar 2012 and 2013; and (b) end users had been reducing demand for the Company’s products as prices for rare earth elements increased.
On November 10, 2011, the Company reported disappointing third quarter 2011 revenues and earnings results below analysts’ estimates and announced a reduction in Mountain Pass production guidance for the fourth quarter of 2011 due to expected equipment downtime relating to Mountain Pass engineering and expansion issues. The Company’s stock price fell, dropping from $38.70 per share on November 10, 2011 to $33.45 per share on November 11, 2011, or 13.6%, on heavy trading volume.
If you are a member of the class, you may, no later than April 3, 2012, request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff of the class. A lead plaintiff is a representative party that acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member's claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Under certain circumstances, one or more class members may together serve as "lead plaintiff." Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. You may retain Ryan & Maniskas, LLP or other counsel of your choice, to serve as your counsel in this action.
www.rmclasslaw.com.
8 women allege rape, harassment in military suit
Eight current and former members of the U.S. military allege in a new federal lawsuit that they were raped, assaulted or harassed during their service and suffered retaliation when they reported it to their superiors.
The lawsuit, being filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Washington, accuses the military of a having a "high tolerance for sexual predators in their ranks" and of fostering a hostile environment that discourages victims of sexual assault from coming forward and punishes them when they do. The suit says the Defense Department has failed to take aggressive steps to confront the problem despite public statements suggesting otherwise.
The eight women include an active-duty enlisted Marine and seven veterans of the Navy and Marine Corps. Seven women allege that a comrade raped or tried to sexually assault them, including in a commanding officer's office after a pub crawl in Washington and inside a Navy barracks room in Florida. The eighth says she was harassed and threatened while deployed overseas, only to be told by a superior that "this happens all the time."
The women say they've suffered depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder because of the assaults. One woman says she tried to commit suicide after being raped inside her row home by a senior officer and his civilian friend.
The lawsuit, being filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Washington, accuses the military of a having a "high tolerance for sexual predators in their ranks" and of fostering a hostile environment that discourages victims of sexual assault from coming forward and punishes them when they do. The suit says the Defense Department has failed to take aggressive steps to confront the problem despite public statements suggesting otherwise.
The eight women include an active-duty enlisted Marine and seven veterans of the Navy and Marine Corps. Seven women allege that a comrade raped or tried to sexually assault them, including in a commanding officer's office after a pub crawl in Washington and inside a Navy barracks room in Florida. The eighth says she was harassed and threatened while deployed overseas, only to be told by a superior that "this happens all the time."
The women say they've suffered depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder because of the assaults. One woman says she tried to commit suicide after being raped inside her row home by a senior officer and his civilian friend.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)