The Supreme Court is belatedly developing an electronic filing system
similar to those used in courts around the country, Chief Justice John
Roberts said Wednesday in his annual end-of-year report.
Roberts devoted his 10th report as chief justice to discussing the
court's wary embrace of information technology over the years, which he
attributed in part to the judiciary's role as neutral arbiters of a
justice system that must be open to all.
Roberts said that "courts will always be prudent whenever it comes to embracing the 'next big thing.'"
The chief justice talked about the pneumatic tubes that were on the
cutting edge of technology in the late 1800s, but not used by the court
until its new building opened in 1935. Roberts did not once mention
cameras, which are barred from the court's proceedings.
The court's new filing system could be up and running as soon as 2016,
although parties in the court's cases will continue to be required to
submit paper copies of every brief, Roberts said.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, the Vermont Democrat who is the outgoing chairman of
the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the court should be doing more to
allow the public to have meaningful access to the justices' work. "Not
mentioned in his report, however, is the failure of the Supreme Court to
allow even old technology, like photographs of the Supreme Court in
session or live streaming of its oral arguments online," Leahy said.
Sen. Chuck Grassley, the Iowa Republican who is about to become chairman
of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the court needs to do more to
make its activities accessible to the public.
Tuesday, January 6, 2015
Appeals court won't delay or move Tsarnaev trial
The trial of marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev can begin as
scheduled Monday in Boston after a federal appeals court ruled that the
defense had not met the "extraordinary" standard required to justify its
intervention.
The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals announced its decision Saturday. Tsarnaev's lawyer had asked the court to delay the trial and move it out of Massachusetts, saying he couldn't get a fair trial in a place where so many were affected by the bombings.
The appeals court ruled 2-1 to avoid intervening in the trial's timing and location.
"The judges in the majority are satisfied that full consideration has been given to the issues raised by the petition, and it is clear that the petition falls short of meeting the requirements for issuing the extraordinary writ of mandamus," two judges said in the majority opinion. One judge dissented, saying he didn't have enough time to carefully consider the petition filed Wednesday.
One of Tsarnaev's attorneys, Miriam Conrad, declined to comment Saturday.
Tsarnaev has pleaded not guilty to 30 charges connected to the April 2013 explosions that killed three people and wounded more than 260 others. Some of the charges carry the death penalty.
The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals announced its decision Saturday. Tsarnaev's lawyer had asked the court to delay the trial and move it out of Massachusetts, saying he couldn't get a fair trial in a place where so many were affected by the bombings.
The appeals court ruled 2-1 to avoid intervening in the trial's timing and location.
"The judges in the majority are satisfied that full consideration has been given to the issues raised by the petition, and it is clear that the petition falls short of meeting the requirements for issuing the extraordinary writ of mandamus," two judges said in the majority opinion. One judge dissented, saying he didn't have enough time to carefully consider the petition filed Wednesday.
One of Tsarnaev's attorneys, Miriam Conrad, declined to comment Saturday.
Tsarnaev has pleaded not guilty to 30 charges connected to the April 2013 explosions that killed three people and wounded more than 260 others. Some of the charges carry the death penalty.
Monday, December 29, 2014
Court orders release of jailed real estate mogul
A federal appeals court ordered the release Wednesday of a real estate mogul who was jailed last week in Montana after being found in contempt of court over his sale of a Mexico resort.
The ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals comes after onetime billionaire and Yellowstone Club founder Tim Blixseth, 64, was jailed Thursday for not giving U.S. District Judge Sam Haddon a full accounting of a 2011 hotel property sale for $13.8 million.
Blixseth's attorneys argued that the jailing was unconstitutional because Haddon had not given enough details about what he wanted. Attorney Philip Stillman said Blixseth was "elated" with the ruling and hoped to be home in Washington state by Wednesday afternoon.
"This is truly a great Christmas for Mr. Blixseth," Stillman said.
A two-judge panel of the 9th Circuit said that Haddon's incarceration order will be put on hold for 30 days while Haddon gives more specific instructions to Blixseth on how he can comply with his earlier order.
Blixseth sold the property in defiance of a court order. Haddon first demanded answers on where the money went in February.
Creditors are trying to collect on $241 million in judgments against Blixseth stemming from the Yellowstone Club's bankruptcy. The Montana resort he started in the 1990s is now under new ownership.
The ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals comes after onetime billionaire and Yellowstone Club founder Tim Blixseth, 64, was jailed Thursday for not giving U.S. District Judge Sam Haddon a full accounting of a 2011 hotel property sale for $13.8 million.
Blixseth's attorneys argued that the jailing was unconstitutional because Haddon had not given enough details about what he wanted. Attorney Philip Stillman said Blixseth was "elated" with the ruling and hoped to be home in Washington state by Wednesday afternoon.
"This is truly a great Christmas for Mr. Blixseth," Stillman said.
A two-judge panel of the 9th Circuit said that Haddon's incarceration order will be put on hold for 30 days while Haddon gives more specific instructions to Blixseth on how he can comply with his earlier order.
Blixseth sold the property in defiance of a court order. Haddon first demanded answers on where the money went in February.
Creditors are trying to collect on $241 million in judgments against Blixseth stemming from the Yellowstone Club's bankruptcy. The Montana resort he started in the 1990s is now under new ownership.
Court revives Coast Guard suit against Bollinger Shipyards
A federal appeals court has revived a federal lawsuit accusing Bollinger Shipyards of lying about the strength of eight patrol boats it lengthened for the Coast Guard.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that a district judge was wrong to dismiss the suit against the Lockport shipyard, a subcontractor on a project to lengthen eight patrol boats from 110 to 123 feet.
Lawyers for Bollinger did not immediately respond to a request for comment Wednesday from The Associated Press.The government wants Bollinger to repay $78 million, NOLA.com 'The Times-Picayune reports.
Four of the boats were delivered in 2004. The hull of the first, the Matagorda, began to buckle at sea in September 2004. The Coast Guard accepted the other four after modifications to boost their hull strength, but it wasn't enough, according to the ruling.
The Coast Guard revoked its acceptance of all eight in 2007; the Justice Department sued in 2011.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that a district judge was wrong to dismiss the suit against the Lockport shipyard, a subcontractor on a project to lengthen eight patrol boats from 110 to 123 feet.
Lawyers for Bollinger did not immediately respond to a request for comment Wednesday from The Associated Press.The government wants Bollinger to repay $78 million, NOLA.com 'The Times-Picayune reports.
Four of the boats were delivered in 2004. The hull of the first, the Matagorda, began to buckle at sea in September 2004. The Coast Guard accepted the other four after modifications to boost their hull strength, but it wasn't enough, according to the ruling.
The Coast Guard revoked its acceptance of all eight in 2007; the Justice Department sued in 2011.
Friday, December 12, 2014
Massachusetts Real Estate Attorney
For more than 30 years, Attorney Alan H. Segal has been lending legal expertise to the Greater Boston Massachusetts area from his Needham, Massachusetts Law Office. With great attentiveness, Alan and his associates have given legal consultation in business law, estate planning, and Massachusetts real estate law.
You can find Alan on the radio, cable, and local television sharing his ideas about current legal news. Navigating your way through the legal system can be a confusing and difficult task. He and his staff know that and want to be there for you as "YOUR LAWYER".
To visit the Law Office of Alan H. Segal, head to the intersection of Highland Ave and Route 128/95 on the Newton / Needham border, next to Staples.
Attorney Alan H. Segal has been known as a renowned Massachusetts real estate attorney for over 30 years. Sellers, buyers, and lenders of Massachusetts real estate property are all represented by his practice.
It is prudent to seek the guidance of a real estate agent like Alan to help with all real estate home buying in Massachusetts, as all such transactions have legal issues and tax consequences.
If you need an experienced Massachusetts real estate attorney contact us today for a free and confidential consultation!
You can find Alan on the radio, cable, and local television sharing his ideas about current legal news. Navigating your way through the legal system can be a confusing and difficult task. He and his staff know that and want to be there for you as "YOUR LAWYER".
To visit the Law Office of Alan H. Segal, head to the intersection of Highland Ave and Route 128/95 on the Newton / Needham border, next to Staples.
Attorney Alan H. Segal has been known as a renowned Massachusetts real estate attorney for over 30 years. Sellers, buyers, and lenders of Massachusetts real estate property are all represented by his practice.
It is prudent to seek the guidance of a real estate agent like Alan to help with all real estate home buying in Massachusetts, as all such transactions have legal issues and tax consequences.
If you need an experienced Massachusetts real estate attorney contact us today for a free and confidential consultation!
Tuesday, December 9, 2014
Aggressive Securities Arbitration Services
Conway & Conway law firm, located in New York, are impassioned about representing public customers and industry professionals all over the world with a team of devoted futures, securities, and commodities arbitration attorneys. Constantly keeping abreast of developing and current regulatory reforms, U.S. securities laws, and other topics of interest to professionals and investors, our firm is responsive and agile. We are large enough to handle many cases and simultaneously provide personalized service to each client for their futures, securities, or commodities case.
Founded in 1988, Conway & Conway has been a successful New York City securities arbitration law firm, yielding fantastic results in securities arbitration cases from their 565 Fifth Avenue headquarters.
At Conway & Conway, the firm's attorneys have the know-how to deal with litigation and business counseling. At all points of negotiation and acquisition, along with wrongful termination and other corporate matters, we have advocated on behalf of our corporate clients. In addition to corporate clients, the firm works with commercial clients in all types of commercial and business litigation as well.
In the financial services industry, Conway & Conway gives exceptional legal counsel to the public. Whether its investors in dispute or issues with registered representatives and other associates, they have the high-caliber legal counsel to help. Fraud lawyers at the firm are well-versed in all things concerning the laws that apply to the securities and futures industries.
The commodity merchant attorneys at Conway & Conway provide litigation and arbitration services for international commodity merchants related to trade disputes. Their extensive trial experience, combined with a unique familiarity with the commodities industry foreign exchange and futures markets, enables Conway & Conway dedicated commodity arbitration attorneys to resolve serious commodity trade disputes in a timely and cost-effective manner.
For international commodity merchants, the commodity merchant attorneys at Conway & Conway administer arbitration and litigation services pertinent to trade disputes.
Founded in 1988, Conway & Conway has been a successful New York City securities arbitration law firm, yielding fantastic results in securities arbitration cases from their 565 Fifth Avenue headquarters.
At Conway & Conway, the firm's attorneys have the know-how to deal with litigation and business counseling. At all points of negotiation and acquisition, along with wrongful termination and other corporate matters, we have advocated on behalf of our corporate clients. In addition to corporate clients, the firm works with commercial clients in all types of commercial and business litigation as well.
In the financial services industry, Conway & Conway gives exceptional legal counsel to the public. Whether its investors in dispute or issues with registered representatives and other associates, they have the high-caliber legal counsel to help. Fraud lawyers at the firm are well-versed in all things concerning the laws that apply to the securities and futures industries.
The commodity merchant attorneys at Conway & Conway provide litigation and arbitration services for international commodity merchants related to trade disputes. Their extensive trial experience, combined with a unique familiarity with the commodities industry foreign exchange and futures markets, enables Conway & Conway dedicated commodity arbitration attorneys to resolve serious commodity trade disputes in a timely and cost-effective manner.
For international commodity merchants, the commodity merchant attorneys at Conway & Conway administer arbitration and litigation services pertinent to trade disputes.
Wednesday, September 3, 2014
Legislature heads to court on education finance
The Washington Supreme Court is marking the beginning of school with a mandatory assembly for the Legislature on education finance.
The court has ordered lawmakers to come to court on Wednesday to explain why they haven't followed its orders to fix the way Washington pays for public education.
Lawmakers, the governor and others say the court needs to be patient and give the Legislature more time to fulfil the orders in the 2012 McCleary decision.
Thomas Ahearne, the attorney for the coalition that sued the state over education funding, says the Legislature has made so little progress toward meeting the goal that only more pressure from the court will make it happen.
The McCleary decision said lawmakers are not meeting their constitutional responsibility to fully pay for basic education and they are relying too much on local tax-levy dollars to balance the education budget.
The court commended the Legislature for passing some reforms in the K-12 system and for starting to pay for them. The McCleary decision orders the Legislature to finish paying for the reforms, which may add more than $4 billion to the state's biennial budget, according to some government estimates.
The Legislature was given until the 2017-18 school year to fix the problem.
Among the reforms awaiting payment: all-day kindergarten in every school; more instructional hours for high school students to help them earn 24 credits to graduate; pupil transportation fully supported by state dollars; a new formula for school staffing levels, smaller classes in the lower grades; and more state support for school equipment and supplies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)