tagged w/ Lawsuit
-
The Obama administration has invoked the state secrets privilege to block a lawsuit on behalf of US-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, an alleged terrorist said to be targeted for assassination.
In a court filing, the Justice Department said that the issues in the case are for the executive branch of government to decide rather than the courts.
The department also said the case entails information that is protected by the military and state secrets privilege.
The courts have sufficient grounds to throw out the lawsuit without resorting to use of the state secrets privilege, the Justice Department said in its filing.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2010/0925/US-seeks-to-dismiss-suit-filed-for-radical-cleric-Anwar-al-AwlakiThe Obama administration has invoked the state secrets privilege to block a lawsuit on... more
-
-
-
Tomorrow, the European Parliament will vote on the Gallo report that deals with the enforcement of intellectual property. Drafted by a partner of the French President Nicolas Sarkozy, the report paves the way for draconian anti-piracy measures to be introduced across Europe, potentially affecting the lives of millions of Internet users.
In recent years pro-copyright lobbyists have pushed governments worldwide to adopt harsher anti-piracy legislation. Thus far they’ve booked several successes, with the controversial trade agreement ACTA as the most important victory. But there’s more. Tomorrow the European Parliament will vote on another document that could turn the Internet into a copyright police state.
The Gallo report, named after the French MEP Marielle Gallo, is an initiative report. This means that it’s non-legislative, but that doesn’t make it less dangerous. It functions as advice for all European member states and offers local governments and lobbyists an excuse to push for harsher anti-piracy measures.
Among other things, the report offers advice to ”complete the legislative framework to introduce a set of measures to combat intellectual property infringements”. Furthermore, it promotes ”voluntary” partnerships between Internet service providers and copyright holders to crackdown on copyright infringers.
http://torrentfreak.com/european-parliament-votes-on-controversial-anti-piracy-report-100921/Tomorrow, the European Parliament will vote on the Gallo report that deals with the... more
-
-
Some people are looking forward for recent news about Kim Kardashian, Kourtney Kardashian and Khloe Kardashian. However, one man is having enough with the Kardashians sisters' actions - he's filing a lawsuit against them. According to TMZ, an inmate at the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, named D.J. Goodson, filed the legal papers against Kim, Kourtney and Khloe, claiming he developed "extreme emotional distress due to their outrageousness of actions." D.J. Stated that he suffered the "extreme emotional distress" after forced to watch "Keeping Up with the Kardashians" and "Kourtney and Khloe Take Miami". In the suit, which was filed in a federal court, D.J. also mentioned that he permanently scarred from... Get Full story at this link http://www.waneenterprises.com/news/561Some people are looking forward for recent news about Kim Kardashian, Kourtney... more
-
-
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_cHGSUfR5A1Q/S9Trhthd-fI/AAAAAAAAANk/fde3DoqS-TE/s400/teabaggerbigot.jpg
Conservative Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell faces opposition from the Republican establishment's Mike Castle
Arms linked, Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell and her conservative backers kick up their heels and clap to the strains of an original song with lyrics befitting a tea party.
"Look out Washington, D.C., 'cause we are on a roll and we're rocking across this country with a message to be told."
It's a tune that's unnerving the Republican establishment in Delaware, which fears being felled by swift kicks from O'Donnell -- and tea partiers.
Not long after tea party-backed Joe Miller stunned Alaska GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski, the Republican establishment is furiously trying to avoid a similar outcome in the Delaware primary on Tuesday. Republican leaders, top strategists and even the Delaware state GOP chairman have taken the unusual step of openly working to defeat O'Donnell and ensure the nomination of their preferred candidate, nine-term Rep. Mike Castle.
Republicans, who have an outside chance of capturing the majority in the Senate in November, see Castle as their best chance of winning the seat long held by Vice President Joe Biden. The moderate Castle is a former governor and has been the state's lone congressman since 1993.
But O'Donnell, who has lost twice in statewide races, won't be cowed.
"We cannot elect any more liberals to Washington, D.C., especially ones who wear the banner of being a Republican. It is an honor to be a Republican," she told supporters.
Establishment Republicans have been relentless, calling O'Donnell unelectable, a fraud and a liar. But in a challenge to the GOP leadership and in a boost to O'Donnell, GOP Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina just came out with an endorsement saying she will "stand strong for the principles of freedom."
This weekend, Delaware Republicans set about knocking on 10,000 doors, making tens of thousands of phone calls and flooding mailboxes with fliers that explain both candidates' records. In a primary that could draw just 30,000 voters, party officials are going all-in to defend one of their top recruits and discredit O'Donnell.
"She's not a viable candidate for any office in the state of Delaware," said the state party chairman, Tom Ross, who is backing Castle. "She could not be elected dog catcher."
State GOP officials have done everything in their power to take down O'Donnell. For example:
--After a conservative radio host took O'Donnell to task over incorrect claims she won two counties during her 2008 Senate bid against Biden -- in fact, she won none of the state's three counties -- GOP officials gleefully shared the audio.
--When a New Jersey university last week finally awarded O'Donnell a degree she had claimed for 21 years, Republicans called it the latest example of her exaggerations.
--O'Donnell's financial reports show donors are picking up her rent and utilities at a condo that doubles as a campaign headquarters. Republicans hasten to note O'Donnell's dire personal finances that include threats of liens, foreclosures and an Internal Revenue Service audit. Republicans then questioned O'Donnell's ability to handle tax dollars, and wondered about the marketing consultant's reporting just $5,800 in income during a 15-month period.
--The Delaware Republican Party on Thursday filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission accusing O'Donnell and the Tea Party Express of violating FEC rules that restrict coordination between candidates and outside political organizations. The complaint, filed for the party by campaign finance lawyer and former FEC chairman Michael Toner, states that the Tea Party Express solicited donors to contribute to O'Donnell and that O'Donnell and the group worked jointly on advertising, breaching agency rules.
"It is a shame the party is doing this," O'Donnell said after a rollicking dusk rally across from the Delaware Capitol this past week. "Because I believe that we have the right principles to win this election."http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_cHGSUfR5A1Q/S9Trhthd-fI/AAAAAAAAANk/fde3DoqS-TE/s400/teabagge... more
-
-
Sharron Angle hasn't been the beneficiary of much good press — and now that she's got some, she's being sued over how she's using it.
In a lawsuit filed Friday, Las Vegas-based Righthaven LLC says the Nevada Republican Senate nominee has violated copyright laws by posting two newspapers stories in their entirety on her campaign website.
The proposed remedy: Righthaven is asking a federal district judge for statutory damages for willful infringement of the two articles, attorneys’ fees and control of Angle’s domain name, sharronangle.com.
The two articles at issue — a pro-Angle editorial from July 21 and an Aug. 3 news story — both ran in the Las Vegas Review-Journal, which has sold Righthaven the rights to its stories.
Even though it’s far from clear that a judge would cede control of Angle’s domain name to Righthaven, Kurt Opsahl, an attorney at the digital legal rights group Electronic Frontier Foundation, said Righthaven's demand ups the pressure on the candidate.
“Sharron Angle is running for a Senate seat, and her domain name is her online face,” he noted. “It’s an important aspect of the campaign, and the fear of losing that domain name may push her, or any of these other defendants, into settlement.”
The Angle campaign is no stranger to copyright issues. In June, Angle’s campaign committee fired off an angrily worded cease-and-desist letter to Sen. Harry Reid’s offices after the majority leader's campaign committee posted a copy of her entire pre-June victory campaign website at therealsharronangle.com. Reid’s campaign said the purpose was to stop Angle from hiding her “extreme” positions from the general electorate.
Neither Righthaven nor Angle’s campaign could be reached for comment over the weekend, but Angle’s staff has altered the offending pages to now carry only excerpts of the two stories, with links back to the original items.
Angle now has the option of settling the case filed by Righthaven or beginning to litigate the complex copyright issues in federal court.
Asked how much Angle could be liable for, or what Righthaven might demand, Elizabeth Rader, an intellectual property attorney at the law firm of Alston & Bird, responded: “How much money does she have?”
It’s a pertinent question, since Angle’s campaign started off on a shoestring earlier this year but has gained financial momentum — especially in the wake of her June victory in the Republican primary. An Associated Press story in July noted that Angle had bested Democratic incumbent Reid’s fundraising efforts between April and July, though his $9 million war chest at the time still dwarfed her $1.8 million campaign kitty.
That number may have attracted the attention of Righthaven, which has started up a business by launching a Recording Industry Association of America-style mass litigation campaign against individuals, small blogs and websites that it charges with copyright infringement for posting articles from the Las Vegas Review-Journal.Sharron Angle hasn't been the beneficiary of much good press — and now that... more
-
-
A Double header on Google folks!
(Reuters) - Google Inc said on Friday it was the target of an investigation by the Texas Attorney General's office into the fairness of its search engine rankings....
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has asked for information about complaints from a number of companies, Google said on its website. Google specifically mentioned websites operated by Foundem, TradeComet and myTriggers as challenging its results, saying they competed with the search giant.
A spokeswoman for the Texas Attorney General confirmed the probe, but would give no further details. Google said it looks forward to answering questions from the Texas attorney general....
PRIVACY SUIT SETTLED
Separately, Google has settled a federal lawsuit accusing it of privacy violations in connection with its Buzz social networking service, according to a court document filed on Friday.
To settle the lawsuit brought by a Gmail user, Google will set aside $8.5 million for attorneys fees and donations to organizations focused on Internet privacy, according to the court filing.
In addition, "the settlement requires that Google undertake wider public education about the privacy aspects of Buzz," the filing said....
A more fleshed out version of the story at the link.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN0312083220100904A Double header on Google folks!
(Reuters) - Google Inc said on Friday it was the... more
-
-
http://www.tdbimg.com//image/dr13title_SHlwb2NyaXRlcw==.png
Some states have no shame: The Associated Press says that seven states are suing to overturn health-care reform after having already begun to claim new federal health-care subsidies for retired state workers. The states are Arizona, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska, and Nevada. They are among the 20 states that have challenged the law.http://www.tdbimg.com//image/dr13title_SHlwb2NyaXRlcw==.png
Some states have no... more
-
-
Looks like the Roberts Court will get to weigh in on the Wal-Mart class action lawsuit that alleges the retailer discriminated against what could be millions of female employees. Wal-Mart's petition does not challenge the substance of the discrimination claims, but rather seeks to have the class certification aside--a smart move that could set plaintiffs efforts back years if granted. If denied Wal-Mart may find a whole new interest in settling these claims rather than trying them.
Original post with background on the substance of the case below:
On Monday the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals voted 6-5 along ideological lines to certify a gender discrimination claim against retail giant Wal-Mart, making it the largest class action employment discrimination case ever. The suit alleges that the world's largest private employer pays women less than men for the same jobs, that female employees receives fewer promotions than their male counterparts and that women need to wait longer for those promotions than men. Attorneys for the plaintiffs believe the class covers more than one million women. Wal-Mart asserts the number is more along the lines of 500,000 potential class members.
The 9th Circuit's decision upheld a lower court ruling that also allowed the case to move forward as a class action but remanded a portion of the case back to the district court to reconsider two important issues. U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker was ordered to determine the appropriateness of a claim for punitive damages and whether former employees at the time of the 2001 filing of the original action should be part of the class. Depending on how the district court rules on those issues, and the ultimate outcome of the suit, Wal-Mart faces billions of dollars in potential liability.
Wal-Mart has defended against the claims by arguing that traditional rules of class-action lawsuits do not apply because each Wal-Mart operates as an independent business. Therefore, Wal-Mart claims, it is impossible to have a companywide policy of discrimination. If individuals feel they have been discriminated against they should file individual lawsuits and not be part of a class-action, according to Wal-Mart counsel.
This case has been in the pipeline for ages now. It was originally filed in 2001 by six women in federal court in San Francisco, and Wal-Mart has vigorously battled against the claim every step of the way. It's a pretty safe assumption that Wal-Mart will seek review of the decision by the United States Supreme Court. Given the Federalist bend of Chief Justice John Roberts, it would be another safe assumption that this is a case he'd be eager to hear. The Roberts Court has shown an itch to attack threshold procedural questions like jurisdiction and class-action status as a way to limit the availablilty of federal courts to plaintiffs.
But for plaintiffs to get even this far they needed to provide at least an initial showing of pay discrimination, and that initial showing must be sufficiently common among all plaintiffs in order to qualify as a class-action. It's a high threshold and one that should not fail simply because the employer has millions of employees as potential class members.
And taking a step back for a minute, for the sake of argument, even if Wal-Mart's numbers are more reasonable in terms of potential class members, then we are talking about approximately half of a million women who had the ability to bring home more money for their families but were denied that chance simply because of their gender. In the midst of an economic crisis that has shifted an even greater financial burden onto working women, the toll of such a practice is devastating and has a ripple effect in the overall economy at large.
Needless to say the case is being closely watched by the business community given the potential exposure Wal-Mart faces and the overall nature of the claims against the retailer, particularly in the event the Supreme Court intervenes and just who is named the next sitting Justice by the Obama administration.Looks like the Roberts Court will get to weigh in on the Wal-Mart class action lawsuit... more
-
-
The estate of the acclaimed late photographer Ansel Adams is suing a man who has apparently been selling prints he claims are Adams's work.
The Ansel Adams Publishing Rights Trust, which filed the legal case in the US, wants to stop Rick Norsigian selling images it does not endorse.
In July, Mr Norsigian's lawyer said experts concluded "beyond reasonable doubt" the prints were Adams's work.
The case has "no merit", Mr Norsigian's lawyer Arnold Peter added.
It alleges trademark infringement, false advertising, trademark dilution, unfair competition and other claims.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-11068391The estate of the acclaimed late photographer Ansel Adams is suing a man who has... more
-
-
IT'S not every movie star who has a condom named after them.
But Daniel Radcliffe's Harry Potter has become a brand of condom in Switzerland and Warner Bros is not happy.
The Swiss condom brand "Harry Popper" is reportedly being sued for copyright infringement by the studio.
Gawker.com details the hubbub with a broken-English quote from the Swiss newspaper Bote: "For Warner Bros. is obvious: The sorcerer Harry Potter have a 'very positive image.' Condoms have no business there. Especially not now. According to Warner Bros. in November to plan the launch of the new Potter movie. Also a new video game is in preparation. The lawyer for Warner Bros. bluntly: 'The image of my client is in danger.'
There is no denying the correlation between the latex protectors and the popular wizard movie. If the name didn't do it for you, the illustration of a condom swinging a wand and wearing round-frame glasses will.IT'S not every movie star who has a condom named after them.
But Daniel... more
-
-
eden49
-
added this
-
1 year ago
- |
-
The Diocese of Oakland is being sued by six women and one man who say the Diocese were negligent when they hired Reverend Stephen Kiesle. The Reverend is alleged to have abused them when it was known he had other allegations against him.
"He was sentenced to three years probation in 1978 for lewd conduct with two young boys in San Francisco.
In 1982, the diocese recommended his removal from the Church - but that did not happen for a further five years."-BBC
The article says the current Pope was responsible for investigating the abuse claims and wrote a letter saying ""s much paternal care as possible" for Father Kiesle. [...] he said the arguments for removing Father Kiesle were of "grave significance" but he added that such action required "careful review and more time" The "good of the church," he said, had to be considered in any defrocking. "- BBC
It's reported the Diocese have not yet seen the lawsuit and the Vatican is not named as a defendant.The Diocese of Oakland is being sued by six women and one man who say the Diocese were... more
-
-
According to the Huff, Vitaminwater is being accused of making false claims on how healthy the product is, with the company defending the drink by saying it did not misled customers into thinking it is healthy.
"Does this mean that you'd have to be an unreasonable person to think that a product named "vitaminwater," a product that has been heavily and aggressively marketed as a healthy beverage, actually had health benefits? "-the huffingtonpost
According to the article the drink contains more sugar than vitamins (though that will be clear on the ingredients label). The article makes the argument of how truthful can brand labels and marketing can be.According to the Huff, Vitaminwater is being accused of making false claims on how... more
-
-
An East Quogue woman filed a federal lawsuit on Thursday that seeks $70 million in damages from Suffolk County and Southampton Town law enforcement agencies, charging that she was wrongfully arrested, detained and harassed after taking photographs outside the Air National Guard base in Westhampton last July with two guns and dozens of rounds of ammunition in her car.
The lawsuit also alleges that Nancy Genovese, 54, a mother of three who has lived in East Quogue for more than three decades, was the victim of assault and malicious prosecution when she was detained by authorities on the shoulder of Old Riverhead Road for nearly six hours on July 30, 2009, before being arrested.
Ms. Genovese, who was returning home from a shooting range on the night of her arrest, said she stopped near the entrance to the ANG base to take photos of the decommissioned helicopter there for a patriotic “Support Our Troops” website that she was working on at the time. Authorities said they found 500 rounds of ammunition as well as an XM-15 assault rifle and a shotgun inside her car.
Ms. Genovese noted that both weapons, which are legal firearms, were properly stored inside her car at the time and that the responding officers illegally searched her car, a point also made in the lawsuit. The litigation also notes that there were closer to 140 rounds of ammunition in her car.
“To be labeled a terrorist isn’t right,” Ms. Genovese told reporters during a press conference held Thursday morning at the law office of her attorney, Frederick Brewington, in Hempstead. “I’m a patriot,” added Ms. Genovese who became emotional almost immediately after addressing the media.
The lawsuit charges that the arresting officers, who included Southampton Town Police Lieutenant Robert Iberger and Suffolk County Undersheriff Joseph T. Caracappa among others, repeatedly referred to Ms. Genovese as “a right winger” and “tea bagger” because of her political beliefs.
According to Ms. Genovese, officers interrogated her for six hours near the entrance of the base before arresting her. Once in the custody of police, she said they shackled her legs together and told her she was being charged with being a “terrorist.”
Shortly after her arrest, Genovese said, she was taken by sheriff’s deputies to Peconic Bay Medical Center in Riverhead, where she was handcuffed to a bed. The handcuffs and the gown she said she was forced to wear while on suicide watch at the jail caused intense pain and discomfort due to her rheumatoid arthritis, she said
“My arms and legs were so swollen, I couldn’t even walk,” she said.
The lawsuit states that Lt. Iberger, who was not in uniform and driving a minivan at the time, was the person who originally stopped Ms. Genovese on the side of Old Riverhead Road. It also notes that Lt. Iberger contacted the Suffolk County Sheriff’s office and ANG base and “wrongfully” informed them that she “posed a terrorist threat.” Lt. Iberger also took the memory card for her camera containing the photos of the helicopter; the memory card has still not been returned, according to the lawsuit.
Additionally, the lawsuit states that before being placed in handcuffs, Ms. Genovese tried to give her two sons a shopping bag with her cell phone and wallet, the latter of which contained approximately $13,000 in cash. When it was returned to her, the wallet was missing $5,300, according to the lawsuit. The document states that Ms. Genovese had such a large amount of cash on her because she was going to use it to pay the college tuition for her sons and Catholic school tuition for her daughter.
Another defendant is Suffolk County Deputy Sheriff Robert Carlock. The litigation charges that he placed cameras on the roof of his vehicle and aimed them at Ms. Genovese and her sons after they arrived at the scene. Mr. Carlock was the officer who confiscated Ms. Genovese’s rifle that day; it was returned six months after the trespassing charge was officially dropped.
The litigation also alleges that it was Mr. Carlock who allegedly told Ms. Genovese during her interrogation that they would “find something in order to teach all right wingers and tea baggers a lesson..”
Read More: SPREAD THE WORD!
http://morichesdaily.com/An East Quogue woman filed a federal lawsuit on Thursday that seeks $70 million in... more
-
-
Ousted Agriculture Department employee Shirley Sherrod said Thursday she plans to file a lawsuit against Andrew Breitbart, the conservative blogger who posted a video that was edited to make her appear racist.Ousted Agriculture Department employee Shirley Sherrod said Thursday she plans to file... more
-
-
San Francisco passed a cellphone radiation law last month that requires retailers to post radiation labels next to phones being sold in stores. Well, the Cellular Telephone Industries Association didn’t like it and sued.San Francisco passed a cellphone radiation law last month that requires retailers to... more
-
-
The Perspectives Panel discuss a recent outrageous lawsuit filed against Anheuser Busch for false advertisement.The Perspectives Panel discuss a recent outrageous lawsuit filed against Anheuser... more
-
-
Rental car companies across America hold fleets of hundreds of thousands of vehicles, which now been shown to contain countless vehicles that have been named in safety recalls, yet left untreated.
As it seems to often be the case with negligence in major corporations, it tends to go unnoticed until a tragedy or major accident brings light to the situation, such as the current on-going oil spill in the Gulf, or with the tragic and unnecessary death of two young sisters when their Enterprise rental car cost them their lives.
A video report by ABC News outlines the tragic story of the Rachel and Jackie Houck, a story that involves a recalled PT Cruiser that was not serviced, despite Enterprise being warned on the safety recall. The recall warned that the power steering fluid could leak, causing a fire, which it did. Unfortunately for these two young sisters, that fire occurred while driving at highway speeds, resulting in a loss of steering, sending the PT Cruiser into oncoming traffic, crashing into a semi tractor-trailer, and killing them both.
The shocking revelation to come from this horrible event? Enterprise had no corporate policy that recalled vehicles should be held back from being rented until they were serviced. Despite Enterprise having to pay the parents of these girls $15 million in a settlement, they still do not have a policy restricting recalled cars from being rented to the public.Rental car companies across America hold fleets of hundreds of thousands of vehicles,... more
-
-
L onnie Youngblood was a hotshot sax player on the New York club circuit in the mid-1960s when he crossed paths with Jimmy James, a young musician who was turning heads with his dazzling virtuosity on the electric guitar.L onnie Youngblood was a hotshot sax player on the New York club circuit in the... more
-
-
How much did Google spend to fend off Viacom’s $1 billion copyright lawsuit? On today’s earnings call, CFO Patrick Pichette revealed that Google’s legal bills for the case amounted to $100 million, and that was before it went to trial.
The legal bill could have ended up being many times that amount, but last month the judge threw out the case, and Google declared victory. Viacom will reportedly try to appeal, but the summary judgement was pretty harsh. As I wrote at the time:
The fact that the judge granted YouTube’s summary motion to dismiss the case sends a clear message to media companies: Live by the DMCA, Die by the DMCA. The “safe harbor” provision in that Act is what protects YouTube and other Websites from being sued for the copyright infringement of their users as long as they take down infringing material. The judge found that while there were a huge number of infringing videos on YouTube, the site did take them down when notified. In fact, he points out one instance in 2007 when Viacom gave YouTube a single takedown notices for 100,000 videos. By the next day they were down.
Unless Viacom can find a judge who interprets the DMCA more liberally, this lawsuit is going nowhere. YouTube is here to stay, as long as Google has billions of dollars of cash in its war chest.
If Google spent $100 million on lawyers, I wonder how much Viacom spent.How much did Google spend to fend off Viacom’s $1 billion copyright lawsuit? On... more
-
