Recent Posts
- Octuplets mom Nadya Suleman settles her workers’ comp case
- Lawsuit alleges UMC misclassified patients, overcharged millions
- Stabbing victim files civil suit against family
- Potentially deadly ice cream recalled
- Fatal I-75 crash in 2009 spawns lawsuit against Collier teacher
- Spencer Reed Group to Settle EEOC Race and Age Discrimination Lawsuit
- Sickened September 11 workers get revised settlement
- Metro sports giants clash in court
- Wrongful death lawsuit filed against 4 New Orleans cops in Henry Glover case
- Starwatch consumer | BMW, VW issue recalls
- Wrigley Settles False-Ad Class Action For $6M
- New sex abuse suit filed against Los Angeles Archdiocese
- Police, fire unions sue Baltimore over pensions
- Woman falls asleep on United flight, wakes up alone after plane lands
- Carradine’s wife sues film company
Archived Posts
- June 2010 (39)
- May 2010 (27)
- April 2010 (57)
- March 2010 (168)
- February 2010 (144)
- January 2010 (119)
- December 2009 (8)
- November 2009 (165)
- October 2009 (1)
- June 2009 (29)
- April 2009 (61)
- March 2009 (140)
- February 2009 (156)
- January 2009 (151)
- December 2008 (143)
- November 2008 (113)
- October 2008 (192)
- September 2008 (88)
- August 2008 (8)
- July 2008 (29)
Blogroll
Pages
Meta
Supreme Court Opens Term With Tobacco Case
October 7, 2008
On the opening day of its fall term, the Supreme Court jumped right into a controversial case in which tobacco companies are seeking to block litigation in state courts over health claims made about “light” cigarettes. By the end of Monday’s hourlong arguments in Altria Group v. Good, most justices appeared to agree with Altria — the parent company of Philip Morris — that the federal cigarette labeling law pre-empts state tort suits like the one before the Court. In August 2007, the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled that the suit, in which a group of Maine smokers allege that claims of reduced tar and nicotine were false, was not pre-empted.
Read full article Law.com
Posted by Phoenix Construction Site Accident Lawyer
Laveen could shape the future of zoning
Laveen, facing ever-increasing encroachment from Phoenix development, is fighting to challenge numerous “rezonings” in their area. Legally this may greatly restrict municipal power, so we’ll just have to keep an eye on this. AZ Central has the story:
“Crusade could bring flurry of zoning referendums”
by Casey Newton, The Arizona Republic
Laveen resident Randy Jones is cruising up 35th Avenue in his pickup truck, a pair of neighbors in the backseat and Toby Keith on the radio, when he spots a sign announcing a possible rezoning.
Most Valley residents shrug at signs like this one, if they see them at all. Jones pulls over like a cop responding to a crime.
“That could be troublesome,” says Carol Pacey, a fellow activist, as she whips out a pen and paper. Jones agrees. They scribble down the developer’s information.
Read Full Article AZ Central
Posted by Phoenix DUI Defense Attorney
License Plates
An Arizona pro-life or anti-abortion (whatever term you prefer) group had sought license plates with a message of “Choose Life”. The 9th Circuit ruling in favor of the group was upheld by the Supreme Court, as they regarded any restriction as not content-neutral for free speech considerations. East Valley Tribune has the latest:
“Supreme Court OKs anti-abortion license plate”
Howard Fischer, Capitol Media Services
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday wiped out the last legal hurdle for anti-abortion groups to get their own special state license plates.
‘Choose Life’ license plates due out soon
Without comment, the high court upheld a unanimous decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which concluded that the state License Plate Commission illegally denied the request by Arizona Life Coalition to issue a plate with the message “Choose Life.”
Read Full Article East Valley Tribune
Posted by Phoenix Criminal Defense Lawyer