|
|
|
Supreme Court limits Wal-Mart sex bias case
Court Watch |
2011/06/20 07:25
|
The Supreme Court on Monday blocked a massive sex discrimination lawsuit against Wal-Mart on behalf of women who work there.
The court ruled unanimously that the lawsuit against Wal-Mart Stores Inc. cannot proceed as a class action, reversing a decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. The lawsuit could have involved up to 1.6 million women, with Wal-Mart facing potentially billions of dollars in damages.
Now, the handful of women who brought the lawsuit may pursue their claims on their own, with much less money at stake and less pressure on Wal-Mart to settle.
The justices divided 5-4 on another aspect of the ruling that could make it much harder to mount similar class-action discrimination lawsuits against large employers.
Justice Antonin Scalia's opinion for the court's conservative majority said there needs to be common elements tying together "literally millions of employment decisions at once."
But Scalia said that in the lawsuit against the nation's largest private employer, "That is entirely absent here."
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing for the court's four liberal justices, said there was more than enough uniting the claims. "Wal-Mart's delegation of discretion over pay and promotions is a policy uniform throughout all stores," Ginsburg said.
Business interests lined up with Wal-Mart while civil rights, women's and consumer groups have sided with the women plaintiffs. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court won't look at dispute over Sioux land
Court News |
2011/06/20 05:25
|
The Supreme Court has refused to get involved in a long-running dispute on the continued existence of the Yankton Sioux Tribe and the extent of its lands in South Dakota.
The justices on Monday let stand several rulings involving the tribe, including an appeals court decision saying the reservation covers more than 30,000 acres, which is mostly land the federal government holds in trust for the tribe and individual tribal members.
The high court also rejected an appeal from the tribe to block the transfer of two federal recreation areas along the Missouri River to the state of South Dakota.
The cases are Daugaard v. Yankton Sioux Tribe, 10-929; Southern Missouri Recycling v. Yankton Sioux Tribe, 10-931; Hein v. Yankton Sioux Tribe, 10-932; and Yankton Sioux Tribe v. Daugaard, 10-1058.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court to hear Montana dams lawsuit
Court News |
2011/06/20 01:26
|
The Supreme Court is entering a $40 million dispute between an energy company and Montana that could turn on the experiences of the Lewis and Clark expedition.
The justices said Monday they will hear an appeal from PPL Montana of a state court decision ordering the company to pay $40 million in rent for placing its hydroelectric dams in riverbeds owned by the state.
The ownership of the waterways turns on whether they were navigable when Montana became a state in 1889. Both the company and the state base part of their argument on the journey of Meriwether Lewis and William Clark more than 200 years ago. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court won't hear restitution claim in Ponzi case
Headline Legal News |
2011/06/13 20:29
|
The Supreme Court has rejected an appeal from investment funds seeking repayment of their losses in a $3.7 billion Ponzi scheme operated by Minnesota businessman Thomas Petters.
The funds together lost $165 million and challenged a federal judge's order denying restitution to any of Petters' victims. Among other things, the court said the victims would have other ways of recouping some of their money.
The justices on Monday refused to disturb the ruling.
A federal law generally requires a court to order restitution as part of a defendant's sentence, but allows for some exceptions. The judge in this case said that restitution would be too complex, take too long and result in the payment of less than a penny for each dollar victims lost.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court says Halliburton lawsuit can go forward
Court News |
2011/06/13 20:28
|
The Supreme Court ruled Monday that Halliburton Co. shareholders can pursue a class-action lawsuit claiming the oil services company inflated its stock price.
The high court overturned a lower court ruling against the shareholders, who want to represent all investors who bought Halliburton stock between June 1999 and December 2001.
The lawsuit argues that Halliburton deliberately understated the company's liability in asbestos litigation, inflated how much money its construction and engineering units would bring in and overstated the benefits of a merger with Dresser Industries. When Halliburton made corrective disclosures, it made the stock price drop and caused investors to lose money, the lawsuit said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
