|
|
|
Thomas, Kagan asked to sit out health care case
Legal Business |
2011/11/28 09:41
|
Conservative interest groups and Republican lawmakers want Justice Elena Kagan off the health care case. Liberals and Democrats in Congress say it's Justice Clarence Thomas who should sit it out.
Neither justice is budging — the right decision, according to many ethicists and legal experts.
None of the parties in the case has asked the justices to excuse themselves. But underlying the calls on both sides is their belief that the conservative Thomas is a sure vote to strike down President Barack Obama's health care law and that the liberal Kagan is certain to uphold the main domestic achievement of the man who appointed her.
The stakes are high in the court's election-year review of a law aimed at extending coverage to more than 30 million people. Both sides have engaged in broad legal and political maneuvering for the most favorable conditions surrounding the court's consideration of the case.
Taking away just one vote potentially could tip the outcome on the nine-justice court.
Republican lawmakers recently have stepped up their effort against Kagan, complaining that the Justice Department has not fully revealed Kagan's involvement in planning the response to challenges to the law. Kagan was Obama's solicitor general, the administration's top Supreme Court lawyer, until he nominated her to the high court last year. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal Court of Canada Certifies Class Action
Legal Business |
2011/11/27 09:41
|
Branch MacMaster LLP and Hordo Bennett Mounteer LLP report that the Federal Court of Canada has certified the BIM Class Action against Business in Motion International Corporation and Alan Kippax. By order dated November 10, 2011 , Mr. Justice Rennie of the Federal Court officially certified the action on behalf of the national class, as represented by the Plaintiff, Mr. Mark Cuzzetto .
The lawsuit was initiated in May, 2010 against BIM and its principal, Alan Kippax. BIM operated a plan called the "Time Leverage System", recruiting representatives to sell "Perpetual Motion Products". The lawsuit alleges that the Defendants have been engaged in the operation of an unlawful multi-level marketing scheme and/or pyramid scheme contrary to the Competition Act. The class members seek damages for the money they paid to the Defendants.
Persons who have purchased the product and who wish to participate in the action do not need to do anything at this time. Persons who do not want to participate in the action must opt out by January 18, 2012 by completing the online form on the website.
Bim CLASS ACTION
DID YOU PURCHASE A PERPETUAL MOTION PRODUCT FROM OR THROUGH BUSINESS IN MOTION INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION? IF SO, PLEASE READ THIS CAREFULLY AS IT MAY AFFECT YOUR RIGHTS.
WHAT IS THIS CASE ABOUT?
A class action lawsuit has been certified in the Federal Court of Canada claiming that Business in Motion International Corporation and Alex Kippax ("BIM") ran an illegal pyramid scheme and an illegal multi-level marketing scheme. A copy of the Statement of Claim and Order certifying the action as a class proceeding can be found at www.BIMclassaction.com.
HOW WILL THE LAWSUIT PROCEED?
A trial will be held to determine the common issues in the action. If these issues are determine in favor of the class members, there might still need to be individual hearings to determine the entitlement of each class member to a refund.
WHAT DO I HAVE TO DO TO PARTICIPATE?
There is nothing you have to do right now. Unless you opt out, you will be bound by the result of the common issues trial. However, in order to make sure you are notified of any important developments in the action, we recommend you register on our website at www.BIMclassaction.com.
WHAT IF I DO NOT WANT TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS LAWSUIT?
If you do not want to be part of the class action, you must complete the online form at www.BIMclassaction.com. If you do not have access to the internet, please contact Ulla Herlev at Branch MacMaster LLP. You must complete the online form by no later than January 18, 2012 .
DO I NEED TO PAY ANYTHING?
You will only need to pay legal fees if the action is successful in obtaining you a refund of some of the monies you paid. Those legal fees will be paid directly from the refund you receive. You will not need to pay any legal fees out of your own pocket.
Any fee paid to the lawyers must be approved by the Court as being fair and reasonable. The fee agreement entered into by the representative plaintiff provides for the lawyers to be paid up to 1/3 of any amounts recovered or any benefit obtained from the class action. If and when this occurs, the lawyers will apply to Court for approval of that percentage or some lesser amount.
If the class action is unsuccessful at the common issues trial, you will not pay any legal fees.
WHO ARE THE LAWYERS FOR THE CLASS?
The lawyers for the class are:
BRANCH MACMASTER LLP
Barristers and Solicitors
1410 - 777 Hornby Street
Vancouver , BC V6Z 1S4
HORDO BENNETT MOUNTEER LLP
Barristers and Solicitors
1400 - 128 West Pender St.
Vancouver , BC V6B 1R8
Mark Cuzzetto (the representative plaintiff) has been appointed by the Court to instruct the lawyers for the common issues stage. The lawyers must act in the interest of all class members.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Texas AG blasts court's redistricting maps
Legal Business |
2011/11/20 09:30
|
Texas' attorney general sharply criticized a federal court Friday over its proposed maps for state House and Senate districts in the 2012 election, saying the judges overstepped their bounds.
The San Antonio-based federal court released the proposed redistricting maps late Thursday and gave those involved in the case until noon Friday to comment. Minority groups have filed a legal challenge to the Republican-drawn maps, saying they are discriminatory. The court's maps are intended to be an interim solution until the case is resolved after the 2012 elections.
Maps for the House and Senate released Thursday restore many of the minority districts — where Democrats hold the seats — to their previous shapes. Republican lawmakers have denied their maps were intended to minimize minority representation, and say they merely reflect the GOP majority in Texas. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fla. hired law firm with ties to Gov. Scott
Legal Business |
2011/11/18 09:04
|
Florida has spent nearly a half-million dollars - and could spend even more - with a large, well-known law firm that has connections to both the Republican Party of Florida as well as Gov. Rick Scott.
Since August the state has paid nearly $400,000 to the law firm of Alston and Bird to defend a new state law that requires public employees to contribute 3 percent of their pay to the state pension fund.
The firm was hired at the urging of the Scott administration which asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to approve paying the firm hourly rates at $495 an hour or nearly $300 more than what is normally allowed.
The Scott administration and Bondi have defended the hiring of the firm, saying it specializes in the kind of litigation that the state is now involved in.
But the firm's roster also includes a one-time business associate of Scott.
While not working directly on the lawsuit, a senior counsel with the firm's Washington D.C. office is Thomas Scully. Scully is also a general partner with the New York investment firm of Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe. That's the investment firm that this June purchased Scott's shares in Solantic, a chain of urgent care clinics the governor started back in 2001.
Scully, who once led the Federation of American Hospitals, was appointed to the board of directors of Solantic back in 2008. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conn. teeth-whitening rules challenged in court
Legal Business |
2011/11/16 09:47
|
Connecticut's rules that only a dentist can provide certain teeth-whitening services are being challenged in court.
The Institute for Justice filed the lawsuit in federal court in Hartford on Wednesday. The Arlington, Va.-based law firm says the state Dental Commission's regulations promote a monopoly for dentists by banning certain teeth whitening at salons and shopping malls.
A spokesman for the state Department of Public Health says officials haven't read the lawsuit and won't comment.
Regulations imposed in June cite inherent risks in teeth whitening and say whitening involves the practice of dentistry for diagnosing causes of discoloration, customizing treatment and other work.
The Institute for Justice, which takes on libertarian causes, says the regulations have put several practitioners out of business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
