|
|
|
Judge to hear arguments over Loughner's medication
Court Issues |
2011/08/25 17:18
|
Attorneys for the Tucson shooting rampage suspect are making another attempt to stop the forced medication of their client at the Missouri prison facility where mental health experts are trying to make him psychologically fit to stand trial.
A federal judge will hear arguments Friday over a request by Jared Lee Loughner's defense team to halt the pychotropic drug medications.
U.S. District Judge Larry Burns rejected a similar request by Loughner's attorneys in late June. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeal halted the medication but later allowed it to resume after prison officials determined Loughner's outbursts there posed a danger.
Loughner has pleaded not guilty to 49 charges in the Jan. 8 shooting that killed six people and wounded 13 others, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.
He has been at a federal prison facility in Springfield, Mo., since late May after mental health experts determined he suffers from schizophrenia. A judge ruled him mentally unfit to stand trial. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
No choking charges for Wis. Supreme Court justice
Topics |
2011/08/24 17:19
|
A conservative Wisconsin state Supreme Court justice who staved off an unusually intense campaign to replace him this summer will not face criminal charges over allegations that he tried to choke a liberal colleague, a prosecutor said Thursday.
Sauk County District Attorney Patricia Barrett, a special prosecutor in the case, said that after reviewing investigators' reports, she decided there's no basis to file charges against either Justice David Prosser or Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, who accused Prosser of choking her.
Barrett, who is a Republican, told The Associated Press that the accounts of the other justices who were present when the alleged altercation occurred varied widely, however she declined to elaborate.
"I believe a complete review of the report suggests there is a difference of opinion. There are a variety of statements about what occurred ... the totality of what did happen does not support criminal charges against either Justice Bradley or Justice Prosser," Barrett said.
Walsh Bradley accused Prosser of choking her in June while the justices were deliberating the merits of a lawsuit challenging Republican Gov. Scott Walker's contentious law stripping public workers of most of their collective bargaining rights. Walsh Bradley, 61, is seen as part of the court's three-justice liberal minority, while Prosser, a 68-year-old former Republican legislator, is considered part of the four-justice conservative majority. The factions have been feuding for years.
The court delivered its verdict the day after the alleged incident, ruling 4-3 to uphold the law and allowing it to finally take effect. As expected, Prosser voted with the majority. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
NC judge mulls US Airways claim of pilot slowdown
Court Watch |
2011/08/23 17:36
|
A federal judge in North Carolina says he'll rule soon on a lawsuit by US Airways claiming its pilots are staging an illegal work slowdown.
The Charlotte Observer reported Tuesday that the union representing US Airways pilots says the airline is trying to intimidate the pilots into flying on time no matter the risk.
The sides wrapped up their case in Charlotte on Monday.
Tempe, Ariz.-based US Airways says in the lawsuit filed late last month that its pilots are deliberately delaying flights and that its busiest hub in Charlotte has been disproportionately affected.
Capt. Michael Cleary of the Charlotte-based US Airline Pilots Association testified no slowdown is taking place.
The two sides have had a contract dispute since US Airways merged with America West in 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Law Offices of Howard G. Smith Announces Class Action Lawsuit
Press Release |
2011/08/23 17:36
|
Law Offices of Howard G. Smith announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against SinoTech Energy Limited in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of a class consisting of all persons who purchased American Depository Shares (“ADSs”) of SinoTech pursuant and/or traceable to the Company’s Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with the Company’s initial public offering (the “IPO”) on November 3, 2010, including open-market purchasers of SinoTech ADSs between November 3, 2010 and August 16, 2011, inclusive (the “Class Period”).
The Complaint charges SinoTech, certain of the Company’s current and former executive officers and directors, and the underwriters of its IPO with violations of the Securities Act of 1933. SinoTech provides enhanced oil recovery services to oil companies in the People's Republic of China. The Complaint alleges that certain representations made in the Company’s Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with the IPO were materially inaccurate. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that the Company’s reported sales and revenues were materially inaccurate, because the nature, size and scope of the Company’s business was materially exaggerated.
On August 16, 2011, a research report was published on the Internet questioning SinoTech’s previously issued financial statements and future prospects. The report alleged that: (1) SinoTech’s sole import agent, accounting for over $100 million worth of oil drilling equipment orders, appears to be an empty shell company with no sign of operation, a limited import history and negligible revenue base; (2) the Company’s only chemical supplier is an empty shell company, with little or no revenues; (3) the Company’s five largest subcontracting customers, which provide the vast majority of SinoTech’s revenues, appear to be shell companies with unverifiable operations with minimal revenues; (4) the financial statements SinoTech issued in the United States are inconsistent with similar filings the Company made in China; and (5) the Company has engaged in undisclosed related-party transactions.
On this news, ADSs of SinoTech declined more than 40%, to close on August 16, 2011, at $2.35 per share. Thereafter, NASDAQ halted trading of the Company’s stock.
No class has yet been certified in the above action. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. If you purchased ADSs of SinoTech between November 3, 2010 and August 16, 2011, you have certain rights, and have until October 18, 2011, to move for lead plaintiff status. To be a member of the class you need not take any action at this time, and you may retain counsel of your choice.
If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this Notice or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact Howard G. Smith, Esquire, of Law Offices of Howard G. Smith, 3070 Bristol Pike, Suite 112, Bensalem, Pennsylvania 19020, by telephone at (215)638-4847, Toll-Free at (888)638-4847, by email to howardsmith@howardsmithlaw.com or visit our website at http://www.howardsmithlaw.com. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Lawyer & Law Firm Websites |
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
