|
|
|
Monitor chosen to oversee Ferguson's police, court reforms
Attorney Interview |
2016/07/27 10:56
|
A federal judge on Monday chose a monitor team to oversee reforms of Ferguson's policing and court system, a process expected to cost the St. Louis suburb more than $1 million.
U.S. District Judge Catherine Perry announced that Squire Patton Boggs, a law firm based in Cleveland, was picked from four finalists to make sure reforms are adequate in Ferguson. City officials say the cost of the monitoring will not exceed $1.25 million over five years, or $350,000 for any single year.
The team will be led by Clark Ervin, who was inspector general for the U.S. State Department and Homeland Security before becoming a partner at Squire Patton Boggs.
A consent decree between the city and the U.S. Department of Justice, approved by Perry in April, calls for diversity training for police, outfitting officers and jail workers with body cameras, and other reforms.
"I'm excited that both the City of Ferguson and the Department of Justice have worked together to complete the process of choosing an Independent Monitor," Ferguson City Manager De'Carlon Seewood said in a statement. "This is a true testament that the collaboration between both parties had a mission and that is to do what's best for the Ferguson community and its police department."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court sides with property owners in wetlands case
Attorney Interview |
2016/06/05 16:33
|
The Supreme Court is making it easier for landowners to bring a court challenge when federal regulators try to restrict property development due to concerns about water pollution.
The justices ruled unanimously Tuesday that a Minnesota company could file a lawsuit against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers over the agency's determination that its land is off limits to peat mining under the Clean Water Act.
The ruling is a win for property rights and business groups that said it was unfair for government agencies to decide what land is subject to complex environmental laws without a court ever deciding whether the agency is right.
It was the second time in four years that the high court sided with property owners against the government in a dispute over the right to challenge a designation of protected wetlands.
The Obama administration argued that the Hawkes Company could only contest the finding by seeking a permit, an expensive process that could take years to resolve. The company said it should be able to challenge the order immediately in federal court without having to spend more than $100,000 on a permit or risk hefty fines.
Writing for the court, Chief Justice John Roberts said the Corps' decision was the kind of final decision that carries a risk of major criminal and civil penalties if landowners don't go along. He said property owners shouldn't have to wait for the agency to "drop the hammer in order to have their day in court."
The case began when the East Grand Forks, Minnesota, company planned to expand its peat processing operations and asked the Corps for guidance. The agency issued a determination that the property was governed by the Clean Water Act because it affected the Red River of the North about 120 miles away. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stoddard firefighter charged with arson due in court
Attorney Interview |
2016/05/07 16:47
|
A volunteer firefighter charged with arson in connection with a brush fire that burned 190 acres in New Hampshire and prompted the evacuation of 17 homes is due to make his first court appearance.
David Plante is scheduled to be arraigned Monday in Keene.
The 31-year-old Stoddard man was charged Friday with one count of arson, but more charges are expected. He remains in custody after refusing to meet with a bail commissioner.
The fire started Thursday in Stoddard, about 40 miles west of the state capital of Concord. No injuries were reported.
Police have not said what evidence led them to Plante. It's unclear if he has an attorney.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cosby asks court to reseal testimony about affairs, drugs
Attorney Interview |
2016/04/17 23:23
|
Bill Cosby's lawyers urged an appeals court Wednesday to reseal the comedian's lurid, decade-old testimony about his womanizing, but the panel of judges seemed to think the request was pointless, since the deposition has already made headlines around the world.
Members of the three-judge panel of the 3rd U.S. Circuit of Appeals reeled off a list of "the toothpaste's out of the tube"-type metaphors to suggest that any damage to Cosby's reputation from the release of the testimony has already been done.
Cosby's attorneys hope a ruling in their favor could help them keep the documents from being used in the criminal case against him in Pennsylvania and in the many lawsuits filed around the country by women who accuse him of sexual assault or defamation.
But the judges questioned that strategy, too.
The other courts "don't have to necessarily follow us. We can't control them," Circuit Judge Thomas L. Ambro said.
Cosby gave the testimony in 2005 as part of a lawsuit brought against him by Andrea Constand, a Temple University employee who said he drugged and molested her at his home. She later settled for an undisclosed sum, and sensitive documents in the file remained sealed.
In the nearly 1,000-page deposition, the comic known as "America's Dad" admitted to several extramarital affairs and said he obtained quaaludes to give to women he hoped to seduce.
The documents were released last year on a request by The Associated Press. U.S. District Judge Eduardo Robreno found the public had a right to Cosby's testimony because of his role as a self-appointed "public moralist" and because he had denied accusations he drugged and molested women.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Law Firm News RSS Feed
