Court won't consider giving man new trial

(Click The Law) — Mon, 14 May 2012 09:15:40 -0700

The Supreme Court won't consider giving a man convicted in the death of a Texas toddler a new trial because the medical examiner changed her opinion on the cause of death.

The high court on Monday refused to hear an appeal from Neil Hampton Robbins, convicted in the death of 17-month-old Tristen Skye Rivet, who died on May 12, 1998.

At the trial, Dr. Patricia Moore testified that Tristen's death was a homicide caused by asphyxia. But Moore later changed her opinion and said the cause of death was undetermined. Robbins asked for a new trial but the Texas Court of Criminal Appeal refused, saying there is no conclusive evidence of Robbins' innocence and that it wasn't proven that the state purposefully used false testimony.

Court turns away PR congressional vote lawsuit

(Click The Law) — Mon, 14 May 2012 09:15:25 -0700

The Supreme Court won't hear an appeal from residents of Puerto Rico seeking to gain a voting representative in Congress.

The high court turned away the appeal from Gregorio Igartua and other Puerto Ricans on Monday.

Territorial status grants residents of Puerto Rico U.S. citizenship, but they pay no federal income taxes and cannot vote in presidential elections. Their congressional representative also cannot vote in Congress.

A federal judge threw out the lawsuit, and the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that decision, saying that since Puerto Rico was not a state, it could not have a voting member of Congress.

The high court refused to hear the appeal.

Federal appeals court in Ore. takes up no-fly case

(Click The Law) — Mon, 14 May 2012 09:15:13 -0700

A federal appeals court judge leaned forward in his chair, turned his head to the Justice Department attorney defending the government's no-fly list and posed a frank question.

"Let's say you want to fly back to Washington, and you find yourself on the no-fly list," 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Chief Judge Alex Kozinsky said Friday. "You're sitting in an airport, stranded. You think, 'my God, I went to law school, I work for (the Justice Department), in my heart I know I did nothing wrong.' What do you do?"

Fifteen Muslim men who faced circumstances similar to the hypothetical one asked by Kozinsky, are suing the federal government over their placement on the FBI's no-fly list. They had tried to board flights — either domestic or returning to the U.S. — and were told they couldn't fly.

Justice Department attorney Josh Waldman demurred and said circumstances differ among people on the list. The answer didn't satisfy Kozinsky.

"I mean you, yourself. It's going to be future denials, you can't fly to vacations, bar mitzvahs," Kozinsky pressed, drawing laughs in the federal courtroom in Portland. "I think people here are interested."

The judge's questions were at the heart of the men's lawsuit, though the subject before the three-judge appeals court panel was a narrower question — whether a federal court in Oregon has a say in the case, since the policies of the Transportation Security Administration are not subject to district court jurisdiction.

Last year, U.S. District Court Judge Anna Brown rejected the case, saying it couldn't rule on cases involving TSA policies and procedures.

Brown said she made her ruling based on whether the plaintiffs were arguing against the men's placement on the no-fly list by the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center or against TSA policies. The Terrorist Screening Center is subject to district court jurisdiction.

Fed court reverses order for VA system overhaul

(Click The Law) — Tue, 08 May 2012 11:16:43 -0700

A federal appeals court on Monday reversed its demand that the Veterans Affairs Department dramatically overhaul its mental health care system.

A special 11-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that any such changes need to be ordered by Congress or the president.

The 10-1 ruling reversed an earlier decision by a three-judge panel of the same court.

The May 2011 ruling had ordered the VA to ensure that suicidal vets are seen immediately, among other changes. It found the VA's "unchecked incompetence" in handling the flood of post-traumatic stress disorder and other mental health claims was unconstitutional.

The new decision said courts are powerless to implement the fixes sought by two veterans groups that filed the lawsuit against the VA in 2007. The lawsuits alleged that hundreds of thousands of veterans had to wait an average of four years to fully receive the mental health benefits owed them.

"There can be no doubt that securing exemplary care for our nation's veterans is a moral imperative," Judge Jay Bybee wrote for the majority. "But Congress and the president are in far better position" to decide whether and what changes need to be done.

Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP Announces Class Action

(Click The Law) — Tue, 08 May 2012 11:16:10 -0700

Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of Groupon, Inc. pursuant and/or traceable to the allegedly false and misleading Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with Groupon’s November 4, 2011 initial public offering, including purchasers of Groupon common stock between February 8, 2012 and March 30, 2012.

Groupon operates an e-commerce marketplace that connects merchants to consumers by offering goods and services at a discount in North America and internationally. The Complaint alleges that defendants misrepresented or failed to disclose that: (a) the Company materially understated refund reserves for fourth quarter 2011 due to a failure to properly account for coupon refunds; (b) as a result, the Company materially misstated its previously reported fourth-quarter and full-year 2011 financial results; and (c), the Company lacked adequate internal and financial controls.

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 Groupon common stock pursuant or traceable to the Company’s November 4, 2011 initial public offering, and/or during the Class Period described above, you have certain rights, and have until June 4, 2012 to move for lead plaintiff status. To be a member of the class you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent class member.

www.glancylaw.com