Court allows hearings in Nevada abortion case

The Nevada Supreme Court on Tuesday denied a request to block a judge's hearings into the health risks of a mentally impaired woman's pregnancy.

The court's unanimous ruling allowed Washoe County District Judge Egan Walker to resume the evidentiary hearings Tuesday morning in a case that has drawn the attention of national anti-abortion groups.

The 32-year-old woman's parental guardians asked the court Friday to halt the hearings, saying Walker lacks the authority to terminate the pregnancy of their daughter, who has the mental capacity of a 6-year-old.

They claim they have exclusive authority over her health care decisions, and they want their daughter to carry the baby to term in line with their Catholic religious beliefs.

But the high court sided with Walker, saying he has the authority to monitor the woman's welfare and hold the hearings.

Justices noted the guardians failed to file an annual report regarding their daughter's condition and their performance of duties as required by state law. They also said the court obtained information about concerns over the woman's medical condition.

"The purpose of the evidentiary hearings at this time is merely to obtain information in order to make well-reasoned and informed decisions regarding the ward's medical care," justices wrote. "Under these circumstances, we conclude that the district court has not exceeded its jurisdiction or arbitrarily or capriciously exercised its discretion."

Attorney Jason Guinasso, who represents the guardians, was tied up in Tuesday's hearing and unavailable for immediate comment, according to his secretary.

Guinasso has said he's aware of only one similar case in the country. It involved a Massachusetts judge who ordered a mentally ill 31-year-old woman to have an abortion and to be sterilized against her wishes. The state Appeals Court overturned the decision Jan. 17.

The Nevada couple said that while the pregnancy poses health risks to their daughter and the baby, medical experts back them in their decision to continue the pregnancy. The woman suffers from epilepsy and is on medication.

Indiana Property Owners Rights Litigation Attorneys

For over 15 years, our property litigation lawyers have represented the interests of landowners against abuse of their property rights.  We are dedicated to the practice of preventing government and corporate infringements of private property, and can help infringed landowners obtain the compensation he or she deserves.

Experience Counts
Our firm has demonstrated success against the most prominent railroad and telecommunications companies, as well as electric utilities and the U.S. Government. 

Railroad Infringement
Our firm has successfully litigated cases including railroads such as Penn Central, CSX, Conrail, and Norfolk Southern.  These railroads have attempted to use or sell abandoned railroad right of way or use active right of way which they did not own.

National Experience with Fiber Optics Trespass Litigation
Telecommunications companies also have laid unauthorized co-axial cable in both abandoned and active rights of way. Price Waicukauski & Riley's property litigation lawyers have fought such communications giants as ATT, Quest, Sprint, & Level 3 (Williams) in all 48 lower continental states. The attorneys of the firm have obtained settlements totaling hundreds of millions of dollars.

Contact Us for a Complimentary Consultation
Do you have a concern about your property rights in Indiana? Contact Price Waicukauski & Riley to schedule your free initial consultation and discuss your claim with an experienced Indiana Property Rights litigation attorney. For more on how we can help, click on the following link: http://www.price-law.com/practice-areas/property-rights-litigation

Ind. court upholds life sentence for teen killer

The Indiana Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld a sentence of life without parole for a teenager who said he wanted to be like the fictional television serial killer Dexter a few weeks before strangling his 10-year-old brother.

Andrew Conley was 17 in November 2009 when he killed his brother, Conner, while wrestling in their home near Rising Sun and dumped the boy's body in a park. He unexpectedly pleaded guilty in September 2010, averting a murder trial.

In the 3-2 ruling, the justices said Conley acted "as if nothing was out of the ordinary" after the killing. According to testimony during the five-day sentencing hearing, Conley joked with his mother and watched football the day after he killed Conner.

Conley told police he fantasized about killing people since he was in eighth grade. A few weeks before the killing, Conley told his girlfriend that he wanted to be just like the TV serial killer as they walked on the trail where he later disposed of his brother's body.

Three different psychological experts who interviewed Conley all said he was seriously mentally ill, but his appellate lawyer, Leanna Weissmann, said the judge gave too much credence to a psychologist's testimony that the teen could be a psychopath.

New York SEC Attorneys - Herskovits Law

Employment claims brought by securities industry participants involve issues unique to the securities industry.  Having represented broker-dealers and registered representatives, we have substantial experience with both sides of these disputes and have prosecuted or defended claims for Form U5 expungement, unpaid deferred compensation (including Restricted Stock Units), enforcement of employee forgivable loans (EFL), broker-dealer raiding, unpaid bonuses or commissions, and wrongful termination. 

Over the past five years, Robert Herskovits has successfully prosecuted a significant number of EFL cases brought on behalf of Jefferies & Company, Inc. and smaller broker-dealers.  As a small law firm, we remain free from many of the conflicts associated with larger firms, and have defended a multitude of EFL cases brought by various broker-dealers.  When defending an EFL case, we structure a defense designed to achieve a resolution with a significant discount to the Note's unpaid balance.

Herskovits Law has expertise in both prosecuting and defending claims for securities industry participants involved in issues in the securities industry. Having represented numerous employees, their reputation for effective advocacy by advancing their clients' interests from the outset of each case has been acknowledged in the New York Securities Industry. See www.herskovitslaw.com.

Calif. court OKs serial killer's extradition to NY

California's highest court has cleared the way for a convicted serial killer to be brought to New York to face charges in two 1970s killings.

It wasn't clear Thursday when Rodney Alcala, who's awaiting execution in California for five 1970s stranglings, might be brought to a Manhattan court, though the arrangements could take a few weeks. The California Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected his bid to block extradition, according to court records.

A former amateur photographer and TV dating-show contestant who represented himself at his latest trial, the 68-year-old Alcala has been behind bars since his 1979 arrest in California. After a convoluted trail of trials, overturned convictions and bizarre courtroom moments, he was convicted in 2010 of strangling four women and a 12-year-old girl in Southern California. Prosecutors said the killings were accompanied by sexual abuse and torture.

Then the Manhattan district attorney charged Alcala with murdering two 23-year-old women here, one in 1971 and the other in 1978. Alcala had long been suspected in at least one of the deaths. In August, New York's and California's governors signed off on bringing him to New York to face the charges.

SF man suspected of 5 murders gets new lawyer

A judge cited a conflict of interest Thursday while denying a public defender's request to represent a man charged in the grisly slayings of five people inside a San Francisco home.

Judge Lucy Kelly McCabe instead assigned a private attorney for Binh Thai Luc, who is charged with five counts of murder, with special circumstance allegations of committing multiple murders, robbery and burglary.

In addition, Luc received a special circumstance of lying in wait in the death of one victim, which would make him eligible for the death penalty if convicted.

McCabe told public defender Jeff Adachi that his office had a conflict of interest because it previously represented Luc's brother Brian Luc in a separate case last year, and the man might be a witness in the murder case.

Adachi reiterated his argument that Brian Luc is no longer considered a client after he was sentenced to three years of probation for drunken driving and firing a gun in a reckless manner.

Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP Files Class Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP Files Class Action

Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP today announced that a class action has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on behalf of purchasers of BioSante Pharmaceuticals, Inc. securities during the period between February 8, 2010 and December 15, 2011.

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from February 6, 2012. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact plaintiff’s counsel, Darren Robbins of Robbins Geller at 800/449-4900 or 619/231-1058, or via e-mail at djr@rgrdlaw.com. If you are a member of this class, you can view a copy of the complaint as filed or join this class action online at http://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases/biosante/. Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.

The complaint charges BioSante and its Chief Executive Officer with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. BioSante is a specialty pharmaceutical company focused on developing products for female sexual health and oncology.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the commercial viability, effectiveness, and market potential for LibiGel, a drug designed to improve the sex drive of women suffering from female sexual dysfunction, and specifically hypoactive sexual desire disorder (“HSDD”). Defendants boasted about LibiGel’s efficacy over placebo in clinical trials, and provided supposedly concrete “data” regarding the drug’s “statistically significant” effect on increasing the “number of satisfying sexual events” for women suffering from HSDD. As a result of these false statements, BioSante’s stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, reaching a high of $3.81 on July 12, 2011.

On December 14, 2011, BioSante issued a press release disclosing for the first time to investors that LibiGel failed to yield positive results in large-scale efficacy tests designed by the Company. According to the clinical trial results, women treated with LibiGel did not experience a statistically significant increase in either total satisfying sexual encounters or sexual desire. In fact, in the double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, LibiGel did not fare significantly better than the placebo. On this news, BioSante’s stock collapsed $1.64 per share to close at $0.48 per share on December 15, 2011, a one-day decline of 77% on volume of nearly 50 million shares.

According to the complaint, the true facts, which were known by the defendants but concealed from the investing public during the Class Period, were as follows: (a) LibiGel’s efficacy was well short of that required to obtain FDA approval; and (b) LibiGel failed to yield statistically superior results to placebo.

Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all purchasers of BioSante securities during the Class Period (the “Class”). The plaintiff is represented by Robbins Geller, which has expertise in prosecuting investor class actions and extensive experience in actions involving financial fraud.

Robbins Geller, a 180-lawyer firm with offices in San Diego, San Francisco, New York, Boca Raton, Washington, D.C., Philadelphia and Atlanta, is active in major litigations pending in federal and state courts throughout the United States and has taken a leading role in many important actions on behalf of defrauded investors, consumers, and companies, as well as victims of human rights violations.

www.rgrdlaw.com

Court says police cannot be sued over warrant

The Supreme Court said Wednesday that California police officers cannot be sued because they used a warrant that may have been defective to search a woman's house.

The high court threw out the lawsuit against Los Angeles County Sheriff's Detective Curt Messerschmidt and other police officials, who were being sued personally by Augusta Millender for the search on her house and confiscation of her shotgun.

Police were looking for her foster son, Jerry Ray Bowen, who had recently shot at his ex-girlfriend with a black sawed-off shotgun. She told police that he may be at his foster mother's house, so Messerschmidt got a warrant to look for any weapons on the property and gang-related material, since Bowen was supposed to be a member of the Mona Park Crips and the Dodge Park Crips. The detective had his supervisors approve the warrant before submitting to the district attorney and a judge, who also approved the warrant.

Supreme Court refuses to hear Brooks appeal

The Supreme Court has denied a last minute appeal from an Ohio man scheduled to be executed Tuesday morning.

The court on Tuesday denied appeals from Reginald Brooks, who is scheduled to be executed for fatally shooting his three sons while they slept.

State and U.S. courts have rejected attorneys' arguments that the 66-year-old Brooks is not mentally competent and that the government withheld relevant evidence that could have affected Brooks' case.

The appeals first went to Justice Elena Kagan and then to the rest of the court, where it was rejected without comment.

UNUM Insurance & Dr Anthony Sterling's Story

http://www.insiderexclusive.com/show-content/307-disability-insurance-expose--unum-insurance-a-dr-anthony-sterlings-story.html

In this Insider Exclusive  Special "Disability Insurance Expose - UNUM Insurance & Dr Anthony Sterling's StoryWe expose how Unum, the world's largest disability insurance company, "regularly" delays legitimate claims, denies legitimate claims, and then files "frivolous lawsuits against their own policy holders to "strong-arm them" in an attempt to "not pay" legitimate policies and illegally and immorally line their own individual and corporate pockets.

They tried this with Dr Anthony Sterling and FAILED, and in this Insider Exclusive special we show how Frank Winkles, Member @ the Winkles Law Group and member of the Southern Trial Lawyers Association, successfully represented Dr Anthony Sterling to Force Unum Disability Insurance Company to honor their own disability policies.We hope you'll tune in to "Disability Insurance Expose - UNUM Insurance & Dr Anthony Sterling's Story. 

Apple defends use of iPad name in Chinese court

Apple defended its right to use the iPad trademark in China in a heated court hearing Wednesday that pitted the electronics giant against a struggling company that denies it sold the mainland China rights to the tablet's name.

Shenzhen Proview Technology's lawyer Xie Xianghui argued that the sale of the iPad trademark to Apple Inc. by Proview's Taiwan affiliate in 2009 was invalid.

"Apple has no right to sell iPads under that name," Xie said. Apple countered that Proview violated the sales contract by failing to transfer the trademark rights in mainland China.

It also contends that the Chinese LCD maker has not marketed or sold its own "IPAD," or Internet Personal Access Device for years, thus possibly invalidating its claim to the trademark.

The hearing adjourned after a fractious four-hour session which saw the judge repeatedly admonishing both sides to observe proper court protocol as they argued across the courtroom. No date was announced for a judgment or further hearings.

Proview is suing to stop Apple selling the iPad in China under that name. It has also asked commercial authorities in many cities to stop sales of the device. So far, iPads have been pulled from shelves in some Chinese cities but there has been no sign of action at the national level.

Strauss-Kahn has March court date in US

A New York court has scheduled a hearing on a lawsuit filed by the woman who accused former International Monetary Fund chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn of sexually assaulting her in a Manhattan hotel.

Prosecutors dropped criminal charges against Strauss-Kahn last year, but his accuser has demanded damages in civil court.

The March 15 hearing will deal with issues that must be resolved before a trial, which has yet to be scheduled.

Strauss-Kahn wants the lawsuit dismissed because he says he had diplomatic immunity. He isn't required to attend the March court session.

The hotel maid who says she was attacked and forcibly sodomized by Strauss-Kahn is Nafissatou Diallo (na-fee-SAH'-too dee-AH'-loh). Her lawyer, Kenneth Thompson, says she is "looking forward to her day in court and can't wait to get to trial."

Court seems split on double jeopardy question

The Supreme Court seemed divided Wednesday on whether to allow an Arkansas man to be retried on murder charges even though a jury forewoman said in open court that they were unanimously against finding him guilty.

Alex Blueford of Jacksonville, Ark., was charged in July 2008 in the death of 20-month-old Matthew McFadden Jr. Blueford testified at trial that he elbowed the boy in the head by accident. Authorities say the child was beaten to death.

Blueford's murder trial ended in a hung jury. The jury forewoman told the judge before he declared a mistrial that the jury voted unanimously against capital murder and first-degree murder. The jury deadlocked on a lesser charge, manslaughter, which caused the mistrial.

The Arkansas Supreme Court ruled last year that Blueford should be retried on the original charges. But Blueford's lawyers want justices to bar a second trial on capital and first-degree murder charges, saying that would violate Fifth Amendment protections preventing someone from being tried twice for the same crime.