|
|
|
Court reinstates whistleblower case at nuke site
Industry News |
2014/11/11 13:34
|
An appeals court reinstated a lawsuit filed by a whistleblower at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation who claims he was fired by a subcontractor after raising safety issues at the nation's most polluted nuclear weapons production site.
In its ruling Friday, the 9th U.S. Court of Appeals also said plaintiff Walt Tamosaitis is entitled to a jury trial.
The appeals court ruled that a lower court wrongly dismissed the case against the primary subcontractor on construction of a Hanford vitrification plant intended to deal with the most dangerous wastes, the Tri-City Herald reported.
"We are anxious to get into court as soon as we can," Tamosaitis' attorney, Jack Sheridan said.
Hanford, located near Richland, Washington, for decades made plutonium for nuclear weapons and now contains the nation's largest collection of radioactive wastes.
The lawsuit will continue with only URS Energy and Construction as a defendant. The 9th Circuit ruled that it had been appropriate to dismiss the U.S. Department of Energy from the lawsuit.
It's the first time a court of appeals has confirmed that whistleblowers are entitled to a jury trial, Sheridan said.
"It puts them on equal footing with other victims of discrimination," he said.
Tamosaitis contends the subcontractor removed him as the research and technology manager of the unfinished $12.2 billion vitrification plant project after he said more time was needed to resolve complex technical issues. Construction on the plant has since stopped because of technical and safety issues. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
California high court strikes measure from ballot
Industry News |
2014/08/18 14:05
|
The California Supreme Court on Monday blocked an advisory measure backed by Democrats from the November ballot.
By a 5-1 vote, the court ordered the removal of Proposition 49, which would have asked voters if they want a federal constitutional amendment to overturn the U.S. Supreme Court's so-called Citizens United ruling allowing unlimited corporate spending in elections.
The majority opinion said no harm will come from removing the nonbinding measure while courts determine its validity. The court said it would consider the issue in more detail in September.
Writing separately, Justice Goodwin Liu agreed with the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, an anti-tax group that filed a lawsuit seeking to remove the measure from the ballot. The group argued that advisory measures are not a proper use of the ballot.
Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye said she would have allowed placing the proposition on the ballot, as a divided appeals court had ruled earlier.
The bill to place the measure on the ballot was introduced by Sen. Ted Lieu, D-Torrance, and it passed over Republicans' opposition. Brown, a Democrat, let the bill become law without his signature. Lieu's Sacramento office didn't return a phone call placed late Monday. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Caregivers can't sue Alzheimer's patients
Industry News |
2014/08/05 15:26
|
People with Alzheimer's disease are not liable for injuries they may cause their paid in-home caregivers, California's highest court ruled Monday in a case involving a home health aide who was hurt while trying to restrain a client.
The California Supreme Court ruled 5-2 that people hired to work with Alzheimer's patients should know the disease commonly causes physical aggression and agitation in its later stages. The court majority concluded it would therefore be inappropriate to allow caregivers who get hurt managing a combative client to sue their employers.
"It is a settled principle that those hired to manage a hazardous condition may not sue their clients for injuries caused by the very risks they were retained to confront," Justice Carole Corrigan wrote for the majority.
The law in California and many other states already establishes that caregivers in institutional settings such as hospitals and nursing homes may not seek damages from Alzheimer's patients who injure them. To have a different standard for caregivers working in private homes would give families a financial incentive to put relatives with Alzheimer's into nursing homes, Corrigan said. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appeals court to take up Missouri execution case
Industry News |
2014/07/17 12:03
|
A last-minute stay from a federal judge has put a Missouri inmate's execution temporarily on hold.
John Middleton was scheduled to die one minute after midnight Wednesday for killing three people in rural northern Missouri in 1995. With less than two hours to go before the execution, U.S. District Judge Catherine Perry granted a stay, ruling there was enough evidence of mental illness that a new hearing should be held.
Courts have established that executing the mentally ill is unconstitutional.
Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster appealed to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, but that court adjourned for the night without a ruling.
It was a confusing end to a day that saw a flurry of court actions. Perry first granted a stay early Tuesday, but that was overturned by the appeals court. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to overturn the appeals court ruling and declined to halt the execution on several other grounds, including the contention by Middleton's attorneys that he was innocent of the crimes.
Middleton's attorneys then went back to Perry, who once again granted a stay.
However the appeals court eventually rules, the case is likely to end up again in the U.S. Supreme Court.
If the stay is lifted, the state could execute Middleton at any time Wednesday. The death warrant expires at midnight Thursday and if Middleton is not executed by then, the Missouri Supreme Court would have to set a new date. State witnesses and media were told to report back to the prison by 10:30 a.m.
Middleton, 54, would be the sixth man put to death in Missouri this year — only Florida and Texas have performed more executions in 2014 with seven each. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
