|
|
|
N. Ind. court helps veterans get back on track
Press Release |
2013/11/11 13:31
|
A northern Indiana judge is helping troubled veterans get their lives back in order.
Porter Superior Judge Julia Jent started the Veterans Treatment Court slightly more than two years ago. Case managers, mental health professionals, prosecutors and public defenders work to help veterans who have had a run-in with the law try to solve some of the problems they are facing.
On Friday, six military veterans who graduated from the program. Sixty-three-year-old Paul Hake of Porter says it completely change his life. Hake is a Marine veteran who served in Vietnam. He says he had a problem with alcohol, but now he has his life back.
The class was the third graduating class since the program began. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appeals court rejects secret Delaware arbitration
Press Release |
2013/10/25 13:29
|
A federal appeals court has upheld a ruling declaring that a Delaware law allowing chancery judges to oversee secret arbitration in high-stakes business disputes is unconstitutional.
A three-judge panel of the Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-to-1 Wednesday to uphold a federal judge's ruling in favor of the Delaware Coalition for Open Government, which challenged the law.
DelCOG, backed by The Associated Press, The New York Times and several other major news organizations, claimed in its lawsuit that the secret arbitration conducted by Delaware's Chancery Court violated the First Amendment rights of citizens to attend judicial proceedings and access court records.
Attorneys for the state argued that secret arbitration made the Chancery Court more efficient and generated revenue for Delaware, corporate home to thousands of companies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Malpractice law covers doctors' businesses
Press Release |
2013/09/09 11:49
|
Businesses formed by doctors are covered by a state law that caps the damages that victims of medical malpractice can collect from health care providers, New Mexico's highest court ruled Thursday.
The state Supreme Court said that medical professional corporations and limited liability companies fall under the law's definition of a health care provider under the state's medical malpractice law.
At issue was whether the 1976 law applied only to licensed physicians, hospitals, outpatient clinics and certain others such as chiropractors. A corporation established by a group of doctors for tax or business purposes isn't licensed, however.
The court said that excluding the businesses formed by medical professionals would undermine the purpose of the law, which was to increase the availability of insurance coverage for malpractice claims. The law was enacted after a large private insurer stopped offering malpractice coverage in the state.
The court said that "covering individuals without offering the same benefits to the companies that they form or operate under disturbs the balanced scheme originally set up by the Legislature that was intended to attract enough health care providers to service the needs of patients in New Mexico and, in turn, ensure that the patients were protected when claims for medical malpractice arise."
The court issued the ruling in deciding three separate malpractice lawsuits.
In 2011, Gov. Susana Martinez vetoed a measure passed by the Democratic-controlled Legislature that would have revised the malpractice law to increase its liability caps and make clear that the business organizations of doctors were covered.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CARRIER iQ, Inc. Sued in Class Action
Press Release |
2011/12/06 10:23
|
New York City based Horwitz, Horwitz amp; Paradis, Attorneys at Law and Los Angeles based Kiesel Boucher amp; Larson LLP announced this morning that they have filed a nationwide class action lawsuit against Mountain View, California based CARRIER iQ, Inc. on behalf of a class comprised of all persons and entities who own an electronic device, including but not limited to, smartphones, feature phones, tablets, and electronic-readers (collectively, the Electronic Devices), in which CiQ's Mobile Intelligence software application is installed.
The class action complaint, which was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, alleges that CiQ manufactures a software application that, unbeknownst to Class members, was embedded into a wide variety of Electronic Devices, including but not limited to, smartphones, feature phones, tablets, and electronic-readers, purchased by Class members over the past six years. Plaintiff further alleges that CiQ utilized its software application to illegally intercept, collect, and share the data and communications sent or received by Class members over their Electronic Devices in which CiQ's software application has been secretly installed for approximately six years.
More specifically, Plaintiff alleges that CiQ's software application enabled CiQ to illegally intercept and monitor all communications that are sent to, and received by, an Electronic Device in which CiQ's software is installed. CiQ's software does so by: (i) intercepting and recording all keystrokes depressed on the Electronic Devices; (ii) intercepting, reading and displaying the actual text of all text messages sent from, or received by, the Electronic Devices; and (iii) intercepting, reading and displaying all Internet browser searches conducted on private Wi-Fi networks
In commenting on the allegations of the Class Action Complaint, Plaintiff's attorney Paul O. Paradis remarked, The vast nature of CiQ's illegal interception activities and the fact that the Company's illegal activities were able to be conducted without detection for nearly 6 years is frightening. In the digital age in which we live, the revelation of CiQ's illegal electronic interception activities is a watershed moment for privacy advocates around the world and serves as an alarming wake up call to all of us who are concerned about protecting the privacy of confidential communications of any type. Attorney Paul Kiesel added, At this juncture of the litigation, it appears that in excess of 140 million class members were victimized by CiQ's illegal interception activities. That fact, in and of itself, is stunning.
Plaintiff alleges that CiQ's illegal interception and data collection and sharing activities violated both the federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act and California's Invasion of Privacy Act, as well as other laws intended to protect Class member's privacy and property interests. Plaintiff seeks statutory damages, restitution, punitive damages on behalf of himself and all Class members, as well as an injunction enjoining Defendant from continuing the illegal practices complained of in the Complaint.
If you have any information concerning practices complained of in the Class Action Complaint or would like further information regarding this nationwide class action, please contact Paul O. Paradis at 212-986-4500 or e-mail at pparadis@hhplawny.com or Paul Kiesel at 310-854-4444 or email at kiesel@kbla.com.
Horwitz, Horwitz amp; Paradis, Attorneys at Law, and Kiesel Boucher amp; Larson, LLP have been retained as two of the law firms to represent the Class. The attorneys at Horwitz, Horwitz amp; Paradis, Attorneys at Law, and Kiesel Boucher amp; Larson, LLP have extensive experience in prosecuting class action cases, and have been appointed as Lead Counsel in numerous major class actions by federal and state courts across the United States and have obtained major recoveries on behalf of injured parties. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
