Friday, August 14, 2015

Court fines Washington state over education funding

Washington officials are considering a special legislative session after the state Supreme Court issued daily fines a of $100,000 until lawmakers comply with a court order to improve the way the state pays for its basic education system.
 
Thursday's order, signed by all nine justices of the high court, ordered that the fine start immediately, and be put into a dedicated education account.

The court encouraged Gov. Jay Inslee to call a special session, saying that if the Legislature complies with the court's previous rulings for the state to deliver a plan to fully fund education, the penalties accrued during a special session would be refunded.

Inslee and legislative leaders are set to meet Monday in Seattle discuss what next steps the state should take.

"There is much that needs to be done before a special session can be called," Inslee said in a statement. "I will ask lawmakers to do that work as quickly as humanly possible so that they can step up to our constitutional and moral obligations to our children and lift the court sanctions."

The ruling was the latest development in a long-running impasse between lawmakers and justices, who in 2012 ruled that the state is failing to meet its constitutional duty to pay for the cost of basic education for its 1 million schoolchildren.

Thomas Ahearne, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said that the court's action "is long overdue."

"The state has known for many, many years that it's violating the constitutional rights of our public school kids," Ahearne said. "And the state has been told by the court in rulings in this case to fix it, and the state has just been dillydallying along."

The lawsuit against the state was brought by a coalition of school districts, parents, teachers and education groups — known as the McCleary case for the family named in the suit.

In its original ruling, and repeated in later follow-up rulings, the justices have told the Legislature to find a way to pay for the reforms and programs they had already adopted, including all-day kindergarten, smaller class sizes, student transportation and classroom supplies, and to fix the state's overreliance on local tax levies to pay for education. Relying heavily on local tax levies leads to big disparities in funding between school districts, experts say.

Thursday, August 06, 2015

LA County jails to be under court oversight for mentally ill

The U.S. Department of Justice has reached a settlement agreement with Los Angeles County and its Sheriff's Department that will bring its jails under court oversight to address the treatment of mentally ill inmates.

The settlement agreement was filed Wednesday along with a complaint alleging a pattern or practice of inadequate mental health care and excessive force in the jails that violate inmates' constitutional rights.

Once the agreement is approved in federal court, it will be overseen by an independent monitor and team of mental health and corrections experts.

It requires reforms such as new training, improved records keeping and communication between custody and mental health staff to prevent and respond to suicides and self-inflicted injuries. The agreement also expands measures against excessive force that were required in a prior class-action lawsuit, including improvements in leadership, policies, training, data collection and analysis, and grievance procedures.

The Sheriff's Department, which manages the largest jail system in the nation, has already started to implement many of the measures in the agreement. "The settlement agreement avoids protracted litigation and provides a blue print for durable reform," U.S. Attorney Eileen M. Decker said in a statement.

Federal Court Says Texas Voter ID Violates Voting Rights Act

A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that Texas' voter ID law has a "discriminatory" effect on minorities in a victory for President Barack Obama, whose administration took the unusual step of bringing the weight of the U.S. Justice Department to fight a wave of new ballot-box restrictions passed in conservative statehouses.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the 2011 Texas law runs afoul of parts of the federal Voting Rights Act — handing down the decision on the eve of the 50th anniversary of the landmark civil rights law.

Texas was allowed to use the voter ID law during the 2014 elections, thereby requiring an estimated 13.6 million registered Texas voters to have a photo ID to cast a ballot.

The ruling was a victory, albeit not a sweeping one, for Democrats and minority rights groups. Whereas a Texas federal judge last year called the voter ID law the equivalent of a poll tax, a three-judge panel of the New Orleans court disagreed. It instead sent the law back to the lower court to consider how to fix the discriminatory effects.

Until then, Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said the law will remain in effect, though he did not acknowledge the issues raised by court's mixed ruling.

"I'm particularly pleased the panel saw through and rejected the plaintiffs' claim that our law constituted a 'poll tax.' The intent of this law is to protect the voting process in Texas, and we will continue to defend this important safeguard for all Texas voters," Paxton said.

Other Republican-controlled states, including Wisconsin and North Carolina, have passed similar voter ID measures in recent years, but the Texas law signed by then-Gov. Rick Perry is widely viewed as one of the nation's toughest. It requires one of seven forms of approved identification, but unlike other states with voter ID restrictions, Texas doesn't recognize university IDs from college students. It does, however, accept concealed handgun licenses as proof of identity.

Thursday, July 16, 2015

Wisconsin court ends probe of presidential hopeful Walker

Presidential candidate Scott Walker won a major legal victory Thursday when Wisconsin's Supreme Court ended a secret investigation into whether the Republican's gubernatorial campaign illegally coordinated with conservative groups during the 2012 recall election.
 
No one has been charged in the so-called John Doe probe, Wisconsin's version of a grand jury investigation in which information is tightly controlled, but questions about the investigation have dogged Walker for months.

Barring an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, the ruling makes Walker's campaign that much smoother as he courts voters in early primary states.

"Today's ruling confirmed no laws were broken, a ruling that was previously stated by both a state and federal judge," said Walker's spokeswoman Ashlee Strong. "It is time to move past this unwarranted investigation that has cost taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars."

The case centers on political activity conducted by Wisconsin Club for Growth and other conservative organizations during the 2012 recall, which was spurred by Democrats' anger over a Walker-authored law that effectively ending collective bargaining for most public workers.

The justices cited free speech in effectively tossing out the case, ruling state election law is overbroad and vague in defining what amounts to "political purposes."

Justice Michael Gableman, part of the court's conservative majority, praised the groups for challenging the investigation.

"It is fortunate, indeed, for every other citizen of this great State who is interested in the protection of fundamental liberties that the special prosecutor chose as his targets innocent citizens who had both the will and the means to fight the unlimited resources of an unjust prosecution," Gableman wrote in the majority opinion.


Monday, July 06, 2015

Bryant tells court it should affirm same-sex marriage ruling

Gov. Phil Bryant remains opposed to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide, but he’s stopping his court fight against it.

In a letter Wednesday, Bryant’s lawyer asks the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to return a Mississippi gay marriage lawsuit to U.S. District Judge Carlton Reeves in Jackson. That would allow Reeves to enter a final ruling aligned with the Supreme Court decision.

Reeves overturned Mississippi’s gay marriage ban last year, but put his ruling on hold. The appeals court also put a hold on Reeves’ ruling.

Those procedural blocks need to be lifted, but most Mississippi counties are already issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Lawyers for plaintiffs want judges to act before July 4, to “celebrate the promise of liberty and freedom for all.”

Oklahoma court to look at blocking Tulsa grand jury probe

The Oklahoma Supreme Court said Thursday it will consider whether to stop a grand jury investigation into an embattled sheriff whose longtime friend and volunteer deputy fatally shot an unarmed man.

Attorneys for Tulsa County Sheriff Stanley Glanz want justices to toss out a lower court's decision to empanel a grand jury on July 20. The state Supreme Court late Thursday appointed a referee to hear evidence and arguments in the case on July 14.

More than 6,600 Tulsa residents petitioned for the investigation into whether Glanz neglected his duties and whether reservists who gave gifts to the sheriff were shown special treatment. Glanz's lawyers say some signatures were gathered improperly and the petition should be tossed.

District Judge Rebecca Nightingale on Tuesday rejected Glanz's claims. Terry Simonson, a spokesman for the sheriff, said Glanz is appealing to the high court because the law has been applied incorrectly.

"He has the same rights as every citizen in Oklahoma to defend the position he believes in and the right to appeal based upon that conviction," Simonson said. "That's what he did today."

The petition drive began after reserve deputy Robert Bates, 73, shot and killed Eric Harris on April 2. Harris ran from authorities during a gun-sales sting operation and Bates maintains he confused his stun gun and handgun. Bates has pleaded not guilty to second-degree manslaughter in the slaying.

Sunday, June 21, 2015

Texas turns away from criminal truancy courts for students

A long-standing Texas law that has sent about 100,000 students a year to criminal court — and some to jail — for missing school is off the books, though a Justice Department investigation into one county's truancy courts continues. Gov. Greg Abbott has signed into law a measure to decriminalize unexcused absences and require school districts to implement preventive measures. It will take effect Sept. 1. Reform advocates say the threat of a heavy fine — up to $500 plus court costs — and a criminal record wasn't keeping children in school and was sending those who couldn't pay into a criminal justice system spiral. Under the old law, students as young as 12 could be ordered to court for three unexcused absences in four weeks. Schools were required to file a misdemeanor failure to attend school charge against students with more than 10 unexcused absences in six months. And unpaid fines landed some students behind bars when they turned 17. "Most of the truancy issues involve hardships," state Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, said. "To criminalize the hardships just doesn't solve anything. It costs largely low-income families. It doesn't address the root causes." Only two states in the U.S. — Texas and Wyoming — send truants to adult criminal court. In 2013, Texas prosecuted about 115,000 cases, more than twice the number of truancy cases filed in juvenile courts of all other states, according to a report from the nonprofit advocacy group Texas Appleseed. An estimated $10 million was collected from court costs and fines from students for truancy in fiscal year 2014 alone, the Texas Office of Court Administration said.

Friday, June 12, 2015

Appeals court sets aside conviction of bin Laden assistant

A federal appeals court has set aside the military commission conviction of a Guantanamo Bay detainee who allegedly produced an al-Qaida recruiting video and served as Osama bin Laden's personal assistant and public relations secretary.
 
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled 2-1 that the conspiracy case against the detainee was legally flawed because conspiracy is not a war crime. The detainee is Ali Hamza al-Bahlul.

The system of military commissions was created by the administration of President George W. Bush after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

The Obama administration argued that Congress acted within its authority in making conspiracy a crime that could be tried by military commission.

Al-Bahlul's lawyers argued that military commissions can only try offenses under the law of war.

Court says net neutrality rules will go into effect Friday

Rules that treat the Internet like a public utility and prevent companies from blocking or slowing down some online traffic will go into effect Friday after a federal appeals court refused to delay them.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said it won't postpone implementation of the net neutrality regulations even though AT&T, Verizon, and other companies are fighting against them. The panel said the United States Telecom Association, the plaintiffs in the case, did not satisfy the requirements for a stay.

The ruling is a setback for the industry, but the litigation will go on. The court accepted the Telecom Association's request to speed up the proceedings and asked the two sides to submit a schedule for briefing within two weeks.

Last February, the FCC agreed in a 3-2 vote to new rules that specifically prohibit service providers from blocking or slowing Internet traffic. To make sure the FCC has the authority to punish violators, the agency agreed to put Internet service in the same regulatory camp as the telephone and other utilities. That means providers would have to act in the "public interest" when supplying Internet service and refrain from "unjust or unreasonable" business practices.

Thursday, April 23, 2015

Court affirms dad's rights in turkey baster conception

The Virginia Court of Appeals has affirmed the parental rights of a man whose son was conceived by using a turkey baster.

A three-judge panel unanimously upheld Roanoke Circuit Judge Charles N. Dorsey's decision granting joint custody and visitation rights to Robert Preston Boardwine.

According to the court, Joyce Rosemary Bruce wanted to have a child she could raise on her own. Boardwine supplied the sperm in a plastic container. Bruce transferred it to a turkey baster, which she used to inseminate herself.

Bruce argued that Boardwine had no parental rights under the state's assisted conception law. But the appeals court said Tuesday that the law applies only to pregnancies resulting from the use of medical technology, and the use of a common kitchen implement at home doesn't qualify.

Tuesday, March 24, 2015

Supreme Court rejects challenge to voter ID law in Wisconsin

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday turned away a challenge to Wisconsin's voter identification law, allowing the law to stand and handing a victory to Gov. Scott Walker following a long fight by opponents who say it's a thinly veiled attempt to make it more difficult for Democratic backers to vote.

The law won't be enforced for an April 7 election because it's only two weeks away, but it will be in subsequent elections, the state attorney general said. Walker, a likely 2016 Republican presidential candidate, is a longtime proponent of voter ID requirements and signed Wisconsin's into law in 2011. But it was only in effect for one low-turnout primary in 2012 before legal challenges kept it on hold.

The Supreme Court's decision not to take up the case ends the legal fight, for now. "This is great news for Wisconsin voters," Walker said in a statement. "As we've said, this is a common sense reform that protects the integrity of our voting process, making it easy to vote and hard to cheat."

Democratic critics, as well as a federal judge in Milwaukee who last year declared the law to be unconstitutional, say in-person voting fraud is extremely rare. In his ruling striking down the law, U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman said there appears to have been one documented case of voter fraud in Wisconsin between 2004 and 2012, and that was committed by a man who obtained a ballot in the name of his deceased wife.

Opponents of the law say its true intent is to make it more difficult for older, poor and minority voters who tend to support Democrats and are more likely not to have the proper ID. The American Civil Liberties Union and allied groups persuaded Adelman to declare the law unconstitutional last year. But the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago later ruled that the law did not violate the Constitution.

Wednesday, January 21, 2015

Judicial candidates' appeals for campaign cash at high court

The Supreme Court is weighing whether candidates for elected judgeships have a constitutional right to make personal appeals for campaign cash.

The justices are hearing an appeal from Lanell Williams-Yulee of Tampa, Florida, who received a public reprimand for violating a Florida Bar rule that bans candidates for elected judgeships from personally soliciting donations.

The bar and many good government groups say the ban that is in place in Florida and 29 other states is important to preserve public confidence in an impartial judiciary.

A ruling for Williams-Yulee could free judicial candidates in those states to ask personally for campaign contributions.

In all, voters in 39 states elect local and state judges. In the federal judicial system, including the Supreme Court, judges are appointed to life terms and must be confirmed by the Senate.

The arguments are taking place five years after the Supreme Court freed corporations and labor unions to spend freely in federal elections. The court has generally been skeptical of limits on political campaigns, though slightly less so when it comes to those involving judges.

In 2002, the court struck down rules that were aimed at fostering impartiality among judges and barred candidates for elected judgeships from speaking out on controversial issues. But in 2009, the court held in a case from West Virginia that elected judges could be forced to step aside from ruling on cases when large campaign contributions from interested parties create the appearance of bias.

John Q. Kelly – Personal Injury Attorney

John Quinlan Kelly is a New York City attorney specializing in high-profile wrongful death cases, and whose clients are at the center of some of the biggest news stories in history. He is currently the personal injury department chair at Ivey, Barnum, & O’Mara, LLC.

John Q. Kelly, one of the most renowned litigators in the country, has a proven track record in personal injury and wrongful death litigation.


• Mr. Kelly has handled some of the most widely publicized civil cases in recent history and has achieved some of the largest verdicts and settlements recorded.

• The national and international coverage of the matters he handles, and the results he has achieved, have made Mr. Kelly a media fixture both as a featured guest and as a legal commentator.

John Q. Kelly – Ivey, Barnum & O’Mara in Greenwich

Linkedin
Facebook
Wikipedia

Thursday, September 04, 2014

Court: US can withhold Guantanamo detainee images

The U.S. government can withhold photographs and videotapes of a Guantanamo Bay detainee identified as the would-be 20th hijacker in the Sept. 11 terror attacks, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan agreed with the government that images of Mohammed al-Qahtani, if made public, "could logically and plausibly be used by anti-American extremists as propaganda to recruit members and incite violence against American interests at home and abroad."

Authorities have said al-Qahtani narrowly missed being one of the hijackers when he was denied entry into the U.S. at an Orlando, Florida, airport a month before the attacks. He was captured by Pakistani forces in December 2001 and taken to Guantanamo, where he remains.

The Center for Constitutional Rights sued the departments of Defense and Justice and the CIA in 2012, saying the release of videotapes and photographs of his interrogation and confinement would serve the public interest. The group has accused FBI and military personnel of subjecting al-Qahtani to isolation and aggressive interrogation techniques in 2002, including the use of a snarling dog, stripping him naked in the presence of a woman and repeatedly pouring water on his head.

Wednesday, July 09, 2014

South Carolina Episcopalians take fight to court

About 50 conservative Episcopal churches in South Carolina are in court this week, trying to keep their name, seal and $500 million in land and buildings after they broke away from the national denomination in a wide-ranging theological dispute.

The breakaway group, the Diocese of South Carolina, said it had to leave the national church not just because of the ordination of gays, but a series of decisions it says show national Episcopalians have lost their way in the teachings of Jesus and salvation.

The national church argues the split wasn't properly made, and it is fighting for the 20 or so churches in South Carolina staying under its umbrella.

Property disputes in the Episcopal Church and other Protestant churches have been going on for decades and end with varying results.

In March, the U.S. Supreme Court decided not to intervene in a dispute between the Episcopal Church and a conservative northern Virginia congregation that left the denomination in a rift over homosexuality and other issues. The court left in place a judge's decision siding with the national church, ending a seven-year fight over a church that traces its roots back to George Washington.

Monday, May 26, 2014

State court allows 'pink slime' lawsuit to proce

The South Dakota Supreme Court is allowing a $1.2 billion defamation lawsuit to proceed against television network ABC over its coverage of a meat product that critics derided as "pink slime."

The decision on Thursday allows the plaintiffs to potentially depose news anchor Diane Sawyer, two of the networks correspondents and other defendants.

Dakota Dunes-based Beef Products Inc. sued the network in 2012 for its coverage of the meat product the industry calls "lean, finely textured beef." BPI alleges that the coverage led to plant closures and layoffs because it misled consumers into believing the product was unsafe.

Attorneys for ABC in court filings say the network in each of its broadcasts stated the FDA deemed the product safe to eat. The network didn't immediately respond to requests for comment.

Suspect sought for death penalty appears in court

The suspect accused of kidnapping and killing a 15-year-old girl in Northern California has appeared in court for the first time since prosecutors say they are seeking the death penalty against him.

KTVU-TV reports that Antolin Garcia-Torres made a brief appearance in a Santa Clara County courtroom in San Jose on Friday.

It was the his first time since District Attorney Jeff Rosen announced he was seeking capital punishment against Garcia-Torres in the disappearance of Sierra LaMar.

Garcia-Torres is accused of killing the Morgan Hill girl who vanished while on her way to school in March 2012. He was arrested two months later, after authorities say they found Sierra's DNA in his car and his DNA in her handbag.

Sunday, November 03, 2013

Appeals court to review approval of BP settlement

A year ago, lawyers for BP and Gulf Coast residents and businesses took turns urging a federal judge to approve their settlement for compensating victims of the company's massive 2010 oil spill.

On Monday, however, the one-time allies will be at odds when an appeals court hears objections to the multibillion-dollar deal. That's because several months after U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier approved the settlement, BP started complaining that the judge and court-appointed claims administrator were misinterpreting it. The London-based oil giant is worried it could be forced to pay billions of dollars more for bogus or inflated claims by businesses.

Plaintiffs' attorneys who brokered the deal want the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to uphold the class-action settlement.

As of Friday, payments have been made to more than 38,000 people and businesses for an estimated $3.7 billion. Tens of thousands more could file claims in the coming months.

The settlement doesn't have a cap, but BP initially estimated that it would pay roughly $7.8 billion to resolve the claims. Later, as it started to challenge the business payouts, the company said it no longer could give a reliable estimate for how much the deal will cost.

The dispute centers on money for businesses, not individuals. Awards are based on a comparison of revenues and expenses before and after the spill. BP says a "policy decision" that claims administrator Patrick Juneau announced in January has allowed businesses to manipulate those figures in a way that leads to errors in calculating their actual lost profits.

Friday, October 25, 2013

Cowan Law Group - Josef Cowan, Attorney


Welcome to the Cowan Law Group, a premier law firm that has earned a reputation as a highly effective, results-oriented firm that provides smart, strategic legal solutions in an efficient manner. For more than 20 years, leading companies and successful individuals across the country have sought out our firm because they recognize that we are a unique and powerful resource for their legal and business needs.

Q.    What do you like to do?

A.    I love spending time with my family.  I’m very fortunate to have a beautiful wife and 2 terrific sons, whom I adore, and a terrific dog named Lucy the entire family is crazy about.  I’m also very passionate about photography, music, and guitar.  However, what I believe has shaped me most is my passion for travel.  When I was 18, I was very lucky to have an opportunity to backpack through nearly all of Western Europe for 6 months by myself.  The experience was transformational, to say the least, and it instilled in me a strong drive to see and experience the world.  Since then, I have also traveled to Africa, the Middle East, Cuba, and many parts of the United States, Mexico and Canada.  One of my goals is to travel to New Zealand in the not too distant future.

Q.    What professional licenses do you have?

A.    I’m licensed to practice law in the State of California and am admitted to practice in the United States District Courts for the Central and Southern Districts of California.  In addition, I have a California contractors license, and a California real estate brokers license.

Q.    Are you active in any professional organizations?

A.    Over the years I’ve been active in the Orange County and Los Angeles Bar Associations, the Orange County Association of Realtors, as well as the Associated General Contractors and the Building Industry Association.  These are all great organizations and I’ve enjoyed being part of them.  In addition, I was also very fortunate to be a member of Young Presidents Organization for 14 years, and had the great privilege of being a member of our local chapter’s board of directors for several years, as well as our chapter’s chairman.   I graduated from YPO in 2012 and am now a member of World Presidents Organization.

Wednesday, October 09, 2013

Calif. court: Spanking with wooden spoon not abuse

A state appeals court on Tuesday tossed out child abuse findings against a frustrated Northern California mother who spanked her 12-year-old daughter hard enough with a wooden spoon to cause bruising.

The 6th District Court of Appeal in San Jose reversed the child abuse determination made by the Santa Clara County Department of Social Services. Social workers waned to report Vernica Gonzalez to the state Department of Justice's child abuse database with a "substantiated" abuse determination. That determination was upheld by a trial court judge.

The appeals court said the spanking came close to abuse, but that social workers and the lower court judge failed to consider the family's entire circumstances.

Gonzalez and her husband testified that other forms of punishment such as groundings and taking away her phone had failed to persuade their 12-year-old daughter to do her schoolwork and avoid gang culture. The parents said that other family members had testified that spankings in the household were a rarity.

The appeals court said the mother's growing frustration with her daughter's behavior and her intention not to inflict harm in the April 2010 spanking weighed heavily in its ruling.