U.S. District Judge C. Weston Houck has ruled for the second time in recent months that legal issues arising from the Episcopal schism in eastern South Carolina belong in state court, not federal court.
Houck dismissed a federal lawsuit late Friday brought by Bishop Charles vonRosenberg, the bishop of parishes remaining with the national Episcopal Church.
The bishop had asked Houck to block Bishop Mark Lawrence, the spiritual head of churches that left the national church, from using the name and symbols of the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina.
But Houck ruled the issues "are more appropriately before, and will more comprehensively be resolved, in South Carolina state court."
Lawrence and churches in the conservative diocese separated from the more liberal national church last year. Those parishes later sued in state court to protect their use of the diocesan name and symbols and title to a half billion dollars in church property.
In a consent order agreed to by both sides and signed by a state judge earlier this year, Lawrence and those parishes were given the right to use the name and symbols.
Parishes remaining with the national church later tried to move that case to federal court, but Houck ruled in June that doing so would disrupt the balance between state and federal courts.
Wednesday, August 28, 2013
Thursday, June 27, 2013
San Antonio, Texas - Guardianships Lawyer
The Aldrich Law Firm's in Texas is a skilled attorney in all aspects of guardianship. Many families may not fully understand the complexities of these cases when an adult is incapacitated and a person need supervision and protection. In Texas, the Probate Code states that guardianship as “a legal process to provide protection for adults who are incapacitated.” A “ward” is an incapacitated person who cannot make decisions for themselves, and a “guardian” is a court-appointed person or entity that makes decisions on their behalf. When matters get complicated and decisions related to the well-being and care of a person need to be made, you can reach out to a guardianship lawyer in San Antonio to help you with your legal matters.
Thursday, May 23, 2013
Appeals court allows capital retrial of Wolfe
A federal appeals court will allow a capital murder case to proceed against an accused drug kingpin from northern Virginia.
In a 2-1 ruling, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond overturned a federal judge in Norfolk who had ordered a halt to the prosecution of Justin Wolfe and his immediate release.
That judge said misconduct by prosecutors in Prince William County made it impossible for Wolfe to get a fair trial.
But a majority on the appellate court disagreed. The judges ruled that a new trial can be done fairly. A dissenting judge said the misconduct was so bad that freeing Wolfe was the only proper outcome.
Wolfe was sent to death row in 2002 for a drug-related murder, but his original conviction and sentence were overturned.
In a 2-1 ruling, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond overturned a federal judge in Norfolk who had ordered a halt to the prosecution of Justin Wolfe and his immediate release.
That judge said misconduct by prosecutors in Prince William County made it impossible for Wolfe to get a fair trial.
But a majority on the appellate court disagreed. The judges ruled that a new trial can be done fairly. A dissenting judge said the misconduct was so bad that freeing Wolfe was the only proper outcome.
Wolfe was sent to death row in 2002 for a drug-related murder, but his original conviction and sentence were overturned.
Tuesday, April 16, 2013
Court: Can human genes be patented?
DNA may be the building block of life, but can something taken from it also be the building block of a multimillion-dollar medical monopoly?
The Supreme Court grapples Monday with the question of whether human genes can be patented. Its ultimate answer could reshape U.S. medical research, the fight against diseases like breast and ovarian cancer and the multi-billion dollar medical and biotechnology business.
"The intellectual framework that comes out of the decision could have a significant impact on other patents - for antibiotics, vaccines, hormones, stem cells and diagnostics on infectious microbes that are found in nature," Robert Cook-Deegan, director for genome ethics, law & policy at Duke University, said in a statement.
"This could affect agricultural biotechnology, environmental biotechnology, green-tech, the use of organisms to produce alternative fuels and other applications," he said.
The nine justices' decision will also have a profound effect on American business, with billions of dollars of investment and years of research on the line. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has been awarding patents on human genes for almost 30 years.
The Supreme Court grapples Monday with the question of whether human genes can be patented. Its ultimate answer could reshape U.S. medical research, the fight against diseases like breast and ovarian cancer and the multi-billion dollar medical and biotechnology business.
"The intellectual framework that comes out of the decision could have a significant impact on other patents - for antibiotics, vaccines, hormones, stem cells and diagnostics on infectious microbes that are found in nature," Robert Cook-Deegan, director for genome ethics, law & policy at Duke University, said in a statement.
"This could affect agricultural biotechnology, environmental biotechnology, green-tech, the use of organisms to produce alternative fuels and other applications," he said.
The nine justices' decision will also have a profound effect on American business, with billions of dollars of investment and years of research on the line. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has been awarding patents on human genes for almost 30 years.
Monday, April 8, 2013
Doctor to plead guilty in CA prescription case
A Southern California doctor has agreed to plead guilty to charges of illegally prescribing drugs to his patients at nightly meetings in Starbucks stores.
Court documents show 44-year-old Alvin Mingczech Yee entered into a plea agreement earlier this week. He is expected to plead guilty to seven counts at a April 17 hearing.
Prosecutors say Yee saw up to a dozen patients nightly at Starbucks coffee stores across suburban Orange County at meetings that cost up to $600. Prosecutors say Yee barely examined them but prescribed drugs including OxyContin and Vicodin.
Yee was arrested in October 2011 at his Irvine office and has been free on bond.
Court documents show 44-year-old Alvin Mingczech Yee entered into a plea agreement earlier this week. He is expected to plead guilty to seven counts at a April 17 hearing.
Prosecutors say Yee saw up to a dozen patients nightly at Starbucks coffee stores across suburban Orange County at meetings that cost up to $600. Prosecutors say Yee barely examined them but prescribed drugs including OxyContin and Vicodin.
Yee was arrested in October 2011 at his Irvine office and has been free on bond.
Tuesday, February 5, 2013
Arnold Law Office, LLC - Criminal Defense
If you are facing Oregon state or municipal criminal charges, it is important to promptly retain competent criminal defense legal counsel. A thorough review by an Oregon criminal defense attorney followed by an investigation can often make or break a case. The most candid remarks from potential witnesses come before the state has had multiple opportunities to interrogate and prepare witnesses. This is especially important in serious felony cases or Measure 11 and other mandatory minimum sentence cases.
When your liberty is in jeopardy due to a criminal case, it is important to invest in an Oregon criminal defense lawyer who will give your case the attention that it and you deserve. You need to make an informed decision about the merits and hazards of a jury trial versus the advantages of plea negotiations.
http://www.arnoldlawfirm.com/defense.html
When your liberty is in jeopardy due to a criminal case, it is important to invest in an Oregon criminal defense lawyer who will give your case the attention that it and you deserve. You need to make an informed decision about the merits and hazards of a jury trial versus the advantages of plea negotiations.
http://www.arnoldlawfirm.com/defense.html
Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Court weighs warrantless blood tests in DUI cases
The Supreme Court is considering whether police must get a warrant before ordering a blood test on an unwilling drunken-driving suspect.
The justices heard arguments Wednesday in a case involving a disputed blood test from Missouri. Police stopped a speeding, swerving car and the driver, who had two previous drunken-driving convictions, refused to submit to a breath test to measure the alcohol level in his body.
The justices appeared to struggle with whether the dissipation of alcohol in the blood over time is reason enough for police to call for a blood test without first getting a warrant.
In siding with defendant Tyler McNeely, the Missouri Supreme Court said police need a warrant to take a suspect's blood except when a delay could threaten a life or destroy potential evidence.
The justices heard arguments Wednesday in a case involving a disputed blood test from Missouri. Police stopped a speeding, swerving car and the driver, who had two previous drunken-driving convictions, refused to submit to a breath test to measure the alcohol level in his body.
The justices appeared to struggle with whether the dissipation of alcohol in the blood over time is reason enough for police to call for a blood test without first getting a warrant.
In siding with defendant Tyler McNeely, the Missouri Supreme Court said police need a warrant to take a suspect's blood except when a delay could threaten a life or destroy potential evidence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)