Patent Cases Jump In Front of New Rules
Silver Trial Headed For Closing Arguments Monday
U.S. Family Detention Centers: Still There, Still Debated
New York Corruption Trial Said To Be Moving Quickly
NYT Going Deep On Arbitration Issue
The New York Times continues its milestone series on arbitration this week and continues to set the stage for serious reform, especially in California where the practice is widespread across many industries. In particular, the series focuses on how arbitration clauses can remove disputes from courts into private practices.
The paper says that those practices “…often bears little resemblance to court… Over the last 10 years, thousands of businesses across the country — from big corporations to storefront shops — have used arbitration to create an alternate system of justice. There, rules tend to favor businesses, and judges and juries have been replaced by arbitrators who commonly consider the companies their clients, The Times found.”
This is the kind of series that nearly always brings a call to action, so stay tuned. Check in on the series here.
Lawyers Fight Bail Inequality By Filing More, Smaller Cases
AZ Case Shows How Little Border Patrol Fears Courts
Anyone looking for an example of Border Patrol officials basically ignoring the U.S. courts might check out a southern Arizona case. Migrants there have long complained about dirty and overcrowded cells, explains the Arizona Republic newspaper, and about being held in frigid cells deprived of adequate food and water, not to mention denied medical care. The ACLU and other groups sued, and the Republic explains that “… a federal judge then ordered the Border Patrol to save all video surveillance tapes dating back to June 10 at the eight holding facilities in the Tucson sector, one of the nation’s busiest, in response to a request from the ACLU seeking evidence to prove its case.”
But it turns out the Border Patrol has since “willfully” destroyed video recordings in direct violation of U.S. District Court Judge David C. Bury’s order, the newspaper says. Government officials say it was a technical problem. The judge issued sanctions (no doubt strongly worded!) but otherwise there seem few consequences to defying the court.” See the story here.