Cases

On The ABA Not Standing Up To A ‘Libel Bully’

October 25, 2016 By CCM Staff

Donald J. Trump at a campaign rally in Naples, Fla., on Sunday. Credit Eric Thayer for The New York Times

Welcome to the age of the “libel bully.” The American Bar Association used the phrase to describe Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump in a report on his litigation, but knew better than to publish that report. The New York Times writes that “… the [ABA] report concluded that Mr. Trump was a “libel bully” who had filed many meritless suits attacking his opponents and had never won in court. But the bar association refused to publish the report, citing “the risk of the A.B.A. being sued by Mr. Trump.

The story notes that “.. internal communications, the bar association’s leadership, including its general counsel’s office and public relations staff, did not appear to dispute the report’s conclusions.
But James Dimos, the association’s deputy executive director, objected to the term ‘libel bully’ and other sharp language in the report, saying in an Oct. 19 email that the changes were needed to address ‘the legitimately held views of A.B.A. staff who are charged with managing the reputational and financial risk to the association.'”

Another quote from A.B.A. staff push-back: “While we do not believe that such a lawsuit has merit, it is certainly reasonable to attempt to reduce such a likelihood by removing inflammatory language that is unnecessary to further the article’s thesis,” Mr. Dimos wrote. “Honestly, it is the same advice members of the forum would provide to their own clients.”

Catch up on your irony here:

Filed Under: Cases Tagged With: American Bar Association, Donald trump, First Amendment, Libel Bully

WaPo Reporting On California Charter School Litigation, Issues

October 20, 2016 By CCM Staff

Valerie Strauss, Education Reporter

Valerie Strauss at The Washington Post is reporting on the California charter school legal issues, including why the Golden State has so much civil litigation. Strauss notes that “… California, called the charter Wild West, deserves special attention… the state has more charter schools and charter school students than any other state in the nation. One billionaire even came up with a secret plan to “charterize” half of the Los Angeles Unified School District…”

Among the problems she lists that “… a report released recently by the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California and Public Advocates, a nonprofit law firm and advocacy group, found that more than 20 percent of all California charter schools have enrollment policies that violate state and federal law.” She also backgrounds that “… in some places, charter schools open without mentioning their existence to the traditional school district in which they reside, prompting lawsuits by the districts.”

Read the third of her ongoing series here: Valerie Strauss

Filed Under: Cases, Community Tagged With: American Civil Liberty Union of Southern California, California charter schools, district lawsuits, federal violations, state violations

NYT Outlines Obama’s Immigration ‘Shift’

October 17, 2016 By CCM Staff

Central American immigrants who had been released from United States Border Patrol detention waited at the Greyhound bus station in McAllen, Tex., in July 2014. Credit John Moore/Getty Images

The New York Times is among those reporting that the Obama administration is “delaying deportation proceedings” for recent immigrants in cities across the United States, allowing more than 50,000 of those who fled Central American communities since 2014 to remain in the country – legally – for years. It’s not a true policy shift, but instead a cost-saving measure, experts say. They also say mostly families are the ones staying.

The NYT reported that: “The shift, described in interviews with immigration lawyers, federal officials, and current and former judges, has been occurring without public attention for months. It amounts to an unannounced departure from the administration’s widely publicized pronouncements that cases tied to the so-called surge of 2014 would be rushed through the immigration courts in an effort to deter more Central Americans from entering the United States illegally.”

The report also notes that “.. the delays are being made as a cost-saving measure, federal officials said, because of a lapse in enforcement that allowed immigrants who were supposed to be enrolled in an electronic monitoring program to go free. Some of those affected had failed to report to government offices to be fitted with GPS ankle bracelets, according to a February memo from the chief immigration judge, Print Maggard, in Arlington, Va. Now that the government will not have to pay the daily fee of $4 to $8 a person to monitor such bracelets, the immigrants’ cases have been pushed back for years, some until 2023, judges and federal officials said. The cases of those who met their reporting obligations are still being expedited, with some cases moving faster than lawyers and judges had expected.”

Read the NYT story here: Obama Administration Is Quietly Delaying Thousands of Deportation Cases

Filed Under: Cases Tagged With: backlog, deportation, immigration court

‘Civil Gideon’ Finding Support From NYC Council

October 13, 2016 By CCM Staff

Councilman Mark Levine at a rally at New York City Hall on Monday in support of a bill that would provide legal help to low-income tenants facing eviction. Credit Dave Sanders for The New York Times

The New York Times continues to cover the Big Apple’s efforts to provide some level of ‘civil Gideon’ to residents facing housing evictions. The term refers to providing civil representation in some cases, usually immigration and family law issues but also evictions, in the same way public defenders represent criminal defendants who cannot afford an attorney.

The NYT reports that “… despite $62 million set aside this fiscal year by Mayor Bill de Blasio, a Democrat, to bolster legal help, more than 70 percent of low-income tenants in New York City still go without lawyers in Housing Court, according to a report published in June by the newly created Office of Civil Justice, part of the city’s Human Resources Administration.

The story backgrounds that “… with landlords almost always represented by lawyers, tenants are overmatched from the start, tenant advocates and city officials say. Across the city last year, there were nearly 22,000 evictions, with the greatest number in the Bronx.”

And, reporting on a meeting in late September, the NYT says that “… the City Council held a hearing on a bill that would make New York City the first jurisdiction in the country to guarantee lawyers for any low-income residents facing eviction. Under the measure, tenants who make below 200 percent of the federal poverty line would qualify. (For a single person, the cutoff would be $23,540; for a family of four, it would be $48,500.) The bill, which has already garnered the support of an overwhelming majority of council members, is part of a broader effort gaining momentum across the country to create a right to counsel for people in high-stake legal cases like evictions and foreclosures.”

You can read the entire NYT piece here: For Tenants Facing Eviction, New York May Guarantee a Lawyer

Filed Under: Cases Tagged With: Bill de Blasio, Civil gideon, eviction law, housing eviction, low income tenants, New York Housing court

October 5, 2016 By CCM Staff

The state of Virginia’s DMV is the latest agency under fire for tying drivers’ licenses to paying court costs and fines. The Washington Post reports that “… after a class-action lawsuit claimed Virginia suspends the driver’s licenses of those too poor to pay fines and court costs in an ‘unconstitutional scheme,’ the state replied Monday, saying the suit raised no legitimate complaint.”

Also from the WaPo: “Though Plaintiffs’ case could appear sympathetic from a policy perspective, it fails when viewed from a legal one,” said the state’s memorandum in support of a motion to dismiss.

The class action, filed in July in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia, documents that more than 940,000 people in Virginia currently have their licenses suspended for nonpayment. Such suspensions have become a civil rights issue across the country because they are seen to criminalize civil courts action.

Read the WaPo piece here: ‘DMV is not responsible’: Va. denies claim it unfairly suspends driver’s licenses

Filed Under: Cases Tagged With: civil rights, drivers licenses suspension, State of Virginia, unconstitutional scheme

California Lawyer-Oversight Bill Leads To Attorney Fee Request

September 13, 2016 By CCM Staff

The California State Bar is supposed to protect consumers, but a recent state audit found the agency put people at “significant risk” after failing to keep watch over attorneys across California. NBC Bay Area Investigative Reporter Bigad Shaban reports in a story that first aired February 24, 2016. (Published Wednesday, Feb. 24, 2016)

The NBC affiliate in California’s San Francisco area is reporting that the state bar of California is, for the first time in almost 20 years, asking the state Supreme Court for authority to collect attorneys’ dues. The report backgrounds that “… the announcement comes after a bill aimed at reforming the bar failed to pass through the state’s most recent legislative session… the bill, SB-846, sought to divide the bar into two agencies, since it currently serves as both a trade group for lawyers and a regulatory body that is supposed to discipline attorneys.”

The potential legislation comes amid concerns that the California bar should be run by people who do not practice law. The NBC report noted that “… the California State Bar has come under harsh criticism in recent months over mismanagement and misspending. Last week, the Investigative Unit revealed that a recent state audit shows the agency is overpaying its employees, all while the bar’s fund to repay victims of corrupt lawyers is millions of dollars short.”

The NBC affiliate, perhaps one of the most aggressive local news in the nation, said that the Investigative Unit revealed how the bar was accused of failing to keep watch over some of the state’s worst attorneys. According to a separate state audit released in June 2015, in trying to clear its backlog of consumer complaints against attorneys, the bar allowed some lawyers to continue practicing, even though they should have been disciplined or disbarred.

Source: Bill to Reform California State Bar Fails to Pass Through Legislature | NBC Bay Area http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Bill-to-reform-California-State-Bar-fails-to-pass-through-state-legislature-392199531.html#ixzz4K9qbxtjM
Follow us: @NBCBayArea on Twitter

Filed Under: Cases, Community Tagged With: backlog reduction, California State Bar, corrupt lawyers, court reform

Chevron Wins Latest In Long-Running Civil Case

August 8, 2016 By CCM Staff

Gasoline pumps situated at a Chevron station in Milpitas, Calif., in February. A federal judge ruled that a record $9.5 billion environmental-damage award against Chevron was tainted. ASSOCIATED PRESS

California-based Chevron has won the latest court decision in a case that the Wall Street Journal calls “… one the longest running in corporate history.” The WSJ backgrounds that “… Monday’s decision affirms a lower-court ruling by U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan, who found in 2014 that the $9.5 billion environmental-damage judgment won by New York lawyer Steven Donziger and his Ecuadorean plaintiffs against Chevron was obtained through fraud and corruption. Judge Kaplan ruled Mr. Donziger couldn’t enforce the judgment in the U.S. or profit from the award anywhere in the world.

One reason the case will continue: “The appeals judges wrote that although the $9.5 billion judgment can’t be enforced in the U.S., their ruling does not stop the plaintiffs from taking action to enforce the judgment elsewhere.”

Read about the latest chapter of the saga here:http://www.wsj.com/articles/chevron-wins-ruling-blocking-enforcement-of-9-5-billion-ecuador-judgment-1470686218

Filed Under: Cases, National Tagged With: Chevron, corruption, fraud, US District Court

Advocate Outlines Woes As Immigration Court Backlog Moves Past 500,000

August 5, 2016 By CCM Staff

Photo Credit: Francis Riviera

In an opinion piece in The Hill newspaper in Washington D.C., a San Antonio immigration advocate outlines a recent milestone in the immigration court backlog: “In numbers just released, the backlog in immigration courts has now risen above half a million cases (500,051). Immigrants wait an average of 672 days for resolution of their cases, and for some cases the wait can reach up to six years. The highest number of pending cases are in California (93,466 cases), Texas (87,088 cases), and New York (86,834 cases).”

Sara Ramey says that “… in Texas, where my NGO RAICES serves the immigrant community, the average wait for resolution of a case is 712 days. The San Antonio court is setting hundreds, if not thousands, of cases for Nov. 29, 2019 as a place holder until the court can find a date, likely on an even later day. And this is just to start proceedings, not to determine the merits of the case.

Ramey does a good job outlining the problems when cases go that long and makes an appeal for both political parties to step up on the issue. See her argument here: http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/judicial/289875-immigration-court-delays-make-a-mockery-of-us-justice

Filed Under: Border Kids, Cases, Community, Events, Refugee Children Tagged With: Border Kids, court backlog, immigrant rights, immigration advocacy

Dems Face Fraud Charges In Email Leak

July 26, 2016 By CCM Staff

Outgoing Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz. PHOTO: ZUMA PRESS

Those leaked emails indicated that that Democratic Party leaders may have conspired against the primary campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders have not only led to a party shake-up but have sparked class-action litigation, the Wall Street Journal is reporting. The story is that “… a trove of hacked party emails posted by WikiLeaks show that Democratic National Committee officials had worked to undermine the underdog campaign of Mr. Sanders.

Some of the more damaging info: Weeks before the firestorm erupted, culminating in the resignation of party chief Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a group of plaintiffs brought a lawsuit in federal court alleging that DNC “actively concealed its bias” from its donors and Democrats backing Mr. Sanders.

DNC Seeks Dismissal of Lawsuit Alleging Donor Deception

Filed Under: Cases, National Tagged With: Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Democratic National Committee, Democratic National Party, party resignation, Sen.Bernie Sanders, WikiLeaks

Yikes: ‘RBG’ Speaks Her Mind On Trump, May Disqualify Herself

July 12, 2016 By CCM Staff

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in her Supreme Court chambers in Washington in July 2014. (Cliff Owen/AP)

It turns out that Donald Trump is not alone in speaking his mind and worrying even his biggest fans. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in a New York Times interview, made it pretty clear she can’t imagine a United States under a President Trump. She even joked about moving to New Zealand, although to be fair she was quoting her late husband – but the sentiment was pretty clear.

That’s a problem, say legal scholars. There’s a reason that justices are seldom vocal in the political arena. If Mr. Trump is anxious about having a judge with Mexican heritage on his civil case, can you imagine him with a justice who has made her view so clear? Aaron Blake, writing for the Washington Post, notes that Ginsburg “…. goes to a place justices almost never do – and perhaps never have – for some very good reasons.”

The report cites some pretty strong voices saying this was a mistake. Like this: “Louis Virelli is a Stetson University law professor who just wrote a book on Supreme Court recusals, titled ‘Disqualifying the High Court. He said that ‘public comments like the ones that Justice Ginsburg made could be seen as grounds for her to recuse herself from cases involving a future Trump administration. I don’t necessarily think she would be required to do that, and I certainly don’t believe that she would in every instance, but it could invite challenges to her impartiality based on her public comments.'”

Read the story and gauge the fallout here: In bashing Donald Trump, some say Ruth Bader Ginsburg just crossed a very important line

Filed Under: Cases, National Tagged With: Donald trump, Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Trump Bashing