|
|
|
Court: $1M coverage for Conn. fire victim families
Legal News |
2013/06/11 16:04
|
Families suing the operator of a Hartford nursing home where 16 patients died in a 2003 fire suffered a setback Monday, when the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that the home's insurance coverage was $1 million instead of the $10 million claimed by the victims' relatives.
The justices' 3-2 decision reversed a lower court judge's interpretation of Greenwood Health Center's insurance policy in favor of the families. The high court instead found in favor of Boston-based Lexington Insurance Co., a subsidiary of American International Group Inc.
"It just seems completely inadequate," Van Starkweather, an attorney for one victim's family, said about the lower coverage figure. "I'm disappointed. It was a close decision. Three justices went with AIG. Two justices went with the victims."
A lawyer for Lexington Insurance declined to comment Monday.
The fire at Greenwood Health Center on Feb. 26, 2003, broke out after psychiatric patient Leslie Andino set her bed on fire while flicking a cigarette lighter. Officials at the time said it was the 10th deadliest nursing home fire in U.S. history. Andino was charged with 16 counts of arson murder, but was found incompetent to stand trial and committed to a psychiatric hospital.
Relatives of 13 of the 16 victims sued the nursing home's operator for cash damages, saying it failed to adequately supervise Andino. Hartford Superior Court Judge Marshall K. Berger Jr. ruled in 2009 that Greenwood's insurance policy with Lexington provided $250,000 in coverage for each plaintiff and the policy's maximum coverage was $10 million.
But Lexington Insurance appealed Berger's decision, saying that the $10 million was the total coverage for all seven nursing homes run by Greenwood's operator and that each home was insured up to $1 million.
In a decision written by Chief Justice Chase T. Rogers, the Supreme Court's majority found that each plaintiff actually was eligible for up to $500,000 from the insurance policy if they won their lawsuit, but that the policy's total coverage was limited to $1 million. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Calif. erred in new lethal injection regs
Legal News |
2013/06/01 18:05
|
Executions in California will remain suspended after a state appeals court ruled that corrections officials made several "substantial" procedural errors when they adopted new lethal injection rules.
The 1st District Court of Appeals said the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation failed to explain, as required by state law, why it was switching from a three-drug injection method to a single drug.
The court's opinion, which affirmed a lower court ruling, also said the agency misled the public by not providing the documents and information it used to reach its decision.
Corrections spokeswoman Deborah Hoffman said in an email that the agency was reviewing the ruling.
"In the meantime, at the governor's direction, CDCR is continuing to develop proposed regulations for a single-drug protocol in order to ensure that California's laws on capital punishment are upheld," Hoffman said.
California has not executed an inmate since 2006, when a federal judge halted the practice, finding that the three-drug mixture amounted to cruel and unusual punishment. The state was ordered to redo its capital punishment system.
Since then, California has built a new death chamber at San Quentin State Prison and trained a new team to carry out executions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court Upholds Rifle Sales Reporting Requirement
Legal News |
2013/06/01 18:04
|
A federal appeals court panel has unanimously upheld an Obama administration requirement that dealers in southwestern border states report when customers buy multiple high-powered rifles.
The firearms industry trade group, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, and two Arizona gun sellers argued that the administration overstepped its legal authority in the 2011 regulation, which applies to gun sellers in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas.
But the three-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia said that the requirement was "unambiguously" authorized under the Gun Control Act of 1968.
The challengers argued that the requirement unlawfully creates a national firearms registry, but the court said because it applies to a small percentage of gun dealers, it doesn't come close to creating one. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: US can keep bin Laden photos under wraps
Legal News |
2013/05/23 18:45
|
A federal appeals court is backing the U.S. government’s decision not to release photos and video taken of Osama bin Laden during and after a raid in which the terrorist leader was killed by U.S. commandos.
The three-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia turned down an appeal Tuesday from Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group, which had filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the images.
The court said that the CIA properly withheld publication of the images. The court concluded that the photos used to conduct facial recognition analysis of bin Laden could reveal classified intelligence methods — and that images of bin Laden’s burial at sea could trigger violence against American citizens. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
UK murder suspect's extradition case set for 2013
Legal News |
2012/12/04 03:11
|
A U.K. court will wait until next year to hold the extradition hearing of a Briton accused of hiring a hit man to kill his wife during their honeymoon in South Africa — after his mental state is reviewed.
The lawyer for Shrien Dewani says he has flashbacks and is a "husk" of his former self. Attorney Clare Montgomery said Monday it is unthinkable he would be able to plan any escape.
Dewani's mental condition will be reviewed in April, with a full extradition hearing set for July.
The 32-year-old is accused of arranging the murder of his wife, Anni, 28. She was found shot dead in an abandoned taxi in Cape Town's Gugulethu township in November 2010.
In March, a British court halted Dewani's extradition, citing his mental state. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Generals backed Kelley's sister in court
Legal News |
2012/11/15 21:19
|
In the latest twist of the David Petraeus sex scandal, court records show the former CIA director and Gen. John Allen intervened last September in a messy custody dispute on behalf of Jill Kelley's sister, whom a judge described as dishonest and lacking integrity.
Kelley is the woman who received harassing emails from Petraeus' biographer and paramour, according to U.S officials. She also is thought to have exchanged flirtatious communications with Allen, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan. Pentagon investigators are now examining Allen's relationship with Kelley.
The new court files are significant because they provide of a fuller picture of the twins' connections to Petraeus and Allen, two powerful figures ensnared in the scandal. It also raises questions why two decorated generals would vouch for Kelley's twin sister, Natalie Khawam, who had piles of legal troubles in recent years.
Petraeus resigned Friday as CIA director after disclosures that author Paula Broadwell sent the emails to Kelley, who in turn went to the FBI, setting off a series of stunning revelations that have engulfed Washington just days after President Barack Obama was re-elected.
Both Allen and Petraeus wrote letters in September supporting Khawam in her ongoing custody fight for her son, D.C. Superior Court records show. Allen met Khawam, 37, when he was deputy commander of U.S. Central Command in Tampa, where they attended social functions. Petraeus said he met Khawam three years ago through Kelley. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scottsdale considers law firm contract in suit
Legal News |
2012/11/06 19:05
|
The City Council in Scottsdale is poised to approve a $350,000 contract with a law firm it has hired to defend a former officer in a wrongful death lawsuit over the last of his six fatal shootings.
The city hired Struck, Wieneke & Love to defend former officer James Peters in a suit filed by the relatives of John Loxas and the American Civil Liberties Union. The City Council is set to consider the contract on Nov. 13, according to the Arizona Republic reports.
Peters fatally shot Loxas on Feb. 14 after police were called to his house. He was unarmed and holding his 7-month-old grandson in his doorway when Peters shot him in the head.
The shooting was the officer's seventh since 2002. He has since retired with an accidental disability pension of $4,547 per month, according to the city.
Another firm is defending the city and other officials under a contract worth up to $50,000.
The suit was filed on Sept. 24 and claims, among other things, that city officials failed to adequately investigate the previous shootings. It alleges that the city and Police Chief Alan Rodbell didn't establish adequate policies to protect against the "unreasonable use of force by its officers."
The suit seeks unspecified damages against Peters, the city, Rodbell and Detective Brian McWilliams. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
