Legal Radar

Judge: GM Can Retain Its Bankruptcy Protection

A federal judge early this week ruled that GM (General Motors Co.) can hold on to its bankruptcy protection, which allows it to halt legal claims worth billions of dollars from consumers seeking damages over a faulty ignition switch.

Robert Gerber, a U.S. bankruptcy judge, who heard the oral arguments, submitted a 134-page ruling indicating that he couldn’t find evidence where GM carried out fraudulent acts in court when it participated in the bankruptcy process. The protection curbs customers from filing suit for compensation for injuries sustained and declining resale values to older GM vehicle models equipped with faulty ignition switches.

Attorneys of the plaintiffs argued that GM mislead the court for not revealing the faulty ignition switch matter, which it had knowledge of back in 2005. GM said its executives weren’t informed of the issue until 2013, which pushed for a 2.6-million vehicle recall a year later. The ignition switch problem has now been linked to over 80 deaths and more than 100 injuries.

Ex-Blackwater Security Team Slapped with Long Sentences

Just early this week, a federal judges carried out a stiff prison sentences on 4 ex-Blackwater guards for being part of a 2007 Baghdad shooting that killed 17 Iraqis and wounded 14 others.

One of the ex-Blackwater guards, Nicholas Slatten, a sniper, was convicted of murder and received a life sentence. The remaining three, Dustin Heard, Paul Slough, and Evan Liberty, were each given a 30-year sentence for manslaughter and weaponry offenses.

Judge Royce Lamberth passed down the sentences in a proceeding, taking place in a courtroom where friends and family of the guards were present, along with a small number of relatives of the Iraqi victims.

Sentences given to guards involving weaponry charges and manslaughter were lower than what was sought after by the federal government. In carrying out the sentences, Lamberth said he weighed the seriousness of the crimes committed and the clean records of the accused.

Attorneys for the guards intend to make an appeal.

Judge Refusing to Lift Injunction on Immigration Action

A Texas federal judge early this week refused to lift his injunction in halting the Obama administration’s immigration process to deferring over 4 million individuals living in the United States illegally.

District Judge Andre Hanen shot down a request by the Obama administration to lift his ruling on February of temporarily halting the administration from proceeding with its immigration actions, as announced last year by President Barack Obama.

The Justice Department already made an appeal on the issue to the 5^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is ready hear the oral arguments next week.

In shooting down the administration’s request, Hanen believes his February ruling was the right decision. His previous ruling found that the immigration policy of the Obama administration wasn’t properly issued within federal law grounds, which is the Administrative Procedure Act.

Hanen also made another ruling on Tuesday that allows states to investigate their claim of the administration not properly carrying out certain aspects of the immigration program.

Italy’s SC Looking into the Fate of Amanda Knox

It looks like Amanda Knox’s case made it to another court.

The highest court in Italy is set to hear appeals on murder convictions against Knox, 27-years, and ex-boyfriend Rafaelle Sollecito, 30-years, who were both guilty several years back for allegedly killing Knox’s roommate, Meredith Kerchler.

The ruling will determine whether to maintain the verdicts, made another appeal, or throw out both convictions.

If the high court maintains the murder convictions for Knox and Sollecito, the prosecutor will have the order to bring out their sentences. Sollecito will be in custody while the prosecutor will request the extradition of Knox, who’s currently in the United States.

Two years ago, Italy’s Supreme Court overturned their acquittals and pushed the case back to the Court of Appeals. In 2014, the court re-convicted Knox and Sollecito and sentenced the couple to 28 years and 25 years in jail, respectively.

The Supreme Court will hear arguments later this week before making a decision.

Kercher’s family lawyer will likely fight for Knox’s extradition.

Flag Shirt-Wearing Students Asking SC to Hear Their Case

Later this week, the justices are set to privately discuss a ruling against white high school students who sued their school for demanding them to remove their flag-print shirts on the day their classmates were celebrating Mexican heritage.

Attorneys of the students are asking for the Supreme Court to overturn the previous ruling, which resulted to the school not infringing on any constitutional rights.

The lawsuit was carried out by three students from Live Oak High School in California. In 2010 of the Cinco de Mayo, they wore shirts with a huge American flag print, angering Mexican students who saw them as a racial slur.

Aware of a possible trouble brewing, the school’s assistant principal demanded the students to have their shirts worn inside-out or replaced with other shirts. Several wearers refused while the other two went home. Those same two students received numerous threats and had to miss school for another day out of fear.

U.S Court of Appeals Scrutinizing NCAA on Athlete Payments

The U.S. Court of Appeals is determining as to whether or not school athletes deserve a piece of the billions of dollars universities benefit from basketball and football, despite increased pressure for universities to offer their athletes better benefits.

The NCAA asked the 9^th Court of Appeals earlier this week to dump a ruling of offering student athletes some shared of revenue made for utilizing their likeness, names, and images.

In a court ruling last year, Oakland, California District Judge Claudia Wilken sided with a dozen former and current student athletes who threw an antitrust class action against the NCAA.

But in a court of appeals hearing early this week, two of the three judges in the 9^th Circuit panel seemed open to the NCAA being in violation of antitrust laws.

Currently, Judge Jay Bybee indicated that contracts signed by the NCAA with TV network consist language of player’s images and names. This suggests that such rights are essential assets that could be fall victim to anti-competitive actions by the NCAA.

Dutch Court Trashes Data Retention Law

A Dutch court early this week gave privacy advocates a victory by bringing down a data retention law that allows government agencies access to any telecommunication data.

The Hague district court said the law was in violation of privacy rights and the right to personal data protection.

The latest ruling is a big blow to the Dutch government, which said the law was essential to combat crime and terrorism. But it’s a win for privacy advocates, lawyers, and journalists who said the law was unconstitutional since data is stored regardless if the citizen is a suspect or not.

The ruling is effective immediately, prompting telecommunication firms to no longer gather and store data.

The government was previously reluctant to trash the law for national security reasons. Authorities are aggressively seeking ways to expand surveillance capabilities following the latest attacks in Copenhagen and Paris, and an increasing number of radical Muslims who were born or grew up in Europe.

SC Shoots Down Prosecutors in Fisherman Case

In a recent court ruling this week, a court mentioned that prosecutors made the wrong move in applying the Sarbanes-Oxley corporate governance law to a fisherman suspected of eliminating evidence which involved taking in undersized fish.

When Congress deemed it criminal to destroying or covering up any object with any intention of obstructing a probe, it didn’t mean the law would be applicable to creatures of the sea, according to the court.

The Sarbanes-Oxley law, which was passed due to accounting issues on public-traded firms, prevents the destruction of business documents and records as evidence. It has no application on the fisherman’s claimed destruction of his catch.

The case involved John Yates, a Florida-based fisherman who was caught red-handed with a 72 grouper on what seemed to be smaller than the minimum standard size limit. Ignoring a wildlife officer, Yates instructed his fishing crew to toss the grouper and replace it with a bigger one. Yates faced 20 years of prison time for the destruction and concealing undersized fish that obstructed a federal probe.

Privacy Groups Tackling Dutch Data Retention Law Head On

A group involving attorneys, privacy advocates, and journalists early this week are urging the Dutch court to shoot down a data-retention law allows the government to easily access telecommunication data it believes can fight off crime and terrorism.

The same group is asking the District Court of The Hague to carry out a preliminary injunction and formally declare the law to be unconstitutional.

The Hague court is expected to make a ruling on the issue by next month.

The suit is the latest in the past decade of legal hurdles to the data-retention law across Europe.

In the Netherlands, where the law was carried out in 2009, data must be left stored for up to one year.

The Dutch government is looking to expand surveillance capability following the latest terrorist attacks in Copenhagen and Paris as well as an increase in homegrown radical Muslims.

Ivo Opstelten, the Dutch minister of security and justice, indicated that data storage is essential to monitoring Jihadist groups and other crime types including child porn networks.

FTC Further Strengthens Antitrust Victory in Healthcare Case

The FTC (Federal Trade Commission) is consistently maintaining a court presence regarding its efforts to halt healthcare mergers it thinks aren't competitive.

A judge-panel from the 9^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals mentioned that an Idaho federal judge remained on strong round when he ruled that 2012 deal of St. Luke’s Health System with the Saltzer Medical Group could push to higher pricing for medical services.

The 9^th Circuit indicated that when a merger in healthcare happens it risks higher pricing. At the same time it’s not enough to prove that a merger would let the current system serve patients better.

St. Luke’s pointed out that the merger would let it offer improved healthcare as well as enhanced electronic sharing of medical records. The court of appeals, however, showed findings that St. Luke’s isn’t required to purchase a new group of doctors to take in a different and new approach.