|
|
|
Class-action lawsuit filed against Mountain State
Legal Line News |
2012/07/20 12:11
|
Three students are suing Mountain State University, former President Charles Polk and the Board of Trustees over the school's revoked accreditation, saying it renders their degrees worthless.
Dale Burger and his two children, Amanda and Jeff Burger, are seeking class-action status for their case, filed late Wednesday in Kanawha County Circuit Court.
Some 3,000 students were enrolled as of April, the lawsuit says. But the plaintiffs contend that the class should cover anyone who enrolled since July 10, 2008. That's when the school first learned it might be in trouble.
The lawsuit says Mountain State told students it was in sound shape when it knew otherwise.
A spokesman declined comment on the lawsuit Thursday.
The private Beckley-based school has campuses in West Virginia, Florida, North Carolina and Pennsylvania.
Mountain State is appealing the Higher Learning Commission's decision to withdraw general accreditation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Solar firm that got DOE loan to declare bankruptcy
Legal Line News |
2012/07/01 14:59
|
A Colorado-based solar panel maker that received a $400 million loan guarantee from the Obama administration said Thursday it will file for bankruptcy, the latest setback for an industry battered by the recession and stiff competition from companies in China. Abound Solar of Loveland, Colo., said it will suspend operations next week, after talks with potential buyers broke down. The company received about $70 million from the Energy Department before officials froze its credit line last year. Abound is the third clean-energy company to seek bankruptcy protection after receiving a loan from the Energy Department under the economic stimulus law. California solar panel maker Solyndra and Beacon Power, a Massachusetts energy-storage firm, declared bankruptcy last year. Solyndra received a $528 million federal loan, while Beacon Power got a $43 million loan guarantee. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Etan Patz suspect's court date postponed to Oct. 1
Legal Line News |
2012/06/21 12:10
|
Prosecutors made it clear Wednesday they are still investigating and assessing a case against a man charged in a notorious 1979 child disappearance, agreeing with his lawyer to postpone a court date for three months for both sides to keep gathering information.
Pedro Hernandez had been due in court Monday as doctors evaluate his mental fitness for trial in the murder case surrounding Etan Patz, one of the first missing children whose picture ever appeared on a milk carton. But the Manhattan district attorney's office said Wednesday that both sides had agreed to put off Hernandez's appearance to Oct. 1 "to allow all parties to proceed with their investigations in a measured and fair manner."
Hernandez's lawyer, Harvey Fishbein, declined to comment.
Postponing court dates is far from unusual. But the three-month timeframe appears to allow plenty of time for both sides to see what information might be available to strengthen — or weaken — a court case that arose from a confession from a man who has struggled with mental illness and hallucinations, according to his lawyer and family. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court will take up wiretaps lawsuit
Legal Line News |
2012/05/22 16:14
|
The Supreme Court says it will consider shutting down a legal challenge to a law that lets the United States eavesdrop on overseas communications.
A federal appeals court ruled last year that a lawsuit filed by lawyers, journalists and human rights groups objecting to the latest version of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act could proceed. But the Obama administration appealed, and the justices said Monday they will take up the case in the fall.
The lawsuit was brought by those in jobs that require them to speak with people overseas who are possible targets of the surveillance.
No court has ruled on the merits of the lawsuit. The current legal fight is over whether the law's challengers are entitled to make their case in federal court.
The administration says the lawsuit should be dismissed because the plaintiffs only have a fear of having their communications intercepted — as opposed to citing specific instances — which the administration says is insufficient for asking federal judges to intervene. The law's challengers, however, argue that they already have taken costly and burdensome steps to protect the confidentiality of their overseas communications, based on a reasonable belief that the government could be monitoring their calls. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal Marketing News RSS
