Court: Lawmakers must expedite education funding
Attorneys News
The Washington Supreme Court on Thursday ordered lawmakers to submit a complete plan by the end of April to detail how the state will fully pay for basic education.
The 8-1 ruling said that while the state made progress in last year's budget to increase funding for K-12 education, it was "not on target" to hit the constitutionally required funding level by the 2017-18 school year.
"We have no wish to be forced into entering specific funding directives to the State, or, as some state high courts have done, holding the legislature in contempt of court," read the majority opinion, written by Chief Justice Barbara Madsen. "But, it is incumbent upon the State to demonstrate, through immediate, concrete action, that it is making real and measureable progress, not simply promises."
Joining Madsen were Justices Charles Johnson, Debra Stephens, Susan Owens, Charles Wiggins, Mary Fairhurst, Steven Gonzalez and Sheryl Gordon McCloud. Justice Jim Johnson wrote a separate dissent, which was to be released at a later date.
In 2012, the high court ruled that the state is not meeting its constitutional obligation concerning education funding. That ruling was the result of a lawsuit brought by a coalition of school districts, parents and education groups, known as the McCleary case for the family named in the suit. The court has required yearly progress reports from the Legislature on its efforts. Those reports are then critiqued by the group that brought the lawsuit, and by the Supreme Court.
Related listings
-
Defamatory online posts revisited by Texas court
Attorneys News 01/10/2014They say nothing on the Internet ever really goes away, but the Texas Supreme Court is considering whether defamatory postings might be worth the effort to try. Justices on the state's highest civil court on Thursday weighed broader questions about c...
-
Court-martial date set in Naval Academy case
Attorneys News 11/04/2013A court-martial has been scheduled for February for a U.S. Naval Academy student accused of aggravated sexual assault. Midshipman Josh Tate appeared at an arraignment Monday at the Washington Navy Yard. The court-martial is scheduled to begin Feb. 10...
-
The Law Offices of Craig Hubble - Carson Employment Law
Attorneys News 09/25/2013Carson Employment litigation attorney can assist you in determining the best solution in order for clients to seek recovery in the most efficient and effective manner. Employment litigation can come in various forms, including claims for wrongful ter...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.