Summary of Supreme Court actions Wednesday
Headline News
_ Ruled for employers who want to force unionized workers to pursue their age discrimination claims through arbitration instead of a federal lawsuit. The court, in a 5-4 decision, said an arbitration agreement negotiated between an employer and a union that strips them of their option to take complaints to court is binding on workers. The dissenting justices said the high court in the past ruled that unions cannot bargain away employees' federal forum rights in discrimination cases.
_ Said the federal government should pay federally appointed lawyers for working on state clemency requests for death row inmates. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati had said that the law does not allow federal public defenders to be paid for working on state clemency requests. The high court disagreed and reversed that decision on a 7-2 vote.
_ Ruled that the government may consider cost in deciding whether to order power plants to undertake environmental upgrades that would protect fish. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York said that the Clean Water Act does not allow cost to be used when deciding what technology would best minimize environmental impacts. But Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for a 6-3 majority, said even the appeals court and environmentalists "concede that some form of cost-benefit analysis is permitted."
Related listings
-
Coleman won't rule out appeal if loses Senate case
Headline News 03/26/2009Republican Norm Coleman, trying to regain his U.S. Senate seat, visited the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday and didn't rule out an appeal if a Minnesota court rules against him in his recount battle against Democrat Al Franken. One of Minnesota's two Senate ...
-
Philadelphia law firm disbands, citing economy
Headline News 03/23/2009A major Philadelphia law firm founded in 1903 is disbanding, citing the economic crisis. WolfBlock LLP has more than 300 lawyers. The firm announced Monday that the partners have voted to shut down, but not immediately. They plan to keep operating fo...
-
Supreme Court narrows minority district protections
Headline News 03/09/2009The Supreme Court ruled Monday that electoral districts must have a majority of African-Americans or other minorities to be protected by a provision of the Voting Rights Act.The 5-4 decision, with the court's conservatives in the majority, could make...
Is Now the Time to Really Call a Special Education Lawyer?
IDEA, FAPE, CHILD FIND and IEPs: The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) guarantees all children with disabilities to a free appropriate public education (FAPE). FAPE starts with a school’s responsibility to identify that a child has a disability (Child Find) and create an Individualized Education Program (IEP) to suit the needs of the child.
Forte Law Group is one of only a very few law firms within the state of Connecticut that is dedicated to exclusively representing families and children with special needs.
Parents need to be persistent, dedicated and above all else aware of the many services and accommodations that their child is entitled to under the law. As early as this point within your child’s special education, many parents will often find themselves in the situation asking, “is now the time to really call a special education lawyer?” Here are a few things to consider when asking yourself that question.