Supreme Court considers Fighting Sioux case
Lawyer Blogs
North Dakota's Supreme Court grilled the state Board of Higher Education's lawyer Thursday about the board's tardiness in challenging a law that requires the University of North Dakota's sports teams to carry the Fighting Sioux nickname.
State lawmakers first approved the pro-nickname law in March 2011. Yet it wasn't until last month, after the law was repealed and then revived in a referendum campaign, that the higher education board sued to block the law, Justice Daniel Crothers said.
"That harm has been there since the statute was passed almost a year ago ... Why now? Why in the face of a referral?" Crothers asked Douglas Bahr, an assistant attorney general who is representing the board, during Supreme Court oral arguments Thursday.
Secretary of State Al Jaeger scheduled a June 12 referendum on the law after nickname backers turned in more than 16,000 petition signatures demanding a ballot.
The law says UND's sports teams must be known as the Fighting Sioux and keep a separate logo that depicts the profile of an American Indian warrior.
NCAA officials have told UND that as long as the nickname and logo are kept, the Grand Forks school may not host NCAA post-season tournaments. Its teams, cheerleaders and band members may not wear them on uniforms during post-season play.
Related listings
-
House acts against high court on eminent domain
Lawyer Blogs 02/29/2012The House sought Tuesday to undercut a 2005 Supreme Court ruling that gives state and local governments eminent domain authority to seize private property for economic development projects. Sponsors of the bill, which passed by a voice vote, said it ...
-
British arms-to-Iran suspect faces Texas court
Lawyer Blogs 02/27/2012A retired British businessman is to appear in a federal court in El Paso after being extradited last week on charges that he tried to sell missile batteries to Iran in 2006. Christopher Tappin turned himself in Friday after fighting extradition from ...
-
Appeals court tosses Armenian payments law
Lawyer Blogs 02/24/2012A federal appeals court on Thursday struck down a novel and controversial California law that allowed descendants of 1.5 million Armenians who perished in Turkey nearly a century ago to file claims against life insurance companies accused of reneging...
Illinois Work Injury Lawyers – Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD.
Accidents in the workplace are often caused by unsafe work conditions arising from ignoring safety rules, overlooking maintenance or other negligence of those in management. While we are one of the largest firms in Illinois dedicated solely to the representation of injured workers, we pride ourselves on the personal, one-on-one approach we deliver to each client.
Work accidents can cause serious injuries and sometimes permanent damage. Some extremely serious work injuries can permanently hinder a person’s ability to get around and continue their daily duties. Factors that affect one’s quality of life such as place of work, relationships with friends and family, and social standing can all be taken away quickly by a work injury. Although, you may not be able to recover all of your losses, you may be entitled to compensation as a result of your work injury. Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD. provides informed advocacy in all kinds of workers’ compensation claims, including:
• Injuries to the back and neck, including severe spinal cord injuries
• Serious head injuries
• Heart problems resulting from workplace activities
• Injuries to the knees, elbows, shoulders and other joints
• Injuries caused by repetitive movements
For Illinois Workers’ Compensation claims, you will ALWAYS cheat yourself if you do not hire an experienced attorney. When you hire Krol, Bongiorno & Given, Ltd, you will have someone to guide you through the process, and when it is time to settle, we will add value to your case IN EXCESS of our fee. In the last few years, employers and insurance carriers have sought to advance the argument that when you settle a case without an attorney, your already low settlement should be further reduced by 20% so that you do not get a “windfall.” Representing yourself in Illinois is a lose-lose proposition.