Other Decisions: Decided
Decided - The FindLaw Noteworthy Decisions and Settlements Blog

Recently in Other Category

Lately, we've heard a lot of discourse and protest about excessive use of police violence against minorities. However, there is an equally vulnerable minority group, the mentally ill and disabled, who are also frequent victims of police force.

In the case of City and County of San Francisco v. Sheehan, the Supreme Court considered whether Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act requires police to provide accommodations to armed and violent mentally ill suspects. The Court also looked at whether the Fourth Amendment clearly establishes that officers cannot forcibly enter the home of an armed, mentally ill subject when there was no immediate need.

In its ruling, the Court sidestepped both issues.

Some former Boeing employees may soon finally receive the benefits of a 10-year long class action lawsuit. Talk about perseverance.

Boeing and the Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace (SPEEA) have agreed on a settlement 10 years after the suit was filled. Boeing will pay $90 million to cover pension and retiree health benefits to former Boeing Co. employees.

Oral arguments before the Supreme Court for the October 2014 Term have ended. Now, the justices and clerks will focus on writing decisions for all the cases heard this term.

Usually, decisions are issued about 90 days after they're heard. However, there are several cases beyond the 90 day average, and we've heard of no decision yet. Maybe they're extra special?

Here are three Supreme Court decisions we're eagerly awaiting:

The Supreme Court upheld a rule prohibiting judges from soliciting funds for their own election campaigns. The Florida Bar had disciplined Lanell Williams-Yulee for mailing and posting a letter online requesting financial contributions to her campaign.

The 5-4 decision united an odd group of justices, and may ask more questions than it answered. So let's take a look at what the Court said, through the opposing opinions.

I'm not saying I did anything wrong, but here's some money.

A group of investors sued Sprint in a class action lawsuit accusing the company of lying to investors about Sprint's merger with Nextel Communications. Sprint recently agreed to settle the lawsuit and pay $131 million, cash, but denied all liability.

We break down quite a few legal decisions on our blogs, and we post some of them over on Courtside. So when you're looking at a court ruling we've published or reading one issued in a case you're involved in, how do you know what you're looking for?

Courts can publish in different formats and employ a lot of "legalese," so here are a few tips on how to read a court decision.

Remember that massive Target data breach in 2013? Well, some victims may soon be getting a payout for their troubles.

A Minnesota judge has granted preliminary approval of $10 million settlement in a class-action lawsuit against Target. The 2013 data breach may have affected up to 40 million credit and debit card numbers and the personal information of 61 million people. This settlement is in addition to free credit monitoring that Target has already offered its customers.

What does this mean for you? Here's what you need to know:

I've got good news and bad news. The good news: If you've recently gotten one of 24,000 red-light camera tickets in Broward County, Florida, it may have just been dismissed. The bad news: The county just lost about $6.3 million in potential revenue.

Two Broward County judges this week dismissed 24,000 red-light tickets after the red-light camera program was challenged in court for breaking a Florida state law, the ABA Journal reports.

How did so many people get so lucky?

Don't post sexually explicit pictures of a minor on a revenge porn website. Even more importantly, don't ignore the lawsuit when you get sued!

Eric Chanson and Kevin Bollaert, owners of the (now-defunct) revenge porn website YouGotPosted.com, must now pay a $900,000 default judgment to a young girl whose pictures were posted on the site.

What did they do, and what is a default judgment?

Calif.'s Foie Gras Ban Struck Down by Federal Judge

A federal judge has struck down California's ban on foie gras on the grounds that it conflicts with federal poultry regulations.

California's ban on the controversial French delicacy was first signed into law in 2004, taking effect in 2012. But on Wednesday, U.S. District Court Judge Stephen Wilson sided with a group of restaurants, foie gras producers, and farmers who argued that the California law was unconstitutional, reports the Los Angeles Times.

What led to the ruling, and what does it mean for foie gras fans in California?