New York Man Cleared on "Standing" Charges
Court Alerts
New York state's highest court ruled it was not illegal to stand on a sidewalk, handing a win to a man arrested after refusing to move from the spot where he was standing and talking to friends in busy Times Square.
The New York Court of Appeals decided in favor of Matthew Jones on Tuesday. He was charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest — by flailing his arms — on June 12, 2004. Police said other people "had to walk around" him, and he would not move when asked.
Jones man pleaded guilty to a violation after spending a night in jail, but he later appealed.
In order to prosecute someone for disorderly conduct in New York, the person must be acting "with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof" and obstructing vehicular or pedestrian traffic, according to the opinion written by Judge Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick. The opinion was unanimous.
The court found that Jones' behavior did not meet the definition of disorderly conduct just because he stood in the middle of the sidewalk at 2:01 a.m. with friends.
"Otherwise, any person who happens to stop on a sidewalk — whether to greet another, to seek directions or simply to regain one's bearings — would be subject to prosecution under this statute," the opinion said.
The court also found that Jones could not have resisted arrest because his arrest was not authorized by the law.
Related listings
-
Uzan Family's $1 Billion Upheld by Appeals Court
Court Alerts 11/21/2007A U.S. appeals court upheld a $1 billion punitive damages award to Motorola Inc against the Uzan family of Turkey on Wednesday. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said the lower court "properly applied the variety...
-
CPDC President Pleads Guilty to Obstruction of Audit
Court Alerts 11/19/2007The president of the Los Angeles-based Community Partnership Development Corporation (CPDC) pleaded guilty this morning to charges of obstructing an audit conducted by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, which was looking i...
-
United Rentals Takes Cerberus to Court
Court Alerts 11/19/2007United Rentals filed a lawsuit against Cerberus Capital Management seeking to force the private-equity firm to follow through with its buyout of the rental-equipment company. The suit comes after Cerberus said last week that it wanted to pay a $100 m...
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.