Court Backs Ruling Against Congressman
Headline News
The long legal fight between two members of Congress over an illegally taped telephone call ended Monday when the Supreme Court refused to review the case.
The court left in place a federal appeals court ruling that Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., should not have given reporters access to the tape-recorded telephone call of Republican leaders discussing the House ethics case against former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga, in December 1996.
McDermott asked the justices to hear his appeal of the May ruling, which he said infringed on his free speech rights. The court did not comment on its action.
The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, in a 5-4 decision, said McDermott's offense was especially egregious since he was a senior member of the House ethics committee at the time.
The ruling upheld a previous decision ordering McDermott to pay House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, more than $700,000 for leaking the taped conversation. The figure includes $60,000 in damages and more than $600,000 in legal costs.
Boehner was among several GOP leaders heard on the December 1996 call, which involved ethics allegations against Gingrich. Then the House speaker, Gingrich was heard on the call telling Boehner and others how to react to allegations. He was later fined $300,000 and reprimanded by the House.
McDermott, who was then serving on the ethics panel, leaked the tape to two newspapers, which published stories on the case in January 1997.
Related listings
-
Lawyer in Katrina Case Faces Bribery Charge
Headline News 11/29/2007A 40 percent contingency fee negotiated by a Manhattan law firm retained by the widow of a real estate developer involved in a multimillion-dollar estate dispute was not "unconscionable on its face," an appeals court ruled yesterday.The court said th...
-
Law Firms Face New Rules on Retirement
Headline News 11/28/2007With hordes of attorneys poised to assume senior status, achieving a consensus among partners to ditch mandatory retirement policies is just the first step -- and perhaps the easiest -- in switching to what many say is a fairer system. Kirkpatrick &a...
-
High-Profile Lawyer Sentenced for Taxes
Headline News 11/27/2007A civil rights lawyer known for his high-profile cases against police and President Bush was sentenced Tuesday to three years in prison for federal tax evasion, bankruptcy fraud and money laundering.Stephen Yagman, 63, was convicted of trying to avoi...
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.