Court Rules For Private Lawyer Hired By CA City
Lawyer Blogs
The Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that private individuals hired temporarily by local governments have the same protection against civil rights lawsuits as public employees.
Chief Justice John Roberts said Tuesday that it makes no sense to treat people differently because one person is a full-time government employee and another has been retained for a discrete task.
The court sided with attorney Steve Filarsky, who was hired by the city of Rialto, Calif., to investigate the possible misuse of sick leave. Filarsky and several full-time Rialto employees were sued by a firefighter who was under investigation.
Lower courts threw out claims against all the city employees, but the federal appeals court in San Francisco said Filarsky's case was different because he was not employed by Rialto.
Related listings
-
High court turns down Louisiana bid on Census
Lawyer Blogs 03/19/2012The Supreme Court has turned down Louisiana's bid to recover the congressional seat taken from the state as a result of the 2010 Census. The court is not commenting on its order Monday preventing the state from pursuing a lawsuit that claims the Cens...
-
Supreme Court considers Fighting Sioux case
Lawyer Blogs 03/16/2012North 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 lawmak...
-
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 ...
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.