High court won't extend Calif. prison deadline
Lawyer Blogs
The Supreme Court on Friday turned down California's request to delay a federal court order related to state prison overcrowding.
The justices refused to extend a deadline beyond Sept. 18 for telling a special three-judge panel how California will reduce its inmate population by 40,000, roughly a quarter, over two years.
The judges called for the reduction so the state can improve medical and mental health care for inmates in its 33 adult prisons. The federal courts have found the care so poor that it violates inmates' constitutional rights.
While rejecting the state's plea for a delay, the court noted that the three-judge panel has agreed not to put a final order into effect until after the justices have had a chance to review its decree.
The special three-judge panel had rejected California's request for a delay earlier this month, sending the matter to the high court.
In addition to its failed request for a delay, the Schwarzenegger administration is appealing to the Supreme Court the panel's inmate-release order. It has been joined by Republican legislators and associations representing prosecutors, sheriffs, police chiefs and chief probation officers.
The administration argues that the federal courts are overreaching in their effort to direct the state's affairs and are violating a federal law that restricts judges' actions in inmates rights cases
Related listings
-
Court: Employer must pay for weight-loss surgery
Lawyer Blogs 09/11/2009The Indiana Court of Appeals has ruled that a pizza shop must pay for weight-loss surgery for an obese employee to ensure the success of another operation for a back injury he suffered at work.The decision is raising concern among businesses bracing ...
-
Balsillie, NHL fight for Coyotes ownership
Lawyer Blogs 09/10/2009Finally, auction day has come for the Phoenix Coyotes. It's two days, actually.The NHL franchise is to be sold at auction in a two-day hearing that began Thursday in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in downtown Phoenix.Only two bids have been made.One by Canadi...
-
Court: Microsoft OK to sell Word during appeal
Lawyer Blogs 09/08/2009The U.S. Appeals Court for the Federal Circuit says Microsoft Corp. can keep selling its Word desktop software as it appeals an unfavorable patent ruling.In May, a Texas district court said some versions of Microsoft's word processing software infrin...
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.