Supreme Court Backs Police in Chase Case
Lawyer Blogs
[##_1L|1318291473.jpg|width="180" height="122" alt=""|_##]The Supreme Court on Monday gave police officers protection from lawsuits that result from high-speed car chases, ruling against a Georgia teenager who was paralyzed after his car was run off the road. In a case that turned on a video of the chase in suburban Atlanta, Justice Antonin Scalia said law enforcement officers do not have to call off pursuit of a fleeing motorist when they reasonably expect that other people could be hurt.
Rather, officers can take measures to stop the car without putting themselves at risk of civil rights lawsuits.
"A police officer's attempt to terminate a dangerous high-speed car chase that threatens the lives of innocent bystanders does not violate the Fourth Amendment, even when it places the fleeing motorist at risk of serious injury or death," Scalia said.
The court sided 8-1 with former Coweta County sheriff's deputy Timothy Scott, who rammed a fleeing black Cadillac on a two-lane, rain-slicked road in March 2001.
Victor Harris (nyse: HRS - news - people ), the 19-year-old driver of the Cadillac, lost control and his car ended up at the bottom of an embankment.
Harris, paralyzed, sued Scott.
Lower federal courts ruled the lawsuit could proceed, but the Supreme Court said Monday that it could not. Justice John Paul Stevens dissented.
In an unusual move, the court posted the dramatic video on its Web site.
Related listings
-
U.S. court to decide case of Mexican on death row
Lawyer Blogs 04/30/2007[##_1L|1029053113.jpg|width="130" height="98" alt=""|_##]The U.S. Supreme Court said on Monday it would decide whether President George W. Bush had the authority to direct a state court to comply with an international tribunal's ruling in the case of...
-
UGA settles harassment lawsuit involving athletes
Lawyer Blogs 04/28/2007The University of Georgia reached an out-of-court settlement with a former student who filed a 25 million dollar sexual harassment lawsuit.The woman -- Tiffany Williams -- claimed U-G-A officials were slow to respond to an alleged assault involving t...
-
Bush Vows to Veto Iraq Troop Withdrawal
Lawyer Blogs 04/28/2007President Bush warned Congress Friday that he will continue vetoing war spending bills as long as they contain a timetable for the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. Speaking a day after the Democratic-controlled Congress approved legislation t...
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.