Kansas SC suspends former AG’s law license indefinitely | Legal Newsline

Today's post was shared by Legal Newsline and comes from legalnewsline.com

The Kansas Supreme Court has suspended former state Attorney General Phill Kline’s law license indefinitely. The high court released its decision Friday. Kline “As fully detailed below, after reviewing each instance of misconduct found by the panel, we find clear and convincing evidence that Kline committed 11 (Kansas Rules of Professional Conduct) violations,” according to the court’s per curiam opinion. “In assessing discipline, we have considered the facts and circumstances of each violation; the ethical duties violated by Kline to the public, the legal system, and the legal profession; the knowing nature of his misconduct; the injury that resulted from the misconduct; the existence of aggravating and mitigating factors; and the applicable advisory American Bar Association Standards for imposing discipline. “Ultimately, after applying that framework, we reject the Disciplinary Administrator’s suggestion of disbarment and conclude Kline’s misconduct warrants indefinite suspension, the discipline recommended by the panel.” In October 2011, a panel for the Kansas Board for Discipline of Attorneys recommended that Kline should have his state law license suspended indefinitely. Kline served as the state’s top lawyer from 2003 to 2007, and as Johnson County District Attorney from 2007 to 2009. The three-member panel pointed to Kline’s actions during investigations of abortion...

[Click here to see the rest of this post]

Found on

Related articles

• Raising the mandatory judicial retirement age to 80 (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• ABA president, others express concern over shutdown's effects on judiciary (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• N.Y. AG announces order against major tobacco companies (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• Judge denies jury trial in Chevron RICO case (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• Closing arguments in Calif. lead paint trial take place Monday (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• Thirty-one federal court facilities to be downsized (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• BP claims investigation finds attorney took $40K kickback in exchange for expediting nearly $8M claim (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)

Tribunal finds Chevron not liable for environmental claims in Ecuador

Today's post was shared by Legal Newsline and comes from legalnewsline.com

Chevron Corp. announced Wednesday that an international arbitration tribunal has found the company not liable for environmental claims in Ecuador. The tribunal is convened under the authority of the U.S.-Ecuador Bilateral Investment Treaty, also known as the BIT, and administered by the Permanent Court of Arbitration. The PCA, located in The Hague, Netherlands, administers cases arising out of international treaties and other agreements to arbitrate. On Tuesday, the tribunal issued a partial award in favor of Chevron and its subsidiary, Texaco Petroleum Company, or TexPet. The tribunal found that the settlement and release agreements that the government of Ecuador entered into with TexPet released TexPet and its affiliates of any liability for all public interest or collective environmental claims. The arbitration stems from Ecuador’s interference in the ongoing environmental lawsuit against the company. “The game is up. This award by an eminent international tribunal confirms that the fraudulent claims against Chevron should not have been brought in the first place,” Hewitt Pate, Chevron’s vice president and general counsel, said in a statement. “It is now beyond question that efforts by American plaintiffs lawyers and the government of Ecuador to enforce this fraudulent judgment violate Ecuadorian, U.S. and international law. “Continuing to support this fraud only increases the government of...

[Click here to see the rest of this post]

Related articles

• N.Y. AG announces order against major tobacco companies (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• Chevron pleads no contest to criminal charges stemming from Richmond refinery fire (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• Federal arbitration board orders FEMA to pay New Orleans Katrina responders (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• BP claims investigation finds attorney took $40K kickback in exchange for expediting nearly $8M claim (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• Garlock testimony switches to financial liability (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• Fla. appeals court says $33M in damages to smoker's widow not excessive (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
• 9th Circuit Vacates MSP Injunction Against CMS for Medicare Reimbursement (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)

Found on

Plaintiffs in Calif. lead paint case say companies’ witnesses were ‘not persuasive’

The lead paint industry has not yet come to the table to settle the public health nightmare of lead pigment in paint. Soon California may change the economics of the problem. Today's post was shared by Legal Newsline and comes from legalnewsline.com

SAN JOSE, Calif. (Legal Newsline) — The plaintiffs in a six-week trial over lead paint — 10 cities and counties in California — argue that the one-time paint and pigment manufacturers they’re suing have not presented a “persuasive” case. The cities and counties — Santa Clara County, San Francisco City, Alameda County, Los Angeles County, Monterey County, Oakland City, San Diego City, San Mateo County, Solano County and Ventura County — filed their 52-page statement of decision with the Santa Clara County Superior Court Friday. Friday was the deadline for all parties in the lead paint trial, which wrapped up last month, to submit their proposed statements of decision, as requested by Judge James Kleinberg. Kleinberg is presiding over The People of California v. Atlantic Richfield Company et al. Kleinberg In their statement of decision, the plaintiffs argue that their witnesses were “credible,” and that the defendants’ witnesses — which refuted evidence offered by the cities and counties — were “not persuasive.” “Defendants contend that ‘intact’ lead paint does not present a hazard. The Court finds that the evidence demonstrates otherwise,” the plaintiffs wrote in their statement and proposed order. “Lead paint on high friction surfaces presents an immediate hazard, even if it is presently intact, because normal use causes the paint to degrade, exposing young...

[Click here to see the rest of this post]

Found on