Tag: Lawyers

  • Telangana: Peddapalli Bar Association roars against attacks on lawyers

    Telangana: Peddapalli Bar Association roars against attacks on lawyers

    [ad_1]

    Hyderabad: Claiming increasing attacks on advocates in Telangana, the representatives of the Manthani Peddapalli Bar Association have appealed to Bar Associations across the state to observe February 17 as a ‘Block Day’ every year.

    The move denotes their protest against the Telangana government’s leisure and ignorance towards crimes allied with the lawyer’s fraternity.

    They have urged the state government to bring the ‘Advocate Protection Act’ immediately while asking bar associations across the state not to withstand the state ignoring their threats.

    “All learned brothers are well aware that the brutal attacks on our brother Advocates who fight for the cause of justice. Nowadays, it has become common that threatening Advocates, attack them and even kill them,” read their appeal.

    Remarking on an incident from February 2021, where a High Court lawyer Gattu Vaman Rao and his wife Nagmani were waylaid and stabbed to death by a group of assailants in daylight in the Manthani area, the official held that the charges against the culprits have not been framed to date.

    “The family members of the deceased lawyers are still continuing their fight with a demand of further detailed enquiry to bring real culprits into light, who are the masterminds and behind the murder incident,” plighted the officials in their letter.

    Subscribe us on The Siasat Daily - Google News

    [ad_2]
    #Telangana #Peddapalli #Bar #Association #roars #attacks #lawyers

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • ‘A judge judged everyday by lawyers, public’, SC on appointment of Madras HC judge

    ‘A judge judged everyday by lawyers, public’, SC on appointment of Madras HC judge

    [ad_1]

    New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday said a judge is judged everyday by the lawyers, litigants and the public, as the courts are open and the judges speak by giving reasons in writing for their decisions, while giving detailed reasons for not entertaining two pleas filed against appointment of L.C. Victoria Gowri as judge of the Madras High Court.

    A bench comprising justices Sanjiv Khanna and B.R. Gavai said: “Principle of secularism and dignity of every individual – regardless of the religion, caste or creed, is the foundation of Rule of Law and equal protection of laws.”

    It further added: “Not only is the conduct and judgments delivered considered at the time of confirmation, a judge is judged everyday by the lawyers, litigants and the public, as the courts are open and the judges speak by giving reasons in writing for their decisions”.

    The petitioners alleged that Gowri made “hate speeches” against Christians and Muslims and therefore, she was unfit to the post.

    The bench said there have been cases where the persons recommended for elevation have expressed reservations or even criticised policies or actions, but this has not been held to be a ground to treat them as unsuitable.

    The apex court said Article 51A of the Constitution casts an obligation on every citizen, and more so on every judge, to promote harmony, spirit of common brotherhood among all transcending religious, linguistic, regional or sectional diversities.

    The bench said the person in question has been elevated as an additional judge and “on taking oath the person pledges to work as a judge to uphold the Constitution and the laws”. On February 7, the court had dismissed the petitions.

    The bench said it goes without saying that the conduct of the judge and her/his decisions must reflect and show independence, adherence to the democratic and constitutional values.

    “This is necessary as the judiciary holds the centre stage in protecting and strengthening democracy and upholding human rights and Rule of Law,” it added.

    The bench noted that exercising power of judicial review upon the collegium decision would be contrary to the dictum of earlier decisions of the apex court, which are binding upon it.

    “To do so would violate the law as declared, as it would amount to evaluating and substituting the decision of the collegium, with individual or personal opinion on the suitability and merits of the person,” it said.

    The bench said: “We need to state that after the collegium of the High Court makes a recommendation for elevation, inputs are received from the intelligence agencies, which conduct a background check, and comments from the government are considered by the collegium of the Supreme Court consisting of the Chief Justice of India and two senior most Judges. Opinion and comments of the Judges in this Court conversant with the affairs of the High Court concerned are called for in writing and placed before the collegium.”

    It further added that invariably a number of shoot down and dismissive letters and communications from all quarters are received.

    “Only thereafter, and on consideration, the collegium of the Supreme Court takes a final call, which is then communicated to the government,” the bench said.

    [ad_2]
    #judge #judged #everyday #lawyers #public #appointment #Madras #judge

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Lawyers for U.S., Navy Seals battle over revoked Covid-19 vaccine mandate

    Lawyers for U.S., Navy Seals battle over revoked Covid-19 vaccine mandate

    [ad_1]

    covid 19 military vaccines 81772

    The appeals court issued no immediate rulings Monday.

    Justice Department attorney Casen Ross urged the appeals court to set aside as moot preliminary injunctions a federal judge in Texas issued early last year against the Biden administration policy requiring service members to receive a coronavirus vaccine unless granted a religious exemption.

    Ross said the National Defense Authorization Act passed in December effectively reversed that policy and rendered the injunctions against the policy moot. Lawmakers acted to nix the military vaccine mandate over the opposition of President Joe Biden, who signed the broader defense measure anyway. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin formally repealed the orders related to the policy last month.

    “This court should accordingly follow its routine practice and vacate those injunctions because these appeals have become moot,” Ross said.

    The Supreme Court stepped in last March to block a portion of the injunctions, essentially giving the military unfettered authority to make deployment decisions. The Biden administration did not ask the high court to disturb portions of the injunctions prohibiting discipline or removal of service members who refused to get vaccinated or said it violated their religious beliefs.

    Three conservative justices dissented from that decision. However, Justice Brett Kavanaugh backed it, saying it was in keeping with a tradition of giving the president broad authority over the military.

    However, at Monday’s arguments, Judge James Ho said he didn’t think the policy was about military needs at all.

    “It was about a vaccine policy for the entire country or at least a large percentage. … So, this was not a military decision. This was a social policy decision,” declared Ho, an appointee of President Donald Trump. “There’s no discussion of military readiness or anything. It’s a perhaps debatable or worthy vaccine mandate policy discussion we can have, but it doesn’t sound in military necessity or military readiness. It sounds in social policy.”

    Ho also suggested that Biden’s stated desire to maintain the policy meant it was possible it could return in the future.

    “This change is a policy you all vociferously oppose. So, it sort of seems weird to say that there’s no controversy anymore,” the judge said.

    While Ho sounded inclined to leave the injunctions in place, another judge on the panel, James Graves, seemed to be considering wiping them out while letting the litigation continue in the district court. Graves, an appointee of President Barack Obama, asked repeatedly whether the injunctions were actually blocking any policy that is currently in effect.

    Judge Kyle Duncan, a Trump appointee, expressed concern that the Navy seemed to have abandoned the religious exemption process it had put in place when the mandate was in effect.

    Ho and Duncan pressed Ross about whether the Justice Department contends the case is completely moot or whether the service members can continue to press their legal battle in the lower court. Ross took the unusual tack of declining to say, even though a filing addressing that issue is due in the district court later Monday.

    “The government hasn’t made a filing yet in that case, and, so, I think it would be premature for me to make any representation to this court,” Ross said. “We have a number of hours before it’s actually due. So, I don’t want to get in front of those litigators.”

    [ad_2]
    #Lawyers #U.S #Navy #Seals #battle #revoked #Covid19 #vaccine #mandate
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Washington Post lawyers are deposing ex-Nunes aides in libel suit about 2017 White House visit

    Washington Post lawyers are deposing ex-Nunes aides in libel suit about 2017 White House visit

    [ad_1]

    election 2024 trump 85403

    In late 2020, Nunes sued The Post. He alleges in his complaint that a Post story published earlier that year — that labeled Nunes’ visit to the White House a “midnight run” aimed at buttressing Trump’s baseless claims that he had his “wires tapped” while he was a candidate for president — was erroneous and intended to imply nefariousness. The Post report came amid escalating probes related to the Trump campaign’s contacts with Russia, and as Trump attacked intelligence agencies pursuing the matter.

    After the story was published, The Post added a correction to the top of it, noting that Nunes had stated he did not believe the wiretapping claims and that his visit to the White House “took place during daylight hours.”

    The litigation is one of a flurry of lawsuits Nunes filed against news outlets, and Post attorneys have accused him in court of wielding the litigation for political and fundraising purposes. They have told the judge in their case that they are seeking evidence from Nunes and his aides about both the circumstances of the 2017 White House trip, which could help prove the accuracy of the paper’s reporting, as well as evidence about how Nunes has sought to benefit from the litigation.

    Among the evidence The Post has obtained is an official visitor log showing that Nunes arrived at the White House at 5:30 p.m. on March 21. Nunes estimates he remained for about 90 minutes before attending a Republican Party function and then an afterparty with constituents and a House colleague at the time, former Rep. George Holding (R-N.C.)

    But during the nearly two-hour hearing on Wednesday, U.S. District Court Judge Carl Nichols chided Nunes and his attorney, Steven Biss, for what he described as incomplete responses to The Post’s demands for information about the 2017 White House trip. The Post had asked — and Nichols ordered — Nunes to produce a detailed itinerary about his whereabouts and actions on March 21, 2017, and received just three paragraphs in response, omitting key details about where he was and who he was with.

    “That’s not a timeline — that could not be more general,” Nichols complained to Biss.

    Biss filled in some of those details at Wednesday’s hearing, prompting Nichols to suggest the information should have been turned over to The Post.

    “This isn’t about telling me orally what you think happened,” said the judge, who is a Trump appointee.

    The Post contended that Nunes’ limited production of information about his White House visit defied credulity. He told the paper that only his former spokesman, Jack Langer, had relevant details about that trip and that he never emailed, texted or spoke to any other aides or colleagues about it. Biss indicated that Nunes couldn’t recall precisely how he arranged the visit but believed he coordinated it with Ellis on a “classified” phone line and treated even the logistical details about the visit as classified.

    “Everything related to that meeting was classified,” Biss insisted.

    But Nichols noted that Nunes discussed the visit publicly the next day. And Post attorney Nicholas Gamse said that Ellis’ own deposition contradicted aspects of that story. Ellis, he said, recalled stepping out of a secure room to reach Nunes on his personal phone, not a classified line. And Ellis told the paper that he might have texted with Nunes about it, as well. Yet Nunes produced no call records or texts in response to the court’s discovery order.

    Gamse contended that Nunes’ claim to have so little to produce in response to the court’s order beggared belief. Ellis, he said, also recalled discussing the documents Nunes reviewed with other Nunes staffers on the House Intelligence Committee. And Nunes provided no details about when and how he departed from the White House to attend the GOP function, including whether he traveled with anyone or took a car, for which a receipt might be available.

    “We have not gotten a straight answer,” Gamse complained.

    Nichols said he intended to rule on The Post’s complaints quickly to keep the case moving forward.

    Biss countered The Post’s concerns by suggesting that there simply wasn’t much for Nunes to produce. He didn’t discuss his White House visit with any staffers, never traded emails or texts with them about it, and asked his former aides to check for information, only to hear that they had none, the lawyer said.

    Post attorneys, however, said they obtained at least one text message from Nunes’ former deputy chief of staff, Caitlin Shannon, and a detailed itinerary from Morrow, his scheduler, that Nunes hadn’t turned over in the case. The newspaper’s lawyers also raised concerns that some evidence that might have been relevant might have been destroyed when Nunes resigned his congressional seat at the end of 2021 and staffers returned their official devices.

    Biss also disclosed on Wednesday that he and Nunes considered filing suit against at least one other news organization over its reporting on the disputed White House visit. The attorney did not identify which other outlet Nunes considered suing.

    [ad_2]
    #Washington #Post #lawyers #deposing #exNunes #aides #libel #suit #White #House #visit
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Police beat African-American man like ‘human pinata’: Lawyers

    Police beat African-American man like ‘human pinata’: Lawyers

    [ad_1]

    Washington: A 29-year-old African-American man, who died on January 10 of unspecified injuries just three days after he was stopped by police in Memphis for reckless driving, was beaten like a “human pinata”, according to lawyers for the victim’s family.

    The Memphis Police Department has fired five officers — Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Emmitt Martin III, Desmond Mills, Jr. and Justin Smith — following the incident on January 7, reports the BBC.

    All the five officers are African-American.

    On Monday, Tyre Nichols’ family watched footage of his encounter with police and described a violent, disturbing scene.

    “My son was a beautiful soul,” Rowvaughn Wells, the victim’s mother told mediapersons. “Nobody is perfect, but he was damn near.”

    She said he had not used drugs, nor carried weapons, and did not like confrontation and called his death a “murder” by police.

    The day Nichols was stopped by Memphis police, he had been on his way to Shelby Farms Park, Wells said, where “he liked to skateboard and watch each evening’s sunset”.

    City officials have said police officers pulled over Nichols for reckless driving and that two “confrontations” occurred during the stop.

    According to authorities, the first happened as officers approached the vehicle being driven by Mr Nichols, and he attempted to flee on foot.

    They said the second confrontation happened when officers tried to arrest him.

    Nichols then complained of shortness of breath and was taken by ambulance to hospital, police said, where he was listed in a critical condition.

    Officials said Nichols had “succumbed to his injuries” on January 10, but they provided no further detail.

    An official cause of death has not yet been disclosed.

    At the Monday press conference, a lawyer for the Nichols family, Antonio Romanucci, described the encounter as “an unadulterated, unabashed, non-stop beating of this young boy for three minutes”.

    “Not only was it violent, it was savage,” the BBC quoted Romanucci as saying.

    Nichols had tried to escape police to run home, his family said, alleging he was beaten by police less than 73 metres from his mother’s house, where he lived.

    [ad_2]
    #Police #beat #AfricanAmerican #man #human #pinata #Lawyers

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )