<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl" type="text/xsl" media="screen"?><?xml-stylesheet href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css" type="text/css" media="screen"?><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">

<channel>
	<title>Aramation Law</title>
	
	<link>http://www.aramation.com/law</link>
	<description>laws, lawyers, cases and more...</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:05:37 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/AramationLaw" type="application/rss+xml" /><item>
		<title>Verdict: Exxon Valdez ruling overturned (US Supreme Court, 2008)</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~3/319770708/</link>
		<comments>http://www.aramation.com/law/2008/06/25/verdict-exxon-valdez-ruling-overturned-us-supreme-court-2008/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:05:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Aram</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[2008]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[USSC]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aramation.com/law/2008/06/25/verdict-exxon-valdez-ruling-overturned-us-supreme-court-2008/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Supreme Court reversed the Federal Court of Appeal decision awarding $2.5 billion punitive damages in the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster, down to $500 million. Justice David Souter wrote that the punitive damages may not exceed the compensation already paid to victims for economic losses, in a 5-3 decision (Justice Samuel Alito sat out since [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Supreme Court reversed the Federal Court of Appeal decision awarding $2.5 billion punitive damages in the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster, down to $500 million. Justice David Souter wrote that the punitive damages may not exceed the compensation already paid to victims for economic losses, in a 5-3 decision (Justice Samuel Alito sat out since he owns Exxon stocks).</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~4/319770708" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.aramation.com/law/2008/06/25/verdict-exxon-valdez-ruling-overturned-us-supreme-court-2008/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.aramation.com/law/2008/06/25/verdict-exxon-valdez-ruling-overturned-us-supreme-court-2008/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Canada: Search warrant suggests $1.1 million election scheme</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~3/274905454/</link>
		<comments>http://www.aramation.com/law/2008/04/21/canada-search-warrant-suggests-11-million-election-scheme/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2008 19:38:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Aram</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[election]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[search]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aramation.com/law/2008/04/21/canada-search-warrant-suggests-11-million-election-scheme/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last week&#8217;s search warrant on the Conservative Party headquarters, and the accompanying affidavit, suggests the election scheme for 2005-2006 was close to $1.1 million. It is alleged that the national headquarter transferred money to local candidates who immediately sent the money back as &#34;payment&#34; for campaign advertising. 
[Read the full story on The Globe and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Last week&#8217;s search warrant on the Conservative Party headquarters, and the accompanying affidavit, suggests the election scheme for 2005-2006 was close to $1.1 million. It is alleged that the national headquarter transferred money to local candidates who immediately sent the money back as &quot;payment&quot; for campaign advertising. </p>
<p>[<a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080421.wsearchwarrant_new0421/BNStory/National/home" target="_blank" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview ('/outbound/www.theglobeandmail.com');">Read the full story on The Globe and Mail</a>]</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~4/274905454" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.aramation.com/law/2008/04/21/canada-search-warrant-suggests-11-million-election-scheme/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.aramation.com/law/2008/04/21/canada-search-warrant-suggests-11-million-election-scheme/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Canada: Justice Bastarache to retire from Supreme Court</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~3/274905455/</link>
		<comments>http://www.aramation.com/law/2008/04/09/canada-justice-bastarache-to-retire-from-supreme-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 20:35:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Aram</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[SCC]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aramation.com/law/?p=14</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Justice Michael Bastarache announced his retirement from the Supreme Court of Canada, almost 15 years before he reaches the mandatory retirement age of 75. He has not given a reason for his retirement, but it is rumored to be his health.
His replacement is set to be chosen in the Atlantic Provinces, potentially before the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img style="border-right: 0px; border-top: 0px; border-left: 0px; border-bottom: 0px" border="0" alt="image" align="right" src="http://www.aramation.com/law/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/image.png" width="240" height="265" /> Justice Michael Bastarache announced his retirement from the Supreme Court of Canada, almost 15 years before he reaches the mandatory retirement age of 75. He has not given a reason for his retirement, but it is rumored to be his health.</p>
<p>His replacement is set to be chosen in the Atlantic Provinces, potentially before the court resumes in October.</p>
<p>[<a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080409.wbastarache0409/BNStory/National/home?cid=al_gam_mostview" target="_blank" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview ('/outbound/www.theglobeandmail.com');">Read full article from The Globe and Mail</a>]</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~4/274905455" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.aramation.com/law/2008/04/09/canada-justice-bastarache-to-retire-from-supreme-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.aramation.com/law/2008/04/09/canada-justice-bastarache-to-retire-from-supreme-court/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Verdict: Princess Diana killed by recklessness of driver and paparazzi</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~3/274905456/</link>
		<comments>http://www.aramation.com/law/2008/04/07/verdict-princess-diana-killed-by-recklessness-of-driver-and-paparazzi/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2008 16:24:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Aram</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[European Union]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[jury]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[verdict]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aramation.com/law/?p=12</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A coroner&#8217;s jury ruled that Princess Diana was killed by recklessness of driver and paparazzi back in 1997. The fact that Princess Diana and Dodi were not wearing seatbelt was a contributing factor according to the jury. 
[Read details on MSNBC]
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A coroner&#8217;s jury ruled that Princess Diana was killed by recklessness of driver and paparazzi back in 1997. The fact that Princess Diana and Dodi were not wearing seatbelt was a contributing factor according to the jury. </p>
<p>[<a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23996067/" target="_blank" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview ('/outbound/www.msnbc.msn.com');">Read details on MSNBC</a>]</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~4/274905456" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.aramation.com/law/2008/04/07/verdict-princess-diana-killed-by-recklessness-of-driver-and-paparazzi/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.aramation.com/law/2008/04/07/verdict-princess-diana-killed-by-recklessness-of-driver-and-paparazzi/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Merger: Justice Department okays XM + Sirius</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~3/274905457/</link>
		<comments>http://www.aramation.com/law/2008/03/25/merger-justice-department-okays-xm-sirius/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2008 17:28:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Aram</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Justice Department]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[merger]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aramation.com/law/?p=11</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Sirius Satellite&#8217;s purchase of XM Satellite Radio was approved today by the Justice Department, making the merger get closer to reality after the deal was originally announced in February 2007. The biggest opposition still remains the National Association of Broadcasters, representing the interests of every AM/FM radio stations and broadcasters in United States.
The last [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img style="border-right: 0px; border-top: 0px; border-left: 0px; border-bottom: 0px" border="0" alt="xmsirius" align="right" src="http://www.aramation.com/law/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/xmsirius.jpg" width="184" height="138" /> Sirius Satellite&#8217;s purchase of XM Satellite Radio was approved today by the Justice Department, making the merger get closer to reality after the deal was originally announced in February 2007. The biggest opposition still remains the National Association of Broadcasters, representing the interests of every AM/FM radio stations and broadcasters in United States.</p>
<p>The last hurdle remains FCC, which made an order all the way back in 1997 that satellite radio provider cannot buy the other.</p>
<p>[<a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idUSWAT00918420080325?feedType=RSS&amp;feedName=technologyNews&amp;pageNumber=1&amp;virtualBrandChannel=10004" target="_blank" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview ('/outbound/www.reuters.com');">Read full news story at Reuters</a>]</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~4/274905457" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.aramation.com/law/2008/03/25/merger-justice-department-okays-xm-sirius/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.aramation.com/law/2008/03/25/merger-justice-department-okays-xm-sirius/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Case: Having threesome with client’s girlfriend</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~3/274905458/</link>
		<comments>http://www.aramation.com/law/2007/11/28/case-having-threesome-with-clients-girlfriend/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2007 21:08:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Aram</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[sex]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aramation.com/law/?p=9</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lawyers have many ethical rules to follow, and one of them in Wisconsin bars them from having sex with &#8220;current clients&#8221;. The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled in October that attorney Michael Inglimo did not violate that specific rule since he had sex with his client&#8217;s girlfriend during a threesome, and regulation bans only direct sex [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lawyers have many ethical rules to follow, and one of them in Wisconsin bars them from having sex with &#8220;current clients&#8221;. The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled in October that attorney Michael Inglimo did not violate that specific rule since he had sex with his client&#8217;s girlfriend during a threesome, and regulation bans only direct sex with the client.</p>
<p>Of particular note is how the judges describe a threesome:</p>
<blockquote><p>Counts 1 and 2 relate to Attorney Inglimo&#8217;s representation of L.K in a criminal case between April 2000 and January 2001. During this representation in October 2000, Attorney Inglimo had sexual relations with L.K.&#8217;s girlfriend in L.K.&#8217;s presence and with L.K. also engaging in sexual relations with his girlfriend during the sexual encounter. The referee further found, however, that there was no evidence that during the encounter there was any intimate physical contact between Attorney Inglimo and L.K.</p></blockquote>
<p>[<a href="http://www.wisbar.org/res/sup/2007/2005ap000718.htm" target="_blank" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview ('/outbound/www.wisbar.org');">Read the entire decision here</a>]</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~4/274905458" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.aramation.com/law/2007/11/28/case-having-threesome-with-clients-girlfriend/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.aramation.com/law/2007/11/28/case-having-threesome-with-clients-girlfriend/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>New trial ordered in baby’s death - Supreme Court of Canada</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~3/274905459/</link>
		<comments>http://www.aramation.com/law/2007/11/08/new-trial-ordered-in-babys-death-supreme-court-of-canada/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:07:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Aram</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Criminal]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[SCC]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aramation.com/law/?p=8</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In an unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of Canada ordered a new trial (but refused to acquit) a couple who was accused of killing their baby. Marco Trotta and Anisa Trotta&#8217;s trial depended heavily on Dr. Charles Smith who has been disgraced for many errors committed during his job as pathologist. The Ontario government called [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In an unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of Canada ordered a new trial (but refused to acquit) a couple who was accused of killing their baby. Marco Trotta and Anisa Trotta&#8217;s trial depended heavily on Dr. Charles Smith who has been disgraced for many errors committed during his job as pathologist. The Ontario government called an inquiry into Dr. Smith works mainly in child autopsy, and several people who have been convicted based on his evidence have been freed.</p>
<p>Marco Trotta already spent 10 years in jail, and was released on bail while his murder conviction was being reviewed by the Supreme Court. The Court ruled that the only way to rectify the situation is to start a new trial.</p>
<p>[<em><a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20071108.wtrotta1108/BNStory/National/home" target="_blank" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview ('/outbound/www.theglobeandmail.com');">Read full story at The Globe and Mail</a></em>]</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~4/274905459" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.aramation.com/law/2007/11/08/new-trial-ordered-in-babys-death-supreme-court-of-canada/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.aramation.com/law/2007/11/08/new-trial-ordered-in-babys-death-supreme-court-of-canada/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Tooth drilling disaster due to “Car Wash”</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~3/274905460/</link>
		<comments>http://www.aramation.com/law/2007/11/02/tooth-drilling-disaster-due-to-car-wash/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2007 23:06:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Aram</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Lawsuit]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[malpractice]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aramation.com/law/?p=6</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[According to the lawsuit filed by Brandy Fanning against Dr. George Trusty, he was performing dental surgery using a drill while dancing to the music Car Wash being played in the radio. The lawsuit alleges that his dancing caused the drill bit to break off and lodge in her sinus. Dr. Trusty&#8217;s attempt to take [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img align="right" src="http://www.aramation.com/law/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/dentaldrill.jpg" alt="Dental Drill" />According to the lawsuit filed by Brandy Fanning against Dr. George Trusty, he was performing dental surgery using a drill while dancing to the music <em>Car Wash </em>being played in the radio. The lawsuit alleges that his dancing caused the drill bit to break off and lodge in her sinus. Dr. Trusty&#8217;s attempt to take out the stuck drill bit caused it to go further into her body, finally settling around the bone near eye socket.</p>
<p>She is claiming $600,000 for her pain and suffering.</p>
<p>[<a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21599495/" target="_blank" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview ('/outbound/www.msnbc.msn.com');">Read the full story on MSNBC</a>]</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~4/274905460" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.aramation.com/law/2007/11/02/tooth-drilling-disaster-due-to-car-wash/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.aramation.com/law/2007/11/02/tooth-drilling-disaster-due-to-car-wash/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Wikipedia cleared in defamation case (France)</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~3/274905461/</link>
		<comments>http://www.aramation.com/law/2007/11/02/wikipedia-cleared-in-defamation-case-france/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2007 18:02:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Aram</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[European Union]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[defamation]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[France]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aramation.com/law/?p=4</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Judge Emmanuel Binoche ruled that Wikipedia cannot be liable for defamation for content that it does not know to be illicit in nature. This protection for web hosts were granted in a 2004 French law, which means web sites aren&#8217;t legally bound to either monitor or investigate the origin of the contents submitted by users [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img align="left" src="http://www.aramation.com/law/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/wikipedia.png" alt="Wikipedia logo" />Judge Emmanuel Binoche ruled that Wikipedia cannot be liable for defamation for content that it does not know to be illicit in nature. This protection for web hosts were granted in a 2004 French law, which means web sites aren&#8217;t legally bound to either monitor or investigate the origin of the contents submitted by users who are not under Wikipedia&#8217;s control.</p>
<p>[<a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idUSL0280486220071102" target="_blank" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview ('/outbound/www.reuters.com');">Read original story on Reuters.com</a>]</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~4/274905461" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.aramation.com/law/2007/11/02/wikipedia-cleared-in-defamation-case-france/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.aramation.com/law/2007/11/02/wikipedia-cleared-in-defamation-case-france/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>FCC frees apartments from Cable monopoly</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~3/274905462/</link>
		<comments>http://www.aramation.com/law/2007/10/31/fcc-frees-apartments-from-cable-monopoly/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2007 17:03:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Aram</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[consumer protection]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[FCC]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aramation.com/law/?p=3</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Monopolies are generally frowned upon, and FCC has now invalidated exclusive Cable contract of apartment buildings. The Federal Communications Commission unanimously banned exclusive agreements with hope that this will lead to healthier competition and ultimately cheaper rates for residents.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Monopolies are generally frowned upon, and FCC has now invalidated exclusive Cable contract of apartment buildings. <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21529079/" target="_blank" onclick="javascript:pageTracker._trackPageview ('/outbound/www.msnbc.msn.com');">The Federal Communications Commission unanimously banned exclusive agreements </a>with hope that this will lead to healthier competition and ultimately cheaper rates for residents.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AramationLaw/~4/274905462" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.aramation.com/law/2007/10/31/fcc-frees-apartments-from-cable-monopoly/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.aramation.com/law/2007/10/31/fcc-frees-apartments-from-cable-monopoly/</feedburner:origLink></item>
	</channel>
</rss>
