Va. court: Hookah lounge exempt from smoking ban

A divided Virginia Court of Appeals has ruled that a Blacksburg hookah lounge is exempt from the state's restaurant smoking ban.

In a 6-3 ruling Tuesday, the court said the She-Sha Cafe and Hookah Lounge is not subject to the ban because it's a retail tobacco store as well as a restaurant. She-Sha says most of its revenue comes from customers' use of hookahs - tall water pipes that are used to smoke flavored tobacco.

The state law regulating indoor public smoking covers restaurants but specifically exempts tobacco retailers. The court's majority cited that exemption in ruling in She-Sha's favor.

The decision reverses a three-judge panel's ruling that She-Sha is covered by the ban because it also serves food.

Planned Parenthood Asks Supreme Court's Help In Texas

Planned Parenthood is asking the Supreme Court to place Texas' new abortion restrictions on hold.

The group says in a filing with the high court Monday that more than a third of the clinics in Texas have been forced to stop providing abortions since a court order allowed the new restrictions to take effect Friday.

Planned Parenthood says that the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals went too far in overruling a trial judge who blocked the law's provision that requires doctors who perform abortions in clinics to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital.

The filing was addressed to Justice Antonin Scalia, who oversees emergency matters from Texas.

Appeals court moves BP forward in settlement dispute

The April 2010 blowout of BP's Macondo well off the Louisiana coast triggered an explosion that killed 11 workers on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig and led to millions of gallons of oil spilling into the Gulf. Shortly after the disaster, BP agreed to create a $20 billion compensation fund that was administered at first by the Gulf Coast Claims Facility, led by attorney Kenneth Feinberg.

BP argued that Barbier and court-appointed claims administrator Patrick Juneau misinterpreted terms of the settlement. Plaintiffs' lawyers countered that BP undervalued the settlement and underestimated how many claimants would qualify for payments.

In the panel's majority opinion, Judge Edith Brown Clement said BP has consistently argued that the settlement's complex formula for compensating businesses was intended to cover "real economic losses, not artificial losses that appear only from the timing of cash flows."

"The interests of individuals who may be reaping windfall recoveries because of an inappropriate interpretation of the Settlement Agreement and those who could never have recovered in individual suits for failure to show causation are not outweighed by the potential loss to a company and its public shareholders of hundreds of millions of dollars of unrecoverable awards," Clement wrote.

Judge Leslie Southwick wrote a concurring opinion. Judge James Dennis wrote a partial dissent, largely disagreeing with the other two.

"Because BP has not satisfied its heavy burden of showing that a change in circumstances or law warranted the modifications it sought, the district court correctly affirmed the Administrator's decision rejecting BP's argument and actions to modify the agreement," Dennis wrote.

Court withdraws ruling in BP insurance dispute

A federal appeals court reversed course Thursday on its earlier ruling favoring BP in a multimillion-dollar insurance dispute, handing at least a temporary setback to the energy giant as it seeks to defray some of the enormous costs associated with the huge 2010 Gulf oil spill.

BP has argued that it is entitled to a portion of $750 million in coverage from a drilling contractor's insurance policies to help the London-based multinational help pay pollution-related costs following the explosion, fire and spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

BP leased the drilling rig that exploded from Transocean Ltd. and required by contract that the Swiss-based drilling company maintain minimum insurance coverage for BP's benefit. Transocean's policy with Ranger Insurance Ltd. provided at least $50 million in coverage, while its policies with several "excess liability" insurers added at least another $700 million in coverage.

BP contends it is entitled to coverage under those Transocean policies as an "additional insured" party, but U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier rejected the company's interpretation of the policy language in a November 2010 ruling. Then the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans reversed Barbier's ruling on March 1 in a decision favoring BP.

On Thursday, a three-judge panel of the same New Orleans based appeals court said the outcome of the dispute isn't clear and it would seek answers from the Texas Supreme Court to two questions that could help the federal appeals court ultimately decide the case. For now, Barbier's ruling against BP stands.

Court strikes down Arizona 20-week abortion ban

A federal court in San Francisco Tuesday struck down Arizona's ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the law violates a string of U.S. Supreme Court rulings starting with Roe v. Wade that guarantees a woman's right to an abortion before a fetus is able to survive outside the womb. That's generally considered to be about 24 weeks. Normal pregnancies run about 40 weeks
Several states have enacted similar bans starting at 20 weeks. But the 9th Circuit's ruling is binding only in the nine Western states under the court's jurisdiction. Idaho is the only other state in the region covered by the 9th Circuit with a similar ban.
A trial judge had ruled that the ban could take effect. U.S. District Judge James Teilborg ruled it was constitutional, partly because of concerns about the health of women and possible pain for fetuses.
But abortion-rights groups appealed that decision, saying the 20-week ban would not give some women time to carefully decide whether to abort problem pregnancies.

Court dismisses lawsuits in power plant deaths

The Colorado Court of Appeals has dismissed lawsuits against three companies in the deaths of five workers at a power plant in 2007.

The appeals court agreed Thursday with a judge that there was no evidence that the companies violated duties or failed to provide adequate warnings of a fire hazard.

The workers died after a fire broke out inside a pipeline at Xcel Energy's Cabin Creek hydroelectric plant near Georgetown, about 40 miles west of Denver. The men were inside the pipeline resealing it at the time.

The workers were trapped in the tunnel when a flammable solvent they were using to clean an epoxy paint sprayer ignited on Oct. 2, 2007.

Families of the men and four injured employees sued KTA-Tator Inc., Structural Integrity Associates Inc. and Graco, Inc., claiming the companies were negligent.

The court, however, noted that the sprayer used by the workers carried a warning that "flammable fumes, such as solvent and paint fumes, in (a) work area can ignite or explode" and offered safety options.

The workers communicated by radio for 45 minutes with colleagues and rescue crews. But reaching them would have involved using ropes or ladders to go down a 20-foot vertical section of tunnel then along a 1,000-foot section at a 55-degree slope, to reach the horizontal section where they were located.

Court: Can human genes be patented?

DNA may be the building block of life, but can something taken from it also be the building block of a multimillion-dollar medical monopoly?
The Supreme Court grapples Monday with the question of whether human genes can be patented. Its ultimate answer could reshape U.S. medical research, the fight against diseases like breast and ovarian cancer and the multi-billion dollar medical and biotechnology business.
"The intellectual framework that comes out of the decision could have a significant impact on other patents - for antibiotics, vaccines, hormones, stem cells and diagnostics on infectious microbes that are found in nature," Robert Cook-Deegan, director for genome ethics, law & policy at Duke University, said in a statement.
"This could affect agricultural biotechnology, environmental biotechnology, green-tech, the use of organisms to produce alternative fuels and other applications," he said.
The nine justices' decision will also have a profound effect on American business, with billions of dollars of investment and years of research on the line. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has been awarding patents on human genes for almost 30 years.

Coit & Associates, P.C. - Criminal Defense

The criminal defense attorneys of Coit & Associates, P.C. have offices in Eugene and Portland.  Each lawyer on our staff takes pride in providing the best representation in the greater Eugene and Portland metropolitan areas and beyond.  Our attorneys provide effective, aggressive and affordable criminal defense for defendants charged with or suspected of committing crimes in Eugene/Lane County, Linn County, Clackamas County, Washington County, Deschutes County, Portland/Multnomah County and throughout many remaining counties of Oregon.

Our criminal defense attorneys understand that being charged with a crime is one of the most difficult things one can undergo in life.  Our lawyers are experienced in all levels of criminal defense and handle all types of criminal defense cases in Oregon State and Federal courts.  Coit & Associates attorneys handle cases ranging from the least serious misdemeanors to the most serious felonies.  No matter the size or seriousness of your case, a lawyer at Coit & Associates, P.C. will aggressively tackle the case and understand its importance to you and your family.  As such, our attorneys will handle your criminal case with the utmost care, attention to detail, and strictest confidentiality.

http://www.criminaldefenseoregon.com/practice-areas/criminal-defense