|
|
|
Viacom, Fox want to run anti-smoking ads too
Court Line |
2014/01/30 22:08
|
More TV networks want to gain from tobacco companies' mandate to run anti-smoking ads that will cost tens of millions of dollars.
Fox Broadcasting and the company behind MTV, Comedy Central and BET argue that a court-ordered plan to air anti-tobacco ads on ABC, CBS and NBC won't do a good job reaching young adult and black viewers. Those populations were aggressively targeted by the tobacco industry and are areas of concern for the public health community.
Fox, which is owned by Rupert Murdoch's Twenty-First Century Fox Inc., and Viacom Inc. are asking the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., to include its channels in the anti-smoking ad purchase.
The required ads stem from a 2006 ruling that the nation's largest cigarette makers concealed the dangers of smoking for decades. A judge ordered the tobacco companies to pay for corrective statements related to issues such as the adverse health effects of smoking, the addictiveness of smoking and nicotine and the negative health effects of secondhand smoke. The companies involved in the case include Richmond, Va.-based Altria Group Inc., owner of the biggest U.S. tobacco company, Philip Morris USA; No. 2 cigarette maker, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., owned by Winston-Salem, N.C.-based Reynolds American Inc.; and No. 3 cigarette maker Lorillard Inc., based in Greensboro, N.C.
Along with the TV ads, the tobacco companies are also meant to publish statements in newspapers, websites and on cigarette packs.
The tobacco companies and the federal government last month agreed on how to publish the statements. The court must still approve the deal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court rules against steelworkers' claim
Court Line |
2014/01/27 21:47
|
The Supreme Court says steelworkers do not have to be paid for time they spend putting on and taking off protective gear they wear on the job.
The court was unanimous Monday in ruling in favor of United States Steel Corp. over workers' claims that they should be paid under the terms of federal labor law for the time it takes them to put on flame-retardant jackets and pants, safety glasses, earplugs, hardhats and other equipment.
Justice Antonin Scalia said for the court that the labor agreement between the company and the workers' union says the employees don't get paid for time spent changing clothes. Scalia said most of the items count as clothing. He said earplugs, glasses and respirators are not clothing, but take little time to put on. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lawmakers push back against Washington high court
Legal Focuses |
2014/01/27 21:47
|
Washington state's highest court has exercised an unusual amount of power on education funding, and it's prompted some lawmakers to raise constitutional concerns.
Before last year's legislative session, the court ruled that the state wasn't meeting its obligation to amply pay for basic education. In response, the Legislature added about $1 billion in school-related spending, and lawmakers widely agree they'll add more funding in coming years.
Earlier this month, the court went a step further, analyzing specific funding targets while telling lawmakers to come back with a new plan by the end of April.
Those specific demands have irked budget writers in the Legislature.
"They are way out of their lane," said Republican Sen. Michael Baumgartner.
Baumgartner expects lawmakers will continue adding "substantially new resources" to the state education system, but he said the court's position could erode the proper balance of power in Olympia. Baumgartner hopes lawmakers will ignore the court's latest demands, or he fears justices may exercise more power going forward. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court Upholds Hawaii Reapportionment
Court Watch |
2014/01/24 21:14
|
The Supreme Court has upheld Hawaii's reapportionment plan that leaves out some military personnel and students when calculating population and determining state legislative districts.
The justices affirmed a lower court ruling without comment Tuesday.
Voters challenging the reapportionment plan said it wrongfully excluded more than 108,000 military members, their families and university students. But a three-judge court in Hawaii found that the plan did not violate the Constitution's right to equal protection.
The case is Kostick v. Nago, 13-456. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minn. Supreme Court dismisses Vikings stadium suit
Legal Focuses |
2014/01/24 21:14
|
Minnesota's Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a lawsuit challenging the funding plan for a new Vikings football stadium, eliminating a legal obstacle that threatened a last-minute derailment of the project.
Minnesota finance officials postponed a $468 million bond sale while the case was pending. After the ruling, the chairwoman of the government authority managing the construction said she believed the project could be kept on schedule, despite earlier worries about possible delays and cost overruns.
"We are confident that we will be able to move forward very quickly, to get the financing in place for the bond sale and to keep things on track," said Michele Kelm-Helgen, board chairwoman for the Minnesota Sports Facilities Authority.
The nearly $1 billion stadium, on the Metrodome site in downtown Minneapolis, has a planned opening of July 2016.
Doug Mann, an activist and former Minneapolis mayoral candidate, filed the Supreme Court lawsuit on Jan. 10, arguing the stadium funding plan was unconstitutional. But the state's highest court disagreed.
State law "does not confer original jurisdiction on the court to resolve all challenges to legislation authorizing the use of appropriation bonds," the court's five-page ruling read. It was unsigned and issued "per curiam," meaning on behalf of the entire court. Justice Alan Page, a former Minnesota Vikings player, did not participate. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Law Firm & Attorney Directory |
| Law Firm PR News provides the most current career information of legal professionals and is the top source for law firms and attorneys. |
| Lawyer & Law Firm Directory |
|
|
Law Firm PR News RSS
