US judge OKs $116M ruling in deadly terror attack
Headline Legal News
A federal judge in Rhode Island has upheld a $116 million verdict against the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority over a 1996 terror attack that killed a U.S. citizen and his wife.
U.S. District Court Judge Ronald Lagueux (LAH'-guh) ruled Wednesday the defendants cannot set aside the judgment against them because they didn't respond to the accusations from the victims' family.
The lawsuit was filed in Providence by relatives of Yaron Ungar (YAH'-rohn UNG'-er) and his wife, Efrat. The Ungars were killed by Hamas gunmen near the West Bank in June 1996. Yaron Ungar also held Israeli citizenship.
The lawsuit said the Palestinian Authority and the PLO offered a safe haven to members of Hamas.
The defendants have denied responsibility.
Related listings
-
Conservative Sessions leads court nomination fight
Headline Legal News 05/07/2009The top Republican in the Senate served notice on President Barack Obama Tuesday that the GOP won't rubber-stamp his choice to succeed the retiring Justice David Souter. "The president is free to nominate whomever he likes," said Senate Minority Lead...
-
Judge Upholds $100M Verdict for Mattel
Headline Legal News 04/28/2009A federal judge upheld a $100 million jury verdict Monday for MattelInc. in a lengthy legal battle over rights to the Bratz doll, a rivalto Mattel's Barbie. U.S. District Judge Stephen Larson also confirmed in his ruling lateMonday that the Bratz dol...
-
South Korean Blogger Acquitted
Headline Legal News 04/20/2009A South Korean court on Monday acquitted a blogger accused of causingthe country huge financial losses by spreading misleading informationon the economy. Prosecutors had sought an 18-month prison term for Park Dae-Sung, 30 --better known by his Inter...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.