Anthrax settlement may moot contempt case
Recent Cases
The US Department of Justice announced Friday that it has settled a lawsuit brought by former US Army germ-warfare researcher Dr. Steven Hatfill, a development that may moot a landmark contempt case against former USA Today reporter Toni Locy now awaiting a ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. Under the settlement, Hatfill would drop all damages claims against the government in return for a lump sum payment of $2.825 million and a 20-year annuity of $150,000 amounting to $3 million. Hatfill had initially sued the Department alleging that it violated the US Privacy Act by providing personal information and information about him to journalists - including Locy - during its investigation of the 2001 anthrax attacks in which he was at one point named a "person of interest". Locy had refused to disclose her sources in discovery, arguing that the information Hatfill was seeking was not central to his lawsuit. In a letter to the Court of Appeals Friday informing it of the settlement, Hatfill lawyer Christopher Wright said that Locy's evidence was no longer needed by his client.
In March, US District Judge Reggie Walton found Locy in contempt of court for not disclosing her sources and ordered her to pay a fine of $500 a day, increasing to $1000 a day after one week and then up to $5000 a day after two weeks, the costs of which could not be covered by her former employer. Locy obtained an emergency stay of that order from the Court of Appeals and oral arguments on the merits of the sanctions were heard last month. The appeals court has yet to make a formal ruling on the status of the contempt case in light of the Hatfill settlement, but Locy said late Friday that she and her lawyers are hopeful that the deal would end the matter. Locy will be a professor at Washington & Lee University's journalism school this fall.
Related listings
-
Drunken Groom's Marriage Declared Invalid After 30 Years
Recent Cases 06/26/2008An Australian bridegroom was horrified to learn after he had walked down the aisle that he was already married — after a drunken holiday romance he could barely remember.The husband has had to confess in the Family Court that he spent 28 days partyin...
-
"Naked Cowboy" Wins Court Shoot-Out with Candy Cowboy
Recent Cases 06/25/2008A ruling in a trademark infringement case filed by a New York street entertainer who performs as “The Naked Cowboy” is another indication that judges may be taking parodies too seriously when the parody conveys a commercial message.Robert Burck alleg...
-
Court to rule on pension credit for old maternity leaves
Recent Cases 06/22/2008The Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether decades-old maternity leaves should count in determining pensions.The issue has split federal appeals courts and could become increasingly important as women who took maternity leaves in the 1960's and 7...
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.