Appeals court considers Arizona cross-border shooting case

Recent Cases

A government attorney argued Friday that the mother of a 16-year-old Mexican boy killed by a U.S. Border Patrol agent in a cross border shooting should not be allowed to sue the agent because the boy lacked significant ties to the United States.

But a lawyer for the mother countered that the boy's grandmother cared for him while she was a legal permanent U.S. resident.

The arguments before a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco stem from the October 2012 shooting of Jose Antonio Elena Rodriguez by Border Patrol agent Lonnie Swartz, who opened fire from Arizona and hit Elena Rodriguez in Mexico.

Related listings

  • Court: US agency acted reasonably to protect seals

    Court: US agency acted reasonably to protect seals

    Recent Cases 11/02/2016

    An appeals court panel on Monday ruled that a federal agency acted reasonably in proposing to list a certain population of bearded seals threatened by sea ice loss. The decision by a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San F...

  • Greece court cancels TV license overhaul; blow to government

    Greece court cancels TV license overhaul; blow to government

    Recent Cases 10/26/2016

    A high court has canceled a television license auction in Greece, dealing a blow to the country's left-wing government which carried out the sale as part of an anti-corruption drive. Judges from the Council of State court ruled 14-11 late Wednesday t...

  • Court hearing on potential Ontario ban of Indians name, logo

    Court hearing on potential Ontario ban of Indians name, logo

    Recent Cases 10/17/2016

    A Toronto court will hear arguments on an attempt to bar the Cleveland Indians from using their team name and logo in Ontario. The legal challenge by indigenous activist Douglas Cardinal comes on the same day the baseball team takes on the Toronto Bl...

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.