Latest news with #legalvictory
Reuters
9 hours ago
- Business
- Reuters
U.S. law firm Susman Godfrey defeats Trump executive order
June 27 (Reuters) - Law firm Susman Godfrey convinced a judge on Friday to permanently block a White House executive order against it, capping a string of court victories for firms targeted for their association with U.S. President Donald Trump's perceived enemies. U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan said Trump's order unlawfully retaliated against Susman for cases it has taken and its efforts to promote racial diversity, violating the firm's rights to free speech and due process of law under the U.S. Constitution. AliKhan is the fourth federal judge in Washington to reach a similar conclusion, following wins for Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block and WilmerHale in parallel cases. The rulings by a mix of Democratic and Republican-appointed judges each decisively rejected Trump's orders suspending security clearances at the firms, restricting their access to government officials and seeking to cancel federal contracts held by their clients. Nine prominent law firms, including Paul Weiss, Skadden Arps, Latham & Watkins and Kirkland & Ellis, have settled with the White House to avoid similar actions against them by the administration. Those firms cumulatively pledged nearly $1 billion in free legal services to support causes backed by Trump. Some later argued that the threat of being targeted by the administration left them no alternative. Susman in its lawsuit called Trump's order retaliation for its defense of the integrity of the 2020 presidential election that Trump lost to Democrat Joe Biden. The firm represents election technology supplier Dominion Voting Systems in cases that challenged false claims the election was stolen from Trump through widespread voting fraud. Trump also had accused Susman of racial discrimination in its hiring practices. AliKhan at a hearing on May 8 repeatedly questioned a lawyer for the Justice Department about the administration's failure to show that the firm's employment programs or its work for Dominion violated the law. The Justice Department and White House have defended Trump's executive orders against law firms as lawful exercises of presidential power. Trump accused the firms of "weaponizing" the justice system against him and his political allies.
Wall Street Journal
4 days ago
- Entertainment
- Wall Street Journal
Lawyers Market Big #MeToo Verdicts, but Their Clients Struggle to Collect
Elizabeth Taylor spent nearly a decade pursuing a sexual-harassment claim against her former boss at an online streaming company in Los Angeles. The long, grinding legal fight seemed worth it when a jury awarded her $8.4 million in late 2023. Her lawyer, Lisa Bloom, was ebullient, splashing news of the verdict across her website, Instagram page and YouTube channel. She billed it as 'one of the biggest sexual harassment verdicts of the year.'
The Sun
18-06-2025
- Business
- The Sun
Millions who were set to get up to £70 in compensation from Mastercard could now be waiting months for payment
MILLIONS of Brits who are eligible for compensation from Mastercard could be forced to wait months for the payment. The credit card company has agreed to a £200million settlement which could mean you are owed money for purchases made years ago. 1 Around 47million customers could receive compensation of up to £70 each after a landmark legal victory in May. But it could be months until the money is paid out. This is because Innsworth is now trying to challenge how the funds will be shared, according to Money Saving Expert. Innsworth is a business that helps to fund legal claims, in exchange for a share of the winnings. But in this instance, Innsworth said the Tribunal that approved the settlement "made a series of errors in its judgement" when deciding how much of the money should be given to Innsworth. The company has now filed a legal claim called a judicial review to try and get a higher amount. As a result of the new case, the launch of the online claims portal will be delayed, so payouts will also be pushed back. Meanwhile, if Innsworth wins its case and gets more of the £200million, it could reduce the amount of money customers get. When was the legal challenge launched? Walter Merricks, a former financial ombudsman, launched the legal claim in 2016. He alleged that 46million British shoppers were ripped off after fees were wrongly levied on transactions made over a 15-year period between 1992 and 2008. .
Daily Mail
17-06-2025
- Daily Mail
Driver Philip Carr finally wins lengthy court fight to overturn £9,500 fine for parking outside his own home
A driver has won a long-running court battle to overturn a £9,500 fine he was given for parking outside his own home more than six years ago. Philip Carr was hit with the penalty notice while renting an apartment in Altrincham, Trafford in late 2018 and early 2019. But the car parking operator, Vehicle Control Services Ltd, sent the fine to his old address, where his vehicle was still registered by the DVLA. Mr Carr said that meant he didn't receive the letter and was unaware of the fine. He added that as a tenant he was allowed to use the apartment block's car park but despite 'multiple requests' hadn't been given a permit by the landlord. In May 2023, Mr Carr succeeded in getting the fine struck off after an appeal was heard at Manchester Civil Justice Centre. He argued that following suggestions he was parking without a permit he had called VCS in August and October 2018 and told them 'he was a tenant at the premises and had the right to park there'. A district judge ruled that following those calls, VCS didn't take 'reasonable steps to ascertain [Mr Carr's] address'. The judge also ruled that the fine had expired without being served and struck it out. However, in May 2024, VCS won an appeal to overturn that ruling and reinstate the fine after successfully arguing that the judge was 'wrong to decide that service was defective'. Mr Carr then took the case to the London's Appeal Court where, earlier this month, he once again succeeded in getting the fine struck off. Jackson Yamba, representing Mr Carr, argued the District Judge had made a clear factual finding that the serving of the fine was defective and that there had been no failure or error which justified the decision to overturn that original ruling. The Appeal Court judges Lord Justice Bean, Lord Justice Moylan and Lord Justice Phillips, agreed and once again struck off the fine.
Screen Geek
14-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Screen Geek
Judge Throws Out $400 Million Justin Baldoni Defamation Suit Against Blake Lively
Justin Baldoni and Blake Lively have been involved with quite the legal debacle, and now a judge has moved things to a new level, having thrown out the $400 million defamation suit that Justin Baldoni filed against Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds. As shared via Variety, the judge found 'that her accusations of sexual harassment were legally protected and therefore immune from suit.' As a result, 'Judge Lewis J. Liman dismissed Baldoni's entire lawsuit – which also alleged extortion and other claims – but allowed him to amend and refile a couple of allegations regarding interference with contracts.' Lively's lawyers shared the following statement regarding the 'total victory' for the situation: 'Today's opinion is a total victory and a complete vindication for Blake Lively, along with those that Justin Baldoni and the Wayfarer Parties dragged into their retaliatory lawsuit, including Ryan Reynolds, Leslie Sloane and The New York Times,' the statement begins. 'As we have said from day one, this '$400 million' lawsuit was a sham, and the Court saw right through it. We look forward to the next round, which is seeking attorneys' fees, treble damages and punitive damages against Baldoni, Sarowitz, Nathan, and the other Wayfarer Parties who perpetrated this abusive litigation.' The legal protection allowed the judge to make this ruling is known as 'the litigation privilege,' which the outlet explains 'immunizes legal claims from defamation actions.' Other privileges mentioned as having an impact on this ruling include the 'fair report' privilege. Justin Baldoni accused Reynolds in the suit for having called him a 'sexual predator,' thus the defamation, but the judge noted that this comment was based on Lively's version of the events, and because he did not have a reason to doubt them, believed it was okay. He additionally applied the same logic to Lively's publicist, Leslie Sloane. Now Lively's complaint against Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios is being scheduled to take place in March 2026. Stay tuned to ScreenGeek for any additional updates regarding Justin Baldoni and Blake Lively as we have them. The debacle between the two celebrities is far from over, and now that Baldoni had his defamation lawsuit thrown out, we'll have to see what happens next for him and Lively.
