- Posted June 30, 2011
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
SUPREME COURT NOTEBOOK
Court won't revive Clemens lawsuit against trainer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court won't revive baseball star Roger Clemens' lawsuit against his former personal trainer for claiming he injected the pitcher with steroids and human growth hormones.
The high court on Tuesday refused to hear an appeal from the seven-time Cy Young winner, who has an upcoming perjury trial in Washington.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals threw out Clemens' defamation suit against his longtime trainer Brian McNamee, saying a Texas federal court didn't have jurisdiction over Clemens' claims involving statements McNamee made in New York.
Clemens wanted that decision overturned, but the high court refused to take up the case.
McNamee said in New York he had injected Clemens with steroids and HGH and repeated those allegations during an interview at his New York home to a writer for SI.com.
Clemens has denied using performance-enhancing drugs, and testified in front of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in February 2008 that he never used drugs in his 24-year career.
Prosecutors say that was a lie and have charged him with false statements, perjury and obstruction of Congress. The former pitching star's criminal trial is expected to begin on July 6.
The case is Clemens v. McNamee, 10-966.
Court casts doubt on Maine law
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court has thrown out an appeals court ruling upholding Maine's restrictions on the sale of doctors' drug prescribing habits, following last week's high court ruling striking down a similar law in Vermont.
The federal appeals court in Boston upheld data-mining restrictions in Maine and New Hampshire, while the New York-based appeals court struck down the Vermont law.
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 last week that the Vermont law unfairly restricts data-mining and pharmaceutical companies from using the information detailing doctors' prescribing records, though without patient names.
Tuesday's order directs the Boston-based court to take a new look at the Maine law in light of the Supreme Court ruling.
Conn. Green Party appeal
rejected
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court has rejected an appeal from the Green Party of Connecticut challenging state requirements for third party candidates to qualify for public campaign funds.
The justices did not comment Tuesday in refusing to disturb a federal appeals court ruling in favor of the state.
On Monday, the court struck down an Arizona law providing matching public funds to candidates to offset heavy spending by privately funded rivals. An appeals court had earlier voided a similar provision in Connecticut, but upheld portions of the law dealing with third party candidates.
Published: Thu, Jun 30, 2011
headlines Oakland County
- Whitmer signs gun violence prevention legislation
- Department of Attorney General conducts statewide warrant sweep, arrests 9
- Adoptive families across Michigan recognized during Adoption Day and Month
- Reproductive Health Act signed into law
- Case study: Documentary highlights history of courts in the Eastern District
headlines National
- Judge is accused of using racial slur, vulgar terms and ‘libtard’ label for employee offended by his comments
- ACLU and BigLaw firm use ‘Orange is the New Black’ in hashtag effort to promote NY jail reform
- Colorado Supreme Court considers whether habeas petition can free zoo elephants
- 4th Circuit upholds $1M sanction for law firm that tried to ‘sabotage’ federal court’s authority
- Don’t give money to law schools unless they teach originalism, conservative federal appeals judge says
- Average BigLaw partner compensation increased 26% in 2 years, reaching this high-water mark