“I don’t believe in defunding the police, this bill is about promoting good practices,” the independent added of LD 214 the bill that would end qualified immunity in Maine entirely.
Evangelos noted, in his opinion, “good police officers who do the right thing, abide by our laws, have nothing to worry about,” if the law is passed.
A summary of the legal language in the bill reads that it, “eliminates the ability to assert a defense of qualified immunity for civil actions concerning the actions of state police officers, sheriffs, deputies, constables, municipal police officers, marine patrol officers, game wardens and Capitol Police officers brought under the Maine Civil Rights Act.”
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
A legal action claiming the existence of women-only
sections at two gyms is illegal sex discrimination has reached the
Connecticut Supreme Court. This article sets out the issues and the
possible impact on employers.
Executive summary
For decades fitness facilities have been
offering women-only sections, allowing women to
exercise in private without self-image worries or unwanted male
attention. But these sections are now in jeopardy as the
Connecticut Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities (CHRO)
brings a case against two prominent Connecticut gyms, Edge Fitness
Maine lawmakers are considering changes to the state’s qualified immunity laws, with the state legislature’s judicial committee holding a hearing on a proposal to eliminate qualified immunity there all together. The push in Maine to end the federal legal rule that protects police officers from civil lawsuits while on the job, comes in the wake of the George Floyd murder.
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
The Florida Supreme Court recently amended Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510 (Summary Judgment), adopting the less restrictive federal summary judgment standard as articulated by the United States Supreme Court in
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986),
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986), and
Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (1986). Summary judgement is the procedural mechanism whereby lawsuits may be disposed of prior to a trial if the judge determines that, based on the uncontested material facts in the case, there is no way for the nonmoving party to win. The amended Rule 1.510 will apply to any summary judgment motion decided on, or after, May 1, 2021, including in pending cases.
Ammoland Inc. Posted on
Bloomberg anti-gun columnist Sir Max Hastings missing the point entirely on his recent anti-gun article. IMG NRA-ILA.
U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- Bloomberg columnist Sir Max Hastings shares his thoughts on guns, crime, and the differences between his native Britain and the United States in
Having a father who had brought home keepsake firearms from the Second World War, he claims he became “exceptionally proficient” at taking apart and reassembling guns as a child. This glimpse into his background is provided to preempt the “common response of American enthusiasts to the rest of the world’s horror: ‘Foreigners don’t understand guns.’” That isn’t quite the point. Foreigners – regardless of how well they may handle guns – don’t always understand Americans.