SC Supreme Court to rule on public autopsy reports

South Carolina's Supreme Court will begin grappling with that question Wednesday, when it hears a lawsuit by a Sumter County newspaper against the county's coroner.

The Item newspaper wants the high court to toss out a lower court's ruling that said autopsies do not have to be made public because they do not fall under the state's Freedom of Information Act.

The coroner says autopsies should be considered medical records that are exempt from public view. The newspaper says autopsy reports are investigative tools, not medical records.

Open records advocates say the Sumter County case is an example of government officials making it harder to get public documents.

It's a debate that is far from settled nationally. About 15 states across the U.S. allow the public release of an autopsy report. About a half-dozen other states allow the release of reports not being used as part of a criminal investigation. The rest severely restrict what's released or don't give any information from the reports, according to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.

Keeping autopsy records secret closes off an important tool to make sure police agencies do the right thing when they investigate deaths, especially people shot and killed by officials or who die in custody, said Frank LoMonte, executive director of the Student Press Law Center.

"There is any number of cases over the years where journalist watchdogs have been able to shed light on suspicious circumstances only by having access on those records," LoMonte said. "And those records don't just show culpability, they can clear someone, too."

Ohio courts must report mental health info

Courts in Ohio must now report certain mental health information about people convicted of violent crimes for inclusion in a law enforcement database.

A rule approved by the Ohio Supreme Court requiring that notification took effect Jan. 1. The court devised the form to be submitted to law enforcement after legislation was approved last year.

The law requires judges to report ordering mental-health evaluations or treatment for people convicted of a violent crime or approving conditional release for people found incompetent to stand trial or not guilty by reason of insanity.

The legislation was introduced after a Clark County sheriff's deputy was fatally shot in 2011 by a man with a criminal history who was conditionally released from a mental health institution.

Va. court: Hookah lounge exempt from smoking ban

A divided Virginia Court of Appeals has ruled that a Blacksburg hookah lounge is exempt from the state's restaurant smoking ban.

In a 6-3 ruling Tuesday, the court said the She-Sha Cafe and Hookah Lounge is not subject to the ban because it's a retail tobacco store as well as a restaurant. She-Sha says most of its revenue comes from customers' use of hookahs - tall water pipes that are used to smoke flavored tobacco.

The state law regulating indoor public smoking covers restaurants but specifically exempts tobacco retailers. The court's majority cited that exemption in ruling in She-Sha's favor.

The decision reverses a three-judge panel's ruling that She-Sha is covered by the ban because it also serves food.

Texas Supreme Court tackles same-sex divorce

The issues of same-sex marriage and divorce are set to go before the Texas Supreme Court.

The court is scheduled to hear arguments Tuesday on whether Texas can grant divorces to same-sex couples who married elsewhere.

Both cases involve same-sex couples who married legally in Massachusetts. Texas approved a constitutional ban on gay marriage in 2005.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott argues that state law won't allow Texas to recognize the divorces because that would validate the marriage. The couples question whether the same-sex marriage ban applies to divorce and whether it conflicts with the U.S. Constitution.

The U.S. Supreme Court in June struck down parts of the federal Defense of Marriage Act because it treats same-sex couples unequally.

The Texas court is not expected to rule for several months.

Law Firm Website Templates‎ - Legal Marketing Tips

4 Myths about Template Website Design for Law Firms

Template websites are one of the most affordable and simple solutions for attorneys looking to get their legal business online. They are offered for a very low price and require a limited amount of input to get online. Still, template websites get a bad name. In this article, we’ll dispel several myths and make a case for why a template website is just as capable as any custom designed site.

MYTH: Templates Always Have Unprofessional Design

Firstly, we should establish the difference between a template website and a sitebuilder website. Sitebuilder websites can be incredibly cheap, and usually offer the benefit of do-it-yourself customizability. People who know what they want and have time to invest are drawn to these solutions.

However, these sitebuilders lack the knowledge and experience of a designer or web developer, and users often find their capabilities limited by the interface or a necessity for HTML/ CSS fluency. The most capable attorneys will end up with a website that undersells their professionalism and excellence. The least will have a website that offends the eyes and scares potential clients away.

Our template websites differ because they are based on our most successful custom designs. Unlike other template solutions, each template has been professionally designed by our in-house, highly experienced web designers, and is proven to be successful at impressing visitors and converting prospects into real business. They are also created specifically for lawyers and law firms, so each template is absolutely appropriate for legal professionals.

MYTH: Template Websites Aren’t SEO Optimized

We’ve heard a lot of arguments against template websites because they are not SEO optimized. Law Promo’s template websites are ALWAYS fitted with the very best of onsite optimization. While template websites are made to be static–best for those who have little interest in constant work and updates on their pages–they still are search engine optimized like any of our custom websites, and have the potential for search engine success. Page titles, heading tags, image tags, and keywords are all equally powerful as they would be on a custom website. And if you’re looking to keep your website fresh, you can always add a blog for constant, keyword-rich updated content.

MYTH: My Website Will Look Like Everyone Else’s

This is another concern we hear frequently: “Won’t there be other websites out there, just like mine?” Law Promo offers dozens of different website templates with several customizable options, so its unlikely that there will be many others like yours. Further, you only need to worry about what your potential visitors see. As long as your website isn’t the same as your immediate competitors, a template website is an affordable and easy solution for any law firm.

With the available choices and custom options, your website will be fit to your preferences, and your visitors will not be thinking about whether it’s a template website or not. Instead, they’ll get a great initial impression of your professionalism, then go on to learn more about you through your written content, where most legal professionals really shine.

MYTH: Template Websites Require Technical Knowledge and Web Savvy

We’ve heard horror stories about template design companies that hand their customers a completed template website and expect them to install and maintain it themselves. We understand that attorneys are busy individuals without the time to learn about server configuration or technical coding. That’s why we do all of the technical work for you– you make a few simple choices, send us your written content, and your website will be online and running in a little over a day.

Remember, template websites are not for everyone. If your firm is looking for a deeply personalized, high-functioning website designed to dominate the web space, you’ll be looking for more involved custom design and coding. However, for those who realize that the web is a necessary space for business but don’t have the time to invest in content creation, we highly recommend our template website solution designed specially for legal professionals.

IMF head Lagarde in court in fraud probe

International Monetary Fund chief Christine Lagarde is facing questions at a special Paris court Thursday over her role in the 400 million euro ($520 million) pay-off to a controversial businessman when she was France's finance minister.
The court hearing threatens to sully the reputations of both Lagarde and France. The payment was made to well-connected entrepreneur Bernard Tapie as part of a private arbitration process to settle a dispute with state-owned bank Credit Lyonnais over the botched sale of Adidas in the 1990s. It is seen by many in France as an example of the cozy relationship between big money and big power in France.
Lagarde has earned praise for her negotiating skills as managing director of the IMF through Europe's debt crisis and is seen as a trailblazer for women leaders. Her decision to let the Adidas dispute go to private arbitration rather than be settled in the courts has drawn criticism, and French lawmakers asked magistrates to investigate.
Lagarde, smiling at reporters, left her Paris apartment Thursday morning and appeared at a special court that handles cases involving government ministers. She has denied wrongdoing.
At the time of the payment, Tapie was close to then-French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who was Lagarde's boss. Critics have said the deal was too generous to Tapie at the expense of the French state, and that the case shouldn't have gone to a private arbitration authority because it involved a state-owned bank.

Court: California cities can ban pot shops

Local governments in California's have legal authority to ban storefront pot shops within their borders, California's highest court ruled on Monday in an opinion likely to further diminish the state's once-robust medical marijuana industry.

Nearly 17 years after voters in the state legalized medical marijuana, the court ruled unanimously in a legal challenge to a ban the city of Riverside enacted in 2010.

The advocacy group Americans for Safe Access estimates that another 200 jurisdictions statewide have similar prohibitions on retail pot sales. Many were enacted after the number of retail medical marijuana outlets boomed in Southern California after a 2009 memo from the U.S. Justice Department said prosecuting pot sales would be a low priority.

However, the rush to outlaw pot shops has slowed in the 21 months since the four federal prosecutors in California launched a coordinated crackdown on dispensaries by threatening to seize the property of landlords who lease space to the shops. Hundreds of dispensary operators have since been evicted or closed voluntarily.

Marijuana advocates have argued that allowing local government to bar dispensaries thwarts the intent of the state's medical marijuana law - the nation's first - to make the drug accessible to residents with doctor's recommendations to use it.