Legal Showdowns: Ohio Fracking Loophole, McCord's Funding, The Hospital Tragedy, and Amazon's Union Victory
The Allied Outsourcing
Medical Record Reviews | Virtual Assistance | Paralegal & Support | Legal Administrative & Secretarial Services
Fracking Forcing Its Way onto Ohio Land: The Legal Loophole
In 2007, Jill Antares Hunkler, a native Ohioan, got a 3-acre property in Belmont County to build her own home in Ohio. She had no idea that within a decade, the place she envisioned to be peaceful and her spending a traditional life would be surrounded by around 78 oil and gas fracking wells. As of today, the US Geological Survey claims that her land sits atop the Utica and Marcellus Shale formations, which hold around 2.3 and 120 million barrels of oil. Owing to this there had been a 25% surge in fracking wells in Belmont County this year from 1,625 operational ones in 2023 as per the Ohio Department of Natural Resources.?
How is it even legalized??
People owning property in Ohio need to sign a lease agreement for fracking through a process termed “unitization,” which involves consolidating multiple individual units of land into one to ease the fracking process in terms of efficiency and a coordinated approach. This leads to the conclusion that if you don't agree to sign a lease, they would initially force the land owners through multiple means including calling, sending letters, or offering frequent home visits. If nothing works, you will experience fracking happening in your proximity because one of your neighbors agreed to it.
Proponents of fracking often cite that these operations bring employment to the region. Still, opponents usually claim that it leads to the exploitation of landowners because they lack knowledge of the market value of their land and are often cheated by drillers who offer them low prices. Although the state law intends to regulate a "just and reasonable" compensation for leasing their sites, the amount of compensation can vary significantly on the location. The usual landowners get an average of $500 to up to $6000 per acre. They also receive a percentage of the gas produced, typically 12.5%, per the state's regulations.?
What does the future hold??
The Environment Protection Agency claims fracking risks contaminating nearby underground water resources in case of improper installation or accidents during transportation or storage. However, the president of the Ohio Oil & Gas Association, Rob Brundrett, claims that companies involved in fracking take precautionary measures very seriously. The track records have been decent, with only three significant incidents since 2018. This accounts for a mere 0.004% of operations experiencing an essential incident in the past timeframe, supporting their rigorous standards and practices. Regarding the former water contamination issue, The Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) has investigated water well complaints since 1983 and found no evidence of fracking-related groundwater quality issues. However, residents believe that the effects of fracking have far-reaching consequences, including contributing to climate change.?
“A non-native of Ohio won’t ever understand the stark reality of the area where fracking occurs” as quoted by a native. “You experience the noise of a jet engine in the middle of the night and the constant traffic of trucks carrying sand and fracking brine.” They argue that the impacts may not be immediate or direct, but they still affect everyone's life, including those who don't live near the fracking sites.
Source Link:?
Funding the Fight: MPs Want to Know How McCord's Legal Case is Being Paid For
Raymond McCord, a campaigner famously involved in numerous legal cases, including Brexit and Irish unification, denies releasing his information owing to funding he receives as legal aid. However, the High Court judge stated that the requested information was lawful, transparent, and fair, and the decision was previously known as the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO). He ruled that three unionist Members of Parliament (MPs)- Jim Allister, Gregory Campbell, and Carla Lockhart - are entitled to access information about the legal aid funding received by Mr. McCord.
Reviewing the judicial review challenge, Mr. McCord claims the information violated his data and breached his personal information. He and his lawyers also argue this is being done to vilify his character and that the information is intended to publicly criticize him by gaining political points. Mr. Allister, along with others, leaves a question on how far it is appropriate to use legal aid and to fund cases on public law issues. The remaining more worthy cases do not receive funding but should be disclosed.?
How is the disclosure fair?
The jury emphasized the importance of requests from elected representatives, reflecting the more significant public interest and the need for transparency and accountability of the Legal Services Agency (LSA) as a public authority. They acknowledged that the request was made by Mr. Allister, one of the MPs who requested the information is entirely lawful and should be answered. A judge has dismissed this statement in weight to the transparency that the public should avail. Also, a "peace campaigner" frequently engages with the media and makes public statements, and he cannot claim his information to be private. The justification in itself seems pretty inconsistent.?
The Legal Services Agency (LSA) has agreed to withhold the information for six weeks to allow Mr. McCord to appeal, and no information will be disclosed during that period.
Source Link: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/mps-entitled-to-information-on-mccord-legal-funding/ar-AA1pIWFa?
Tragic Oversight at California Hospital Leads to Year-Long Search for Missing Patient
In an incredibly heartbreaking situation, the family of Jessie Peterson endured a year of suffering as they searched for their beloved family member, only to learn that she had never exited the medical facility where she was last observed. Jessie, a 31-year-old with diabetes, was reportedly said to have left the Mercy San Juan Medical Center in Sacramento against medical recommendations. Her mother and two sisters launched an unyielding quest, notifying police of her disappearance, distributing flyers, and exploring familiar neighborhoods.?
However, the reality was even more tragic. Jessie Peterson sadly passed away in the hospital due to a cardiac arrest on April 8, 2023. Alarmingly, her death certificate, which was only finalized a year later, indicates that her decaying body was left unnoticed on a shelf in the hospital's off-site cold storage. This heartbreaking discovery has prompted Peterson’s family to pursue a $15 million lawsuit against the hospital for negligence.?
Under California law, death certificates must be completed within 15 hours of an individual’s passing. Yet, in this instance, a whole year elapsed before officials from Sacramento County informed Peterson's family about the whereabouts of her remains, which still had her identification bracelet attached. A representative for Mercy San Juan’s parent company, Dignity Health, conveyed their condolences but declined to comment on the ongoing legal proceedings.
Christopher Ogolla, a Barry University School of Law professor, expressed that while the accusations are surprising, such incidents are not rare. His investigation, which reviewed over 240 lawsuits related to the improper handling of human remains across all 50 states since 1905, reveals a troubling pattern of negligence in corpse management.?
Legal disputes in these matters are filled with obstacles. Even though the hospital had an obligation to care for Jessie Peterson as a patient, it is still uncertain whether this obligation extends to her relatives. Previous rulings, including a 2003 decision in which a hospital was not responsible for failing to notify next of kin before cremation, add complexity to the legal situation.
The compensation sought by Peterson’s family focuses on emotional anguish rather than physical injuries or financial damages, presenting challenging issues regarding the assessment and validation of their distress. The lawsuit demands $5 million in compensatory damages and an additional $10 million in punitive damages. However, establishing that the hospital’s conduct was the direct cause of the family’s anguish, rather than Peterson’s death itself, introduces another layer of difficulty.?
领英推荐
Ginger Congi, Peterson's mother, recalls the exhausting year-long process of trying to find her daughter. Just hours before her passing, Peterson had spoken about leaving the hospital following a diabetic incident. When Congi reached out again, a hospital staff member verified that Jessie had discharged herself against medical recommendations. Considering Peterson's background of addiction and unstable living situation, her family initially assumed she may have traveled out of town.
The family's concern intensified as weeks turned into months without any contact. They reported her as missing, shared her picture in the local community, and inquired with homeless people if they had encountered her. Congi recalls examining every individual she encountered, yearning to find her daughter.?
The idea that Jessie might still be in the hospital never crossed Congi's mind despite having received updates about her daughter's treatment from the facility. Even after her relentless questioning, it took a year for the reality to come to light, leaving the family with lingering doubts about why it took so long to discover Jessie’s passing.?
After consulting various lawyers, Congi found Marc Greenberg, a partner at Tucker Ellis in Los Angeles, willing to represent them. Greenberg had recently dealt with a comparable situation regarding the San Diego County Medical Examiner, securing a settlement and implementing procedural changes after the mishandling of a corpse.?
Greenberg's goal is to hold Dignity Health responsible, stressing that punitive damages can trigger transformation and help avert such calamities in the future. He aspires to enforce systemic changes to shield other families from the anguish and distress the Petersons face.
In this heart-wrenching case, the Peterson family's struggle underscores the urgent need for accountability and systemic change in handling human remains. Their pursuit of justice serves as a poignant reminder of the profound impact that institutional negligence can have on grieving families.
Breaking News: NLRB Upholds Historic Amazon Union Victory
In a groundbreaking ruling, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has dismissed Amazon's appeal against the first victorious union effort in its history, affirming a 2022 union triumph at a warehouse in New York City. This crucial decision represents an essential breakthrough in labor relations for the e-commerce giant, reinforcing the Amazon Labor Union (ALU) as the representative for roughly 8,300 employees at the Staten Island facility, referred to as JFK8.
A Significant Decision?
On Thursday, in a 2-1 vote, the NLRB determined that Amazon's objections did not justify reassessing the regional director's ruling from the previous year. The NLRB endorsed the ALU as the representative for the JFK8 employees, marking a milestone that reflects the strength and determination of the labor movement within the technology and e-commerce industry.?
NLRB Chair Lauren McFerran and Member David Prouty, both affiliated with the Democratic Party, rejected Amazon's numerous assertions, asserting that the election was not compromised by the purported misconduct of workers, union representatives, and NLRB officials. Among Amazon's primary arguments was the claim that ALU President Christian Smalls, a past employee at JFK8, had infiltrated company grounds to be detained to disrupt anti-union events and sway the vote. Nonetheless, the board saw no validity in these assertions, stating, "Regardless of whether the [union] facilitated Smalls' detention as part of its campaign tactics... the arrest and the surrounding circumstances did not prevent voters from making an independent and unpressured choice in the election."
Disagreement and Dispute?
The ruling was opposed. Board member Marvin Kaplan, the sole Republican on the panel, expressed his dissent, contending that the union's "aggressive and militant methods," such as trespassing, vandalism, and threats of violence, compromised the election's fairness and demanded a new vote. Despite this opposition, the majority ruling prevailed, affirming the legitimacy of the union's success.
Amazon's representative, Mary Kate Paradis, criticized the board's ruling, asserting, "The reality is that there was substantial interference in this election from both the ALU and the NLRB." Paradis highlighted Amazon's stance that the ruling was erroneous regarding facts and legal principles.?
Future Actions for Amazon and the ALU?
While Amazon cannot contest the NLRB's ruling, the company is initiating a separate challenge in another NLRB case, alleging that Amazon unlawfully declined to negotiate with the union. The resolution of this case could ultimately be taken to a federal court, signaling that the legal disputes related to this unprecedented union effort are far from concluded.
Wider Consequences and Prospective Developments
The union's victory at JFK8 has ignited a surge of unionization initiatives at other Amazon facilities. Nonetheless, subsequent endeavors have produced varied outcomes, with employees at two additional New York locations and one in Alabama rejecting union formation.?
The ALU has confronted its difficulties within the organization, including several members' lawsuits against the union leaders. The legal action claimed that a small cadre of officials, spearheaded by Smalls, declined to conduct officer elections, unilaterally amended the union's bylaws, and intimidated dissenters with legal repercussions and disciplinary measures. In reply, the ALU has refuted any misconduct but consented to conduct a leadership election, which occurred last month. Furthermore, ALU members voted in June to partner with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, enhancing the union's resources and fortifying its ability to negotiate agreements.?
Amazon continues to encounter accusations of anti-union practices, such as terminating union advocates and conducting compulsory anti-union gatherings. The corporation insists that it has not violated any regulations and honors its workers' right to decide whether to join unions.?
Summary?
The NLRB's ruling to affirm the union's success at JFK8 marks a crucial victory for the labor movement. It establishes a precedent for future unionization attempts within Amazon and the broader technology sector. As the clash between Amazon and the ALU persists, this decision is a compelling reminder of the lasting significance and resilience of workers' rights and collective negotiations.
Source link: https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/amazon-loses-challenge-unions-election-win-nyc-warehouse-2024-08-30/
-- Business Development Manager | Partnership Manager | IT Sales Specialist | Driving Tech Solutions for Businesses | Python--
5 个月Hi there! We're seeking outstaff service providers. If you're the right person to chat with, please drop a reply. If not, I'd really appreciate it if you could direct my profile to the right contact.