<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Legal Book &#187; the-federal</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.the-legal-book.com/tag/the-federal/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com</link>
	<description>Legal product guide</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 06:37:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Woman Mistakenly Put on &#8216;No-Fly&#8217; List Can Sue, Appellate Panel Rules</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/woman-mistakenly-put-on-no-fly-list-can-sue-appellate-panel-rules/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/woman-mistakenly-put-on-no-fly-list-can-sue-appellate-panel-rules/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 06:37:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[after-attending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[california]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[left-the-united]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lower-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stanford]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-woman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[united]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[woman]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/woman-mistakenly-put-on-no-fly-list-can-sue-appellate-panel-rules/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The 9th Circuit has revived a suit by a Stanford Ph.D. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The 9th Circuit has revived a suit by a Stanford Ph.D. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/woman-mistakenly-put-on-no-fly-list-can-sue-appellate-panel-rules/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Courthouse Supervisor Faces Individual Liability Under FMLA</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/courthouse-supervisor-faces-individual-liability-under-fmla/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/courthouse-supervisor-faces-individual-liability-under-fmla/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 21:51:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[allows-employees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court-system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[first-impression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[individual-under]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[split-the-circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[under-the-federal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/courthouse-supervisor-faces-individual-liability-under-fmla/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a case of first impression, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that a court system supervisor may be liable as an individual under the federal law that allows employees to take 12 weeks of job-protected leave for medical reasons. The issue has split the circuit courts.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a case of first impression, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that a court system supervisor may be liable as an individual under the federal law that allows employees to take 12 weeks of job-protected leave for medical reasons. The issue has split the circuit courts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/courthouse-supervisor-faces-individual-liability-under-fmla/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>3rd Circuit Upholds State Law Favoring American Steel</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/3rd-circuit-upholds-state-law-favoring-american-steel/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/3rd-circuit-upholds-state-law-favoring-american-steel/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 07:15:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[not-unconstitutional]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pennsylvania]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public-works]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ruled-last]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state-law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-3rd]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[titutional-or-pre]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[united]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/3rd-circuit-upholds-state-law-favoring-american-steel/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Rejecting a Delaware corporation's arguments, the 3rd Circuit ruled last week that a Pennsylvania state law that mandates that steel used in public works projects be made in the United States is not unconstitutional or pre-empted by the federal Buy American Act.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rejecting a Delaware corporation&#8217;s arguments, the 3rd Circuit ruled last week that a Pennsylvania state law that mandates that steel used in public works projects be made in the United States is not unconstitutional or pre-empted by the federal Buy American Act.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/3rd-circuit-upholds-state-law-favoring-american-steel/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8216;Occupy the Courts&#8217; Protests Hit Supreme Court and Federal Courthouses Nationwide</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/occupy-the-courts-protests-hit-supreme-court-and-federal-courthouses-nationwide/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/occupy-the-courts-protests-hit-supreme-court-and-federal-courthouses-nationwide/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Jan 2012 09:40:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[citizens]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[citizens-united]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal-courthouses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[friday-demonstrators]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[its-campaign]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[massed-at-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[movement-took]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[occupy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[police-barricade]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[protest-the-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pushed-through]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/occupy-the-courts-protests-hit-supreme-court-and-federal-courthouses-nationwide/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Occupy movement took its campaign against corporate domination to the federal judiciary Friday. Demonstrators pushed through a police barricade and stormed the U.S. Supreme Court building, while others massed at federal courthouses nationwide to protest the Court's 2010 Citizens United decision.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Occupy movement took its campaign against corporate domination to the federal judiciary Friday. Demonstrators pushed through a police barricade and stormed the U.S. Supreme Court building, while others massed at federal courthouses nationwide to protest the Court&#8217;s 2010 Citizens United decision.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/occupy-the-courts-protests-hit-supreme-court-and-federal-courthouses-nationwide/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DEA Agent Involved In Self-Shooting Loses Appeal In D.C. Circuit</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/dea-agent-involved-in-self-shooting-loses-appeal-in-d-c-circuit/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/dea-agent-involved-in-self-shooting-loses-appeal-in-d-c-circuit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 07:07:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[agency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[his-appeal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[said-the-video]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shot-himself]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-agency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-leg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-shooting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[video]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[video-clip]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[videotaped-talk]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/dea-agent-involved-in-self-shooting-loses-appeal-in-d-c-circuit/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lee Paige, the federal drug agent who accidentally shot himself in the leg during a videotaped talk with children, has lost his appeal in a suit that alleged the government illegally released personal information. The D.C. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lee Paige, the federal drug agent who accidentally shot himself in the leg during a videotaped talk with children, has lost his appeal in a suit that alleged the government illegally released personal information. The D.C. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/dea-agent-involved-in-self-shooting-loses-appeal-in-d-c-circuit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Toyota blames driver for fatal accident, signaling MDL defense</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/toyota-blames-driver-for-fatal-accident-signaling-mdl-defense/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/toyota-blames-driver-for-fatal-accident-signaling-mdl-defense/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 22:56:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bellwether-case]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crash-involving]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[deceased-driver]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lurched-forward]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-first]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[toyota]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/toyota-blames-driver-for-fatal-accident-signaling-mdl-defense/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a court document that provided a glimpse into Toyota's potential defense in the first bellwether case in the federal multidistrict litigation over sudden acceleration, the company blamed a deceased driver for a crash involving a 2008 Camry that allegedly lurched forward while on an exit ramp.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a court document that provided a glimpse into Toyota&#8217;s potential defense in the first bellwether case in the federal multidistrict litigation over sudden acceleration, the company blamed a deceased driver for a crash involving a 2008 Camry that allegedly lurched forward while on an exit ramp.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/toyota-blames-driver-for-fatal-accident-signaling-mdl-defense/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Court says credit repair groups can force consumers into arbitration</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/court-says-credit-repair-groups-can-force-consumers-into-arbitration/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/court-says-credit-repair-groups-can-force-consumers-into-arbitration/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2012 08:26:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[claims]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[credit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[credit-repair]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gives-consumers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[organizations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rejecting-arguments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[repair-organizations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[senior-citizen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unfair-or-deceptive]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/court-says-credit-repair-groups-can-force-consumers-into-arbitration/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Credit repair organizations can require consumers to arbitrate their claims, the Supreme Court has ruled, rejecting arguments by consumer and senior citizen groups that the federal Credit Repair Organizations Act gives consumers a non-waivable right to go to court with claims of unfair or deceptive practices.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Credit repair organizations can require consumers to arbitrate their claims, the Supreme Court has ruled, rejecting arguments by consumer and senior citizen groups that the federal Credit Repair Organizations Act gives consumers a non-waivable right to go to court with claims of unfair or deceptive practices.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/court-says-credit-repair-groups-can-force-consumers-into-arbitration/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>In medical leave case, questions of self-care and sovereign immunity</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/in-medical-leave-case-questions-of-self-care-and-sovereign-immunity/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/in-medical-leave-case-questions-of-self-care-and-sovereign-immunity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2012 08:26:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employees-leave]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fired-employee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[illnesses-under]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[judiciary-urged]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[key-provision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[medical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[medical-leave]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wednesday]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/in-medical-leave-case-questions-of-self-care-and-sovereign-immunity/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The lawyer for a fired employee of the Maryland judiciary urged the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday to find that states can be sued when they refuse to give their employees leave for serious illnesses under a key provision of the federal Family and Medical Leave Act.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The lawyer for a fired employee of the Maryland judiciary urged the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday to find that states can be sued when they refuse to give their employees leave for serious illnesses under a key provision of the federal Family and Medical Leave Act.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/in-medical-leave-case-questions-of-self-care-and-sovereign-immunity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>In medical leave case, questions of self-care and sovereign immunity</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/in-medical-leave-case-questions-of-self-care-and-sovereign-immunity-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/in-medical-leave-case-questions-of-self-care-and-sovereign-immunity-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2012 08:26:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employees-leave]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fired-employee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[illnesses-under]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[judiciary-urged]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[key-provision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[medical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[medical-leave]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wednesday]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/in-medical-leave-case-questions-of-self-care-and-sovereign-immunity-2/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The lawyer for a fired employee of the Maryland judiciary urged the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday to find that states can be sued when they refuse to give their employees leave for serious illnesses under a key provision of the federal Family and Medical Leave Act.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The lawyer for a fired employee of the Maryland judiciary urged the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday to find that states can be sued when they refuse to give their employees leave for serious illnesses under a key provision of the federal Family and Medical Leave Act.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/in-medical-leave-case-questions-of-self-care-and-sovereign-immunity-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>In Annual Report, Roberts Defends Supreme Court Ethics Procedures</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/in-annual-report-roberts-defends-supreme-court-ethics-procedures/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/in-annual-report-roberts-defends-supreme-court-ethics-procedures/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2012 22:15:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[capability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[colleagues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[complete-confidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[his-year-end]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roberts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-capability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-state]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/in-annual-report-roberts-defends-supreme-court-ethics-procedures/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., in his year-end report on the state of the federal judiciary, offered a vigorous defense of the Supreme Court's handling of ethical issues. He also said he has "complete confidence in the capability of my colleagues to determine when recusal is warranted."]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., in his year-end report on the state of the federal judiciary, offered a vigorous defense of the Supreme Court&#8217;s handling of ethical issues. He also said he has &#8220;complete confidence in the capability of my colleagues to determine when recusal is warranted.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/in-annual-report-roberts-defends-supreme-court-ethics-procedures/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Plum Role for MoFo Associate</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/a-plum-role-for-mofo-associate/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/a-plum-role-for-mofo-associate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2011 10:31:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fell-right]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foerster]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[key-front]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kind]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[morrison]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[only-dream]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pro-bono]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-legal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/a-plum-role-for-mofo-associate/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It's the kind of case, and career opportunity, that plenty of associates can only dream of. And it fell right in Rita Lin's lap. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s the kind of case, and career opportunity, that plenty of associates can only dream of. And it fell right in Rita Lin&#8217;s lap. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/a-plum-role-for-mofo-associate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Federal, State Claims May Be Split  In Takings Case, 3rd Circuit Rules</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/federal-state-claims-may-be-split-in-takings-case-3rd-circuit-rules/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/federal-state-claims-may-be-split-in-takings-case-3rd-circuit-rules/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Dec 2011 10:03:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[being-split]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defendants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plaintiff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state-action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-plaintiff]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/federal-state-claims-may-be-split-in-takings-case-3rd-circuit-rules/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has decided a plaintiff's federal claims are not precluded when the plaintiff puts the defendants in a state action on notice that the federal claims are being split off and the defense never objects.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has decided a plaintiff&#8217;s federal claims are not precluded when the plaintiff puts the defendants in a state action on notice that the federal claims are being split off and the defense never objects.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/federal-state-claims-may-be-split-in-takings-case-3rd-circuit-rules/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>State&#8217;s removal of case does not automatically waive sovereign immunity, 1st Circuit rules</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/states-removal-of-case-does-not-automatically-waive-sovereign-immunity-1st-circuit-rules/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/states-removal-of-case-does-not-automatically-waive-sovereign-immunity-1st-circuit-rules/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2011 02:48:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[among-the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals-courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lower-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[police-officers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[removal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ruling-affirms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-1st]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[waives-its]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/states-removal-of-case-does-not-automatically-waive-sovereign-immunity-1st-circuit-rules/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Deepening a split among the federal appeals courts, the 1st Circuit has ruled that a state's removal of a claim to federal court waives its sovereign immunity only if the removal gives the state an unfair advantage. The ruling affirms a lower court judgment against claims by a police officers' union.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Deepening a split among the federal appeals courts, the 1st Circuit has ruled that a state&#8217;s removal of a claim to federal court waives its sovereign immunity only if the removal gives the state an unfair advantage. The ruling affirms a lower court judgment against claims by a police officers&#8217; union.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/states-removal-of-case-does-not-automatically-waive-sovereign-immunity-1st-circuit-rules/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Winston &amp; Strawn Secures $276 Million for Investors (and $24 Million in Contingency Fees) in 18-Year-Old Suit Against the FDIC</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/winston-strawn-secures-276-million-for-investors-and-24-million-in-contingency-fees-in-18-year-old-suit-against-the-fdic/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/winston-strawn-secures-276-million-for-investors-and-24-million-in-contingency-fees-in-18-year-old-suit-against-the-fdic/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Dec 2011 04:12:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[276-million]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[epic-18-year]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fdic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government-over]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meritor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[million-contingency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[over-the-fdic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/winston-strawn-secures-276-million-for-investors-and-24-million-in-contingency-fees-in-18-year-old-suit-against-the-fdic/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ending an epic 18-year fight with the federal government over the FDIC's seizure of Meritor Savings Bank, a judge in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims has issued a final order awarding Meritor's shareholders $276 million in damages and a nearly $24 million contingency fee to Winston &#038; Strawn.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ending an epic 18-year fight with the federal government over the FDIC&#8217;s seizure of Meritor Savings Bank, a judge in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims has issued a final order awarding Meritor&#8217;s shareholders $276 million in damages and a nearly $24 million contingency fee to Winston &#038; Strawn.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/winston-strawn-secures-276-million-for-investors-and-24-million-in-contingency-fees-in-18-year-old-suit-against-the-fdic/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>When Computer Misuse Becomes a Crime</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/when-computer-misuse-becomes-a-crime/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/when-computer-misuse-becomes-a-crime/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Dec 2011 07:06:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[computer-fraud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[computer-or-fib]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[digital]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[heated-battle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[oral-argument]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[out-whether]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[over-civil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-digital]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/when-computer-misuse-becomes-a-crime/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What started as a routine prosecution stemming from an employment dispute has turned into a heated battle over civil liberties in the digital age. At oral argument on Thursday, an en banc panel of the 9th Circuit will sort out whether the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act allows for the federal prosecution of employees who so much as check a ballgame score on a work computer or fib on Facebook in violation of a terms of use agreement.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What started as a routine prosecution stemming from an employment dispute has turned into a heated battle over civil liberties in the digital age. At oral argument on Thursday, an en banc panel of the 9th Circuit will sort out whether the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act allows for the federal prosecution of employees who so much as check a ballgame score on a work computer or fib on Facebook in violation of a terms of use agreement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/when-computer-misuse-becomes-a-crime/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>In privacy case, justices home in on the meaning of &#8216;actual damages&#8217;</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/in-privacy-case-justices-home-in-on-the-meaning-of-actual-damages/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/in-privacy-case-justices-home-in-on-the-meaning-of-actual-damages/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Dec 2011 07:37:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[case-watched]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court-on-wednesday]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[damages]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[emotional-distress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government-clashed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hiv]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[over-whether]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wednesday]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/in-privacy-case-justices-home-in-on-the-meaning-of-actual-damages/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a case watched closely by privacy and whistleblower advocates, lawyers for an HIV-positive pilot and the federal government clashed in the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday over whether damages for mental and emotional distress can be recovered for violations of the Privacy Act.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a case watched closely by privacy and whistleblower advocates, lawyers for an HIV-positive pilot and the federal government clashed in the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday over whether damages for mental and emotional distress can be recovered for violations of the Privacy Act.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/in-privacy-case-justices-home-in-on-the-meaning-of-actual-damages/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>For the justices, the weirder side of consumer protection</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/for-the-justices-the-weirder-side-of-consumer-protection/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/for-the-justices-the-weirder-side-of-consumer-protection/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2011 08:48:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumers-under]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[monday]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[private-right]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prohibits-robocalls]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sought-access]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[two-argued]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/for-the-justices-the-weirder-side-of-consumer-protection/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Supreme Court struggled Monday with whether Congress, in creating a private right of action for consumers under a statute that prohibits robocalls and unsolicited faxes, limited them to suits in state courts. The case was one of two argued Monday in which consumers sought access to the federal courts.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Supreme Court struggled Monday with whether Congress, in creating a private right of action for consumers under a statute that prohibits robocalls and unsolicited faxes, limited them to suits in state courts. The case was one of two argued Monday in which consumers sought access to the federal courts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/for-the-justices-the-weirder-side-of-consumer-protection/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>TD Bank executive takes Fifth in Rothstein-related trial</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/td-bank-executive-takes-fifth-in-rothstein-related-trial/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/td-bank-executive-takes-fifth-in-rothstein-related-trial/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Nov 2011 05:07:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[former-regional]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[frank-spinosa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lawsuit-brought]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ponzi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scott-rothstein]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-former]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-witness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[thursday]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vice-president]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[witness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[yes-man]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/td-bank-executive-takes-fifth-in-rothstein-related-trial/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Frank Spinosa, a former regional vice president for TD Bank who is accused of being Scott Rothstein's yes man, refused to answer any questions Thursday on the witness stand in the federal lawsuit brought by investors in the former lawyer's $1.2 billion Ponzi scheme.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Frank Spinosa, a former regional vice president for TD Bank who is accused of being Scott Rothstein&#8217;s yes man, refused to answer any questions Thursday on the witness stand in the federal lawsuit brought by investors in the former lawyer&#8217;s $1.2 billion Ponzi scheme.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/td-bank-executive-takes-fifth-in-rothstein-related-trial/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rule sought for unsealing grand jury records</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/rule-sought-for-unsealing-grand-jury-records/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/rule-sought-for-unsealing-grand-jury-records/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2011 06:32:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[attorney-general]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[control-over]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[create-tighter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[criminal-procedure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[grand-jury]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[holder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[over-the-release]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[proposed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[release]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-proposed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-release]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/rule-sought-for-unsealing-grand-jury-records/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[U.S. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>U.S. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/rule-sought-for-unsealing-grand-jury-records/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Jenner&#8217;s Andrew Weissmann Tapped as New FBI GC</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/jenners-andrew-weissmann-tapped-as-new-fbi-gc/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/jenners-andrew-weissmann-tapped-as-new-fbi-gc/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Oct 2011 20:18:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[become-the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[block]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enron]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal-bureau]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[his-post]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[investigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new-general]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[task-force]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[weissmann]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/jenners-andrew-weissmann-tapped-as-new-fbi-gc/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Andrew Weissmann, the former director of the federal government's Enron task force, has left his post as co-chair of Jenner &#038; Block's white-collar defense and investigations practice to become the Federal Bureau of Investigation's new general counsel.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Andrew Weissmann, the former director of the federal government&#8217;s Enron task force, has left his post as co-chair of Jenner &#038; Block&#8217;s white-collar defense and investigations practice to become the Federal Bureau of Investigation&#8217;s new general counsel.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/jenners-andrew-weissmann-tapped-as-new-fbi-gc/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>3rd Circuit Applies &#8216;Later-Served&#8217; Rule to Removal Petitions</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/3rd-circuit-applies-later-served-rule-to-removal-petitions/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/3rd-circuit-applies-later-served-rule-to-removal-petitions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Oct 2011 07:03:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defendants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[different-days]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[served-on-different]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[split-the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-3rd]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-defendants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-time]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[time]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/3rd-circuit-applies-later-served-rule-to-removal-petitions/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In an issue that has split the federal circuits, the 3rd Circuit has ruled that, in cases where multiple defendants are served on different days, the defendants each have 30 days from the time they're served to file a notice of removal from state court to federal court.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In an issue that has split the federal circuits, the 3rd Circuit has ruled that, in cases where multiple defendants are served on different days, the defendants each have 30 days from the time they&#8217;re served to file a notice of removal from state court to federal court.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/3rd-circuit-applies-later-served-rule-to-removal-petitions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Feds Say Charges are Constitutional in Facebook Threat Case</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/feds-say-charges-are-constitutional-in-facebook-threat-case/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/feds-say-charges-are-constitutional-in-facebook-threat-case/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Oct 2011 04:48:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[constitutionality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[days-before]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[facebook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal-prosecutors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[making-violent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pennsylvania]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reject-the-man]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-constitutionality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[threats-on-facebook]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/feds-say-charges-are-constitutional-in-facebook-threat-case/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Just days before a Pennsylvania man is scheduled to go on trial for making violent threats on Facebook, federal prosecutors are urging a judge to reject the man's challenge to the constitutionality of the federal cyberstalking statute.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just days before a Pennsylvania man is scheduled to go on trial for making violent threats on Facebook, federal prosecutors are urging a judge to reject the man&#8217;s challenge to the constitutionality of the federal cyberstalking statute.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/feds-say-charges-are-constitutional-in-facebook-threat-case/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Constitutionality of Facebook Threat Charges Challenged</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/constitutionality-of-facebook-threat-charges-challenged/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/constitutionality-of-facebook-threat-charges-challenged/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2011 22:04:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[constitutionality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[facebook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[now-challenging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pennsylvania]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pure-speech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-constitutionality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[threats-on-facebook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[violent-threats]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/constitutionality-of-facebook-threat-charges-challenged/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Pennsylvania man who was indicted for making violent threats on Facebook is now challenging the constitutionality of the federal cyberstalking statute, arguing that the law criminalizes "pure speech" and is vague and overbroad.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A Pennsylvania man who was indicted for making violent threats on Facebook is now challenging the constitutionality of the federal cyberstalking statute, arguing that the law criminalizes &#8220;pure speech&#8221; and is vague and overbroad.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/constitutionality-of-facebook-threat-charges-challenged/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>T. John Ward Leaves East Texas &quot;Rocket Docket&quot; Court to Join Son&#8217;s Law Firm</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/t-john-ward-leaves-east-texas-rocket-docket-court-to-join-sons-law-firm/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/t-john-ward-leaves-east-texas-rocket-docket-court-to-join-sons-law-firm/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Oct 2011 04:59:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bench]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[his-son]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[practice-at-ward]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stepped-down]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[texas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unlikely-hot]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/t-john-ward-leaves-east-texas-rocket-docket-court-to-join-sons-law-firm/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[T. John Ward Sr., the federal district court judge credited with turning Marshall, Texas, into an unlikely hot spot for patent litigation, stepped down from the bench on Friday]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>T. John Ward Sr., the federal district court judge credited with turning Marshall, Texas, into an unlikely hot spot for patent litigation, stepped down from the bench on Friday</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/t-john-ward-leaves-east-texas-rocket-docket-court-to-join-sons-law-firm/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Battle over Medicaid launches new Supreme Court term</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/battle-over-medicaid-launches-new-supreme-court-term/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/battle-over-medicaid-launches-new-supreme-court-term/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Oct 2011 04:42:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bar-private]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[california]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[case]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[high-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[medicaid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[monday]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state-decisions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[urged-the-high]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/battle-over-medicaid-launches-new-supreme-court-term/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[California urged the high court Monday to bar private individuals from challenging state decisions to reduce Medicaid reimbursement rates for health care providers. Justices gave no hint of what they might do with the case in which California has drawn support from 31 states and the federal government.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>California urged the high court Monday to bar private individuals from challenging state decisions to reduce Medicaid reimbursement rates for health care providers. Justices gave no hint of what they might do with the case in which California has drawn support from 31 states and the federal government.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/battle-over-medicaid-launches-new-supreme-court-term/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

