The legal battle over a controversial ballot measure that could raise the mandatory retirement age for Pennsylvania's judges is not yet settled, despite an exhaustive run of litigation in state court that concluded earlier this week with the question set to appear Nov. 8.
- Foster Care Agency Hit With $5M Verdict Over Sex Abuse
- Amtrak Settles Derailment Litigation for $265M
- Ex-OAG Appeals Chief to Return After Settling Suit Against Kane
- Young Scholar, Now Lawyer, Says Clarence Thomas Groped Her in 1999
- Phila. Bar Pushes for Ban on Harassment, Stronger Equal Pay Law
- Anita Hill Calls for Investigation Into New Thomas Allegation
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is set to review this week which version of the impairment rating guidelines should be used to determine workers' compensation benefits, in a much-anticipated case during an argument session full of open questions with potentially significant answers.
Buried in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's latest deadlock on a question in litigation over the constitutional amendment to change the mandatory judicial retirement age, beyond the detailed review of the layered lawsuit and the careful reasoning spread through four separate opinions, lay a dispute over the influence of "public opinion" on the justices' decisions.
In the Legal's Life Sciences, Pharmaceuticals & Health Care supplement, articles focus on the future of 3D printing in the industry, personal health technology and medical marijuana.
In The Legal’s GC Compensation supplement find out how general counsel ranked in the state, read about salaries in Pennsylvania and the state of regulation.