Robert Fellmet - Robert Fellmeth

Robert Fellmet
Robert fellmuth 5233205.jpg
MillatiAmerika
Olma materStenford universiteti,
Garvard universiteti
KasbYurist
Taniqli ish
Federal savdo komissiyasi to'g'risida Nader hisoboti.

Robert ("Bob") Fellmeth, huquqshunoslik bo'yicha professor San-Diego universiteti yuridik fakulteti, jamoat manfaatlari to'g'risidagi narxlar kafedrasi egasi va jamoat manfaatlari to'g'risidagi huquq markazi va bolalar advokati institutining ijrochi direktori.

Ta'lim

Robert Fellmet ishtirok etdi Kailua o'rta maktabi kuni Oaxu holatida Gavayi.[1] U 1962 yilda talabalar birlashmasining prezidenti etib saylandi va uni 1963 yilda tugatdi. Fellmet keyinchalik AB bilan tugatdi jum laude dan Stenford universiteti 1967 yilda [2] va 1970 yilda Garvard Universitetining JD bilan).[3] Garvardda yuridik fakultetning Fuqarolik huquqlari - Fuqarolik erkinliklarini tadqiq qilish qo'mitasiga rahbarlik qilgan va ushbu tashkilotning dastlabki muammolari ustida ishlagan. Garvard fuqarolik huquqlari-fuqarolik erkinliklari to'g'risidagi qonunni ko'rib chiqish.[4]

Dastlabki iste'molchilarni himoya qilish

Da Garvard yuridik fakulteti, Fellmeth asl nusxalardan biriga aylandi "Naderning bosqinchilari, "1960-70 yillardagi iste'molchilar harakati tarkibida iste'molchilar advokati Ralf Nader bilan ishlagan. U yuridik fakultetning dastlabki 7 nafar talabalaridan biri bo'lgan. Federal savdo komissiyasi 1968 yilda va u uchta hammualliflardan biri bo'lgan Federal savdo komissiyasi to'g'risida Nader hisoboti.[5]Nashr qilinganidan keyin u 1969 yil yozida "Nader reyderlari" deb nomlangan tashkilotni tashkil etdi, mablag 'yig'di va FDA, Qishloq xo'jaligi departamenti faoliyati, havoning ifloslanishi va suvning ifloslanishini nazorat qilish va transportni tartibga solish bo'yicha ish olib boradigan 5 guruhga bo'lingan tadqiqotchilarni jalb qildi. ning Davlatlararo savdo komissiyasi (ICC) navbati bilan. Natija kitoblari kiritilgan Kimyoviy bayram, Havoning yo'q bo'lib ketishi, suvsiz joylar, shamolni tikish va davlatlararo savdo-sotiqda kamchilik. U 7 nafar yuridik talabalarining ICC loyihasini boshqargan, natijada birgalikda mualliflik qilgan kitob, Davlatlararo tijoratni bekor qilish (Grossman, 1969). Ushbu davr mobaynida, Hayot jurnali ushbu tadqiqotchilar "Yolg'iz Ranger posse oladi" nomli maqolasida va Felmet va jamoat direktorlarini o'z ichiga olgan talabalarni Kapitoliy zinapoyasida Nader orqasida turganini tasvirlab bergan.[6]

1970 yilda Garvard yuridik fakultetini tugatgandan keyin Fellmet Naderda qoldi. Keyin Kaliforniyada Naderning javob beruvchi huquqni o'rganish markazi homiyligida erdan foydalanish siyosatini o'rganib chiqdi va ma'ruza qildi, so'ngra kitob: Er siyosati (Grossman, 1970). 1971 yildan 1973 yilgacha ushbu markaz tarkibida Nader Kongressi loyihasini boshqargan. Ushbu loyiha Kongressning amaldagi har bir a'zosining 30-50 betlik sahifalarini, shtat poytaxtlari va Kongress okruglarida ko'ngilli tadqiqotchilar ko'magida yosh jurnalistlar va jurnalistika talabalari tomonidan yozilgan. Anketalarda tumanlar haqidagi demografik ma'lumotlar, saylovoldi kampaniyasini moliyalashtirish tafsilotlari va saylovoldi kampaniyasiga oid va'dalar mavjud bo'lib, a'zolarning qo'mita ovozlarini erta oshkor etilishi (ilgari hammaga ochiq emas edi). Ko'pgina profillar xulosa shaklida Kongressning tegishli tumanlaridagi gazetalarda chop etilgan 1972 yilgi saylovlar. Kongress loyihasining profil yozish qismi tomonidan nazorat qilingan Joan Kleybruk, keyinchalik direktori Milliy avtomobil yo'llari harakati xavfsizligi boshqarmasi va keyinchalik milliy iste'molchilar va jamoat manfaatlari tashkilotining prezidenti: Davlat fuqarosi.[7]

Loyiha, shuningdek, Kongressning katta qo'mitalari haqida beshta kitob nashr etdi va Fellmeth o'z hissasini qo'shdi Savdo qo'mitalari loyiha direktori tomonidan tahrirlangan kitob Devid Prays, keyinchalik Kongress a'zosi. Loyiha eng yaxshi sotuvchini ham ishlab chiqardi Kongressni kim boshqaradi. Fellmeth muqaddimani loyiha direktori sifatida yozgan, kitob muallifi Devid Tsvikga bo'lingan, Jeyms Fouls va Mark Grin.[8]Fellmetning ishi dastlabki bilan bog'liq iste'molchilar harakati 1970-yillarda, shu jumladan Federal Savdo Komissiyasi (FTCni takomillashtirish to'g'risidagi qonun) va yuk tashishni tartibga solish (the Yuzaki transportni tartibga solish to'g'risidagi qonun ). U erkin bozor kuchlarini tiklashga kirishgan birinchi iste'molchilar tarafdorlaridan biri edi va ba'zida bu harakat ichida "konservativ" deb topildi. U va boshqa "reyderlar" ushbu davrning iste'molchilar xavfsizligi va atrof-muhit to'g'risidagi qonunlari bilan bog'liq. Fellmeth Naderning tarjimai holida va iste'molchilar harakatining dastlabki yillarida,[9] shu jumladan yaqinda bo'lib o'tgan hujjatli film Aqlsiz odam.[10]

Oq yoqali jinoyat bo'yicha prokuror: 1973-1981

Professor Fellmet 1973 yilda o'tkazilgan Kongress loyihasidan so'ng Nader tashkilotini tark etdi. O'sha yili u prokuror sifatida xizmatni boshladi. San-Diego okrugi, 1981 yilgacha ixtisoslashgan tuman prokurorining o'rinbosari sifatida davlat qonunlarini bajaradi oq yoqadagi jinoyat. 1974 yilda u antitrestlik va adolatsiz raqobat to'g'risidagi qonunlarni amalga oshiruvchi xalqning birinchi maxsus prokuratura bo'limini boshladi.[11] Keyingi etti yil davomida u tegishli ishlarni yuritdi. O'sha yillarning so'nggi ikki yilida, 1979 yildan 1981 yilgacha, u AQSh prokurorining yordamchisi sifatida tayinlangan - bu shtat yoki federal yurisdiksiyada jinoiy yoki fuqarolik ishlarini yuritishga imkon beradigan maqom. Ushbu davr mobaynida u 22 antitrestlik va adolatsiz raqobat ishlarini sudga tortdi. Hisobot beruvchilar (e'lon qilingan apellyatsiya qarorlari bilan) kiritilgan Odamlar Mobile Magic-ga qarshi va Xalqqa qarshi milliy rieltorlar assotsiatsiyasi, uchun javobgarlikni keltirib chiqaradigan hukm bilan o'z-o'zidan milliy, davlat va mahalliy rieltorlik savdo uyushmalariga nisbatan noqonuniy bog'lanish va narxlarni belgilash bo'yicha huquqbuzarliklar.[12]

Ushbu davrda professor Fellmet okrug advokatlari milliy assotsiatsiyasi kollejida va Milliy sud kollejida (AQShning Nevada shtatidagi Reno shahridagi federal binolarni o'qitish uchun tashkil etilgan o'quv bazasi) antitrestlik va adolatsiz raqobat mavzularida dars berdi. davlat sudi sudyalari).[13]

Shuningdek, u Kaliforniya okrugidagi advokatlar assotsiatsiyasi bilan Kaliforniyaning adolatsiz raqobat to'g'risidagi qonunlarini qayta yozishda ishlagan. O'sha paytdagi davlat qonun chiqaruvchisi tomonidan to'rtta o'zgartirish kiritildi Alan Sieroty, bu nizomni Fuqarolik Kodeksining 3369-bo'limidan ko'chirib, Ca-da hozirgi shaklida kengaytirdi. Avtobus. & Profs. Kod qismi 17200 va boshq.[14] Keyingi yillarda u nizomni avval prokuror, so'ngra xususiy fuqarolik maslahatchisi sifatida va so'nggi yigirma yil davomida jamoat manfaatlari himoyachisi sifatida "Jamiyat manfaatlari huquqi markazi" orqali amalga oshirdi.[15]

1993 yildan so'ng, u da'vogar advokatning qonunni tuzishda muhim rol o'ynagan adolatsiz raqobat to'g'risidagi qonunni suiiste'mol qilishidan xavotirga tushdi. U bir xil da'vo qilingan jinoyat uchun ko'p yoki soxta da'volarning oldini olish uchun sinf harakatlari to'g'risidagi qonun hujjatlarining ba'zi tegishli jarayon elementlarini talab qiladigan islohotlarni tavsiya qildi. Shtat qonun chiqaruvchisi uni 1995 yildan 1998 yilgacha islohotlarni ko'rib chiqish uchun o'zining "Qonunlarni qayta ko'rib chiqish komissiyasi" ga maxsus maslahatchi etib tayinladi. Uning takliflari, "keng jamoatchilik" uchun da'vo qo'zg'atadigan shaxs odatdagi jabrlanuvchi sifatida tan olinishi va jamoatchilikni "etarli darajada vakili qilishi" kerakligi haqidagi talabni o'z ichiga olgan (masalan., jalb qilingan advokatlar bilan noo'rin munosabatlarga va manfaatlar to'qnashuviga ega bo'lmaslik), Bosh prokuratura tomonidan jamoatchilikka tegishli ogohlantirish va "rad etish" imkoniyati uchun tegishli nashrni taqdim etish va sud barcha ishlar va kelishuvlarni ko'rib chiqish tegishli tartibda va adolat uchun. Ushbu choralar, deydi Fellmet, o'zining so'nggi hisobotida, suiiste'mollarni cheklaydi va ishlarga tegishli yakuniylikni beradi.[16] Ammo uning islohotlariga sug'urta sohasi ham, sud advokatlari ham qarshilik ko'rsatdilar va qonun chiqaruvchi ularni mavjud bo'lmagan muammolarni hal qilish uchun rad etdi. Uch yil o'tgach, Beverli-Xillzdagi Trevor huquq guruhi va boshqa bir qancha firmalar u bashorat qilganidek keng miqyosda suiiste'mol qilishni boshladilar. Ya'ni, yuridik firmalar yuzlab proma-aktsiyalarni, xususan avtoulovlarni ta'mirlash firmalariga, tirnoq salonlari va restoranlarga qarshi, texnik buzilishlar va to'lovlarni talab qilish uchun, yakuniy va res judicata xuddi shu da'vo qilingan huquqbuzarliklar uchun boshqa da'vo qo'zg'atilishiga yo'l qo'ymaslik va advokatlarning talab qilinadigan va to'langan to'lovlarini sud tekshiruvisiz. Davlat advokati javobgarlikka tortilgan advokatlarga nisbatan intizomiy jazo choralarini ko'rdi va Fellmet ushbu sud jarayonlarida advokatlarning "ekspert guvohlari" sifatida saqlanib qoldi - natijada huquqbuzarlarning aksariyati ishdan bo'shatildi.[17]

Biroq, suiiste'mollar sanoatni Kaliforniyaning adolatsiz raqobat to'g'risidagi qonunini cheklash uchun ham safarbar qildi. Ular 2004 yilda 64-taklifni taklif qildilar, bu Fellmeth tomonidan talab qilingan o'zgarishlardan ancha ustun bo'lib, u qarshi bo'lgan cheklovlarni joriy etdi. Ushbu chora 59% dan 41% gacha bo'lgan marj bilan qabul qilindi va Fellmeth tomonidan tavsiya etilgan talablardan yuqori sinfiy harakat talablarini o'z ichiga oldi va uning o'sha paytdagi nashrlarda bildirilgan qarshiliklari tufayli. Taklif to'g'ridan-to'g'ri moliyaviy yo'qotish bilan bog'liq bo'lmagan har qanday ishni adolatsiz raqobatni qamrab olishdan olib tashlandi. Shunday qilib, sog'liqni saqlash, xavfsizlik, shaxsiy hayot va atrof-muhitga oid huquqbuzarliklar endi nizomning amal qilish doirasiga kiritilmagan.[18]

Kaliforniya atletik komissiyasi

1976 yildan 1981 yilgacha Fellmet gubernator tomonidan Davlat atletika komissiyasiga tayinlandi, so'ngra besh kishilik boks va kurashni tartibga soluvchi organ, va boshq. Fellmeth boshqa komissarlar tomonidan 5 yildan uch yilgacha Komissiya raisi etib saylangan. U bokschilar uchun birinchi pensiya rejasini tuzdi va 1980 yilda uning qonunchilikda qabul qilinishiga homiylik qildi (Bus. & Profs. 18880-bo'lim va boshqalar). Hozirgi vaqtda u to'rt yoki undan ortiq yil davomida "kamzul" ga erishish uchun etarlicha jang qilgan 500 ga yaqin bokschini qamrab oladi. Shuningdek, u nogironlik bo'yicha nafaqani o'z ichiga oladi. Jamiyat manfaatlari to'g'risidagi qonunchilik markazi (CPIL) orqali Fellmeth vaqti-vaqti bilan pensiya rejasini promouterlarning qarama-qarshiliklaridan va uni yo'q qilishga urinishlaridan himoya qilib kelgan. So'nggi yillarda CPIL boksdan tashqari kasb-hunar ta'limi uchun erta imtiyozlar berish uchun uni erkinlashtirgan qonunchilikni qo'llab-quvvatladi.[19] Fellmeth shunga o'xshash pensiya rejalarini milliy va boshqa yirik shtatlarda (Nevada, Nyu-Jersi, Nyu-York) qabul qilishni qo'llab-quvvatladi. Biroq, bu harakatlar muvaffaqiyatli bo'lmadi va Kaliforniya tizimi professional bokschilar uchun yagona pensiya tizimi bo'lib qolmoqda.[20]

Fellmeth shuningdek, boksni tartibga solishda qo'llaniladigan tartibga solish bo'yicha islohotlarni amalga oshirishni taklif qildi va g'olib chiqdi, u teatrlashtirilgan professional kurashni tartibga solishdan olib tashladi va litsenziyani talab qiladigan shaxslar sonini kamaytirdi (masalan, usherlar, chipta olib ketuvchilar, chipta printerlari) u promouterlarning raqobatiga to'sqinlik qildi.[21]

O'qitish va jamoat manfaatlari markazi markazi

1978 yilda professor Fellmet San-Diego universiteti huquqshunoslik fakultetida partiyaviy ravishda antitrestlik va iste'molchilar huquqlarini o'qitishni boshladi, shu bilan birga prokuror bo'lib ishlagan. U 1982 yilda doimiy o'qituvchilikka o'tdi va 1984 yilda maktabda to'liq professor lavozimini egalladi. Ko'p o'tmay, u "jamoat manfaatlari to'g'risidagi qonunchilikdagi narxlar kafedrasi" ni milliy miqyosda egallashga tayinlandi.[22]U iste'molchilar huquqi, antitrestlik qonuni, savdoni tartibga solish, intellektual mulk va jinoiy jarayonlarni o'rgatgan. So'nggi yigirma yil davomida uning diqqat markazida ikki yo'nalish bor: jamoat manfaatlari to'g'risidagi qonun va amaliyot, bolalar huquqlari va himoya vositalari.[23]

Jamiyat manfaatlari to'g'risidagi qonunni yaratish va maqsadi markazi

Professor Fellmet 1980 yilda yuridik talabalarni jamoat manfaatlari amaliyotida o'qitib, jamoat manfaatlari huquqi markazini (CPIL) ochdi. [www.cpil.org] Yuqorida qayd etilgan "Jamiyat manfaatlari to'g'risidagi qonun va amaliyot" kursi CPIL dasturining bir qismidir va klinikaning tarkibiy qismini o'z ichiga oladi. Kurs jamoat manfaatlari to'g'risidagi qonunlarni o'qitish uchun forum sifatida davlat idoralaridan foydalanadi. Normativ forum, ularning har biri tomonidan tartibga solinadigan savdo / kasb-hunar birlashmalarining kuchli hukmronligi, ularning keng vakolati va umumiy ruxsat beruvchi nizomlari tufayli tanlangan. Yopiq agentliklarga kommunal xizmatlar komissiyasi, shtat advokatlari, buxgalteriya kengashi, tibbiy kengash, boshqariladigan sog'liqni saqlash departamenti, Cal-OSHA, sug'urta komissari, ko'chmas mulk departamenti va boshqa 20 ta agentlik kiradi.

1980-yillarning birinchi o'n yilligida CPIL sudga murojaat qildi Le Dao v. Tibbiy sifat kafolati kengashi[24] AMA tomonidan sertifikatlangan tibbiyot maktabida o'qiganidan so'ng, Vetnamdan "qayiq odamlari" sifatida qochib, Kaliforniyaning barcha imtihonlarini topshirgan va shifoxonalarda stajyor sifatida qatnashganidan so'ng, amaliyotni o'tkazish huquqidan adolatsiz mahrum etilgan 25 dan ortiq vetnamlik shifokorlarning litsenziyalashiga ruxsat berish. Qonunchilik palatasi CPIL tomonidan homiylik qilingan, litsenziyalashni samarali ko'rsatuvchi qonunlarni qabul qilganida, sud ishi ahamiyatsiz bo'lib qoldi. Dastlabki yillardagi boshqa sud jarayonlari shtatning Ochiq uchrashuvlari va jamoat yozuvlari aktlariga tegishli edi.[25]

Qonunchilikda "Jamoat yozuvlari to'g'risida" gi qonunga va "Ma'muriy protsessual qonunlarga" o'zgartishlarni kuchaytirish kiritilgan.[26]Da'vogarning ayblanuvchining litsenziyalovchi idorasiga da'vo qilingan noqonuniy xatti-harakatlar yoki etkazilgan zarar to'g'risida har qanday hisobotini taqiqlovchi "tumshuq bandlari" bilan bog'liq doimiy mavzular. Fellmetning ta'kidlashicha, bunday bandlar huquqbuzarga foyda keltiradi va da'vogarning maslahatchisi asosan mijoz tomonidan olinishi kerak bo'lgan hisob-kitob mablag'lari tufayli ularni qabul qilishga majbur. CPIL advokatning noto'g'ri ishi bo'yicha da'volarni taqiqlashda muvaffaqiyat qozondi va yaqinda iste'molchilar bilan ishlash departamenti tomonidan tartibga solinadigan barcha savdo va kasblarga nisbatan ularni taqiqlash to'g'risidagi qonunni qabul qildi.[27] Biroq, ular har tomonlama taqiqlangan emas.[28]

CPIL litsenziyalangan mutaxassislarning intizomini hal qilish uchun beshta alohida protsedura tizimiga qarshi chiqadi: (a) ma'muriy sud sudyasi oldida "taklif qilingan qaror" ga olib boradigan sud majlisi (b) kengash yoki agentlik rahbariga, so'ngra qaror qabul qilmasdan sud qarori va guvohlarni ko'rmasdan. So'ngra (v) "mustaqil hukm" asosida qayta sud jarayoni uchun yuqori sudga, so'ngra (d) apellyatsiya sudiga va (e) shtat Oliy sudiga murojaat qilish uchun. CPIL hujjatlarida ta'kidlanishicha, ushbu beshta qadam jinoiy ta'qib qilish uchun mavjud bo'lganidan ikkitasi ko'proq va kechikish odatda to'liq davom etadigan joyda 5 yildan oshadi. CPIL kam qadamlarni qo'llab-quvvatlaydi, ularning har biri yuqori sifatli. Birinchisi, ma'muriy huquq sudyasi oldida to'liq sud jarayoni bo'lib, iloji boricha mavzu sohasini bilishi kerak, so'ngra bir bosqichli sud nazorati o'tkaziladi.[29]

CPIL islohotlari tibbiyot kengashi tomonidan ijro etilishi to'g'risida qisman qabul qilingan va 1980 yillarning oxirlarida asosan Fellmet va Barlar prezidentlari tomonidan tuzilgan Davlat advokatura tizimida to'liq aks ettirilgan (quyida Fellmeth shtatidagi Barlarning intizom monitoringi pozitsiyasini ko'rib chiqing). Fellmetning tartibga solish nazariyasi, shu jumladan bozor kuchlariga taxminiy bog'liqlikni targ'ib qilish, aralashuvni talab qiladigan bozor kamchiliklarini tahlil qilish va ushbu variantlarni afzalroq tartiblash bilan uning dastlabki maqolasida: Tartibga solish nazariyasi: davlat tomonidan tartibga solinadigan islohotlar platformasi.[30]

CPIL evolyutsiyasi, hozirgi holat

1985 yilda CPIL direktori o'rinbosari va uning muharriri bo'lib ishlagan Yelizaveta (Mulroy) Mohr Kaliforniya Normativ Qonuni bo'yicha muxbir, San-Frantsiskoga ko'chib o'tdi va Kaliforniya Sug'urta departamentida maslahatchi lavozimini egalladi - bu lavozimda u hali ham ishlaydi. Uning o'rnini bosish uchun AQSh dollaridagi sobiq talabalar o'rtasida qidiruv o'tkazildi. Nomzodlardan biri maktabni bitirgan Julianne D'Angelo va uning eng yaxshi talabalaridan biri - "Law Review" jurnalining bosh muharriri edi. 1982 yilda AQSh Qonunchilik fakultetini bitirgach, D'Angelo xonim Feniksdagi federal okrug sudyasiga murojaat qildi va keyin Vashington shtatidagi Adliya vazirligida ishladi U San-Diego universiteti lavozimiga ishga yollanganlar orasida edi. 1985 yil va uni to'ldirish uchun maktabga qaytib keldi. 1986 yilga kelib u har ikkala muharriri bo'lib ishlagan Kaliforniya Normativ-huquqiy hujjatlari bo'yicha muxbir va jamoat manfaatlari to'g'risidagi qonunlar markazi ma'muriy direktori. Shu bilan birga, 1989 yilda Robert Fellmeth bolalar huquqlarini himoya qilish instituti qoshidagi bolalarni himoya qilish mavzusiga o'tdi. 1995 yilda, ikkalasi ham qirq yoshga to'lganida, Julie D'Angelo va Robert Fellmet turmushga chiqdilar.[31]

Professor Robert Fellmeth, jamoat manfaatlari to'g'risidagi qonunlar narxlari kafedrasi egasi sifatida CPILning ijrochi direktori lavozimida ishlaydi. Ammo so'nggi yigirma yillik ishlarining aksariyati ma'muriy direktor, professor Julianne Fellmeth tomonidan boshqarilgan. O'sha davrda CPIL iste'molchilarni himoya qilishda ishtirok etdi, xususan, PUC, Davlat advokati, Buxgalteriya kengashi, Sug'urta departamenti, Tibbiy kengash, Pudratchilar davlat litsenziyalash kengashi. U Sarbanes - Oxley buxgalteriya islohotlarini amalga oshirish uchun shtat qonunchiligini ishlab chiqishda va CPIL-da homiylik qilgan. CPIL "Katta uch buxgalteriya" firmasi tomonidan qo'llab-quvvatlanadigan siyosatga qarshi chiqdi.[32] Bir misol Bonni Mur ish. CPIL, hisob-kitob kengashida, go'yoki amaldagi CPAlar hukmronlik qilganligi, "buxgalter" so'zini o'zlaridan boshqalari tomonidan kengash qoidalari orqali foydalanishni taqiqlashga urinishgan deb da'vo qildi.[33] Sud kengashni amaliyotchilar segmentiga faqat ushbu atamani egallashga ruxsat berishni taqiqladi - bu CPIL va boshqalar bahslashish yanada keng ma'noga ega.

CPIL shuningdek, davlat qonunchilik organi vakolatiga kiruvchi idoralar monitoringini olib borishda faol ishtirok etdi. CPIL Pudratchining Davlat litsenziyalash kengashi (CSLB) ijro etilishi monitoringi xodimlari sifatida ishlagan. Tom Papageorge - bu uzoq vaqtdan beri federal va shtatdagi oq tanli jinoyatlar bo'yicha prokuror. CSLB loyihasi qonunchilikni uning ijro etuvchi tizimini o'zgartirishga olib keldi, shu jumladan vakolatxonalar va pudratchilarning majburiyatlari bo'yicha iste'molchilar huquqlarini himoya qilish.[34]

CPIL professori Julie Fellmeth o'zi vakolatli shifokorlar amaliyoti va bemorlarning xavfsizligi bilan bog'liq bo'lgan ko'p yillik tekshiruvga ruxsat beruvchi qonunchilikka muvofiq Tibbiy Kengashning ijro etilishi monitoringi sifatida tayinlangan. Uning hisobotlari, yuqorida aytib o'tilganidek, shifokor intizomini o'zgartiradigan qonunchilikka olib keldi.[35]

CPIL targ'iboti natijasida ba'zi boshqa qonunlar qabul qilindi, chunki ko'plab boshqa kasblar va kasblarning tibbiy reglamenti bekor qilindi. Iste'molchilar bilan ishlash departamenti tarkibidagi "iste'molchilar tergovchilari" umumiy guruhining o'rniga Tibbiy kengashda ixtisoslashgan tergovchilar mavjud. Xuddi shunday, Bosh prokuratura huzurida ushbu ishlarni sudga yuboradigan maxsus tibbiy sifat bo'limiga ega. Va Ma'muriy eshituvlar idorasi, ishlarni ko'rib chiquvchi Ma'muriy qonun sudyalarini (ALJ) taqdim etadi, endi sudlarni olib boradigan alohida guruhga ega bo'lib, sudyalarning kichik guruhiga ushbu mavzu bo'yicha ko'plab ishlarni boshdan kechirishga imkon beradi. alkogol, moliyaviy, ko'chmas mulk va boshqa ko'plab tartibga solish sohalari bilan shug'ullanadigan ALJlar bo'yicha holatlar. CPIL ushbu o'zgarishlarni (1990 yilda SB 2375 (Presley) va 1993 yilda SB 916 (Presley)) yaratadigan qonunchilikka homiylik qildi. Tibbiy kengash ishlari endi to'rtdan beshgacha emas, balki uch bosqichda ko'rib chiqilishi mumkin. An'anaviy ravishda va aksariyat idoralarga kelsak, ALJ tinglovidan so'ng, taklif qilingan qaror qayta ko'rib chiqilmoqda de novo Tibbiy kengash tomonidan (sud ekspertizasi bo'lmagan va ko'rsatuvlarni ko'rmagan - CPILning qarshi bo'lgan qadam) va keyin yuqori sud tomonidan mustaqil hukmni ko'rib chiqishga, apellyatsiya sudiga shikoyat qilishning avtomatik huquqiga va Oliy sudning qaroriga binoan. Tibbiy kengashga nisbatan CPIL apellyatsiya sudini iltimosnoma bilan ko'rib chiqadigan o'zgarishni qo'lga kiritdi (va shuning uchun o'z xohishiga ko'ra). CPILning ta'kidlashicha, bu erda farq shundaki, "huquq" apellyatsiyasining uchinchi darajasi hatto soxta shikoyatlar ham yakuniy qarorni bir necha yilga kechiktirishi mumkin. Shunday qilib, Tibbiy kengash tizimida protseduralar biroz kamroq va mansabdor shaxslar tomonidan yaxshilangan tajribaga ega.[36]Umumiy jarayondan tashqari, CPIL mutaxassislar, jumladan shifokorlar, hamshiralar va boshqa sog'liqni saqlash xodimlari va advokatlar orasida alkogol va giyohvand moddalarni suiiste'mol qilish muammosiga katta tashviqot ishlarini olib bordi. Tibbiy kengashni nazorat qilish monitorida professor D'Angelo Fellmet Tibbiy kengashning "burilish" dasturini tekshirdi - qobiliyatsizligi yoki boshqa xavfli amaliyotda ayblanayotganlarga giyohvand moddalarni suiste'mol qilish dasturlari orqali intizomni kechiktirish yoki yumshatish imkonini berdi. U shuningdek tizimning juda ko'p "o'yinlarini" topdi.[37] Uning xulosalari Davlat auditorligi idorasi tomonidan o'tkazilgan ikkita oldingi tekshiruv natijalarini takrorladi. Uning hisobotidan keyin o'tkazilgan yana bir tekshiruv yana o'sha tanqidni takrorladi. Shunga ko'ra, Tibbiy Kengashning burilish dasturi 2011 yilda kuchga kirgan Kengashning bir ovozdan qabul qilingan ovozi bilan bekor qilindi. CPILning pozitsiyasi giyohvandlik / spirtli ichimliklarni reabilitatsiyasiga qarshi turish emas, balki politsiya qilinmagan yoki mos kelmaydigan qalbakilashtirilgan davolash usullaridan foydalanishni oldini olishdir. amaliyotni etarli darajada intizomiy himoyasiz va natijada bemorga xavf tug'dirmasdan davom ettirish.[38]

Mutaxassislarning ko'rsatmalari, maslahat berish, tayinlash va kengashlar

Yuqorida qayd etilgan prokurorlar bilan jinoyatlar bo'yicha oq tanli maslahatlashuvdan tashqari, Fellmet iste'molchilar va monopoliyaga qarshi qonunlar, normativ-huquqiy hujjatlar, bolalar to'g'risidagi qonunlar va huquqiy axloq qoidalari bilan bog'liq bo'lgan xususiy va davlat ishlarida ekspert guvoh sifatida xizmat qilgan. U San-Diego, Los-Anjeles va boshqa 7 okrug okrug prokurorlari, sud komissiyasining sud majlislarida ijro etilishida ishtirok etgan shtat bosh prokurori, Kaliforniya va Vashington shtatlari Barlari va AQShning janubiy okrugi prokurori tomonidan ushlab turilgan.[39]

1994 yildan to hozirgi kungacha bo'lgan ko'p yillar davomida professor Fellmet AQSh prokurori va federal sudyalik lavozimlariga arizalarni ko'rib chiqadigan federal "skrining" qo'mitalarida ishlagan. Senator Barbara Bokschi tomonidan tayinlangan, u Bush prezidentligi davrida Kaliforniyaning janubiy okrugiga tayinlanganlarni ikki tomonlama skrining qo'mitasida ishlagan va hozirda Obama ma'muriyati uchun senator Bokschi tomonidan tayinlangan qo'mitadagi 6 kishidan biri. Kaliforniya senatorlarining har birida shunday qo'mita mavjud va ushbu okrugdagi ochiq federal lavozimlarning 1/2 qismi uchun har bir ekran mavjud.[40]

1980 yillar davomida Fellmeth CPIL ishi bilan bog'liq ikkita taxtada xizmat qildi. Ular orasida 1981-1985 yillarda iste'molchilar hisobotlarini nashr etuvchi Amerika Qo'shma Shtatlari Iste'molchilar uyushmasi kengashi bor. Keyinchalik u 1986–91 yillarda Kaliforniya Umumiy Ish Kengashida ishlagan va 1989-91 yillarda uning sud jarayoni raisi sifatida ishlagan. Uning ishlaridan biri, qayta saylanmoqchi bo'lgan sudyalarning o'z saylov byulletenlarini moliyalashtirish talabini - sudning yuqori lavozimidagi ish haqi yillik maoshiga yaqinlashish evaziga moliyalashtirish talabini bekor qilishga urinish muvaffaqiyatsiz tugadi. The Kaplan ish Fellmetning bunday davlat tomonidan yaratilgan xarajatlar sud kampaniyasi talablarini talab qiladigan majburiyatlarni qo'shganligi va sudlarning mustaqilligi to'g'risidagi konstitutsiyaviy talablarni buzganligi haqidagi argumentini rad etdi.[41]

Fellmeth 1992 yildan 2012 yilgacha Vashington shahridagi jamoat manfaatlari lobbi bo'lgan Public Citizens Foundation jamg'armasi raisi bo'lib ishlagan va Kengash tarkibida qolmoqda. [www.citizen.org] Jamiyat fuqarosi tarkibiga Kongress ("Kongress qo'riqchisi"), Sog'liqni saqlash tadqiqot guruhi, Global savdo kuzatuvi, Energiya siyosati, sud ishlari bo'limi va Texas shtatidagi ofisga yo'naltirilgan bo'linmalar kiradi. Ushbu bo'limlar avtoulovlarda xavfsizlik yostiqchalari, shaffoflik va hukumatdagi axloq qoidalarini himoya qilishdi (shu jumladan yaqinda Kongress tomonidan insayderlar savdosini taqiqlovchi qonunchilik), Konstitutsiyaga o'zgartirish kiritish uchun harakat qilmoqda. Citizens United Oliy sudning ishi, korporatsiyalarga siyosiy harakatlar qo'mitalari orqali cheklovsiz yoki to'liq oshkor etilmasdan kampaniyalarga o'z hissalarini qo'shish uchun so'z erkinligi huquqini beradi. Sog'liqni saqlash tadqiqot guruhi nashr etdi Eng yaxshi tabletkalar - eng yomon tabletkalar kitobi va uning FDA targ'iboti bir nechta xavfli dorilarni bozordan olib chiqilishiga olib keldi. Sud jarayonlari guruhi AQSh Oliy sudining advokatlik faoliyatiga ixtisoslashgan va sud ko'rib chiqqan ishlarning taxminan 1/3 qismida advokat tayyorlaydi. [www.citizen.org]

Professor Fellmet yordamchi iste'mol tashkilotlarini yaratishda muhim rol o'ynadi. 1983 yilda u birinchi uch yil ichida CPIL loyihasi sifatida Utility Consumer Action Network (UCAN) ni yaratishda yordam berdi. San-Diego gaz va elektr ta'minoti korxonasining hisob-kitob konvertlariga CPIL tomonidan PUC tomonidan olib borilgan ma'muriy choralar orqali kirish huquqini izladi. CPIL bu ishni yutib chiqdi va UCAN shundan buyon kommunal xizmatlarni to'lash bo'yicha yirik tashkilotga aylandi, [www.ucan.org] 1988 yilda u maxfiylik huquqlari bo'yicha milliy tadqiqot va targ'ibot markazi bo'lgan Privacy Rights Clearinghouse-ni yaratishda yordam berdi. [www.privacyrights.org] 2006 yilda u San-Diego universiteti yuridik fakulteti qoshidagi Energiya siyosati tashabbuslari markazini (EPIC) tashkil etishga yordam berdi va uning maslahat kengashida o'tirdi. EPIC energetika va atrof-muhit qonunchiligi bo'yicha yuridik maktab kurslarini, PUC, Energetika komissiyasi va boshqa idoralar bilan klinikalarga joylashishni va har yili milliy ekspertlarning ekologik simpoziumini o'z ichiga oladi. 2008 yilda EPIC global isish mavzusida mamlakatdagi birinchi talabalar qonunchiligini ko'rib chiqishga homiylik qildi.[42]

Davlat advokatlari intizomi monitoringi lavozimi, advokatlarning odob-axloq qoidalari va tartibga solish

1987 yilda Fellmeth yangi tuzilgan State Bar Discipline Monitor lavozimiga o'sha paytdagi Bosh prokuror Jon Van de Kamp tomonidan tayinlangan. Ushbu bir martalik lavozim besh yil muddatga davom etib, Oliy sud raisi va uni tuzuvchi qonun chiqaruvchi organga hisobot berdi. U shtatdagi advokatura faoliyatini ko'rib chiqish uchun kashfiyot vakolatiga ega bo'lgan va advokatura intizom tizimini o'rganib chiqqan lavozimni boshqargan. U to'qqizta ma'ruza qildi va ularning ko'pchiligini amalga oshirish uchun islohotlar to'g'risidagi qonunchilikni yoki Bar qonunlarini ishlab chiqishni homiylik qildi. Uning ishi Kaliforniya shtati advokatlar intizom tizimini yangilashga olib keldi.[43]

U advokatlarning noto'g'ri xatti-harakatlarini keskin tanqid qilgan. Fuqarolik protsesslarida advokatlar tomonidan ishlatilgan vijdonsizlikni uning ochiqchasiga baholaganligi haqida bir shtatdagi advokatlar intizomi monitoringi hisobotida shunday deyilgan: "Sudga vakillik qilishda, mijozlarga bergan va'dalarida, noxush advokatlar bilan munosabatlarda va ehtimol, ayniqsa, punktlarda advokatning insofsizlik darajasi" va vakolatli organlar va yuridik ma'lumotnomalar, intellektual mag'rurlik darajasi bilan har qanday kishini uyaltiradi. [...] Muammoning bir qismi hiyla-nayrang uchun belgilangan sanktsiyalar yo'qligi bilan bog'liq. [...] Yangi qoidalarni ishlab chiqish mumkin raqiblarning vakolatxonasini boshqaradigan xatti-harakatlar va hozirgi kunda munosib nomusga ega bo'lgan kasbga sharaf o'lchovini tiklash. "

Fellmet tomonidan tavsiya etilgan shtat advokatlarining ayrim islohotlari 1990-yillarning boshlarida, shu jumladan mustaqil davlat advokatlar sudini tashkil etishda qabul qilingan. Ilgari advokatlar o'zlarining hamkasblariga qarshi shikoyatlarni ko'rib chiqdilar, 18 kishilik qo'mitada ko'rib chiqish asosan amaliyotchi advokatlardan iborat edi. Kaliforniya Oliy sudi barcha ishlarni ko'rib chiqdi va shtatlarning sud qarorlarini qabul qilish tizimini tobora ko'proq tanqid qildi. Fellmeth tomonidan tavsiya etilgan yangi Davlat advokatlar sudi va ketma-ket shtatlarning to'rtta prezidentlari tomonidan qo'llab-quvvatlanib, shtat advokati yurisdiktsiyasini bekor qildi va uni asosan Oliy sud tomonidan tayinlanadigan va amaldagi advokatlardan ajratilgan mustaqil shtat sudyalari sudiga topshirdi. Oliy sud 1990-yillardagi o'zgarishni ma'qulladi va har bir ishni Oliy sud tomonidan qayta ko'rib chiqilishini talab qilmasdan yangi sudga yakuniy qaror qabul qilish to'g'risida buyruq chiqardi.[44]

Yaqinda CPIL tomonidan olib borilgan Davlat advokatlari advokati uning boshqaruv tizimini sezilarli darajada qayta ko'rib chiqishni o'z ichiga oladi. O'z tarixining aksariyat qismida shtat advokatura kengashini "Boshqaruvchilar kengashi" tarkibidagi 23 a'zo boshqargan. Kengash tarkibiga okrug saylovlarida boshqa advokatlar tomonidan tanlangan 17 nafar advokatdan iborat ustunlik kiritildi. CPIL, ular ko'pincha xususiy, mahalliy savdo uyushmalari tomonidan boshqarilgan deb ta'kidladi. 2011 yilda shtat qonunchilik organi CPIL tomonidan uzoq vaqtdan beri izlanib kelinayotgan choralarni qabul qildi, bu esa tartibga solingan kasb vakillari tomonidan agentlikni nazoratini tugatdi. Shunga ko'ra, yangi tashkil etilgan shtat advokatlari 19 kishilik "Vasiylik kengashi" tomonidan nazorat qilinadi, 6 a'zosi advokatlar tomonidan saylanadi va qolgan 13 nafari Oliy sud, shu jumladan davlat amaldorlari tomonidan tanlanadi. CPIL tomonidan qo'llab-quvvatlanadigan qonunchilik, shuningdek, shtat advokatlariga Bog'li-Kinning "Ochiq uchrashuvlar to'g'risida" gi qonuniga bo'ysundirdi.[45]

Jamiyat manfaatlari, iste'molchilar uchun nashrlar

Professor Fellmetning iste'molchilar / antitrestlik sohasidagi nashrlarida 11 ta kitob va ko'plab ilmiy maqolalar (shu jumladan Tartibga solish nazariyasi yuqorida muhokama qilingan maqola, konferentsiya taqdimotlari / nashrlar, sharhlar yoki gazeta nashrlari.[46] Ularga, yuqorida qayd etilgan uchta kitobdan tashqari, u quyidagi jamoat manfaatlari bilan bog'liq kitoblarni yozgan yoki o'z hissasini qo'shgan: Er siyosati, mualliflar bilan, Grossman, 1972; boblar Amerika hukumati, siyosatshunoslik matni Piter Voll tomonidan tahrirlangan (Little, Brown 1972) va Kaliforniya ma'muriy va antitrest qonuni, w / Professor Ralf Folsom (Butteruort, 1991). U 2013 yilgi 4-nashrning hammuallifi Kaliforniya Oq bo'yinbog'li jinoyatlar va biznes bo'yicha sud jarayoni, iqtisodiy, siyosiy va boshqa oq yoqadagi jinoyatlar to'g'risida 700 sahifadan iborat risola.[47]

Bolalarni himoya qilish va bolalar huquqlarini himoya qilish instituti

Jamiyat manfaatlari huquqi markazini tashkil etganidan o'n yil o'tgach, Fellmeth "Bolalarni himoya qilish instituti" (CAI) singlisi targ'ibot guruhini yaratdi.[48] Sakramentodagi iste'molchilar uchun lobbi ishlarini olib borganidan so'ng, u asosiy e'tiborni bolalar huquqlariga qaratishni tanladi.

CAI tuzilishi

Bolalarni himoya qilish instituti (CAI) ma'muriy direktor / advokat tomonidan boshqariladi; San-Diyegodagi CAI advokatlarining yana ikkitasi CAI yuridik fakulteti bitiruvchilaridir. CAI, shuningdek, Sakramento va Vashingtonda joylashgan ofislarida ishlaydigan advokatlarga ega.[49] CAIga bolalar uchun kengash deb nomlangan ekspertlar guruhi maslahat beradi. U 20 ta hozirgi va zohiriy a'zolarni o'z ichiga oladi. Ular orasida Amerika pediatriya akademiyasining sobiq prezidenti, Kaliforniya tibbiyot kengashining sobiq raisi va AQSh davlat tibbiy kengashlari federatsiyasining sobiq prezidenti, San-Diyegodagi bolalar shifoxonasining prezidenti, yaqinda xizmat qilgan ikki shtat qonunchilari va bolalar ta'limi sohasidagi rahbarlar bor. , oila qonunchiligi, voyaga etmaganlar huquqi, sog'liqni saqlash va boshqa intizomlar.[50]

O'qitish va klinikalar

1989 yildan beri Robert Fellmeth diqqat markazida bolalarni himoya qilish. U siyosat ta'siri, sudga kirish imkoniyati, qashshoqlik va imkoniyat, ta'lim, ovqatlanish, nogironlik va boshqa huquqlar, shuningdek, fuqarolik erkinliklari bo'yicha an'anaviy materiallarni qamrab oladigan Bola huquqlari bo'yicha qonun maktabi kursini ishlab chiqdi. Voyaga etmaganlar to'g'risidagi qonun uchun uning matni, Bola huquqlari va himoya vositalari, uchinchi nashrida (Clarity Press, 2002, 2006, 2011). CAI akademik dasturi, shuningdek, talabalar voyaga etmaganlarga qaramlik sudida zo'ravonlik ko'rsatgan bolalarni himoya qilish uchun sud tomonidan ayblangan huquqbuzarlarning ishi bo'yicha davlat advokati tomonidan sertifikatlangan klinikalarni o'z ichiga oladi. Bu, shuningdek, talabalarga San-Diego, Sakramento va Vashington shtatlaridagi CAIning professional sud da'vatchilari va lobbistlari bilan ishlashga imkon beradigan "siyosat klinikasi" ni o'z ichiga oladi, u erda uning idoralari va advokatlari bor. [www.caichildlaw.org] Bitirishda "Jamiyat manfaatlari to'g'risidagi qonun" kontsentratsiyasini belgilaydigan CPILning "jamoat manfaatlari to'g'risidagi qonun" dasturida bo'lgani kabi, talabalar ham "Bola huquqlari kontsentratsiyasi" da kredit va bitiruv to'g'risida ma'lumot olishlari mumkin. Bola huquqlari kontsentratsiyasi CAI kurslarini maxsus ta'lim klinikasi va AQShning Huquqshunoslik maktabi va Ta'lim maktabi tomonidan taklif qilinadigan boshqa kurslarni birlashtiradi.[51]

CAI test sud jarayonini olib boradi, qonunlarni tuzishga aralashadi va lobbilar. U 1990 yildan buyon Kaliforniyada turli xil qonun loyihalarini, shu jumladan bolalarni himoya qilish dasturlarini moliyalashtirish uchun "Kid's Plates" (yurak belgisi, ortiqcha belgisi, qo'l shakli yoki yuragi bilan Kaliforniyaning avtoulov raqamlari) va suzish havzalari, avtoulovdagi bolalar uchun xavfsizlik qonunlarini homiylik qilmoqda. , velosiped dubulg'alari va o'yin maydonchalari. CAI has also been active in sponsoring legislation in the areas of child support collection, homeless youth, and child welfare.[52] From 1991 to 2004 CAI published a 650-page California Children's Budget— detailing the demographic data and federal/state/local spending relevant to child poverty, nutrition, health, disability, education (k-12 and higher), protection, and delinquency.[53] Since 1998, it has issued an annual Legislative Report Card on the performance of the State Legislature, including a score or grade for each legislator. CAI also publishes a Children's Regulatory Law Reporter, summarizing rulemaking by the major agencies affecting children (especially the Departments of Health Services, Social Services, and Education).[54]

Since 2008, CAI has released national reports in three subject areas: (a) effective counsel for children in dependency court,[55] (b) disclosure of information pertaining to the deaths and near deaths from child abuse,[56] and (c) state takings from foster children (The Fleecing of Foster Children).[57] The pattern for these studies is to issue an initial report, and then to publish an updated edition every two to three years to stay on the theme of each. The reports examine the statutes and rules of the fifty states in the subject matter, and for the first two subject areas, publish "grades" from A to F for each state's performance in protecting its children. Two such updated reports (a) and (b) above were released in 2012. A future report on new subject matter has been announced for 2013 analyzing the performance of the Department of Health and Human Services, federal courts, and Congress in assuring state compliance with constitutional and statutory floors in child protection.

Reports on the California state level have been published studying the fate of foster children emancipating into adulthood, where outcomes are problematical. CAI has been promoting a solution to the fate of emancipating foster children, called the "Transition Life Coach" (TLC) plan. CAI argues that it recognizes that the median age of self-sufficiency in the U.S, is not 21 years of age, but 26. The TLC plan creates a "trust instrument" funded at the median level of parental support for children (approximately $50,000 for self-sufficiency). The court, who has been the legal parent of the foster child would continue to have a presence in each youth's life. A trustee, called a "Transition Life Coach" (a name selected by foster kids), would provide personal mentoring and write checks under a plan developed with the youth, and monitored by the court. CAI argues that this method allows major input from the child, and is personal. The "coach" (trustee) will often be someone known to the youth, or someone trained to guide him or her, with each having no more than one or two to assist. CAI has written reports and conducted an economic study indicating that the long run consequences would involve public money savings. And CAI has succeeded in amending California law to allow these trusts to be formed by dependency court judges for any foster youth to achieve self-sufficiency without age or other limitation. Nevertheless, no county in California or any other state has to date implemented the proposal, nor has any effectuated a pilot project to date.[58]

Future announced California reports may include (a) a study of child representation in family court, (b) a survey of the impact of AB 12 – the state law implementing the federal Fostering Connections to Success Act which can extend assistance to foster children to age 21, (c) and a study of the effects of public coverage of foster children and dependency proceedings.[40] As to the last, CAI has consistently supported presumptive transparency of public decisionmaking affecting foster children, with liberal allowance for protective orders and confidentiality where in the child's best interest. CAI has contended that a presumptively concealed system – typical in most states—allows child abuse harm and foster child detriment to continue without democratic check.[59]

Child Related Organizations

Fellmeth has been involved in the governance of the National Association of Counsel for Children (NACC) since 2004, serving as its Board President from 2010 to 2012, [www.naccchildlaw.org]. He is on the Board of the First Star Foundation, [www.firststar.org]. He has been on the Board of the National Association of Child Advocates and counsel to the Board of its successor, Voices for America's Children. [www.voices.org]

Within California, Fellmeth helped in the development of the Maternal and Child Health Access Foundation of Lynn Kersey in Los Angeles starting in the 1980s that continues to provide services and advocacy for impoverished pregnant women and young children. [www.mchaccess.org] He remains one of its board members. For the last 22 years, CAI has convened the "Child Advocates Roundtable" in Sacramento, bringing together for meetings, conference calls and webcasts, 65 organizations with an interest in children, with quarterly education meetings, special expert speakers and advocacy planning and coordination work. [41]

Child Related Publications

In addition to reports, articles, and conference presentation publications discussed briefly above, Fellmeth has written or contributed to a number of books in the child rights area in addition to the Child Rights and Remedies matn. Bunga quyidagilar kiradi Health and Welfare for Families in the 21st Century, edited by Helen Wallace, (Jones and Bartlett, 4th edition, 2007); Expert Testimony in Child Related Litigation, (w. Dr. David Chadwick), Chapter 12 in The Forensic Pathology of Infancy and Childhood (edited by R. Byard and K. Collins, Springer Publishing, 2013); va Legal Issues, Chapter 31 in Child Maltreatment 4E: A Clinical Guide and Reference (edited by Chadwick, Giardino and Alexander, STM Learning, 2013).[60]

Sud jarayoni

Fellmeth has been counsel in 40 published appellate cases, half as counsel for a party, usually the plaintiff or petitioner challenging corporate or governmental action. The remainder represent amicus contributions at the circuit or Supreme Court level. Consumer, white collar crime and legal ethics litigation make up about 60% of all of the appellate litigation, with the remaining 40% focusing on child rights.[61]

Jamiyat manfaatlari bo'yicha huquq markazi

The most recent major case of CPIL is Shames v. Hertz, an antitrust case against all 7 of the airport rental car companies operating in California, and the California Travel and Tourism Commission (CTTC), a state agency controlled by the tourism industry. The case challenged two airport rental car charges that 2006 legislation allowed the industry to "itemize" on consumer bills. The case alleges that instead of "itemizing" the charges, they were "added on" to the previous charges on every subsequent bill, effective on January 1, 2007 when the legislation took effect, with the CTTC assisting in the horizontal price fix. The case was initiated and litigated by CPIL, with three antitrust firms brought into the case. It went to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal on an important legal issue pertaining to legislative intent and agency liability, and which upheld the CPIL position – reversing the trial court dismissal of the CTTC from the case. The case was settled in 2013, with a court order stopping what started as a $90 million a year overcharge to consumers, awarding 250,000 consumers as much or more than the overcharge they suffered, and subjecting the CTTC to the Open Meetings Act it had allegedly violated repeatedly.[62]

Bolalarni himoya qilish instituti

CAI's litigation includes California Foster Parents' Association v. Lightbourne, a Ninth Circuit case that found the Ijtimoiy xizmatlar bo'limi compensation to family foster care providers to be over 30% below their actual out-of-pocket costs, in violation of federal law. CAI argued that these rates were also irrational because children in homes with functioning parents have much better outcomes than do group homes with employees serving the parental role, but the latter receive more than 8 times the compensation as do families. The litigation was assisted by the pro bono efforts of Morrison va Foerster joining with the CAI legal team. The supply of family foster care providers had fallen as the compensation levels retracted due to uncompensated inflation in the years following 1998. The case required a 30% immediate increase and CPI adjustment hereafter.[63]

CAI has two other test cases in the courts as of 2013. One challenges the 388 child caseloads of Sacramento dependency court attorneys (E.T., the other challenges the rules of the Department of Social Services (DSS) that allegedly implemented SB 39, a bill sponsored by CAI to provide for disclosure of deaths from child abuse or neglect consistent with federal and state law. The complaint contends that the rules, influenced by counties and social workers, conceals the causes of deaths contrary to the statutory intent and construction.[64] In 2013, the Ninth Circuit upheld the dismissal of the case, invoking the equitable doctrine of "abstention," or categorical deferral to state court practice. Fellmeth has condemned the decision.[65]

Fellmeth and CAI are also involved as counsel for objectors to the current federal case of Fraley va Facebook.[66]

In addition to appellate litigation by CAI and CPIL, Professor Fellmeth has written numerous amicus briefs at the appellate level, including the brief for the National Association of Counsel for Children in the Troxel case, and for CAI on the Camreta case—both before the U.S. Supreme Court since 2006. The Camreta brief was selected as "Brief of the Week" by the National Law Journal in 2011.[67]

Mukofotlar

In 1997, Fellmeth was named "Community Champion for 30 Years of Work in Injury Prevention" by the Civil Justice Foundation. In 2009, he was honored by the University's School of Education Sciences and Leadership as a "Remarkable Leader in Education." In 2012, Fellmeth won the Thorsnes Prize for outstanding scholarship for the third edition of his text Child Rights and Remedies.[68]

Adabiyotlar

  1. ^ Kailua High School is one of four public high schools on the Windward side of Oahu, see Kailua o'rta maktabi. Fellmeth's class of 1963 site is at [1] /
  2. ^ [2]
  3. ^ [3]
  4. ^ The first issue of the Harvard CR-CL Law Review appeared in 1966, Fellmeth was an editor in 1969-70. An early volume featured his co-authored article: "The Federal Trade Commission and the Freedom of Information Act, a Study in Malfeasance", measuring the FTC 's compliance with the 1967 enacted FOIA. A subsequent issue in 1970 featured two Nader-related articles, one by Nader on the FOIA and one by John Esposito leading the Nader air pollution federal inquiry. Qarang [4]
  5. ^ See Schulz, Fellmeth and Cox, The Nader Report on the Federal Trade Commission, Baron Press, 1968, at The Nader Report on the Federal Trade Commission.
  6. ^ [5]
  7. ^ See [www.citizen.org]
  8. ^ Mark Green, Jeyms Fouls, David Zwick, Who Runs Congress, Bantam Press, 1972, see [6]
  9. ^ See Acton and LeMond, Ralph Nader: A Man and a Movement, (Warner Paperback, 1972), 239 pages.
  10. ^ [7]
  11. ^ See California Bus. & Profs. Code Sections 16700 va boshq., 17200 va boshq. and 17500 va boshq.
  12. ^ People v. National Association of Realtors 120 Cal.App.3d 459 (1981), See People v. Mobile Magic Sales Inc. 96 Cal.;App.3d 1 (1980); Shuningdek qarang Corsetti v. Rice 21 Cal.3d 431 (1978).
  13. ^ Qarang
  14. ^ Amendments were enacted in 1977, and added most of the current provisions of the law in new Chapter 5 of the Business and Professions Code starting at section 17200, see Stats. 1977, c.299.
  15. ^ The most recent consumer case of Fellmeth's is the CPIL antitrust prosecution of the rental car industry and the California Travel and Tourism Commission (CTTC) for alleged price fixing. Filed in 2007, the case went to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal in 2010, See Shames v. Hertz 607 F3d 611 (9th Cir. 2010) on the liability of the CTTC. The trial court had dismissed the agency out, but the published decision reversed the district court and upheld its potential liability. Qarang [8]. The case was resolved in 2013 with judgment for the plaintiff class. Qarang [9] at "curriculum vita", p. 11.
  16. ^ See Robert Fellmeth, California's Unfair Competition Act: Conundrums and Confusions, Report to the Law Revision Commission of California, January 1995, 227-277; qarang [10]
  17. ^ Qarang
  18. ^ See history of Proposition 64 at
  19. ^ [11]
  20. ^ See testimony and articles at
  21. ^ See current scope of regulation and history of amendments reducing it, California Bus. & Profs. Code section 18880 va boshq.
  22. ^ [12]
  23. ^ See current classes taught at bottom of
  24. ^ See Le Bup Thi Dao v. Board of Medical Quality Assurance (1st Dist. Ct. of Appeal Case No. A046101 (1990))
  25. ^ See e.g., Belth v. Gillespie 232 Cal.App.3d 896 (1991) a Public Records Act request regarding junk bond related records of the Department of Insurance, holding them not exempt from disclosure and awarding CPIL attorney's fees.
  26. ^ See discussion at
  27. ^ See report of the issues and enactment at
  28. ^ For a discussion of the legislation that applied the prohibition on "gag" clauses to all agencies within the Department of Consumer Affairs, see CPIL Hails Governor Brown's Approval of AB 2570 (Hill), Which Bans "Regulatory Gag Clauses" in Civil Settlement Agreements by DCA Licensees at [13]
  29. ^ See the detailed discussion of CPIL's reform proposals in Robert Fellmeth, A Theory of Regulation: A Platform for State Regulatory Reform, 5 CRLR No. 2 (Spring 1985), available at [14]
  30. ^ Robert Fellmeth, A Theory of Regulation: A Platform for State Regulatory Reform, California Regulatory Law Reporter, Vol 5, No. 2 (Spring, 1985); see also the commentaries in the Muxbir 1990 yillar davomida
  31. ^ Qarang, masalan.
  32. ^ For advocacy work on Accountancy issues, see the 17 entries at
  33. ^ Moore v. State Board of Accountancy 2 Cal.4th 299 (1992) (amicus).
  34. ^ Qarang Contractor State Licensing Board Monitor Reports, 10-10-01, 4-1-02, 10-1-02, and 4-1-03. Center for Public Interest Law, University of San Diego School of Law, at [15].
  35. ^ Medical Board investigation and advocacy by CPIL began with the early Report authored by Robert Fellmeth: Physician Discipline in California: A Code Blue Emergency, Center for Public Interest Law, University of San Diego School of Law, 4-5-1989, see [16]
  36. ^ Leone v. Medical Board (2000) 22 Cal. 4th 660
  37. ^ Julianne Fellmeth, Initial Report of the Medical Board of California Enforcement Monitor Center for Public Interest Law, University of San Diego School of Law, 11-1-04; see also Julianne Fellmeth, Final Report of the Medical Board of California Enforcement Monitor, Center for Public Interest Law, University of San Diego School of Law, 11-1-05, at [17].
  38. ^ See the reports by Brian Joseph, Orange County Register Reporter through 2007 at [18]; Shuningdek qarang Testimony of Julianne D'Angelo Fellmeth, Review of Health Practitioner Substance Abuse Programs, Center for Public Interest Law before the SENATE COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, March 10, 2008, at [19].
  39. ^ For annotated listing of expert witness assignments, including those listed, see "curriculum vita" at pages 13–16 at [20]
  40. ^ [21]
  41. ^ Leon S. Kaplan v. County of Los Angeles 894 F.2d 1076 (9th Cir. 1990).
  42. ^ Qarang
  43. ^ See "Professor Fellmeth was appointed to a 1986 legislatively created position of State Bar Discipline Monitor by then-state Attorney General John Van De Kamp in January 1987. The position was instructed to investigate California's attorney discipline administered by the State Bar and to recommend reforms to the legislature and the Chief Justice of the California Supreme Court. Assisted by CPIL, Professor Fellmeth drafted and published reports on the system every six months for five years, commencing with the first report issued on June 1, 1987." Da [22] see "curriculum vita", at 4
  44. ^ See especially of SB 1543 (Presley) (Chapter 1114, Statutes of 1986), and SB 1498 (Presley) (Chapter 1159, Statutes of 1988; see also [23]
  45. ^ See SB 163, enacted in 2011 (the State Bar Dues bill). Unlike other agencies, the State Bar must annually obtain authorization to bill attorneys for its costs. The 2011 version amended the State Bar Act as described above, Stats 2011, c. 417, See California Bus. & Profs. Code Section 6040 va boshq., as so amended.
  46. ^ For complete listing see “curriculum vita’’ under Fellmeth at
  47. ^ Papageorge and Fellmeth, California White Collar Crime and Business Litigation, (Tower, 4th edition, 2013)
  48. ^ [24]
  49. ^ [25]
  50. ^ Qarang
  51. ^ See concentration descriptions at [26], including child rights and public interest law.
  52. ^ For a regularly updated summary of current CAI legislative advocacy, see [27]
  53. ^ For reports detailing federal, state and local child spending programs as of 2005,[28]
  54. ^ For regular publications of CAI, see
  55. ^ For the third edition of the attorney representation report, See
  56. ^ For the most recent (second edition) of the secrecy report and a video tape of the D.C. press conference, see [29]
  57. ^ For press release on 3-16-11 and other information, see [30] for the report itself, see [31]
  58. ^ See discussion of the TLC plan at
  59. ^ See e.g., CAI OpEd on Los Angeles County Juvenile Court Blanket Order (Mar. 21, 2012), available under "What's New" at [www.caichildlaw.org]
  60. ^ See “Key Works” at
  61. ^ See annotated listing of major reported cases with citations, pp. 5-13 in "curriculum vita" at [32]
  62. ^ See "CPIL files antitrust complaint" at [33],
  63. ^ The case was originally filed as California State Foster Parent Association et al. v. Wagner in United States District Court for the Northern District of California, No.: 07-05086 WHA. CAI served as counsel, along with Morrison and Foerster, for the state's three associations representing family foster care providers. The complaint contended that state compensation rates violated federal law, are set below the actual cost of care, and have impeded the supply of family foster care placements, limiting adoption opportunity. The alleged result was a decline of family placements from 16,000 to 5,000, fewer adoptions. See the related case applicable to group home rates at [34]
  64. ^ Qarang [35] for details regarding these and other recent and current cases involving CAI.
  65. ^ For the ‘’E.T.’’ decision, see
  66. ^ See Daily Journal Publishes CAI OpEd on Proposed Facebook Class Action Settlement (July 22, 2013) under What's New at [36]
  67. ^ For recent amicus cases, see [37]. For CPIL and CAI litigation both as counsel and on an amicus basis from previous years, see citation above of "litigation" under "curriculum vita" at [38].
  68. ^ [39]