var googletag = googletag || {}; googletag.cmd = googletag.cmd || []; googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.pubads().disableInitialLoad(); });
device = device.default;
//this function refreshes [adhesion] ad slot every 60 second and makes prebid bid on it every 60 seconds // Set timer to refresh slot every 60 seconds function setIntervalMobile() { if (!device.mobile()) return if (adhesion) setInterval(function(){ googletag.pubads().refresh([adhesion]); }, 60000); } if(device.desktop()) { googletag.cmd.push(function() { leaderboard_top = googletag.defineSlot('/22018898626/LC_Article_detail_page', [728, 90], 'div-gpt-ad-1591620860846-0').setTargeting('pos', ['1']).setTargeting('div_id', ['leaderboard_top']).addService(googletag.pubads()); googletag.pubads().collapseEmptyDivs(); googletag.enableServices(); }); } else if(device.tablet()) { googletag.cmd.push(function() { leaderboard_top = googletag.defineSlot('/22018898626/LC_Article_detail_page', [320, 50], 'div-gpt-ad-1591620860846-0').setTargeting('pos', ['1']).setTargeting('div_id', ['leaderboard_top']).addService(googletag.pubads()); googletag.pubads().collapseEmptyDivs(); googletag.enableServices(); }); } else if(device.mobile()) { googletag.cmd.push(function() { leaderboard_top = googletag.defineSlot('/22018898626/LC_Article_detail_page', [320, 50], 'div-gpt-ad-1591620860846-0').setTargeting('pos', ['1']).setTargeting('div_id', ['leaderboard_top']).addService(googletag.pubads()); googletag.pubads().collapseEmptyDivs(); googletag.enableServices(); }); } googletag.cmd.push(function() { // Enable lazy loading with... googletag.pubads().enableLazyLoad({ // Fetch slots within 5 viewports. // fetchMarginPercent: 500, fetchMarginPercent: 100, // Render slots within 2 viewports. // renderMarginPercent: 200, renderMarginPercent: 100, // Double the above values on mobile, where viewports are smaller // and users tend to scroll faster. mobileScaling: 2.0 }); });

Construction Dispute Turns On...War Decision

published September 03, 2008

By Author - LawCrossing

( 8 votes, average: 4.4 out of 5)

What do you think about this article? Rate it using the stars above and let us know what you think in the comments below.
<<09/03/08

In fact, a US judge had to determine when and where the US is at war in order to resolve this particular construction case.

Of course, this wasn't just any construction project we're talking about. The project in question, in fact, is the ''Big Dig,'' the massive highway project that consumed Boston for many years.

In May of 2006, some former employees of a concrete supplier to the Big Dig were indicted on a number of charges, among which was submitting fraudulent reports to the government. Not very sexy, so to speak.

But the employees argued that the activity occurred in 2001, which, they said, raises that old civil procedure problem: the statute of limitations.

Indeed, the statute of limitations is five years, so the government could have been barred from prosecuting the employees if their argument was accepted. However, the prosecutor argued that the statute was tolled by the ''Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act.'' Said act states that:

 
When the United States is at war the running of any statute of limitations applicable to any offense (1) involving fraud or attempted fraud against the United States or any agency thereof in any manner, whether by conspiracy or not…shall be suspended until three years after the termination of hostilities as proclaimed by the President or by a concurrent resolution of Congress.
That would, indeed, toll the statute of limitations, depending on when the United States is/was at war.

So the judge, Judge Richard Stearns, was faced with the task of deciding legally when the US is/was at war — all to settle a highway contractor dispute.

What was Judge Stearns' conclusion? That the US was at war with Afghanistan until December 22, 2001, and at war with Iraq until May 1, 2003. This means that for the contractors, the statute was tolled, and the government could proceed with the charges.

However, the more interesting application is that the judge has concluded that the US hasn't been at war since. The judge did note that this was a legal definition, and concluded that the ''war on terror'' isn't something that has been legally declared. The government, meanwhile, did not try to claim that the war on terror is a war for the purposes of the case.

In any event, we now have a legal opinion on when the US has been at war. And it will probably be quite a controversial opinion, too.
( 8 votes, average: 4.4 out of 5)
What do you think about this article? Rate it using the stars above and let us know what you think in the comments below.

Related