Court declines to hear Microsoft antitrust case
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has declined to take up software maker Novell Inc.’s appeal in a long-running antitrust case against Microsoft Corp.
The justices on Monday let stand an appeals court ruling that rejected Novell’s $1 billion lawsuit alleging Microsoft undermined the once popular WordPerfect writing program in favor of its own Word program with the Windows 95 rollout.
Novell claimed Microsoft duped it into developing WordPerfect for Windows 95 only to pull the plug so Microsoft could gain market share with its own product. Novell says it was forced to sell WordPerfect for a $1.2 billion loss.
The 10th Circuit ruled that Novell’s complaint came too late and it failed to make the larger case that Microsoft was protecting a monopoly on operating systems.
High court to hear case of fisherman and red groupers
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a fish story. The case involves the use of a federal law originally aimed at the accounting industry, but which ensnared a fisherman convicted of getting rid of three small red grouper.
The justices said Monday they will review the conviction of commercial fishing boat captain John Yates of Florida. Yates was convicted of destroying evidence: three fish that were under the 20-inch minimum legal size for red grouper caught in the Gulf of Mexico.
The legal issue is that the government used part of the law Congress passed in 2002 in response to the Enron scandal and abuses in the accounting industry. Yates says the law’s anti-shredding provision is intended to prevent the destruction of financial records. The Obama administration said it targets “tangible objects,” including fish.
Court to clarify the process for rescinding mortgages
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court will decide what a home buyer must do to rescind a mortgage that violates the federal Truth in Lending Act.
The justices on Monday agreed to hear an appeal from a Minnesota couple who refinanced their home in 2007 with Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. They claim the company failed to provide some disclosures required under federal law.
The couple sent a written notice of rescission within the three-year statute of limitations, but a federal judge ruled that they should have filed a lawsuit instead. The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed.
The couple argues that federal appeals courts are split on the issue, with some saying written notice is enough and others requiring a lawsuit to rescind. The high court is expected to resolve the split.
