Today's Date: Add To Favorites   
Pa. capital takeover challenged in federal court
Headline Legal News | 2011/12/02 11:03
The state takeover of Pennsylvania's financially troubled capital city received a fresh challenge Thursday, as three Harrisburg residents filed a federal lawsuit calling it an unconstitutional violation of their rights and asking for it to be stopped.

The suit names Gov. Tom Corbett, who signed a law on Oct. 20 enabling an unprecedented takeover of Harrisburg, and the Corbett appointee who, if confirmed, would have broad authority to force the city to pay down a massive debt tied to its trash incinerator.

The lawsuit was filed by a former mayoral candidate, a firefighters' union president and a religious leader. It alleges that the law and the state's takeover violate the plaintiffs' constitutional rights to due process and equal protection.

A Corbett administration spokeswoman said she had not seen the lawsuit and could not immediately comment.

The suit is the latest twist in a battle over who will end up footing the $300 million incinerator debt.

The first attempt to stop the takeover failed last week when a federal bankruptcy judge threw out a petition by a divided City Council to get federal bankruptcy protection for Harrisburg. The judge said the city had been legally barred by a separate state law — signed June 30 by Corbett — from seeking bankruptcy protection and, in any case, had no authority to go over the mayor's head to file it.


Wis. office wants to suspend former DA's license
Court News | 2011/12/01 10:24
The Wisconsin office that regulates attorney conduct asked the state Supreme Court on Wednesday to suspend a former prosecutor's law license for trying to spark an affair with a domestic abuse victim through a barrage of racy text messages and allegedly making sexual remarks to a number of other women.

The Office of Lawyer Regulation filed a complaint with the court alleging former Calumet County District Attorney Ken Kratz violated multiple attorney conduct rules. The office recommended the justices suspend his law license for six months.

Kratz resigned in October 2010 after The Associated Press reported that he sent 30 texts over three days to a then-25-year-old domestic abuse victim in 2009. The Republican district attorney was prosecuting the woman's ex-boyfriend at the time.

Kratz, then 50, called the woman a "tall, young, hot nymph," told her he wanted her to "be so hot" and touted himself as "the prize" with a $350,000 house.

He has since set up a private practice that handles criminal defense, drunken driving, divorce and injury cases, according to the firm's website. Kratz didn't respond to an email or phone message left Wednesday at his office, and his attorney, Robert Bellin, also didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.


Farmers Insurance Settles Class Action Lawsuit
Court Watch | 2011/12/01 10:24
Farmers Insurance entered into a settlement of a nationwide class action lawsuit, In Re Farmers Med-Pay Litigation, pending in the District Court of Canadian County, Oklahoma. The settlement includes Farmers Insurance Company, Inc., Farmers Insurance Exchange, Truck Insurance Exchange, Fire Insurance Exchange, Mid-Century Insurance Company, Farmers Group, Inc., Illinois Farmers Insurance Company, and certain related entities. The Court entered a final order approving the settlement on November 29, 2011.

Plaintiffs alleged that Farmers failed to pay reasonable expenses for necessary medical services related to automobile accidents under Medical Payments and Personal Injury Protection ("PIP") coverage in automobile policies based on Farmers' use of certain claim adjustment systems and procedures. Farmers denies all of Plaintiffs' claims in the lawsuit. However, Farmers agreed to resolve the lawsuit to avoid the burden and expense of continued litigation.

The Settlement Class includes all persons who submitted claims for payment of medical bills related to an automobile accident under Med-pay or PIP coverage if (a) the claim was adjusted from January 1, 2001 to February 9, 2009 based upon a recommended reduction from Zurich Services Corporation ("ZSC"), (b) the claim was paid at less than the amount billed, and (c) total Med-pay or PIP payments were less than the respective limits of coverage. The Class also includes medical providers who were assigned the right to assert these claims.

Those affected by this settlement must complete and submit a valid claim form postmarked no later than December 29, 2011. Further information and claim forms can be obtained by visiting www.MedpayClaimsAdministration.com.



NY court hears hedge fund boss' bail arguments
Court Watch | 2011/11/30 10:24
A federal appeals court did not immediately rule Wednesday whether hedge fund founder Raj Rajaratnam must report to prison next week for an 11-year sentence for insider trading, the longest term ever given for the crime.

Attorney Patricia Millett told the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan that Rajaratnam should remain free on bail while the appeals court hears a challenge to his conviction in the biggest insider trading case in history.

Rajaratnam, 54, was sentenced in October after his conviction this year on charges that he engaged in insider trading from 2003 through October 2009 at the Galleon Group of hedge funds that he founded. Prosecutors said insider trading schemes involved the stocks of at least 19 different public companies and resulted in at least $70 million in illegal gains.

Rajaratnam was also ordered to forfeit $53.8 million and to pay a $10 million fine.

Millett said court papers filed to secure wiretaps that provided evidence crucial to his conviction were improperly made, raising a substantial question of law that entitles him to remain free until the appeals court hears the case sometime next year.



Scott+Scott LLP Announces Securities Class Action
Securities Class Action | 2011/11/29 09:49
On November 28, 2011, Scott+Scott LLP filed a class action complaint against The Cooper Companies, Inc. and certain of the Company's senior officers and directors in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The action for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is brought on behalf of those purchasing the common stock of Cooper between March 4, 2011 and November 15, 2011, inclusive.

If you purchased the common stock of Cooper during the Class Period and wish to serve as a lead plaintiff in the action, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from today. Any member of the investor class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of its choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. If you wish to discuss this action or have questions concerning this notice or your rights, please contact Scott+Scott at (800) 404-7770, (860) 537-5537 or visit the Scott+Scott website http://www.scott-scott.com/cases/coopercos.html for more information. There is no cost or fee to you.

The complaint filed in the action alleges that, during the Class Period, Cooper issued false and misleading statements concealing known quality control problems and process defects at the Company's new overseas contact lens manufacturing facilities.

The complaint alleges that following the announcement of a small voluntary recall, the significance of which Cooper and its senior executives intentionally downplayed, on November 15, 2011, Cooper was forced to disclose a much larger product recall and to finally disclose the seriousness of the potential injuries. As the market learned the true extent of the Company's production issues, product safety defects and the harm to Cooper's reputation and product marketability, the Company's stock price declined precipitously. The class action seeks recovery under the federal securities laws for those who purchased Cooper's common stock between March 4, 2011 and November 15, 2011.

Scott+Scott has significant experience in prosecuting major securities, antitrust and employee retirement plan actions throughout the United States. The firm represents pension funds, foundations, individuals and other entities worldwide.


[PREV] [1] ..[395][396][397][398][399][400][401][402][403].. [605] [NEXT]
All
Securities Class Action
Headline Legal News
Stock Market News
Court News
Court Watch
Legal Interview
Securities Lawyers
Securities Law Firm
Topics in Legal News
Attorney News
Legal Focuses
Opinions
Legal Marketing
Law Firm News
Investment Fraud Litigation
Starbucks appears likely to ..
Supreme Court will weigh ban..
Supreme Court rejects appeal..
Supreme Court restores Trump..
Top Europe rights court cond..
Elon Musk will be investigat..
Retired Supreme Court Justic..
The Man Charged in an Illino..
Texas’ migrant arrest law w..
Former Georgia insurance com..
Alabama woman who faked kidn..
A Supreme Court ruling in a ..
Denying same-sex marriage is..
Trump wants N.Y. hush money ..
China’s top court, prosecut..
Supreme Court restores Trump..


   Lawyer & Law Firm Links
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
New York Adoption Lawyers
New York Foster Care Lawyers
Adoption Pre-Certification
www.lawrsm.com
Car Accident Lawyers
Sunnyvale, CA Personal Injury Attorney
www.esrajunglaw.com
Oregon Family Law Attorney
Divorce Lawyer Eugene. Family Law
www.mjmlawoffice.com
Family Law in East Greenwich, RI
Divorce Lawyer - Erica S. Janton
Post-Divorce Issues Attorney
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
   Legal Resource Links
Securities fraud, also known as stock fraud and investment fraud, is a practice that induces investors to make purchase or sale decisions on the basis of false information, frequently resulting in losses, in violation of the securities laws. Securities Arbitration. Generally speaking, securities fraud consists of deceptive practices in the stock and commodity markets, and occurs when investors are enticed to part with their money based on untrue statements.
 
 
 

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Securities Law News as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case. | Affordable Law Firm Website Design by Law Promo