|
|
|
Fresno DA charges woman after deadly bus crash
Court Watch |
2011/07/20 09:27
|
A woman accused of providing alcohol to a teenage driver who caused a deadly Greyhound bus crash has been charged with a misdemeanor, officials said Tuesday.
Michelle Kay Cole, 22, was charged with purchasing an alcoholic beverage for a person under 21 resulting in death, Fresno County District Attorney Elizabeth Egan said at a news conference.
Cole was cited Monday but not arrested, Egan said. She could face up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine if convicted.
A California Highway Patrol report placed sole blame for the crash on 18-year-old Sylvia Garay. Investigators said she was drunk when her SUV hit a concrete barrier and overturned on Highway 99 on July 22, 2010.
The oncoming bus, carrying 31 passengers on a route from Los Angeles to Sacramento, struck the SUV, skidded into a concrete center divider, then tumbled down a 15-foot embankment and plowed into a eucalyptus tree shortly after 2 a.m. a few miles from downtown Fresno.
Garay, her two passengers and three people on the bus were killed. Authorities say Garay had a blood alcohol level of .11 when she died. The legal limit is .08.
The CHP report said the bus driver had no way to avoid the SUV, which was left without lights when it overturned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paralegal accused of stealing from law firm
Court News |
2011/07/20 09:27
|
Authorities say a South Florida paralegal stole hundreds of thousands of dollars from her Fort Lauderdale law firm.
Miami-Dade officials on Tuesday charged 53-year-old Brenda Wilcott-Kelly with more than 80 felonies, including grand theft and forging documents. Records show she's also took money from a lawyer who was on his deathbed.
Employees of Hermelee & Geffin were in court Tuesday as Judge Dennis Murphy set Wilcott-Kelly's bond at $116,000.
Defense attorney Morgan Cronin said his client is innocent.
According to the arrest affidavit, Wilcott-Kelly took $82,472 from the firm to pay off her husband's credit cards. She is also accused of stealing $31,050 from lawyer Steven A. Schultz, while he was in the hospital. Schultz leased space from the firm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
France, Germany in last-ditch crisis talks
Headline Legal News |
2011/07/20 01:30
|
The eurozone's economic powers are struggling to agree on a new debt crisis plan to present at an emergency EU summit, with Germany downplaying calls from France and Brussels for a big announcement that could boost market confidence and contain the turmoil. French President Nicolas Sarkozy was flying to Berlin on Wednesday afternoon in an apparent last-minute bid to strike a deal with Chancellor Angela Merkel on some kind of new aid package for Greece. The stakes are high. Markets have been extremely volatile over the past weeks on fears the crisis might spread to larger countries like Italy. The International Monetary Fund warned that leaders must do more to keep debt troubles from poisoning the entire continent's economy. Germany and France will discuss "all the options on the table and agree, if possible, on a joint position," said Merkel's spokesman, Steffen Seibert. Germany is optimistic that Thursday's summit will agree on "a good solution that will move us forward," he added. But he reiterated Merkel's stance that the talks will not yield a "spectacular solution" that fixes Greece's problems quickly, but will be merely a stepping stone in a longer process. Merkel had said there would be no decision to restructure Greece's debt or create eurobonds that link debt across countries. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
AT&T Faces At-Home Call Center Employee Wage & Hour Class Action Lawsuit Filed
Court Watch |
2011/07/19 09:30
|
On March 28, 2011, the California employment law attorneys at Blumenthal, Nordrehaug & Bhowmik filed a class action lawsuit against AT&T alleging that the wireless provider violated California wage & hour laws by mislabeling at-home virtual call center employees as independent contractors in order to avoid paying these employees for all of the hours they work, including overtime hours and minimum wages.
The California employment law attorneys at Blumenthal, Nordrehaug & Bhowmik have filed a class action lawsuit against AT&T in Northern California alleging that the wireless phone giant has violated the rights of at-home virtual call center employees under the California Labor Code. The class action lawsuit against AT&T for Labor Code violations was filed on March 28, 2011 in the Northern District of California, entitled Perry v. AT&T and Arise, Case No. CV111498JCS. According to the class action complaint filed against AT&T by the labor law attorneys at Blumenthal, Nordrehaug & Bhowmik, the mobile and wireless provider has hired at-home call center employees to provide billing and technical support for AT&T customers. The complaint alleges that AT&T devised an illegal scheme of mislabeling these virtual at-home call center employees as independent contractors in order to avoid workers' compensation costs as well as paying state and/or federal taxes. The AT&T call center employee class action lawsuit further alleges that the wireless provider intentionally misclassified the at-home virtual call center employees as independent contractors in order to get around wage & hour requirements in violation of California employment laws. Whereas the state’s minimum wage rules, lunch break requirements and overtime laws protect employees, the laws do not apply to independent contractors. The AT&T overtime class action lawsuit alleges that the wireless provider mislabeled at-home call center employees because these workers are required to perform work subject to AT&T’s control. AT&T has the authority to exercise complete control over the work performed and the manner in which the work is performed by these at-home call center employees. Further, AT&T controls the at-home virtual call center employees’ work schedule and hours, according to the complaint. For more information, visit the AT&T at-home virtual call center employee class action lawsuit website or call (866) 771-7099. With its main employment law office located in San Diego County, the California employment law attorneys at Blumenthal, Nordrehaug & Bhowmik have a statewide practice of representing employees on a contingency basis for violations involving wages and hours, overtime pay, discrimination, harassment and wrongful termination.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When is a Person an Employee of Another?
Opinions |
2011/07/18 09:28
|
On July 19, 2011, the Indiana Court of Appeals issued a decision which I found surprising in McCann v. City of Anderson, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App. 2011), Cause No. 48A02-1009-PL-1060. At issue was whether a trial court had properly granted summary judgment on the question of whether a warrant officer was an employee of the Anderson City Court. Despite the procedural posture of the case and factors that weighed in favor of finding an employer-employee relationship, the Court affirmed a decision granting summary judgment to the defendants.
In this case, McCann was a police officer, who eventually became warrant officer for the Anderson City Court in 1998. He held that post until 2005, when the judge asked that McCann be reassigned. As a result of this dismissal, McCann filed suit based on the Indiana Wage Statute, arguing that he had been an employee of the Court and was entitled to funds that had been allocated to the position of warrant officer by that court. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment and the trial court granted the defendants' motion.
On appeal, the Court quoted GKN Co. v. Magness, 744 N.E.2d 397, 402 (Ind. 2001), for the seven factors that a court should consider when determining whether an employer-employee relationship exists. The Court then analyzed each of these factors and determined that three weighed in favor of the existence an employer-employee relationship and four against, with the "most important" factor weighing against.
Thus, over all, four of the seven factors, including the most important, "Control over the Means Used," indicate McCann was not an employee of the City Court. Because the City Court was not McCann's employer, he cannot be due any "unpaid wages" from the City Court. Therefore, he cannot assert a claim against the City Court under the Indiana Wage Statute.
The aspect of this decision that is most surprising is that the Court reached this conclusion despite the procedural posture of the case. It could have easily held that, viewing the facts in the light most favorable to McCann, the seven factors weighed both for and against a finding of an employer-employee relationship between McCann and the City Court created a genuine issue of material fact. This indicates that the factor the Court identified as being "most important", whether the purported employer exercised control over the means used by the purported employee to perform work, is very important indeed.
Lesson:
1.It will be exceedingly difficult to prove the existence of an employer-employee relationship if the purported employer did not exercise control over the means that the purported employee used to perform his work.
Brad A. Catlin
Price Waicukauski & Riley, LLC
http://www.indianalawupdate.com/entry/When-is-a-Person-an-Employee-of-Another |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Investment Fraud Litigation |
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
Legal News RSS Feed
