Lawyer News
Today's Date: U.S. Attorney News Feed
OC Bishop Faces Contempt of Court
Court Feed News | 2007/10/10 15:10
The sexual abuse case was settled and Roman Catholic Bishop Tod Brown could have walked away without ever saying a thing about it in court. But an attempt to clear his name of allegations he helped a high-ranking church official avoid testifying has made Brown the first U.S. bishop who could face jail time in the church sex abuse scandal.

A judge began criminal contempt-of-court proceedings against Brown on Tuesday, just three days after he agreed to pay nearly $7 million to settle the lawsuits that led to contempt allegations surrounding Brown's decision to send the church official to Canada.

Before the hearing, plaintiffs' lawyers said they expected the judge to dismiss the contempt filing because the case had been settled. But Diocese of Orange attorney Peter Callahan insisted the proceedings go forward to clear the bishop's name, and Judge Gail Andler took him up on the offer.

Brown waived his arraignment, which lawyers said was the equivalent of a not guilty plea.

"This is one more example of the diocese stepping in their own mess," said John Manly, a lawyer for the plaintiffs in the case. "Now we can have our cake and eat it too."

Plaintiffs' attorneys had accused Brown of sending Msgr. John Urell to Ontario, Canada, for medical treatment before he could complete a deposition in one of four cases settled Friday. The monsignor was responsible for handling sexual abuse allegations against the diocese.

Brown testified in a pretrial deposition that he made the decision to send Urell to the Southdown Institute, although he knew Urell "had given a deposition and was going to be called back for further deposition."

He said Tuesday the facility is one of few that specializes in psychological care for clergy and because it could take him immediately.

Andler allowed attorneys to deliver their opening statements in the contempt case before postponing the rest of the hearing until Dec. 3. She said a subpoena for Urell's testimony would remain in effect until that date.

Callahan will argue at the hearing to dismiss the contempt matter.

Venus Soltan, a plaintiffs attorney, said Brown sent Urell away to suppress critical evidence about the diocese's handling of sexual abuse. Urell went away a week after he broke down during his deposition by plaintiffs' attorneys.

"When Msgr. Urell was there for half a day, he couldn't take it because he was too upset about having to testify about hiding all these allegations," she said in court. "This is plain and simply hiding the facts."

Callahan, however, said there was no evidence that a court order was in effect when Brown sent Urell away and asserted that a plaintiffs' attorney had verged on perjury in the court filings that precipitated the contempt hearing.

Urell knew nothing about the current case, which involved allegations that a lay assistant basketball coach molested a 16-year-old girl at Mater Dei High School, Callahan said.

"I was disappointed that the judge didn't rule. We were hoping that the bishop would have the opportunity to exonerate himself by telling the truth but he didn't get the opportunity," he said.

At a news conference outside court, two of the young women who were plaintiffs in the cases angrily asked Brown and his attorneys questions about how church officials handled their cases.

Brown did not respond to the questions directly, but apologized.

"To both of you, and to the other victims, all I can do is repeat once again, my sincerest and deepest and most compassionate apology on the part of the church for what happened to you, which was terrible and sinful and criminal and reprehensible," Brown said. "I'm just so very sorry it happened."

Three years ago, Brown agreed to pay $100 million to settle lawsuits from about 90 sexual abuse victims.



Supreme Court wary 3rd-party lawsuits
Lawyer Blog News | 2007/10/10 15:09
The Supreme Court voiced skepticism Tuesday about efforts to allow lawyers, accountants and others who do business with large corporations to be the targets of class-action securities suits. At issue in the high-profile case is whether victims of large-scale corporate fraud can sue third parties that may have played a significant role in the scheme. Think Enron, Global Crossing or any other massive fraud that involved a web of business relationships, where outside experts allegedly signed off on questionable corporate practices.

The Supreme Court and other federal courts have largely frowned on such suits, saying that only the Securities and Exchange Commission has the authority to bring suit against third parties as so-called aiders and abetters. But following the wave of corporate implosions, class-action suits seeking to hold those entities accountable have been on the rise, largely because those outside parties often are the only ones left standing holding any assets. Tuesday, one of those investor class-action cases reached the justices, with several suggesting they are not inclined to allow the suit to go forward.

That's a view that will be welcomed by a range of powerful business groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Bankers Association. Along with the Bush administration, they warn that making third parties vulnerable to such suits would result in an explosion of securities litigation, damaging American competitiveness in the global marketplace.

The closely watched dispute is one some observers have labeled the "Roe vs. Wade" of securities law, one in which more than 30 friend-of-the-court briefs were filed, and it played to an electric atmosphere in a packed Supreme Court chamber.

While business groups largely lined up one side, such consumer advocates as AARP, the senior citizen lobby, and the Council of Institutional Investors stood with the investor plaintiffs.

"The stakes are enormous," said Jeffrey McFadden, a Washington securities lawyer who attended the arguments.

The case involves Charter Communications Inc., a cable television provider that entered into side deals with Motorola Inc. and Scientific-Atlanta Inc., two makers of set-top cable boxes. In 2000, in a scheme to pump up its revenues, Charter agreed to overpay the vendors for the boxes. The vendors then returned part of the money to Charter in the form of advertising fees, adding about $17 million to Charter's balance sheet.

After the machinations were revealed and Charter's stock price plummeted, investors brought suit against all of the parties. Charter eventually settled, leaving the two vendors in the suit.

Lawyers for the vendors argued that the companies never knew the extent of Charter's scheme to inflate its revenues and that they never made any false representations directly to Charter's shareholders, something required to find a violation of federal securities law.

A Missouri federal court dismissed the case against the vendors and the federal appeals court in St. Louis affirmed, citing Supreme Court precedent that has interpreted federal securities laws to bar private causes of action against third-parties.

Chief Justice John Roberts on Tuesday demonstrated little interest in departing from precedent, saying that Congress had clearly decided who could and could not bring suit under federal securities laws.

"We don't get in this business of implying private rights of actions anymore," Roberts said. "We haven't done it in quite some time."

And Justice Anthony Kennedy seemed to worry that once the door to such suits was opened there would be no end to them -- and that companies would simply stop doing business with publicly traded companies as a result.

"I see no limitations to your proposal," he said to the counsel for the investors, New York lawyer Stanley Grossman.

But Grossman argued that there would be no litigation free-for-all, saying that a requirement that third parties must actively participate in an intentional effort to deceive the public would eliminate most prospective actions.

Among the justices, Ruth Bader Ginsburg appeared most likely to come down on the side of the plaintiff investors. She was critical of the vendors' conduct in the case, saying it was possible they knew about Charter's plans but sat by passively. The scheme "can only work if the vendors are silent. Silence, not speech, is what counts," she said. "They set up Charter to make those statements to swell their revenues, revenues they didn't have."

Ginsburg repeatedly expressed a desire to find some sort of middle ground between barring the suits altogether and elevating third parties to the level of the primary corporate defrauders. She noted that it was unlikely the SEC could ever make fraud victims whole by suing third-parties on its own, since the government is not in a position to distribute large damage awards.

Chicago lawyer Stephen Shapiro, arguing for the defendant companies, said Congress had rewritten the securities laws in the 1990s to allow only for the SEC actions and the court needed to recognize that.


Law for domestic partners stands in Oregon
Legal Career News | 2007/10/10 14:29
State election officials say opponents failed to turn in enough signatures to block Oregon's domestic-partnership law for same-sex couples. State elections officials reported Monday that the effort fell 116 valid signatures short of the 55,179 needed to suspend the law and place it on the November 2008 ballot for a popular vote.

That means that as of Jan. 1, Oregon will join eight other states that have approved spousal rights in some form for same-sex couples: Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Maine, California, Washington and Hawaii. Massachusetts is the only state that allows gay couples to marry.

Later this week, word is expected on whether opponents gathered enough signatures to block a gay-rights law that would ban discrimination based on sexual orientation — though that effort, as well, appears to be lacking sufficient signatures.

Social-conservative and church groups mounted the signature-gathering drive after the two gay-rights laws were approved by the Democratic-controlled Oregon Legislature with strong backing from Gov. Ted Kulongoski, also a Democrat.

The state's largest gay-rights group called Monday's announcement a "proud day for Oregon."

"In refusing to sign these petitions, Oregonians showed that they aren't interested in rolling back our anti-discrimination laws," said John Hummel, executive director of Basic Rights Oregon.

Sponsors of the referral effort had conceded in recent days that they probably hadn't gotten enough signatures. But they vowed to take another avenue to try to derail the laws — an initiative effort to repeal the laws outright. They would have until next July to collect 82,000 valid signatures to repeal each of the two laws.



Treasurys Dip As Rate Cut Seems Unlikely
Business Law Info | 2007/10/10 13:02

Treasury prices fell Wednesday amid a growing consensus in the bond market that the Federal Reserve won't cut rates this month. Minutes from the Fed's September monetary policy meeting, released Tuesday, showed Fed officials to be unusually uncertain about the economy and unwilling to state whether there is greater risk or rising inflation or slowing growth. The Fed's elevated uncertainty convinced the Treasury market that it had gone too far in pricing in an October rate cut in prior weeks.

"The market is virtually eliminating any Fed move on Oct. 31, due to the Fed minutes," said Tom di Galoma, fixed income analyst at Jefferies & Co. "This has the bears in control." The view that the Fed is on hold sparked heavy overseas selling of Treasurys and Japanese government bonds that continued into the U.S. session.

The stock market had its own interpretation of the Fed minutes, zeroing in on the fact that Fed policy makers were very worried about the rapid deterioration of the credit markets last summer. The Fed cut rates by a half percentage point at its Sept. 18 meeting and equities investors appear to think the bank could order another rate cut at its October meeting. Stocks were a bit lower Wednesday, after rallying sharply Tuesday on the minutes.



Atlantic City Mayor Robert Levy Resigns
U.S. Legal News | 2007/10/10 12:59

The mayor of Atlantic City has handed in his resignation, after he vanished for two weeks amid allegations that he lied about his military service, his attorney said Wednesday. Levy's departure is effective immediately, according to attorney Edwin Jacobs. On Tuesday, the missing mayor resurfaced after returning home from a stay at a psychiatric and substance abuse center.

In a statement Wednesday, Jacobs cited "multiple health problems" as a factor in Levy's resignation, but did not provide further details.

Levy has been under federal investigation for embellishing his Army service in Vietnam.

"The circumstances surrounding his resignation include multiple health problems, but were precipitated by a pending Federal Department of Veterans Affairs investigation," Jacobs said.

Last fall, the Press of Atlantic City reported that the Vietnam veteran's claims that he was a member of the Green Berets were untrue. He apologized, but federal authorities have been looking into whether the 64-year-old Levy made that claim to increase his veteran's benefit payments.

Jacobs said in the statement that the mayor was in discussions with the U.S. Attorney's Office about resolving the investigation in a "fair and expeditious" way. Levy allegedly took in about $25,000 in extra benefits payments as a result of the falsification.

No part of the investigation includes allegations of Levy's abuse of his position as mayor, his lawyer said.

Levy served in the United States Army for 20 years, form 1964-1984 and served two tours of duty in Vietnam, from which he received multiple medals, awards and citations, according to Jacobs.

"The pending investigation has called into question two of those awards, neither of which appear to be supported by an appropriate military order," said Jacobs.

Members of the city council had asked a judge to declare the mayor's office vacant and clear the way for the council president to take over as interim mayor.

Levy — who was missing for almost two weeks — was at home after leaving a Somerset County clinic known for treatment of substance abuse and mental health issues, according his lawyer.

Tuesday's revelation about Levy's whereabouts came after a brief conference with a state judge, who scheduled a Friday hearing to discuss a request by a city councilman to declare that the mayor had abandoned his office.



Sallie Mae $25 billion buyout ends up in court
Court Feed News | 2007/10/10 12:10

The planned $25 billion buyout of U.S. student lender Sallie Mae has ended up where many said it would -- in court. Sallie Mae said late on Monday that it filed a lawsuit seeking a breakup fee of $900 million from the consortium led by J.C. Flowers & Co, which last week proposed to cut its bid price for the lender citing a recent credit market squeeze and legislation that slashes subsidies to student lenders.

Sallie Mae's lawsuit seeks a declaration that the buyer group has reneged on the merger agreement, that no "material adverse change" has occurred, and that Sallie Mae may terminate the takeover and collect the $900 million.

A material adverse change (MAC) is a condition that could cause a substantial reduction in earnings power and it can give buyers or lenders a "walk right" from their obligations.

The lawsuit is being seen by many as a hard-ball attempt by Sallie Mae to force the buyer group to stick to the original deal, in which the group offered $60 a share, or come up with something closer to it than its revised proposal of $50 a share, or $20.6 billion offer, plus extra payments depending on how the company performed.

"We are prepared to close under the contract the parties signed in April," said Sallie Mae chairman Albert Lord in a statement late on Monday. "Sallie Mae has honored its obligations under the merger agreement. We ask only that the buyer group do the same."  



[PREV] [1] ..[1026][1027][1028][1029][1030][1031][1032][1033][1034].. [1275] [NEXT]
   Lawyer News Menu
All
Lawyer Blog News
Court Feed News
Business Law Info
Class Action News
Criminal Law Updates
Employment Law
U.S. Legal News
Legal Career News
Headline News
Law & Politics
Attorney Blogs
Lawyer News
Law Firm Press
Law Firm News
Attorneys News
Legal World News
2008 Metrolink Crash
   Lawyer News Video
   Recent Lawyer News Updates
US immigration officials loo..
Appeals court rules Trump ca..
Turkish court orders key Erd..
Under threat from Trump, Col..
Military veterans are becomi..
Japan’s trade minister fail..
Supreme Court makes it harde..
Trump signs order designatin..
US strikes a deal with Ukrai..
Musk gives all federal worke..
Troubled electric vehicle ma..
Elon Musk has called for the..
Elon Musk dodges DOGE scruti..
Trump White House cancels fr..
Trump order aims to end fede..
Federal Judge Blocks Trump’..
FOCUS - President Trump prop..
Supreme Court allows small b..
South Korea’s Yoon defends ..
Breaking Legal News Lega..
   Lawyer & Law Firm Links
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Family Law in East Greenwich, RI
Divorce Lawyer - Erica S. Janton
www.jantonfamilylaw.com/about
San Francisco Trademark Lawyer
San Francisco Copyright Lawyer
www.onulawfirm.com
Raleigh, NC Business Lawyer
www.rothlawgroup.com
Oregon DUI Law Attorney
Eugene DUI Lawyer. Criminal Defense Law
www.mjmlawoffice.com
New York Adoption Lawyers
New York Foster Care Lawyers
Adoption Pre-Certification
www.lawrsm.com
Legal Document Services in Los Angeles, CA
Best Legal Document Preparation
www.tllsg.com
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
Family Lawyer Rockville Maryland
Divorce lawyer rockville
familylawyersmd.com
© Lawyer News - Law Firm News & Press Releases. All rights reserved.

Attorney News- Find the latest lawyer and law firm news and information. We provide information that surround the activities and careers in the legal industry. We promote legal services, law firms, attorneys as well as news in the legal industry. Review tips and up to date legal news. With up to date legal articles leading the way as a top resource for attorneys and legal practitioners. | Affordable Law Firm Website Design