|
|
|
E*TRADE hit with class action
Court Feed News |
2007/10/05 10:02
|
Coughlin Stoia LLP yesterday filed a class-action suit against E*TRADE Financial Corp., accusing the company of violating the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The firm is filing suit on behalf of E*TRADE’s investors who purchased common stock in the firm between Dec. 14, 2006 and Sept. 25, 2007. E*TRADE’s CEO Mitchell H. Caplan and Robert J. Simmons, CFO and principal accounting officer, were also named as individual defendants in the suit. In its complaint, San Diego-based Coughlin Stoia alleged that E*TRADE failed to disclose that it was experiencing high delinquency rates in its mortgage and home equity portfolios. Instead, the suit alleges that E*TRADE had an overvalued securities portfolio with mortgage-backed assets. They also allege that the firm kept investors in the dark about the falling mortgage market, which made the value of E*TRADE’s shares plummet. Furthermore, throughout August, while the credit markets crashed and E*TRADE’s stock price dropped, the company continued insisting that was financially sound and that concerns on its market capitalization were unfounded, the suit said. The financial services company, which originated mortgages and subprime loans, pulled from its wholesale mortgage business on Sept. 17. Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP was founded by William S. Lerach, the famed class-action lawyer. A spokeswoman from E*TRADE said that the company does not comment on pending litigation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Craig's decision to stay a headache for GOP
Law & Politics |
2007/10/05 09:46
|
| Some fellow Republicans are peeved that Sen. Larry Craig has decided to complete his term despite his earlier announcement about resigning, but the Idaho lawmaker still has his backers. "It's embarrassing for the Senate. It's embarrassing for our party," said Sen. John Ensign of Nevada, who leads the GOP's Senate campaign committee. "I think it's best for the U.S. Senate, it's best for certainly his party, that he just keeps his word," Ensign told reporters outside the Senate chamber Thursday. "He gave us his word he would do something, and he's backing out on us, and I don't think that's the right thing to do." A judge ruled Thursday that Craig's guilty plea to a misdemeanor disorderly conduct charge could not be withdrawn. Craig entered the plea after his June arrest in a men's room at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport for allegedly propositioning a plainclothes police officer for sex. After news of his arrest and guilty plea broke in August, the senator announced that he would resign at the end of September, but he postponed that move while seeking to have his guilty plea withdrawn. However, after the judge's ruling Thursday, Craig said he'll remain in the Senate and study "additional legal options" -- much to the consternation of some GOP colleagues.  Watch how Craig's decision poses a challenge for GOP leaders » Sen. John Thune, R-South Dakota, called the issue "a distraction" for the party. "I would have hoped he would have done what he said he was going to do," added Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minnesota. "He's chosen not to. The people of Idaho will have to speak to that, and the Ethics Committee will have to speak to that," Coleman said, referring to the Senate panel's indication that it will investigate Craig's conduct. Fellow Idahoan Sen. Mike Crapo was a rare voice in the caucus, issuing a statement in support of Craig's decision. "I look forward to serving with him as we continue to work on issues important to Idaho," Crapo said. But in Boise, a spokesman for Idaho Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter said that the Republican governor already has settled on a replacement for Craig -- but won't name the choice until the senator steps down. Spokesman Jon Hanian denied that Otter, a longtime friend, is pushing Craig to go, saying the governor "just wants to be ready." A Craig resignation would give an appointee the advantage of being in office for a year or more before the next election. Craig said he won't seek re-election in 2008, a decision advisers said he had made earlier. The lack of an Idaho incumbent -- if that happens -- would complicate things for the GOP in what already is shaping up to be a difficult 2008 election. Four other Republican senators -- John Warner of Virginia, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Wayne Allard of Colorado and Pete Domenici of New Mexico -- have announced they will not seek re-election, and at least four others are expected to face tough races. "Democrats are cheering today," the Idaho Statesman newspaper said in an editorial urging Craig to go ahead and resign. "He and we will be distracted by a Senate Ethics Committee and its hearings, which could be public, in what is certain to be brutally ugly, possibly on live TV, and centered on men having sex with men," the editorial warned. Jasper LiCalzi, a political science professor at Albertson College of Idaho, told the Idaho Statesman that some voters still back Craig. "There is core support here that thinks Craig has been railroaded, and there's another group that thinks he should stick it out," LiCalzi told the newspaper. In his statement Thursday, Craig said any replacement would lack the seniority and committee assignments "that are valuable to Idaho." In addition, he said he wanted to clear his name before the Senate Ethics Committee. One of Craig's attorneys, Stanley Brand, said on NBC's "Today" show Friday that Craig is considering appealing the judge's ruling and seems willing to risk a Ethics Committee inquiry. "What he is saying is in 220 years of recorded history ... the Senate has never disciplined anyone for misdemeanor conduct that has nothing to do with official duties," Brand said on "Today." "So, while the Senate theoretically could do that, it hasn't, and our position is there is no reason to start now after 220 years." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brothers plead guilty to mortgage fraud
Court Feed News |
2007/10/04 15:04
|
Two brothers whose convictions for running a mortgage scheme in suburban Rochester were recently overturned pleaded guilty Wednesday to mortgage fraud to avoid a new trial. Robert Amico, 45, and his 36-year-old brother, Richard Amico, were convicted in 2003 of defrauding mortgage lenders out of $58.5 million for homes built in Monroe, Ontario and Wayne counties from 1994 to 2000. Prosecutors called it the largest case of mortgage fraud ever prosecuted in western New York.
A federal appeals court in May overturned the Amicos' convictions, ruling that the judge who presided over their trial should have recused himself when a prosecution witness claimed he had once helped the judge fraudulently obtain a mortgage.
In exchange for their guilty pleas, the Amicos will avoid a new trial and receive lighter sentences than the ones they received after they were convicted.
Robert Amico, who originally was ordered to prison for 17 1/2 years, will be sentenced to at least 10 years under the plea agreement. He has served more than four years already.
Richard Amico, who received an original prison term of nine years, will get a maximum of five years. He has already served more than three years.
The brothers will receive credit for the time they've already served and remain free until they are sentenced in January. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pastor Pleads Guilty In Sex Case
Legal Career News |
2007/10/04 13:05
|
After months of denial, even in the face of two incriminating DNA tests, a storefront pastor entered a guilty plea Wednesday to charges he sexually assaulted an 11-year-old member of his congregation who subsequently bore him a son. Modesto Reyes' decision to enter a plea of guilt under the Alford Doctrine to charges of first-degree sexual assault and risk of injury to a minor came after jury selection in the case began earlier this week.
Reyes' plea brought tears to his disbelieving wife, and upset his adult son, who looked on from the rear of the courtroom.
"I wish he had gone to trial," said Melvin Reyes, 25, outside the courtroom.
Under the plea, accepted by Superior Court Judge David Gold, Modesto Reyes faces a minimum of five years and a maximum of 45 years in prison. In an Alford plea, an accused does not admit guilt, but acknowledges sufficient evidence exists for a conviction.
Reyes has been held since his bail was set at $750,000 after his arrest in June 2006.
Melvin Reyes continued to maintain his father's innocence, replying, "No," when asked by a reporter if he believed his father had repeatedly sexually assaulted the girl and impregnated her.
Two separate DNA tests show that Reyes, the pastor of Iglesia De Dios Te Llama on Broad Street in Hartford, is the probable father of the baby, now nearly 17 months old.
Prosecutor Sandra Tullius told the court that the girl attended Reyes' church in 2004 and 2005 and that he took a liking to her. They ate cookies together, fasted together and then in August of 2005, Tullius said, Reyes took the girl, then age 11, behind Bulkeley High School in a church van and sexually assaulted her.
"He removed her clothes and his clothes and told her it wouldn't hurt," Tullius said.
The following month, Tullius said, Reyes called the girl to the church, told her that his heart was hurting and that only one thing could help him. He then sexually assaulted her again.
When Reyes called her to his office, "she knew what she had to do," Tullius said, adding that Reyes assaulted the girl on at least three other occasions.
The girl, now 13, gave birth to the baby at Hartford Hospital in May of 2006.
Reyes faced 17 charges and more than 200 years in prison in connection with the sexual assaults. Twice this year, Reyes rejected plea deals in the case over the advice of his attorney. In both cases, the deal would have netted him a sentence of 15 years. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Friedman appeals to reverse sex abuse guilty plea
Court Feed News |
2007/10/04 13:03
|
Jesse Friedman's last chance to clear his name of child molestation charges now rests in the hands of a federal judge who heard evidence on his case at a hearing yesterday. Friedman, 38, is trying to reverse his 1988 guilty plea to sexually abusing children as a teenager with his father in Great Neck, a case that was notorious at the time and gained national attention again in 2003 with the Oscar-nominated documentary, "Capturing the Friedmans."
In court papers, Friedman's attorneys argue that Nassau prosecutors withheld evidence revealed later in the movie - a child who accused Friedman made statements to police after hypnosis.
Magistrate Judge Joanna Seybert heard evidence yesterday on a technical issue - whether Friedman filed his federal appeal in time to beat the statute of limitations. She did not say when she would rule.
Nassau County prosecutors and police have stood by Friedman's arrest and conviction. Joseph Onorato, a prosecutor on the 1988 case, refused to shake Friedman's extended hand yesterday outside the courtroom.
State courts have twice rejected Friedman's appeals in the past three years. If Seybert rejects his case, the plea stands.
With his wife, Elisabeth, 28, standing at his side, Friedman said he was "very optimistic."
"I'm not a child molester and I'm not ever going to rest until I prove to the courts and to the world that I'm not a child molester," said Friedman, who in 2001 was released from prison on parole.
In 1987, Friedman, then 18, and his father, Arnold, then 56, were charged with sodomizing 17 children who attended computer classes at their home. They both pleaded guilty, and the father was sentenced to 10 to 30 years; the son 6 to 18 years. Arnold Friedman committed suicide in 1995. The Friedmans proclaimed their innocence from prison but never appealed their guilty pleas.
At issue in yesterday's hearing was when Jesse Friedman learned of the victims' hypnosis and whether his federal case was filed in the next year, as the law requires.
Assistant District Attorney Judith Sternberg argued that Friedman learned of the hypnosis on Jan. 10, 2003, the night he first saw "Capturing the Friedmans." Because his state appeal was filed 362 days later on Jan. 7, 2004, and rejected on March 10, 2006, Sternberg said Friedman had to file his federal appeal within three days of the rejection. The federal case was filed June 23, 2006.
Friedman's attorney, Ron Kuby of Manhattan, contended that the statute of limitations did not begin until July 2003, when Friedman received access to transcripts of the documentary's interviews with anonymous accusers and confirmed their identity.
If Seybert rules in Friedman's favor, she will then hear evidence on whether the hypnotizing of the victim was proper and should have been revealed to Friedman's attorneys. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Florida Lawmakers Sue Dean, DNC
Attorney Blogs |
2007/10/04 12:57
|
| A federal lawsuit to be filed tomorrow by Florida lawmakers against Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean alleges that Dean and the national party are violating the equal protection provisions of the U.S. Constitution and the Voting Rights Act by refusing to recognize the state's Jan. 29 presidential primary. In a draft of the lawsuit circulating among congressional aides and legal experts, Dean is accused of disenfranchising more than 4 million voters in a scheme that the lawsuit contends would also reduce minority voting. The DNC and the Florida Secretary of State are also named in the suit. "The defendants have combined to create a Presidential primary election with a stunningly anti-democratic scenario - every one of the more than 4.25 million registered Democratic voters in Florida will be completely disenfranchised and their constitutional rights with respect to that election will be rendered meaningless," the suit alleges. The suit is being filed by Sen. Bill Nelson and Rep. Alcee Hastings in response to the DNC's decision last month to disqualify all of Florida's delegates to next year's national party convention. A spokesman for Nelson declined to comment and said the senator will make a statement on Thursday. Dean had pushed for the punishment because Florida violated the party's rule against holding presidential primaries before Feb. 5. Both parties are struggling to retain control of the primary calendar even as states attempt to become more relevant by holding their voting at the beginning of the process. By punishing Florida, Dean hopes to stave off other defections from the approved calendar. "Their primary essentially won't count, " Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean told a Florida newspaper in June. "Anybody who campaigns in Florida is ineligible for delegates." The Democratic presidential candidates have responded by pledging not to campaign in states which break the party's rules, like Florida. The lawsuit alleges that taking such a drastic action violates the Constitution and the law in several ways. The suit says the decision imposes "geographic discrimination" that violates the equal rights provisions of the Constitution and effectively eliminates the free expression of speech by the state's residents on behalf of the candidates.
Also, the suit alleges that minority voters will be hurt because the Republican primary will go forward as usual, while the Democratic primary will not count. "Minority members who are predominantly registered as Democratic voters, will suffer a disproportionate impact by virtue of the exclusion of Democratic voters," the suit alleges. The suit asks the court for an injunction that would ban the DNC from going forward with their threatened punishment. In addition to legal arguments, the suit uses harsh language to accuse the DNC of violations. "In the annals of modern politics, no national party has inflicted so devastating and sweeping a "geographic discrimination" upon an entire state's electorate consisting exclusively of members of its own party," the suit says. A spokeswoman for the DNC declined to comment on the suit, saying they had not "been given the courtesy of seeing the claims" made against the national party. "It's disappointing that after months of trying to resolve this situation, they have chosen this path," said spokeswoman Stacie Paxton. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recent Lawyer News Updates |
|
|
Lawyer News RSS
