|
|
|
Gonzales aide to invoke Fifth Amendment
Legal Career News |
2007/03/27 13:50
|
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales‘ liaison with the White House will refuse to answer questions at upcoming Senate hearings about the firings of eight U.S. attorneys, citing her Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination, her lawyer said Monday. The revelation complicated the outlook for Gonzales, who is traveling out of town this week even as he fights to keep his job. Asked why he would want to remain as attorney general amid so many calls for his ouster, Gonzales said he‘s been asking himself lately whether it‘s appropriate for him to stay in his job. But, he said, "at the end of the day, it‘s not about Alberto Gonzales. It‘s about this great Department of Justice that does so many wonderful things for the American people." The House voted 329-78 to strip the attorney general of his power to indefinitely appoint federal prosecutors, approving a bill similar to one passed in the Senate. President Bush , who is standing by Gonzales, has signaled that he will not veto the legislation. |
|
|
|
|
|
Jackson Law Firm Sues Scruggs In Dispute Over Fees
Headline News |
2007/03/27 11:37
|
A Jackson law firm has sued millionaire trial attorney Richard Scruggs for allegedly withholding money it claims it was owed for working on Hurricane Katrina insurance-related litigation. The lawsuit was filed March 15 in Lafayette County Circuit Court by Grady F. Tollison Jr. on behalf of the Jones, Funderburg, Sessums, Peterson & Lee law firm in Jackson. No court date has been set for the lawsuit. Tollison has requested a jury trial. Tollison was not in his office Tuesday and was not immediately available for comment. Scruggs is one of the nation's wealthiest trial attorneys. In the late 1990s, his Mississippi-based firm earned nearly $1 billion in fees for his part in reaching a landmark $250 billion settlement with tobacco companies. He used that windfall to finance lawsuits against insurance companies for denying thousands of policyholders' claims after Katrina destroyed their homes. Scruggs created a legal team, called the Scruggs Katrina Group, to represent the policyholders. SKG's work led to a settlement with State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. that will earn the attorneys about $26 million. Those legal fees are at the crux of the lawsuit. Zach Scruggs of Oxford, Scruggs' son and law partner, said Tuesday that he could not immediately comment on the lawsuit. Also named as defendants in the lawsuit are other members of the SKG team. The lawsuit, which gives only one side of the legal argument, alleges that senior partner John G. Jones and other members of the Jackson law firm deposed witnesses, handled briefs, filed motions and other tasks for Scruggs' group. Specifically, the lawsuit mentions Jones and his law firm's work on a July 2006 lawsuit, filed by SKG on behalf of Pascagoula police officer Paul Leonard against Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. over denial of Leonard's claim. Jones participated in the questioning of witnesses in that lawsuit. The lawsuit notes that the agreement with SKG did not specify a percentage of fees that each participating law firm would receive. The exception was a Ridgeland law firm that had agreed to finance part of the SKG joint venture. The lawsuit alleges Scruggs and other conspired to "freeze out" the Jones firm and offered it a "ridiculously low figure" for its "substantial" work. Jones claimed his firm was offered a $1 million payment and was told it would get nothing from the legal fees to be paid by State Farm, according to the lawsuit. Jones contends Scruggs declined to negotiate or enter into arbitration to settle the fees issue and kept Jones' law firm out of any other lawsuits filed by SKG. The Jones firm claims it is entitled to 20 percent of all past attorney fees collected by SKG and 20 percent of all future attorney fees SKG collects. The lawsuit also asks for unspecified punitive damages. |
|
|
|
|
|
Lakin firm plans to stay put despite eviction notice
Headline News |
2007/03/26 21:35
|
BP America, landlord of the Lakin Law Firm, intends to evict the firm from its office in Wood River in about 90 days. The Lakin firm intends to stay. The firm filed a complaint in Madison County circuit court March 21, seeking to extend its lease at 301 Evans Avenue for five years. For the Lakin firm, Charles Chapman wrote that, "Plaintiff will suffer irreparable injury if this Court does not enter an injunction prohibiting Defendant from taking any actions to evict Plaintiff from the Leased Premises on or after June 30." The property once served as office and warehouse for a refinery, and it looks more like an industrial plant than headquarters of a famous law firm. Petrochemical pipes point toward the building. Docking structures stand by it. Three pairs of railroad tracks run by it. At a bend in Evans Avenue, a broad asphalt apron leads to an entrance that the Lakin firm shares with oil company Atlantic Richfield. According to Chapman's complaint, law firm founder Tom Lakin signed a 10-year lease with Amoco Petroleum Additives Company in 1996. Amoco Petroleum Additives did not own the property, but leased it from Amoco Oil Company. The lease gave Lakin 29,000 square feet of warehouse space and 22,000 square feet of office space, for a total of 51,000 square feet. Rent started at $105,000 a year, a bargain rate at $2.06 per square foot. The lease provided annual consumer price adjustments. It gave the Lakin firm options for two five year extensions. The lease began to run July 1, 1997. At some point, it passed to Amoco Remediation Management Services Corporation. According to Chapman, the firm sent an option notice to Amoco Oil in Wood River in March 2006, and Amoco Oil forwarded it to Elizabeth Yordanoff, BP America managing attorney in Warrenville, Illinois. He wrote, "Defendant did not respond to the option notice until Feb. 9, 2007, when defendant advised plaintiff, via a telephone call, that defendant was not interested in a long term lease and will not consent to the option…" He wrote that on Feb. 23, Yordanoff advised the firm that BP America would not extend the lease because it planned to sell the property. He wrote that Yordanoff offered to extend the lease to Dec. 31. Chapman asked for declaratory judgment extending the lease to 2012. He wrote, "Plaintiff has complied with all prerequisites to exercise the option." He wrote, "…the parties reasonably expected that plaintiff would exercise the option and that defendant would consent to the option." He wrote that by delaying a response to the option notice for a year, BP America waived a provision conditioning the option on its consent. Chapman also claimed breach of contract. He wrote, "Plaintiff has sustained damages and will sustain damages if it is forced to move out of the premises at issue before June 30, 2012." Chapman filed the suit on the miscellaneous remedies docket. Unelected associate judges hear "MR" cases. As of March 26, Chief Judge Ann Callis had not assigned a judge. If BP America dislodges the Lakin firm, Chapman will have to leave too. He practices in the Lakin building, not as a member of the firm but as Charles W. Chapman, Chartered. |
|
|
|
|
|
Security Council broadens Iran nuclear sanctions
Legal World News |
2007/03/26 17:25
|
The UN Security Council unanimously voted Saturday to impose new sanctions on Iran for continuing to enrich uranium in violation of a December 2006 resolution. Security Council Resolution 1747 broadens the sanctions of December's Resolution 1737, freezing assets of investors in Iran and blocking the export of Iranian arms. Council members said they saw the unanimous vote as a strong censure sending a clear message that Iran should "suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development, to be verified by the International Atomic Energy Agency." The Council nonetheless emphasized that the resolution is not intended to punish Iran or its people but rather to prompt renewed negotiations. Iran has 60 days to comply before the sanctions take effect. The Iranian parliament reviewed and rejected Resolution 1737 in December. That resolution cited reports submitted by the IAEA which showed that Iran had not "established full and sustained suspension of all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities" as set out in Resolution 1696 or otherwise complied with IAEA instructions. Iran has consistently decried the sanctions and emphasized that its policy will go unchanged. On Saturday Iranian Minister for Foreign Affairs Manouchehr Mottaki said that Resolution 1747 takes an unlawful, unnecessary and unjustifiable action against the peaceful nuclear programme of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which presents no threat to international peace and security and falls, therefore, outside the Council’s Charter-based mandate. |
|
|
|
|
|
Investors Continue to Challenge Dean Food
Business Law Info |
2007/03/26 17:18
|
Socially concerned investors for the second year in a row have filed a shareholder proposal asking Dean Foods Co. (NYSE: DF) to report to shareholders how it is responding to widespread concern that industrial-scale organic dairies, supplying milk for its Horizon Organic brand, violate consumer trust, seriously jeopardizing share value. The shareholder proposal is a by-product of a seven-year debate in the organic industry over the introduction of large-scale factory-farms, milking as many as 2,000-10,000 cows each. It is the contention of a growing number of public interest, environmental, and farming groups that some of these farms are violating current USDA regulations by labeling their products as organic. In 2005 and 2006, The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based farm policy group, filed formal complaints with the USDA against a number of industrial dairies, including allegations that these mega-farms, mostly in the arid West, were violating the law by confining their cattle to feedlots and sheds rather than grazing as the federal organic regulations require. The dairy farms in question include two owned by Dean Foods in Idaho and Maryland and another California farm shipping milk for distribution under Dean’s Horizon Organic label. Because of inaction by the USDA the Institute is now preparing to seek court intervention in order to compel the agency to investigate the alleged improprieties. “When consumers pay a premium for organic milk, they generally have the expectation that cows have access to pasture and gain a sizable percentage of their nutrients from grass,” said Steven Heim, director of social research with Boston Common Asset Management, lead investor-sponsor of the resolution representing institutional shareholders in the resolution process. “Besides complying with the law itself, we question whether Dean’s procurement of milk from factory-farms violates consumer trust and jeopardizes the value of its organic brands,” Heim added. Dean Foods, the nation’s largest milk processor, also became the largest U.S. marketer of organic dairy products when it acquired the Horizon Organic, Alta Dena, and Organic Cow of Vermont brands. In June 2006 Heim and Mark Kastel, The Cornucopia Institute’s senior farm policy analyst, toured Dean’s Idaho farm at Dean’s invitation. “Although the company is making a $10 million investment in additional facilities in the desert-like conditions, and is attempting to paint their facility ‘green’, serious questions remain as to the legitimacy of milking thousands of cows in these conditions,” Kastel said. The shareholder proposal asks an independent committee of Dean’s board to review Dean’s policies and procedures for its organic dairy products, and report to shareholders on their adequacy to protect Dean’s organic dairy brands and its reputation with organic food consumers. The investor groups also want to know how the company intends to respond to increasing consumer and media criticism. “Even though the proposal is only asking the company, currently engaged in a nationwide advertising campaign touting the greenness of their organic milk business, to report to shareholders concerning this controversy, Dean has opted to ‘lawyer-up’ and aggressively fight the proposal at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission” (SEC), added Sister Linda Hayes of the Springfield Dominicans, an investor-sponsor of the resolution. “This is not the kind of transparency that consumers have expected in the organic food industry.” Unfortunately, it appears that their PR campaign has so far backfired. An active boycott by the 700,000-member Organic Consumers Association has resulted in scores of natural foods retailers around the country dropping all or part of the Horizon Organic product line. The negative press has already led to a growing legion of loyal organic consumers looking for alternative brands. “It is very unfortunate that instead of addressing the central concerns articulated in this shareholder proposal, that the company has instead decided to invest its resources in legal maneuvers to prevent its investors from voting on this resolution,” said Daniel Stranahan of the Needmor Fund, another investor-sponsor of the proposal. Stranahan likewise mentioned the issue of transparency. “We are concerned that Dean Foods’ lack of transparency to its shareholders betrays a similar attitude toward its core consumers.” He added, “Factory farms are antithetical to the concept of organic farming, which supports family-scale production with sound environmental policies.” Dean Foods appeal to the SEC for the authority to prevent its shareholders from voting on the proposal may prove successful. It appears that government regulators are likely to side with the $10 billion corporation. Dean Foods’ primary business has been somewhat stagnant in recent years, so it has been touting its investments in the organic milk labels and the country’s leading soy milk brand, Silk, as vehicles to make its stock more attractive on Wall Street. |
|
|
|
|
|
Class Action Suit Filed Against Worldspace, Inc.
Class Action News |
2007/03/26 16:28
|
NEW YORK, NY -- The Rosen Law Firm recently announced that it has filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of a class consisting of all purchasers of the common stock of Worldspace, Inc. (the "Company" or "Worldspace") (NASDAQ: WRSP) pursuant and/or traceable to the Company's August 4, 2005 Initial Public Offering (the "Class"). Purchasers of WorldSpace shares on the open market are also eligible to join the class action.
The complaint charges that Worldspace and certain of its present officers and directors violated Sections 11, 12 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 by issuing materially false and misleading statements about the Company's subscriber count. The Complaint alleges that the Company included in its subscriber count accounts that had either expired or been "churned." The Complaint alleges that the Company included these expired or "churned" accounts for at least 90 days after the accounts had expired or were otherwise non-paying. As a result of these adverse disclosures the Company's stock fell and members of the Class were damaged. A class action lawsuit has already been filed on behalf of Worldspace shareholders. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than May 15, 2007. If you wish to join the litigation or to discuss your rights or interests regarding this class action, please contact plaintiff's counsel, Laurence Rosen, Esq. or Phillip Kim of The Rosen Law Firm toll free at 866-767-3653 or via e-mail at lrosen@rosenlegal.com or pkim@rosenlegal.com. The Rosen Law Firm has expertise in prosecuting investor securities litigation and extensive experience in actions involving financial fraud. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the nation, concentrating its practice in securities class actions.
To view the complaint or to join the Worldspace class action, go to the website at http://www.rosenlegal.com or call Laurence Rosen, Esq. or Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email lrosen@rosenlegal.com or pkim@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action. |
|
|
|
|
Recent Lawyer News Updates |
|
|