|
|
|
Lehman Brothers sues Citigroup for $2.5B
Business Law Info |
2012/02/10 17:21
|
Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and its creditors are suing several units of Citigroup Inc. to recover $2.5 billion the failed investment bank transferred to a backup account at Citi months before seeking bankruptcy court protection.
In the complaint filed on Wednesday with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, Lehman claims that Citibank is wrongfully withholding the money as a potential source of funds in a dispute over derivative contracts.
Lehman also is asking the court to disallow what it says are $2 billion of "inflated and legally unsupported" claims that Citibank has asserted against it.
In a statement Thursday, Citigroup vowed to defend itself and its right to recover losses from Lehman's collapse. It called the lawsuit unjustified and accused Lehman of trying to renege on its obligations and claw back assets to which it has no right.
According to the lawsuit, Citi demanded on June 12, 2008, that Lehman transfer between $3 billion to $5 billion into an account to cover potential overdrafts by Lehman subsidiaries that were using Citi's clearing and settlement services. |
|
|
|
|
|
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP Files Class Action
Class Action News |
2012/02/10 17:20
|
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP today announced that a class action has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of Powerwave Technologies, Inc. between February 1, 2011 and October 18, 2011, inclusive.
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from today. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact plaintiff’s counsel, Samuel H. Rudman or David A. Rosenfeld of Robbins Geller at 800/449-4900 or 619/231-1058. If you are a member of this class, you can view a copy of the complaint as filed or join this class action online at http://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases/powerwave/. Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.
The complaint charges Powerwave and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Powerwave engages in the design, manufacture, marketing, and sale of wireless solutions for wireless communications networks worldwide.
The complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business and prospects. Specifically, defendants misrepresented and/or failed to disclose the following adverse facts: (i) that the Company was experiencing a dramatic decline in demand from customers in its North American markets; (ii) that the Company was rapidly burning through its free cash flow as revenues declined and expenses increased; and (iii) that, as a result of the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company, its operations and earnings.
Robbins Geller, a 180-lawyer firm with offices in San Diego, San Francisco, New York, Boca Raton, Washington, D.C., Philadelphia and Atlanta, is active in major litigations pending in federal and state courts throughout the United States and has taken a leading role in many important actions on behalf of defrauded investors, consumers, and companies, as well as victims of human rights violations.
http://www.rgrdlaw.com |
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign donations are a risk in super PAC setting
U.S. Legal News |
2012/02/10 15:21
|
Money pouring into the presidential election from super political action committees and nonprofit campaign groups appears so far to be strictly American in origin, donated by U.S. companies, unions and millionaires. But it's easier than ever to conceal the source of money and the identities of contributors, making conditions ripe for illegal donations from foreigners, overseas companies or governments attempting to help a favored candidate for the White House.
"Clearly it is more difficult to enforce the ban on foreign spending when the source of the money is not publicly disclosed," said Trevor Potter, head of the Campaign Legal Center and former chairman of the Federal Elections Commission. Potter is the attorney advising television comedian Stephen Colbert, who set up his own super PAC to illustrate absurdities of how money affects U.S. elections.
Foreign political donations have been outlawed since 1966, and a brief U.S. Supreme Court order last month upheld the ban for foreigners living in the U.S. as well as corporations and individuals abroad. |
|
|
|
|
|
Miss high court hears challenge to Barbour pardons
Court Feed News |
2012/02/10 14:20
|
Feuding attorneys asked the Mississippi Supreme Court on Thursday to determine the validity of pardons that Haley Barbour gave to convicted killers and other convicts during his final days as governor.
Chief Justice Bill Waller Jr. said the court would not rule Thursday, but he didn't say when a decision would come.
"We want them to take enough time to do it right," said Randy Walker, who objects to the pardons. Walker was shot in the head in 1993 by one of the men Barbour set free last month. That former inmate, David Gatlin, also fatally shot his own estranged wife as she held the couple's baby.
At the heart of the dispute is Section 124 of the Mississippi Constitution, which says "no pardon shall be granted" by the governor until the convicted felon applying for the pardon publishes notice of that application for 30 days in a newspaper in or near the county where the crime was committed.
Justices could uphold the pardons, as requested by a private attorney representing Republican Barbour. Or they could declare the pardons invalid, as requested by Democratic Attorney General Jim Hood. If they agree with Hood that the 30-day publication is a must, they could send the pardons back to a lower court, where a circuit judge could hold a trial to determine whether the pardons met those requirements. |
|
|
|
|
|
High court asked to undo Mont. campaign money ban
Legal Career News |
2012/02/10 13:21
|
Corporations are asking the Supreme Court to allow them to spend freely to influence upcoming elections in Montana, despite a state high court ruling upholding a ban on independent corporate campaign spending.
Three groups filed papers with Justice Anthony Kennedy on Friday, saying that the Montana court's decision in December is out of step with Kennedy's majority opinion in the 2010 Citizens United case that struck down a federal ban on independent campaign spending.
The American Tradition Partnership and two other groups sued soon after the 2010 decision to overturn Montana's century-old corporate spending ban. But the state Supreme Court said the Montana law could remain in place because it was a response to political corruption and allows for some corporate spending. |
|
|
|
|
|
Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP Announces Class Action
Class Action News |
2012/02/09 17:36
|
Notice is hereby given that Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all purchasers of the American Depositary Shares of China Medical Technologies, Inc. between November 26, 2007 and December 12, 2011, inclusive seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
A copy of the Complaint is available from the court or from Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP. Please contact us by phone to discuss this action or to obtain a copy of the Complaint at (310) 201-9150 or Toll Free at (888) 773-9224, by email at shareholders@glancylaw.com, or visit our website at http://www.glancylaw.com.
China Medical develops, manufactures and markets immunodiagnostic and molecular diagnostic products. The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations and prospects, including: (1) that the Company’s acquisition of Beijing Bio-Ekon Biotechnology Co. Ltd. (“BBE”) was from a third-party seller connected to China Medical’s CEO; (2) that the Company substantially overpaid to acquire BBE; (3) that China Medical’s acquisition of BBE involved the use of fraudulent shell companies; (4) that the Company was suffering substantial operating losses prior to the acquisition; (5) that a majority of the Company’s accounts receivable were in excess of 120 days; (6) that, as a result, China Medical’s financial results were overstated; (7) that the Company lacked adequate internal and financial controls; and (8), as a result of the foregoing, that the Company's statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of class members and is represented by Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP, a law firm with significant experience in prosecuting class actions and substantial expertise in actions involving corporate fraud.
http://www.glancylaw.com |
|
|
|
|
Recent Lawyer News Updates |
|
|