|
|
|
Defendant won't testify in US webcam spying trial
Court Watch |
2012/03/12 10:00
|
A former Rutgers University student accused of using a webcam to spy on his roommate's intimate encounter with another man won't take the witness stand in his own defense, his lawyer told the judge as he rested his case.
The 20-year-old Ravi, who was born in India and came to New Jersey as a young child, is charged with 15 criminal counts, including bias intimidation and invasion of privacy. Bias intimidation is a hate crime punishable by up to 10 years in prison in New Jersey. He also could be deported to India, where he remains a citizen, if he's convicted on any counts.
Prosecutors presented about 20 witnesses over 10 days as they built a case against Ravi. Defense lawyers called nine lawyers in two days.
Ravi's roommate, Tyler Clementi, committed suicide by jumping off the George Washington Bridge in September 2010, just days after the intimate encounter. His death brought widespread attention to the difficulties that can be faced by young gays.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP Announces Class Action
Class Action |
2012/03/12 10:00
|
Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court, Northern District of Alabama, on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of Walter Energy, Inc. between April 20, 2011 and September 21, 2011, inclusive (the “Class Period”), alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Walter Energy produces and exports metallurgical coal for electric utility and industrial customers in the United States.
The Complaint alleges that defendants misrepresented or failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business and financial prospects, including that: (1) the Company was experiencing so-called “squeeze” events in Alabama and lower coal transportation rates in Canada that significantly reduced the Company’s coal production; (2) the Company’s commitment to ship more than 700,000 tons of coal in the second quarter, at first quarter sales prices, would result in a material adverse effect on Walter Energy’s second-quarter average sales prices and operating results; (3) the Company was experiencing a significant decline in its margins and profitability; and (4), based on the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company’s business and financial prospects during the Class Period.
No class has yet been certified in the above action. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. If you purchased Walter Energy common stock between April 20, 2011 and September 21, 2011, you have certain rights, and have until March 26, 2012 to move for lead plaintiff status.
www.glancylaw.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Afghanistan suspect's base had 2010 killing case
Breaking Legal News |
2012/03/11 10:00
|
Joint Base Lewis-McChord is one of the largest military installations in the U.S., and one that has seen its share of controversies and violence in the past few years.
The news that a soldier suspected of killing 16 Afghan villagers Sunday comes from this base about 45 miles south of Seattle hit hard.
"It's another blow to this community," said Spc. Jared Richardson, an engineer, as he stood outside a barbershop near the base. "This is definitely something we don't need."
Home to about 100,000 military and civilian personnel, the base has suffered a spate of suicides among soldiers back from war. The Army is investigating whether doctors at Lewis-McChord's Madigan Army Medical Center were urged to consider the cost of providing benefits when reviewing diagnoses of post-traumatic stress disorder.
Most famously, four Lewis-McChord soldiers were convicted in the deliberate thrill killings of three Afghan civilians in 2010.
The military newspaper Stars and Stripes called it "the most troubled base in the military" that year.
Catherine Caruso, a spokeswoman for Lewis-McChord, said she could not comment on reports that the soldier involved in Sunday's shooting was based there. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brower Piven Announces Summary Notice of Proposed Settlement of Class Action
Class Action |
2012/03/09 09:35
|
SUMMARY NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION
All Persons and Entities Who Purchased Inyx, Inc. Common Stock Between April 1, 2005 and July 2, 2007, Inclusive.
This Summary Notice is given pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and an Order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the "Court"), dated February 9, 2012. The purpose of this Summary Notice is to inform you of the proposed settlement of the above-entitled class action (the "Action") against defendants Inyx, Inc., Jack Kachkar, Rima Goldshmidt, and Jay M. Green.
A Settlement Hearing will be held before the Hon. P. Kevin Castel, United States District Judge, at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan U.S. Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007, at 11:30 a.m. on May, 4, 2012 in order: (1) to determine whether the Settlement consisting of no less than $600,000.00 (US) and no more than $1,100,000 (US) in cash should be approved as fair, reasonable, and adequate to the Class and the proposed Judgment entered; (2) to determine whether the proposed Plan of Allocation for the proceeds of the settlement is fair and reasonable, and should be approved by the Court; (3) to determine whether any applications for attorneys' fees not to exceed 35% of the settlement Fund and reimbursement of litigation expenses not to exceed $110,000.00 (US) to Class Counsel should be approved; and (5) to rule upon such other matters as the Court may deem appropriate.
If you purchased the common stock of Inyx, Inc. between April 1, 2005 and July 2, 2007, inclusive, and are not otherwise excluded from the Class, you are a Class Member. Class Members will be bound by the final Judgment of the Court. If you are a Class Member, in order to share in the distribution of the Net Settlement Fund, you must submit a Proof of Claim postmarked no later than June 8, 2012, establishing that you are entitled to recovery. If you are a Class Member and need a Proof of Claim, copies may be obtained by telephoning the Claims Administrator at (800) 231-1815 or by downloading the form on the Internet at www.gcginc.com.
If you do not wish to be included in the Class and you do not wish to participate in the proposed Settlement, you may request to be excluded in the manner set forth in the full Notice of Proposed Settlement of Class Action ("Notice"), no later than April 9, 2012. If you are a Class Member, and you do not request exclusion from the Class, you may make written objection(s) to the Settlement, the Plan of Allocation or Class Counsel's request for an award of attorneys' fees and reimbursement of expenses by following the procedures set forth in the Notice. If you make a written objection, you also may appear at the Settlement Hearing. You must file and serve your written objection, in the manner specifically set forth in the Notice, no later than April 9, 2012.
This is only a summary notice. The full Notice of Proposed Settlement of Class Action may be accessed at: www.gcginc.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mo. court denies tax break for convenience stores
Court Watch |
2012/03/07 09:22
|
Missouri's highest court says convenience stores cannot claim a tax break on the electricity used to prepare food.
The Supreme Court's decision Tuesday hinged on whether the act of warming or cooking food qualified as "processing" a product. If so, then the electricity used for food preparation could qualify for a state sales tax exemption.
In a 5-2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that food preparation was not "processing" and the tax break could not be claimed.
Casey's General Stores had sought the tax break for one month of electricity used at stores in Grain Valley and Greenwood.
The Missouri Department of Revenue said it did not have a specific figure for what might have been owed to Casey's, or to other companies that might have made similar claims.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan & Maniskas, LLP Announces Class Action Lawsuit
Class Action |
2012/03/06 09:37
|
Ryan & Maniskas, LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed in United States District Court for the District of Colorado on behalf of purchasers of Molycorp, Inc. common stock during the period between March 9, 2011 and November 10, 2011.
For more information regarding this class action suit, please contact Ryan & Maniskas, LLP toll-free at (877) 316-3218 or by email at rmaniskas@rmclasslaw.com or visit: www.rmclasslaw.com/cases/mcp.
The complaint alleges that defendants’ false and misleading statements about the capability of the Company’s “Mountain Pass” mining operation and the Company’s earnings caused Molycorp common stock to trade at artificially inflated prices throughout the Class Period. Specifically, defendants misrepresented and/or failed to disclose the following adverse facts during the Class Period: (a) Molycorp’s development and expansion of the Mountain Pass mine was not progressing on schedule and would not allow the Company to reach rare earth oxide production rates at the end of calendar 2012 and 2013; and (b) end users had been reducing demand for the Company’s products as prices for rare earth elements increased.
On November 10, 2011, the Company reported disappointing third quarter 2011 revenues and earnings results below analysts’ estimates and announced a reduction in Mountain Pass production guidance for the fourth quarter of 2011 due to expected equipment downtime relating to Mountain Pass engineering and expansion issues. The Company’s stock price fell, dropping from $38.70 per share on November 10, 2011 to $33.45 per share on November 11, 2011, or 13.6%, on heavy trading volume.
If you are a member of the class, you may, no later than April 3, 2012, request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff of the class. A lead plaintiff is a representative party that acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member's claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Under certain circumstances, one or more class members may together serve as "lead plaintiff." Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. You may retain Ryan & Maniskas, LLP or other counsel of your choice, to serve as your counsel in this action.
www.rmclasslaw.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: Inmate cannot change court-appointed lawyer
Court Watch |
2012/03/05 09:13
|
The Supreme Court says a death row inmate can't change his court-appointed appeals lawyer because he didn't like the lawyer's defense tactics.
The justices on Monday turned away the appeal from Kenneth Clair, who was sentenced to death in California in 1987 for burglary and murder.
Clair wanted to change his federal public defender in 2005 because he says they were trying to stop his execution instead of trying to prove his innocence. A federal judge denied his request but the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that decision.
The justices ruled unanimously that the appeals court's decision was incorrect
Justice Elena Kagan wrote that Clair's request came just as a judge was about to make a final ruling so any change would have been too late.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class action or a representative action is a form of lawsuit in which a large group of people collectively bring a claim to court and/or in which a class of defendants is being sued. This form of collective lawsuit originated in the United States and is still predominantly a U.S. phenomenon, at least the U.S. variant of it. In the United States federal courts, class actions are governed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule. Since 1938, many states have adopted rules similar to the FRCP. However, some states like California have civil procedure systems which deviate significantly from the federal rules; the California Codes provide for four separate types of class actions. As a result, there are two separate treatises devoted solely to the complex topic of California class actions. Some states, such as Virginia, do not provide for any class actions, while others, such as New York, limit the types of claims that may be brought as class actions. They can construct your law firm a brand new website, lawyer website templates and help you redesign your existing law firm site to secure your place in the internet. |
Law Firm Directory
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
