|
|
|
Scott+Scott LLP Announces Securities Class Action
Class Action |
2011/11/29 09:48
|
On November 28, 2011, Scott+Scott LLP filed a class action complaint against The Cooper Companies, Inc. and certain of the Company's senior officers and directors in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The action for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is brought on behalf of those purchasing the common stock of Cooper between March 4, 2011 and November 15, 2011, inclusive.
If you purchased the common stock of Cooper during the Class Period and wish to serve as a lead plaintiff in the action, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from today. Any member of the investor class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of its choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. If you wish to discuss this action or have questions concerning this notice or your rights, please contact Scott+Scott at (800) 404-7770, (860) 537-5537 or visit the Scott+Scott website http://www.scott-scott.com/cases/coopercos.html for more information. There is no cost or fee to you.
The complaint filed in the action alleges that, during the Class Period, Cooper issued false and misleading statements concealing known quality control problems and process defects at the Company's new overseas contact lens manufacturing facilities.
The complaint alleges that following the announcement of a small voluntary recall, the significance of which Cooper and its senior executives intentionally downplayed, on November 15, 2011, Cooper was forced to disclose a much larger product recall and to finally disclose the seriousness of the potential injuries. As the market learned the true extent of the Company's production issues, product safety defects and the harm to Cooper's reputation and product marketability, the Company's stock price declined precipitously. The class action seeks recovery under the federal securities laws for those who purchased Cooper's common stock between March 4, 2011 and November 15, 2011.
Scott+Scott has significant experience in prosecuting major securities, antitrust and employee retirement plan actions throughout the United States. The firm represents pension funds, foundations, individuals and other entities worldwide. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court to review fine for mercury storage
Breaking Legal News |
2011/11/28 09:32
|
The Supreme Court will consider throwing out an $18 million penalty against Texas-based Southern Union Co. for illegally storing mercury at a rundown building in Rhode Island.
The justices said Monday they will hear the natural gas company's appeal of the criminal penalty that was imposed by a federal judge and upheld by an appeals court.
What makes the case unusual is that the company is challenging the size of the penalty under a line of Supreme Court cases concerning prison sentences.
Southern Union had used the building in Pawtucket to store outdated mercury-sealed gas regulators that it removed from customers' homes. The mercury was initially removed and shipped to a recycling center. But when that work stopped, the regulators and loose mercury were left to accumulate inside the building.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas, Kagan asked to sit out health care case
Breaking Legal News |
2011/11/28 09:31
|
Conservative interest groups and Republican lawmakers want Justice Elena Kagan off the health care case. Liberals and Democrats in Congress say it's Justice Clarence Thomas who should sit it out.
Neither justice is budging — the right decision, according to many ethicists and legal experts.
None of the parties in the case has asked the justices to excuse themselves. But underlying the calls on both sides is their belief that the conservative Thomas is a sure vote to strike down President Barack Obama's health care law and that the liberal Kagan is certain to uphold the main domestic achievement of the man who appointed her.
The stakes are high in the court's election-year review of a law aimed at extending coverage to more than 30 million people. Both sides have engaged in broad legal and political maneuvering for the most favorable conditions surrounding the court's consideration of the case.
Taking away just one vote potentially could tip the outcome on the nine-justice court.
Republican lawmakers recently have stepped up their effort against Kagan, complaining that the Justice Department has not fully revealed Kagan's involvement in planning the response to challenges to the law. Kagan was Obama's solicitor general, the administration's top Supreme Court lawyer, until he nominated her to the high court last year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal Court of Canada Certifies Class Action
Class Action |
2011/11/28 09:31
|
Branch MacMaster LLP and Hordo Bennett Mounteer LLP report that the Federal Court of Canada has certified the BIM Class Action against Business in Motion International Corporation and Alan Kippax. By order dated November 10, 2011 , Mr. Justice Rennie of the Federal Court officially certified the action on behalf of the national class, as represented by the Plaintiff, Mr. Mark Cuzzetto .
The lawsuit was initiated in May, 2010 against BIM and its principal, Alan Kippax. BIM operated a plan called the "Time Leverage System", recruiting representatives to sell "Perpetual Motion Products". The lawsuit alleges that the Defendants have been engaged in the operation of an unlawful multi-level marketing scheme and/or pyramid scheme contrary to the Competition Act. The class members seek damages for the money they paid to the Defendants.
Persons who have purchased the product and who wish to participate in the action do not need to do anything at this time. Persons who do not want to participate in the action must opt out by January 18, 2012 by completing the online form on the website.
Bim CLASS ACTION
DID YOU PURCHASE A PERPETUAL MOTION PRODUCT FROM OR THROUGH BUSINESS IN MOTION INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION? IF SO, PLEASE READ THIS CAREFULLY AS IT MAY AFFECT YOUR RIGHTS.
WHAT IS THIS CASE ABOUT?
A class action lawsuit has been certified in the Federal Court of Canada claiming that Business in Motion International Corporation and Alex Kippax ("BIM") ran an illegal pyramid scheme and an illegal multi-level marketing scheme. A copy of the Statement of Claim and Order certifying the action as a class proceeding can be found at www.BIMclassaction.com.
HOW WILL THE LAWSUIT PROCEED?
A trial will be held to determine the common issues in the action. If these issues are determine in favor of the class members, there might still need to be individual hearings to determine the entitlement of each class member to a refund.
WHAT DO I HAVE TO DO TO PARTICIPATE?
There is nothing you have to do right now. Unless you opt out, you will be bound by the result of the common issues trial. However, in order to make sure you are notified of any important developments in the action, we recommend you register on our website at www.BIMclassaction.com.
WHAT IF I DO NOT WANT TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS LAWSUIT?
If you do not want to be part of the class action, you must complete the online form at www.BIMclassaction.com. If you do not have access to the internet, please contact Ulla Herlev at Branch MacMaster LLP. You must complete the online form by no later than January 18, 2012 .
DO I NEED TO PAY ANYTHING?
You will only need to pay legal fees if the action is successful in obtaining you a refund of some of the monies you paid. Those legal fees will be paid directly from the refund you receive. You will not need to pay any legal fees out of your own pocket.
Any fee paid to the lawyers must be approved by the Court as being fair and reasonable. The fee agreement entered into by the representative plaintiff provides for the lawyers to be paid up to 1/3 of any amounts recovered or any benefit obtained from the class action. If and when this occurs, the lawyers will apply to Court for approval of that percentage or some lesser amount.
If the class action is unsuccessful at the common issues trial, you will not pay any legal fees.
WHO ARE THE LAWYERS FOR THE CLASS?
The lawyers for the class are:
BRANCH MACMASTER LLP
Barristers and Solicitors
1410 - 777 Hornby Street
Vancouver , BC V6Z 1S4
HORDO BENNETT MOUNTEER LLP
Barristers and Solicitors
1400 - 128 West Pender St.
Vancouver , BC V6B 1R8
Mark Cuzzetto (the representative plaintiff) has been appointed by the Court to instruct the lawyers for the common issues stage. The lawyers must act in the interest of all class members.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court will decide question on crack sentencing
Law Center |
2011/11/28 09:30
|
The Supreme Court will decide whether a law meant to reduce the disparity between crack and powder cocaine prison sentences can apply those who were convicted — but not sentenced — before its enactment.
The high court on Monday agreed to hear an appeal from Edward Dorsey and Corey Hill, who were both convicted of crack cocaine crimes.
However, the men were not sentenced until after The Fair Sentencing Act went into effect. That law reduces the difference between sentences for crimes committed by crack cocaine and powder cocaine users.
The two men argue that because their sentences came after the law's effective date, they should get its lesser prison time. The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed, and the high court will review that decision. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
US court won't block its Texas redistricting map
Court Watch |
2011/11/28 09:26
|
A federal court refused late Friday to block a congressional redistricting map it drew up for Texas, rejecting a request from the state's attorney general just hours after the Republican accused the court of "undermining the democratic process."
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott had asked the San Antonio-based court to stay the implementation of its interim map, which the court drafted when minority groups challenged the original plan passed by the Republican-dominated state Legislature.
The court-drawn map would ensure minorities made up the majority in three additional Texas congressional districts. If the 2012 elections were held under the court's map, Democrats would have an advantage as they try to win back the U.S. House.
Abbott said he would appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. The court-ordered map will remain in place until the legal fights are resolved.
The court drew the maps after minority groups filed a lawsuit, claiming a redistricting plan devised by Republican lawmakers didn't reflect growth in the state's Hispanic and black populations. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court won't hear skycaps' appeal on tips
Labor & Employment |
2011/11/28 08:31
|
The Supreme Court has left in place a ruling that denied $333,000 to airport skycaps who claimed they were cheated out of tips when American Airlines started charging curbside baggage fees.
The court on Monday rejected an appeal from nine skycaps at Logan International Airport in Boston. They wanted the court to review a federal appeals court ruling that overturned a lower court decision in their favor.
The skycaps sued under a Massachusetts law aimed at preventing employers from keeping tips intended for workers. The 1st U.S. Court of Appeals in Boston held that the law was pre-empted by federal aviation law regulating airfares. The court also said that soon after institution of the baggage fee, American Airlines clearly indicated with signs that the $2 fee was not a tip.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
