|
|
|
State Supreme Court rules on illegal taxes
Class Action |
2011/08/01 08:56
|
The state Supreme Court made it easier this week for California taxpayers to seek refunds from cities and counties, ruling that a claim of an illegal local tax can be pursued as a class action on behalf of everyone who was overcharged.
The unanimous decision Monday in a Los Angeles case overturned lower-court rulings requiring local taxpayers to file individual refund claims.
In a class action, a representative can win damages that are distributed to an entire group of people affected by the same unlawful action. Class-action status often determines whether a tax can be effectively challenged, said Paul Heidenreich, a lawyer for consumer organizations in the case.
"When only one person can sue at a time, there's little incentive to do so" with small amounts at stake, he said.
The ruling may not affect San Francisco, however. Deputy City Attorney Peter Keith said the city has ordinances that set rules for tax refund claims and prohibit class actions. He said the court allowed class-wide suits only when a city or county has no laws of its own regulating tax refunds.
Francis Gregorek, lawyer for the plaintiff in the Los Angeles case, said a future ruling may be needed to determine whether a city can shield itself from class actions.
Class actions have become a hotly contested legal battleground. The U.S. Supreme Court restricted their use in two California cases earlier this year, refusing to allow as many as 1.5 million women to sue Wal-Mart Stores Inc. as a group over pay and promotion practices, and rejecting class-wide arbitration of a cell phone customer's overcharge claim against AT&T.
Gregorek's client, Estuardo Ardon, sued Los Angeles in 2006, claiming that a city telephone tax was illegal because it was linked to a federal excise tax that had been ruled invalid. Gregorek said the suit seeks millions of dollars in refunds for all phone customers in the city and has led to challenges against similar taxes in other communities.
The case has remained on hold while state courts determined whether Ardon can represent other customers. An appellate court said he could sue only as an individual, citing the state Supreme Court's 1992 ruling that rejected class-action status for a challenge to the state's taxes on vehicles bought by Californians in other states.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DeMocker defense says former lawyer will keep mum
Breaking Legal News |
2011/08/01 08:54
|
Lawyers for a Prescott stockbroker facing a murder retrial say they won't allow his former defense attorney to give a deposition in the case.
John Sears is one of two attorneys who quit Steven DeMocker's case in October, citing a conflict of interest. The move triggered a mistrial in November.
Deputy Yavapai County Attorney Jeffrey Paupore filed a motion last week that Sears be deposed as a material witness.
But DeMocker's current lawyer says any communications between Sears and DeMocker remains confidential and privileged.
The 56-year-old DeMocker is accused of killing his ex-wife, Carol Kennedy, with a golf club in July 2008 to avoid paying hefty alimony bills. He faces a life sentence if convicted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ex-Schuyler teacher seeks OK to plead guilty
Criminal Law |
2011/08/01 08:54
|
A former Schuyler teacher accused of sending nude photos and sexually explicit text messages to a student is asking to plead guilty.
The Columbus Telegram reports that 26-year-old Jesse Harmon faces federal charges of enticing a minor in sexually explicit conduct, visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct and possession of child pornography.
According to a document filed last month, Harmon requested permission to plead guilty.
A police affidavit filed in Colfax County District Court says Harmon's texts included nude photos of himself, talk about sexual contact and requests for suggestive photos of the 16-year-old student.
A federal hearing for Harmon is scheduled for Aug. 19. He had pleaded not guilty in the state case before it was dropped.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NJ high court to rule in case of retired judge
Court Watch |
2011/08/01 08:53
|
New Jersey's Supreme Court has upheld the censure of a retired Superior Court judge.
Steven Perskie was disciplined in March for not recusing himself in a timely fashion from a case involving his former campaign treasurer. A state Supreme Court committee also found Perskie was not forthcoming in his remarks to a Senate committee about the incident when he was facing re-appointment.
Today's ruling found Perskie shouldn't have rejected a request during a 2006 case that he recuse himself. He later recused himself for different reasons.
The court also found that Perskie didn't intentionally mislead the Senate committee when he answered questions about the incident.
Perskie served on the Superior Court in Atlantic County and retired in January 2010. He also served as a state legislator.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Layoffs loom in Ala. court clerks' offices
Breaking Legal News |
2011/08/01 08:52
|
A month-long notice has begun for massive layoffs in state court clerks' offices.
The Birmingham News reports that court officials say about one-third of the 750 employees in clerks' offices statewide will be laid off effective Aug. 31.
The officials say the layoffs are timed so the 255 workers will be off the state payroll before the court system's new, leaner budget takes effect Oct. 1.
The Jefferson County clerk's offices, which handle more than 75,000 filings per year, will be down to 48 full-time clerks and three temporary workers after the layoffs.
Chief Justice Sue Bell Cobb has ordered clerks' offices statewide to be closed to the public for 10 hours weekly starting in August to give the workers time to catch up on processing court documents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Rosen Law Firm Announces Class Action Lawsuit Against JBI, Inc.
Class Action |
2011/08/01 01:56
|
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. announces that a class action lawsuit for violations of the federal securities laws has been filed against JBI, Inc. /quotes/zigman/573088 JBII +5.11% based on allegations that the company issued materially misleading financial statements to the investing public. If you purchased JBI stock during the period from August 28, 2009 to July 20, 2011 you can join the class action and seek to recover your investment losses.
To join the JBI class action, visit the firm's website at http://www.rosenlegal.com , or call Jonathan Horne, Esq., toll-free, at 866-767-3653; you may also email jhorne@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action. The case is pending the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada.
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. YOU MAY CHOOSE TO DO NOTHING AT THIS POINT AND REMAIN AN ABSENT CLASS MEMBER.
The Complaint alleges that JBI materially overstated its income in connection with its acquisition of JavaCo, Inc. in 2009. As part of the transaction JBI exchanged 1 million shares of its stock for $9,997,134 worth of media credits. The Complaint alleges that JBI's financial statements were false and misleading because (1) the media credits acquired by the Company in connection with the acquisition of JavaCo were substantially overvalued; (2) that the Company was improperly accounting for acquisitions; (3) that, as such, the Company's financial results were not prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP"); (4) that the Company lacked adequate internal and financial controls; and (5) that, as a result of the above, the Company's financial statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
On May 21, 2010, JBI disclosed that its previously issued financial statements for the 2009 fiscal year and third quarter should no longer be relied upon. On July 14, 2011, the Securities and Exchange Commission advised the Company that it was recommending enforcement action against it and possibly one or more of its former officers in connection with the Company's issuing materially inaccurate financial statements.
News that JBI was required to restate its financial statements and was subject to an SEC enforcement action for violation of the federal securities laws has caused its stock price to drop substantially, damaging investors.
You may participate in the securities class action lawsuit to recover your investment losses. If you purchased JBI stock, please visit the website at http://rosenlegal.com to participate in the class action and to obtain more information. You may also contact Laurence Rosen or Phillip Kim of The Rosen Law Firm toll free at 866-767-3653 or via e-mail at or lrosen@rosenlegal.com or pkim@rosenlegal.com.
The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class action lawsuit filed over Antero drilling
Class Action |
2011/07/27 09:15
|
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Antero Resources alleging that the company's gas drilling activities in Battlement Mesa threaten the health of residents.
The suit was filed in Denver District Court on behalf of all 5,000 residents of the unincorporated community, which is located next to Parachute in western Garfield County.
An attorney representing the residents, Corey Zurbuch, says the suit argues that drilling exposes the people of Battlement Mesa to hazardous pollution.
Antero representatives, along with others in the industry, have long argued that their activities are not hazardous to the residents of Garfield County, according to the Glenwood Springs Post Independent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
