Another lawsuit has been filed against Winters Yonker & Rousselle, asking that it be forced to forfeit all attorneys’ fees for allegedly accepting unethical referrals from a for-profit referral service.

The complaint, filed Wednesday in Jefferson Circuit Court, asks that the suit be certified as a class action on behalf of all of the firm’s clients in Kentucky.

The suit was filed by James Rose and Christopher Rose of Elizabethtown, who says they hired the law firm after a motor-vehicle accident in May 2009.

The suit says that about two minutes after calling the 1-800-ASK-GARY referral line, Christopher Rose, James’ adult son, was contacted by as representative of Winters & Yonker, as the firm is now known, and instructed to meet him at 1st Physicians Rehabilitation Inc., a medical office in Louisville, where the law firm signed up the Roses as clients.

The suit alleges that the law firm obtained the referrals through “illegal and/or unethical solicitation,” and that attorneys fees collected by Winters & Yonker from the Roses and other clients should be forfeited. Kentucky lawyer ethics rules prohibit referrals in return for anything of value.

A hearing resumed for the last of five lawyers accused of ethical violations in the handling of Kwame Kilpatrick's text messages Wednesday with testimony from the former mayor's lawyer Samuel McCargo.

McCargo, who was among the first of the lawyers cited for ethical violations, told the Attorney Discipline Board that Assistant Corporation Counsel Valerie Colbert Osamuede never was shown documents that detailed what the text messages purportedly said. He also said she never saw copies of the actual messages before they were delivered in secret to another of Kilpatrick's lawyers.

McCargo, who has yet to receive his punishment for being found guilty in March on five counts of professional misconduct, also said Colbert Osamuede probably didn't violate the state's Freedom of Information Act by withholding requested documents that showed how the text messages were kept a secret part of an $8.4 million whistle-blower lawsuit settlement in 2007.

Midsize law firm Pryor Cashman is making the most of its routine news and communications, using e-mail to help create new sales opportunities. The company, which has 125 attorneys and 90 practice areas, has been using e-mail marketing for about five years. Before that time, said Elizabeth Wall, the company’s marketing manager, Pryor Cashman--with offices in New York and Los Angeles--used direct mail such as holiday cards to communicate with its clients and prospects.

Back in 2008 Wall wanted to find a way to send out holiday cards electronically as part of a new environmental mission called Thinking Green. The e-cards would eliminate paper waste as well as wasted time--no small feat for a two-person marketing department. Traditionally it took between three and four weeks to get the holiday cards ready for mailing because the marketers had to coordinate which partners had to sign which cards and make sure the right clients were on a master mailing list. “It was amazingly inefficient,” Wall said.

• Drunk Driving (DUII, DUI, DWI) - including underage drinking and driving, refusing a breathalyzer test, driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and other drug or alcohol related driving offenses
• Criminal Driving Offenses - including manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide, assault, hit & run, attempting to elude police, reckless driving and licensure issues
• Drug Crimes - including possession

The former chief operating officer at the now-defunct law firm run by admitted Ponzi scheme operator Scott Rothstein was charged Tuesday with money laundering conspiracy for her alleged role in the $1.2 billion scam.

Debra Villegas, 42, was accused of helping Rothstein concoct the fake legal settlements used to lure investors — even forging the names of fictional plaintiffs and defendants on the documents. Villegas, of Weston, became the second person charged in the scheme that brought down the Fort Lauderdale-based firm Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler — and there could be more to come.

"We remain committed to prosecuting investment fraud schemes and all who participate, from top to bottom," said U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Sloman of Miami.

Villegas faces a maximum of 10 years in prison if convicted. Prosecutors are also seeking forfeiture of $1.2 million in cash, a home in Weston valued at about $407,000 that Rothstein transferred to Villegas and $130,000 Maserati Granturismo Coup that was a gift from Rothstein.

An attorney for Villegas did not immediately respond to an e-mail message seeking comment. She is scheduled to appear in court Wednesday; the type of charging document filed by prosecutors typically indicates that the defendant will eventually plead guilty.

A federal judge has ordered a one-month delay in the Enron-related May retrial of a former Merrill Lynch executive.

U.S. District Judge Ewing Werlein Jr. agreed to delay Robert S. Furst's retrial to June 1 to accommodate plea negotiations. Prosecutors and defense attorneys told Werlein during a hearing Friday that they are close to a deal that would resolve the case.

Furst and two other executives were convicted in 2004 of helping push through Enron's sham sale to Merrill Lynch of three power barges moored off the Nigerian coast in 1999. The deal was struck to make the Enron energy division's earnings appear larger.

But an appeals court threw out their fraud and conspiracy convictions in 2006 after finding fault with the prosecution's legal theory.

Supreme Court justices on Tuesday sharply questioned a lower court's decision that has prohibited biotech giant Monsanto Co. from selling genetically engineered alfalfa seeds, possibly paving the way for the company to distribute the seeds for the first time since 2007.

The case has been closely watched by environmentalists and agribusiness. A federal judge in San Francisco barred the planting of genetically engineered alfalfa nationwide until the government could adequately study the crop's potential impact on organic and conventional varieties.

St. Louis-based Monsanto is arguing that the ban was too broad and was based on the assumption that their products were harmful. Opponents of the use of genetically engineered seeds say they can contaminate conventional crops, but Monsanto says such cross-pollination is unlikely.

Organic groups and farmers exporting to Europe, where genetically modified crops are unpopular, have staunchly opposed the development of such seeds.

Environmentalists are concerned with the case's effect on a federal law that requires the government to review a product's effect on the environment before approving it. The U.S. Agriculture Department earlier approved the seeds, but courts in California and Oregon said USDA did not look hard enough at whether the seeds would eventually share their genes with other crops.