Today's Date: Add To Favorites
GOAA member's firm target of lawsuit
Legal Business | 2008/07/09 08:46

A class-action lawsuit filed June 26 in U.S. District Court in Miami accuses an Orlando law firm founded by a member of the Greater Orlando Aviation Authority of racketeering by sending threatening letters that demand money from alleged shoplifters.

According to the complaint, letters from Palmer Reifler & Associates PA say the recipients must pay large fines under state laws or face possible legal action or a "visit from a sheriff."

James Palmer, the senior partner and founder of the firm, was named to the airport board May 23 to a four-year term succeeding Robert Theisen.

The complaint alleges the law firm:

- Sent millions of threatening form letters intended to "harass, intimidate and coerce" people into paying large fines. The suit charges the firm with abusing laws passed in all 50 states as a way for retailers to recover massive losses from retail theft. Under the laws, retailers can seek civil damages and penalties from thieves.
However, a nationally published report contends retailers are supplying the names of those only suspected of shoplifting, even when there is no conviction or solid evidence to indicate guilt.

- Received tens of millions of dollars during the past 20 years at consumers' expense, plus a percentage from the retailers, ranging from 18 percent to 30 percent of the income generated from the letters.
The plaintiffs want to recover their money and stop the alleged harassment by mail and phone, via a jury trial expected later this summer.

It's not the first time Palmer Reifler & Associates have been sued over these types of letters, says Alison Harke, with Harke & Clasby LLP of Miami, one of two firms representing the plaintiffs. However, in previous attempts, the suit either was settled or dismissed. The current approach is to file the lawsuit in federal court under anti-racketeering laws.

Harke says the retailers -- 50 large clients that include Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and J.C. Penney -- may be sued later. Wal-Mart referred requests for comment to its legal department, but no response was received by press time. A spokeswoman at J.C. Penney says her company doesn't comment on pending litigation.

"This is a frivolous lawsuit," says Natt Reifler, a partner and attorney who oversees the recovery law activities of the Palmer firm. It seems to challenge the statutes themselves and the right to send "demand" letters, he says, adding that the process a way to resolve differences without resorting to the courts.

The recovery effort is a legitimate procedure under the law, which doesn't allow for the collection of debt, but for damages and civil penalties, says the lawyer.

Thanks to his firm's actions, retailers have recovered a substantial amount of money over the years, Reifler says. He declines to say how much, but adds that the actions "helps keep prices down," which is a boon for consumers.

"This is an economically viable way for retailers to recover their losses," agrees Daniel C. Johnson, a lawyer specializing in commercial law with the Carlton Fields law firm Orlando office, who is not involved in the case.

"I have not heard of anything I would call an abuse" of the particular laws, adds John Rogers, senior vice president and general counsel for the Florida Retail Federation. He notes that he lobbied on behalf of passage of the recovery laws in Florida.

The law benefits retailers not only by recouping money, but also by reducing the time employees must devote to pursuing cases against shoplifters and in monitoring stores, says Rogers.



Obama denies shifting to reach political center
Politics | 2008/07/09 08:44
Asked by a voter about accusations of flip-flopping, Democrat Barack Obama dismissed the notion Tuesday that he has shifted stances on Iraq, guns and the death penalty to break with his party's liberal wing and court a wider swath of voters.

"The people who say this haven't apparently been listening to me," the likely Democratic presidential nominee said in response to a question at a town-hall style event.

Obama blamed criticism from "my friends on the left" and "some of the media" in part on cynicism that ascribes political motives for every move candidates make. "You're not going to agree with me on 100 percent of what I think, but don't assume that if I don't agree with you on something that it must be because I'm doing that politically," he said. "I may just disagree with you."

The Illinois senator was responding to a question from a self-described "reformed Republican" who said he worked for Democrat Bobby Kennedy four decades ago and thanked Obama for restoring "that faith."

"You had an interesting week of being accused of flip-flopping, which is mostly nonsense," the man said. He then asked Obama to restate his Iraq position, and Obama used the opportunity to dispel the idea he had generally changed his stances.

Since wrapping up the Democratic nomination last month, Obama has voiced positions that break with the Democratic Party's left and seem to shade his own past positions on a range of subjects. He's drawn criticism from some liberal Democrats who question his loyalty and from Republicans who accuse him of flip-flopping.

His remarks aside, Obama is clearly competing for the center of the electorate. Originally best known as an anti-Iraq war candidate, his general election commercials appear nonpartisan and make an obvious play for voters across the political spectrum by focusing on family values and patriotism as well as "welfare to work" and lower taxes.

Over the past few weeks, he angered liberals by supporting compromise electronic surveillance rules for the government's wiretapping program even though the bill provided immunity that he opposed last year for telecommunications companies that conducted warrantless eavesdropping. When the Supreme Court overturned the District of Columbia's gun ban, he said he favors both an individual's right to bear firearms and a government's right to regulate them.

And, he broke with death penalty opponents when he disagreed with the Supreme Court's decision outlawing executions of people who rape children.



Court keeps cell tower backup rules on hold
Court Watch | 2008/07/09 08:40
More than a year after they were introduced, federal rules intended to keep cell phone towers operating during natural disasters remain in limbo.

A federal appeals court on Tuesday put off deciding on the wireless industry's challenge to the regulations until the Federal Communications Commission gets preliminary clearance for the rules.

After a panel of experts appointed by the FCC pointed out that many cell towers along the Gulf Coast stopped working when they lost power during Hurricane Katrina, the agency proposed in May 2007 that all cell towers have a minimum of eight hours of backup power that would switch on in the event a tower lost its regular energy source.

The loss of power contributed to communication breakdowns that complicated rescue and recovery efforts during the 2005 disaster.

Wireless companies have said the regulations were illegally drafted and would present a huge economic and bureaucratic burden. In particular, they said, the thousands of generators or battery packs required would be expensive and local zoning rules or structural limitations could make installation impossible in some places.

The FCC agreed in October to exempt cell sites that a wireless carrier proved couldn't meet the rules. The FCC would give companies six months to report on the feasibility of installing backup power and another six months either to bring sites into compliance or explain how they would provide backup service through other means, such as portable cellular transmitters.

CTIA-The Wireless Association, Sprint Nextel Corp. and others asked the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., this year to intervene, saying the exemptions would still leave wireless companies scrambling to inspect and compile reports on thousands of towers.

The appeals court put the rules on hold while it heard each sides' arguments in May.



FTC considers backing off nicotine guidance
Health Care | 2008/07/09 04:42
The Federal Trade Commission said Tuesday that it no longer considers reliable a test for tar and nicotine used for more than 40 years and touted by the tobacco industry in marketing "light" and "low-tar" cigarettes.

The FTC said it may rescind its guidance on tar and nicotine yields that is based on that test. The commission said if the guidance is withdrawn, advertisers should no longer use terms suggesting FTC endorsement or approval of any specific test method.

The test, known as the Cambridge Filter Method, is a machine-based test that smokes cigarettes according to a standard procedure and is sometimes referred to as "the FTC method." The FTC issued its guidance in 1966 at a time when most public health officials believed reducing the amount of tar produced by a cigarette could reduce a smoker's risk of lung cancer. The commission believed that giving consumers uniform information about tar and nicotine yields of cigarettes would help them make informed decisions about the cigarettes they smoked.

But the FTC said Tuesday scientists now believe the test does not provide meaningful information on relative amounts of tar and nicotine people are likely to get from smoking different brands of cigarettes.

The main reason is that smokers often alter their behavior to get the necessary nicotine dosage, the FTC said. The techniques include taking larger and deeper puffs, smoking more and blocking the ventilation holes that may contribute to lower levels of tar and nicotine.

Nicotine acts as a stimulant and is one of the main factors contributing to the addictive quality of smoking. Tar is the residue from burning tobacco and one of the most destructive byproducts of smoking, accumulating in a smoker's lungs.



US war crimes court to resume at Guantanamo
Breaking Legal News | 2008/07/09 04:41
U.S. military tribunals at Guantanamo Bay resume this week even as new legal challenges could throw the system into further turmoil.

Five men charged in the Sept. 11 attacks, including alleged mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, are to appear Wednesday and Thursday for pretrial hearings in the Bush administration's special tribunal for terrorism suspects. Their trials have not yet been scheduled.

The suspects could get the death penalty if convicted of charges that include murder.

A judge is expected to hold hearings to explore defense allegations that Mohammed intimidated his co-defendants into refusing military lawyers.

Meanwhile, a judge in Washington is considering a challenge that could disrupt the first scheduled war crimes trial, on July 21, of Salim Hamdan, a former driver for Osama bin Laden.

Hamdan's lawyers say a recent Supreme Court decision has raised new legal issues that require U.S. District Judge James Robertson to delay the trial. The government says it wants to move forward.

Robertson has scheduled a July 17 hearing in Washington on the issue, just four days before Hamdan is to go on trial in a specially built courtroom on a former airstrip at the U.S. Navy base in Cuba.

A ruling in favor of the prisoner could also delay the trials for other men held at Guantanamo, and perhaps force the military to devise a whole new way to prosecute alleged terrorists.



Former ed superintendent joins Columbia law firm
Legal Careers News | 2008/07/09 03:44
Former South Carolina Education Superintendent Inez Tenenbaum has joined a Columbia law firm, but she'll still be working on education issues.

The State newspaper of Columbia reported Wednesday that Tenenbaum has jointed the McNair Law firm.

The newspaper reported Tenenbaum will work on financial matters, such as bond referendums for school districts seeking to build or renovate schools.

Tenenbaum was state education superintendent from 1999 to 2003. She says she's missed working with school officials.

Managing partner Bill Youngblood says the McNair law firm has represented about 60 of the state's 85 school districts on financial issues in the past five years.

Youngblood says Tenenbaum brings the firm intellect, institutional memory about public education and an understanding of government.



Senate to pass bill overhauling eavesdropping rules
Political and Legal | 2008/07/09 02:41
The Senate finally is expected to pass a bill overhauling rules on secret government eavesdropping, completing a lengthy and bitter debate that pitted privacy and civil liberties concerns against the desire to prevent terrorist attacks.

The vote, planned for Wednesday, would end almost a year of wrangling between the House and Senate, Democrats and Republicans, and Congress and the White House over the president's warrantless wiretapping program that was initiated after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

A major issue was the Bush administration's insistence that the bill shield from civil lawsuits telecommunications companies that helped the government eavesdrop on Americans without court permission after 9/11.

The White House had threatened to veto the bill unless it immunized companies like AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. from wiretapping lawsuits. About 40 such lawsuits have been filed. They are all pending before a single federal court.



[PREV] [1] ..[694][695][696][697][698][699][700][701][702].. [1189] [NEXT]
All
Class Action
Bankruptcy
Biotech
Breaking Legal News
Business
Corporate Governance
Court Watch
Criminal Law
Health Care
Human Rights
Insurance
Intellectual Property
Labor & Employment
Law Center
Law Promo News
Legal Business
Legal Marketing
Litigation
Medical Malpractice
Mergers & Acquisitions
Political and Legal
Politics
Practice Focuses
Securities
Elite Lawyers
Tax
Featured Law Firms
Tort Reform
Venture Business News
World Business News
Law Firm News
Attorneys in the News
Events and Seminars
Environmental
Legal Careers News
Patent Law
Consumer Rights
International
Legal Spotlight
Current Cases
State Class Actions
Federal Class Actions
US immigration officials loo..
Turkish court orders key Erd..
Under threat from Trump, Col..
Military veterans are becomi..
Austria’s new government is..
Supreme Court makes it harde..
Trump signs order designatin..
US strikes a deal with Ukrai..
Musk gives all federal worke..
Troubled electric vehicle ma..
Trump signs order imposing s..
Elon Musk dodges DOGE scruti..
Trump order aims to end fede..
New report outlines risks of..
Man Charged with Stalking Ca..


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.
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Lorain Elyria Divorce Lawyer
www.loraindivorceattorney.com
Legal Document Services in Los Angeles, CA
Best Legal Document Preparation
www.tllsg.com
Car Accident Lawyers
Sunnyvale, CA Personal Injury Attorney
www.esrajunglaw.com
East Greenwich Family Law Attorney
Divorce Lawyer - Erica S. Janton
www.jantonfamilylaw.com/about
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
  Law Firm Directory
 
 
 
© ClassActionTimes.com. All rights reserved.

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Class Action Times as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. Affordable Law Firm Web Design