Today's Date: Add To Favorites
Cemex approval paves way for next Rinker move
Breaking Legal News | 2007/04/05 18:27

The Department of Justice announced today that it has reached a settlement that will require Mexico-based Cemex S.A.B. de C.V. to divest 39 ready mix concrete, concrete block, and aggregate facilities in Arizona and Florida in the event Cemex succeeds in its hostile takeover of Australia-based Rinker Group. The Department said that without the divestitures the proposed acquisition would substantially lessen competition for ready mix concrete in certain metropolitan areas in Arizona and Florida, as well as result in increased prices for ready mix concrete, concrete block, and aggregate sold to customers handling state Department of Transportation and large building projects. The total value of the Cemex/Rinker transaction, including Rinker's debt, is approximately $12 billion.

The Department's Antitrust Division filed a civil antitrust lawsuit today in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. to block the proposed transaction. At the same time, the Department filed a proposed consent decree that, if approved by the court, would resolve the lawsuit and the Department's competitive concerns.

"Without the divestitures required by the Department, purchasers of ready mix concrete, concrete block and aggregate in these areas of Florida and Arizona, including state departments of transportation, would likely have faced higher prices if the transaction is completed. The Department's action will ensure that these customers will continue to receive the benefits of competition,"said Thomas O. Barnett, Assistant Attorney General for the Department's Antitrust Division.

Ready mix concrete is a building material used in large construction projects including buildings, highways, bridges, tunnels, and other projects. Concrete block is a building material used in the construction of residential and commercial structures. Aggregate is crushed stone and gravel produced at quarries, mines, or gravel pits that is used in, among other things, the production of ready mix concrete, concrete block, and asphalt.

The Department concluded that the deal would have resulted in increased prices for ready mix concrete sold to customers handling state Department of Transportation projects and other large building projects in the metropolitan areas of Fort Walton Beach/Panama City/Pensacola, Jacksonville, Orlando, Tampa/St. Petersburg, and Fort Myers/Naples, Fla., and the areas of Flagstaff and Tucson, Ariz. In Flagstaff, Rinker and Cemex are the only two competitors capable of supplying ready mix concrete for these large projects, and in the other areas in which divestitures are being required there are only one or two firms in addition to Cemex and Rinker that are capable of serving large projects.

The Department also said that the acquisition also would have resulted in an increase in prices for concrete block for a significant number of customers in the metropolitan areas of Tampa/St. Petersburg and Fort Myers/Naples, Fla., where Cemex and Rinker account for more than 60 percent of concrete block sales.

Finally, the Department said that the acquisition would have resulted in increased prices for aggregate to a significant number of customers in the Tucson, Ariz., area where Cemex and Rinker are among a small number of firms capable of supplying aggregates meeting state Department of Transportation specifications.

On Oct. 27, 2006, Cemex announced its intention to acquire Rinker through a hostile cash tender offer. The offer was due to expire on March 30, 2007, but Cemex extended it until April 27, 2007.

Under the terms of the proposed consent decree, once Cemex obtains control of Rinker, Cemex must divest certain ready mix concrete assets to a single buyer in each of the areas of competitive concern. The terms of the proposed consent decree also require the divestiture of all of Rinker's concrete block-related assets in the Tampa/St. Petersburg and Fort Myers/Naples areas. Cemex must divest two aggregate plants in the Tucson, Ariz., area to the same acquirer that purchases the two ready mix plants to be divested at the same locations. Under the consent decree, the Department's Antitrust Division must approve the buyer of all of the divested assets.

Cemex, headquartered in Nuevo León, Mexico, produces and distributes cement, ready mix concrete, aggregate, concrete block, concrete pipe, and related building materials to customers in more than 50 countries. In 2006, Cemex reported total sales of approximately $24.6 billion. Cemex is the largest United States supplier of ready mix concrete and cement and the seventh largest United States supplier of aggregate. Approximately 25 percent of Cemex's revenues are earned in the U.S. Cemex operates in the U.S. through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Cemex Inc., which is headquartered in Houston.

Rinker, headquartered in Chatswood, Australia, produces and distributes aggregate, ready mix concrete, cement, concrete block, asphalt, concrete pipe, and other construction materials through its operations in the U.S. and Australia. In 2006, Rinker reported total sales of approximately $4 billion. Rinker is the second largest U.S. supplier of ready mix concrete and the fifth largest U.S. supplier of aggregate. Approximately 80 percent of Rinker's revenues are earned in the U.S. Rinker operates in the U.S. through its subsidiary, Rinker Materials Corporation, which is headquartered in West Palm Beach, Fla.

As required by the Tunney Act, the proposed consent decree, along with the Department's competitive impact statement, will be published in the Federal Register. Any person may submit written comments concerning the proposed decree during a 60-day comment period to Maribeth Petrizzi, Chief, Litigation II Section, Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice, 1401 H Street, N.W., Suite 3000, Washington, D.C. 20530. At the conclusion of the 60-day comment period, the court may enter the final judgment upon a finding that it serves the public interest.



DOJ busts insulation service companies
Breaking Legal News | 2007/04/05 18:25

Two Long Island, N.Y. insulation service companies and an owner of the companies pleaded guilty today to conspiring to rig bids on the supply of maintenance and insulation services to New York Presbyterian Hospital (NYPH) and Mount Sinai Medical Center (Mount Sinai), the Department of Justice announced.

Michael Theodorobeakos of Upper Saddle River, N.J., and two maintenance and insulation companies he co-owned – Monosis Inc. (Monosis) and STU Associates Inc. (STU) – pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court in Manhattan for rigging bids to NYPH and Mount Sinai. Between approximately 2000 and September 2005, NYPH and Mount Sinai purchased substantial quantities of maintenance and insulation services from Theodorobeakos, Monosis, STU and co-conspirators. Theodorobeakos and the co-conspirators attempted to create the appearance that NYPH and Mount Sinai were awarding contracts based on competitive bids, when, in fact, they frequently were not.

"The Antitrust Division is committed to protecting the competitive market for Americans," said Thomas O. Barnett, Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Department's Antitrust Division. "We will continue to apprehend and bring to justice those who rig bids and thereby deprive the public of the benefits afforded by a truly competitive bidding process." As part of the conspiracy, the indictment charges that Theodorobeakos, Monosis, STU and the co-conspirators carried out the conspiracy by:

Designating which company would submit the low bid and which company would submit a higher, complementary bid;

Creating the illusion of a competitive bidding process by using each other's letterhead to submit high, non-competitive bids; and

Providing and being aware of kickbacks to co-conspirators in order to frustrate and subvert the competitive bidding policies of NYPH and Mount Sinai.

The bid rigging crime with which Theodorobeakos is charged carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and a $1 million fine for an individual. Monosis and STU face a maximum fine of $100 million. The maximum fine may be increased to twice the gain derived from the crime or twice the loss suffered by the victim of the crime, if either of those amounts is greater than the statutory maximum fine.

This charge arose from an ongoing federal antitrust investigation of fraud, bribery, tax-related offenses and bidding irregularities in the award of maintenance and service contracts to the engineering departments of Mount Sinai and NYPH. The investigation is being conducted by the Antitrust Division's New York Field Office with the assistance of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation.



Court dismisses suit to bar use of military fort
Court Watch | 2007/04/05 17:37

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit dismissed a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union to stop the Defense Department from allowing the Boy Scouts of America to hold its National Jamboree every four years at Fort A.P. Hill in Fredericksburg, Va. The ACLU, suing on behalf of individual named taxpayers, had argued allowing the Boy Scouts to hold the event on public property is an unconstitutional establishment of religion, because the organization's membership is limited to those who believe in God.

The ACLU points out the Boy Scouts require members to swear an oath to "do my duty to God and my country."

The court ruled Wednesday, however, the ACLU did not show standing to bring the lawsuit.

Peter Ferrara, general counsel of the American Civil Rights Union explained the ACLU could complain about the policy to Congress or the president, but it "had no business bringing a lawsuit over it and asking the courts to step in."

The ACRU is a non-partisan legal policy organization launched in 1998 that says it is "dedicated to defending all the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment."

The Defense Department, which sees holding the event at the fort as a boon to military recruitment, is expressly authorized to host the event by a federal statute enacted by Congress, Ferrara points out.

Seven Presidents have attended and spoken at the jamboree, beginning with Franklin Roosevelt in 1937. President Bush spoke at the 2005 event, attended by more than 40,000 scouts. The next jamboree is scheduled for 2010 to coincide with the 100th anniversary of the Boy Scouts of America.

As WND reported in 2005, 90 members of Congress filed a federal appeals court brief declaring support for the Defense Department's sponsorship of the jamboree.


The brief asserted the Defense Department's support comes in the form of "non-religious supplies and services."

"The military's rental of forklifts and trucks, transportation and military equipment, restoration of Fort A.P. Hill after the Jamboree, and provision of other secular services is clearly 'neutral and nonideological,'" the brief said. "The only possible message that the military's aid can be viewed as conveying is that patriotism, self-reliance, physical fitness and support of the military are positive things."

Also in 2005, then-Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., introduced legislation to make sure the Boy Scouts can use government facilities for gatherings, meetings and events.

In 2004, the Pentagon settled a lawsuit by telling military bases around the world not to become direct sponsors of Boy Scout troops or Cub Scout dens. Military personnel can now sponsor Boy Scout groups only in their civilian capacity.

As WND reported, the threat of lawsuits by the ACLU has forced the BSA to pull the charters of thousands of scouting units from public schools.



US intelligence chief criticizes surveillance laws
Law Center | 2007/04/05 17:25

John M. "Mike" McConnell, who succeeded John Negroponte as US Director of National Intelligence in February, delivered a policy address to the 2007 Excellence in Government Conference Wednesday criticizing federal surveillance laws as outdated and unresponsive to terrorist threats. McConnell, who previously served as the director of the National Security Agency (NSA) from 1992 to 1996 before working for private consulting firm Booz Allen until February, said:

The laws that we had coming out of Vietnam, Watergate, Church-Pike hearings of the '70s served us well. But it also set up barriers and cultures and processes that did not make us well suited to combat a new "ism," in this case terrorism.

What do I mean by that? When someone enters this country, they are considered a US person. They have all the rights and privileges – let me restate that – most of the rights and privileges of a US citizen. So if the intelligence community is tracking someone of suspected terrorism and they arrive in this country in a legal status, they're now off limits to the intelligence community. Switch to law enforcement. The rules and regulations on law enforcement are much more stringent with regard to conducting surveillance of either US citizens or US persons. So the terrorists that came here and operated here prior to 9/11, so long as they were here legally and so long as they did not break the law, they were mostly invisible to us.



Alleged faux beau pleads not guilty in check fraud
Breaking Legal News | 2007/04/05 11:32

A disbarred lawyer who police say scammed women in Illinois and eight other states out of more than $1 million pleaded not guilty today for allegedly cashing bogus checks here.

Hillard Jay Quint, 42, entered his plea when he appeared before Cook County Judge Diane Cannon in the Criminal Courts building. He is charged with identity theft and four counts of deceptive practice for allegedly cashing $16,000 in checks written on a closed bank account under the alias Matt Goldstein.

At the brief hearing, Quint, dressed in a tan jail outfit, told the judge he cannot afford an attorney. He is being held without bond pending trial.

Quint was arrested Feb. 23 at his Gold Coast apartment. While in Chicago, police say he represented himself as a wealthy CEO from California while dating women he met through online services.

Authorities allege Quint dated at least eight women in Chicago and scammed $24,000 from three of them.

Belmont Area detective Cindy Serafini said Wednesday the investigation into the alleged fraud was ongoing, and more charges were possible.

Quint is scheduled to appear in court for a status hearing on May 14.



Peter Elias Joins Morrison & Foerster’s San Diego Office
Law Firm News | 2007/04/05 11:29






Morrison & Foerster LLP is pleased to announce that Peter Elias has joined the firm as a partner in its San Diego office.  Mr. Elias joins the firm’s Tax Department, where his practice will focus on joint ventures, LLC, mergers and acquisitions, and cross-border tax issues.  He recently has focused his practice extensively in the fund formation and private equity area, forming and advising promoters and investors in all types of pooled investment vehicles, including real estate and opportunity funds, hedge funds, and venture capital funds.

Mr. Elias’s tax expertise advising clients in joint ventures, mergers and acquisitions, project finance transactions, strategic investments and workouts, and real estate transactions will make him a valuable asset to both the corporate and real estate practices at the firm.

“We are delighted to have Pete with us. He will be a great addition to the team and will expand our tax capabilities on the West Coast, allowing us to better serve our corporate and real estate clients,” said Thomas Humphreys, chair of the Tax Department.  “Pete’s outstanding tax skills, particularly in the corporate area, will allow our office to be truly full-service for our corporate clients,” added Mark Zebrowski, managing partner of the firm’s San Diego office.

Mr. Elias said, “Morrison & Foerster provides me with a great platform to expand my practice.  The firm's deep commitment to client service will give me the opportunity to build on existing relationships and contribute to the continued growth of the firm’s tax practice.”

Mr. Elias joins the firm from Foley & Lardner.  Mr. Elias received his J.D. from the University of California, Hastings School of Law in 1992, and his LL.M. in taxation from the New York University School of Law in 1993. He graduated, magna cum laude, from the University of Pittsburgh.  He was admitted to the California State Bar in 1993.

www.mofo.com



Jackson-Hewitt accused of tax fraud schemes
Breaking Legal News | 2007/04/05 08:54

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Department of Justice have filed suit against five Jackson Hewitt franchises, seeking an injunction to bar the companies from preparing tax returns and alleging that all five corporations were involved in fraudulent tax return preparation including the filing of exaggerated claims and the use fake W-2 forms. The government, which filed lawsuits Tuesday in Chicago, Atlanta, Detroit and Raleigh, further alleged  that as a result of the fraudulent activity the US Treasury took a loss of over $70 million. The suits also claim that the corporations, owners, and employees received kickbacks for helping costumers file the fraudulent returns.

Speaking about the lawsuits, IRS Commissioner Mark Everson stated that:

I am deeply disturbed by the allegation that a major franchisee of the nation's second-largest tax preparation firm is intentionally preparing improper tax returns with inflated refunds. I'm particularly concerned that many taxpayers of modest means could actually end up owing the government thousands of dollars if they claimed an improper refund.

The five corporations named as defendants are Chicago Suit: Smart Tax, Inc. of Chicago; Ask Tax, Inc.; Atlanta Suit: Smart Tax of Georgia, Inc.; Detroit Suit: So Far, Inc.; and Raleigh Suit: Smart Tax of North Carolina, Inc.; all Jackson Hewitt Tax Service franchises. The suits also name Farrukh Sohail, who wholly or partially owns each of the five corporations, as co-defendant.



[PREV] [1] ..[1037][1038][1039][1040][1041][1042][1043][1044][1045].. [1185] [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
Tight US House races in Cali..
North Carolina Attorney Gene..
Republicans take Senate majo..
What to know about the unpre..
A man who threatened to kill..
Ford cuts 2024 earnings guid..
Kenya’s deputy president pl..
South Korean court acquits f..
Supreme Court grapples with ..
Supreme Court leaves in plac..
Kentucky sheriff accused of ..
New rules regarding election..
North Carolina appeals court..
A court in Argentina orders ..
Mexican cartel leader’s son..


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