|
|
|
Federal Court Shuts Down So-Called “Warehouse Bank”
Breaking Legal News |
2007/05/01 15:26
|
A federal court in Seattle has shut down a nationwide “warehouse banking” scheme whose promoter falsely promised customers they could legally hide their income, assets, and identities from the Internal Revenue Service, the Justice Department announced today. The warehouse bank, known as Olympic Business Systems (OBS), is operated by Des Moines, Wash., resident Robert Arant. The court order, called a preliminary injunction, was signed on April 27 by Judge Marsha J. Pechman of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. A temporary restraining order freezing Olympic’s assets was previously signed on April 17 by Chief Judge Robert L. Lasnik. The court orders were initially filed under seal, but the court today ordered them unsealed. In papers filed in support of obtaining the injunction, the government alleged that Olympic deposited almost $28 million of customer funds into accounts that OBS maintained in its own name at commercial banks. Olympic allegedly used the funds to pays customers’ bills and expenses while promising to leave no paper trail. Judge Lasnik’s order held that Arant “is or should be aware that courts have repeatedly held that warehouse banks are tax evasion schemes.” A California federal court in 2004 permanently closed a similar warehouse bank. Details about that case are available at http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/txdv04785.htm. In 2005 a federal court in Oregon sentenced operators of a warehouse bank to prison, after their criminal convictions. Details are available at http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/txdv05070.htm.
WWW.USDOJ.GOV |
|
|
|
|
|
Gonzales gave aides power to hire, fire appointees
Breaking Legal News |
2007/04/30 22:56
|
Deputy Attorney General Paul J. McNulty told congressional investigators that he had limited involvement in the firing last year of eight U.S. attorneys and that he did not choose any to be removed, congressional aides familiar with his statements said yesterday. McNulty said he provided erroneous testimony to Congress in February because he had not been informed that Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and his aides had been working with the White House on the firings for nearly two years, the congressional aides said. The statements Friday, during a private interview with investigators from the House and Senate Judiciary committees, make McNulty the latest senior Justice official to assert that he did not identify any of the U.S. attorneys to be fired and that his role was minimal. Gonzales, former chief of staff D. Kyle Sampson and William E. Moschella, the principal associate deputy attorney general, also told Congress they did not choose who was fired. "If the top folks at DOJ weren't the key decision-makers, it's less likely that lower-down people at DOJ were, and much more likely that people in the White House were making the major decisions," said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.). Moschella was also interviewed last week. He told investigators he was solely responsible for a provision in the USA Patriot Act reauthorization law that gave Gonzales the authority to appoint U.S. attorneys for an indefinite time, a congressional aide said. Moschella also said that, when the provision was drawn up in November 2005, he was not aware of a dispute over the appointment of a U.S. attorney in South Dakota, the aide said. Justice officials have pointed to that case as a key justification for the provision, which Congress has since repealed. Democrats criticized Gonzales yesterday for giving Sampson and his White House liaison in March 2006 the authority to hire and fire certain employees. "It is disturbing to learn that the attorney general was granting extraordinary and sweeping authority to the same political operatives who were plotting with the White House to dilute our system of checks and balances in the confirmation of U.S. attorneys," said Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.). Administration officials said Gonzales's order, published in the Federal Register and first reported yesterday by the National Journal on its Web site, codifies a process that is standard for agencies throughout the government in dealing with political appointees. "The notion that the White House shouldn't be involved in presidential appointments is bizarre," said White House spokesman Tony Fratto. |
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court Backs Police in Chase Case
Breaking Legal News |
2007/04/30 07:46
|
The Supreme Court on Monday gave police officers protection from lawsuits that result from high-speed car chases, ruling against a Georgia teenager who was paralyzed after his car was run off the road. In a case that turned on a video of the chase in suburban Atlanta, Justice Antonin Scalia said law enforcement officers do not have to call off pursuit of a fleeing motorist when they reasonably expect that other people could be hurt. Rather, officers can take measures to stop the car without putting themselves at risk of civil rights lawsuits. "A police officer's attempt to terminate a dangerous high-speed car chase that threatens the lives of innocent bystanders does not violate the Fourth Amendment, even when it places the fleeing motorist at risk of serious injury or death," Scalia said. The court sided 8-1 with former Coweta County sheriff's deputy Timothy Scott, who rammed a fleeing black Cadillac on a two-lane, rain-slicked road in March 2001. Victor Harris (nyse: HRS - news - people ), the 19-year-old driver of the Cadillac, lost control and his car ended up at the bottom of an embankment. Harris, paralyzed, sued Scott. Lower federal courts ruled the lawsuit could proceed, but the Supreme Court said Monday that it could not. Justice John Paul Stevens dissented. In an unusual move, the court posted the dramatic video on its Web site. |
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. court to decide case of Mexican on death row
Breaking Legal News |
2007/04/30 06:49
|
The U.S. Supreme Court said on Monday it would decide whether President George W. Bush had the authority to direct a state court to comply with an international tribunal's ruling in the case of a Mexican on death row in Texas. The justices agreed to review a decision by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals that concluded Bush had exceeded his constitutional authority by intruding into the independent powers of the judiciary. The case involved Jose Medellin, who was denied the right to meet with a consular officer from Mexico after his arrest for murder. The World Court in The Hague in 2004 ordered the United States to review the cases of Medellin and 50 other Mexican death row inmates because U.S. officials failed to tell them of their right under the Vienna Convention to talk to consular officers immediately after their arrests. Bush in 2005 decided to comply with the World Court's ruling and he directed state courts to review the 51 cases to determine whether the violation of their rights caused the defendants any harm at trial or at sentencing. Bush's action caused the Supreme Court to dismiss an earlier appeal by Medellin without deciding the merits of the dispute and to send the case back to the Texas courts. After losing before the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Medellin's attorneys again appealed to the Supreme Court. They said the Texas court has put the United States in violation of its undisputed treaty obligations. Bush administration attorneys supported Medellin's appeal. They said Bush acted within his authority and that the Texas court invalidated a presidential action "on a matter of international importance." Medellin, a gang member, was sentenced to death in state court for the 1993 rape and murder of two teenage girls in Houston. The brutal killings stemmed from a gang initiation. Lawyers for the state opposed the appeal. They said Bush exceeded his authority and that he cannot pre-empt Texas criminal law. The Supreme Court will hear arguments and decide the case during its upcoming term that begins in October. |
|
|
|
|
|
UGA settles harassment lawsuit involving athletes
Breaking Legal News |
2007/04/28 02:51
|
The University of Georgia reached an out-of-court settlement with a former student who filed a 25 million dollar sexual harassment lawsuit. The woman -- Tiffany Williams -- claimed U-G-A officials were slow to respond to an alleged assault involving three athletes. The lawsuit revolves around a 2002 claim that she had consensual sex with former Georgia basketball player Tony Cole in her dorm room. Afterward she told police that former basketball player Steve Thomas and ex-football player Brandon Williams sexually assaulted her. The lawsuit claimed that school officials exposed her to danger by recruiting Cole even though they knew he had a history of sexual misconduct. U-G-A attorney Ed Tolley said the settlement was six figures but he did NOT specify the precise figure. Brandon Williams was acquitted of any wrongdoing and criminal charges against Cole and Thomas were dropped.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bush Vows to Veto Iraq Troop Withdrawal
Breaking Legal News |
2007/04/28 01:59
|
President Bush warned Congress Friday that he will continue vetoing war spending bills as long as they contain a timetable for the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. Speaking a day after the Democratic-controlled Congress approved legislation that requires that a troop drawdown begin by Oct. 1, Bush said - as he has before - he will veto it because of that demand. He invited congressional leaders to come to the White House to discuss a new piece of legislation that would not include a timetable, and expressed hope a deal could be reached. But he made clear that if Democrats insist on including timetables again, he will not hesitate to bring out his veto pen. ``If they want to try again that which I've said is unacceptable, of course I won't accept it,'' the president said during a news conference here with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. ``I hope it won't come to that.'' Passage of the Iraq spending legislation in both houses was not by big enough margins to override a presidential veto. So lawmakers and the White House immediately began talking about a follow-up bill. Democratic leaders said they hoped to have one ready by June 1. Several Democratic officials have said the next measure likely will jettison the withdrawal timetable, but may include consequences if the Iraqi government does not meet certain benchmarks, such as expanding democratic participation and allocating oil resources. Bush has set benchmarks for the Iraqi government, but has steadfastly opposed attaching any timeframe to them or requiring any actions if they are not met. Senate leaders said Friday that the bill approved Thursday should go to Bush early next week. The White House has not said whether Bush plans a quiet veto or a public ceremony. Spokeswoman Dana Perino said it was unlikely that Bush would use a Tuesday trip to the Tampa, Fla.-based headquarters of Central Command, which oversees military operations in the Middle East, including Iraq, for the veto.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monroe County pays $440,000 in jail corruption suit
Breaking Legal News |
2007/04/28 01:55
|
A Monroe County Sheriff’s deputy, who alleged in a lawsuit that the jail operation was beset by corruption, has received a $200,000 settlement to resolve the lawsuit. The county paid another $240,000 to an outside law firm which handled the litigation, which was settled last year. The county paid the settlement to Deputy Thomas Zembiec, county officials confirmed today. In a 2004 lawsuit, Zembiec alleged that jail payrolls were falsified so workers were paid for time they didn’t work; that some jail workers possessed and used drugs; and that some high-ranking officials and other jail workers consorted with "temporarily released inmates and persons with criminal backgrounds in order to make money and receive free services." Zembiec alleged that he was transferred from his job at the downtown jail to the Brighton facility to silence his complaints about corruption at the jail. He claimed that two nurses at the downtown jail accused him of sexual harassment, and those charges were the official reason for his transfer. |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|