Today's Date: Add To Favorites
DOJ Reaches Settlement with Compass Bank
Breaking Legal News | 2007/01/12 19:26



The Justice Department has today reached a settlement resolving allegations that Compass Bank of Birmingham, Ala., engaged in a pattern of lending discrimination against individuals based on their marital status.

The government’s complaint alleges that Compass Bank violated the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, which makes it unlawful for any creditor to discriminate against any applicant based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status or age by unlawfully charging higher interest rates to co-applicants for automobile loans who were not married to each other than to co-applicants who were married.

The Justice Department and Compass Bank reached a consent order, which was filed in conjunction with the complaint, in federal district court in Birmingham, Ala. Under the agreement, which remains subject to court approval, Compass Bank is prohibited from discriminating on the basis of marital status in any aspect of its automobile lending.

“Under the law, marital status should have no effect on an individual’s access to credit,” said Wan J. Kim, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. “We will continue to vigorously enforce the federal laws that prevent discrimination in credit and lending services. We commend Compass Bank for working cooperatively with the Justice Department in reaching an appropriate resolution of this case.”

Compass Bank has already implemented changes to its lending procedures that explicitly prohibit distinctions based on marital status, and it is required to maintain these changes under the agreement. In addition, Compass Bank will pay up to $1.75 million plus interest to non-spousal co-applicants who were charged higher interest rates, and it will provide enhanced equal credit opportunity training to its officers and employees who set rates for automobile loans.

The Federal Reserve Board referred this matter to the Justice Department for enforcement after its 2003 periodic examination gave the Board reason to believe that Compass Bank’s loan pricing procedures and directives constituted a pattern or practice of discrimination. Compass Bank cooperated fully with both the Board’s and the Department’s investigations into its lending practices and agreed to settle this matter without contested litigation.



House OKs bill expanding study of stem cells
Breaking Legal News | 2007/01/12 14:05



The US House of Representatives passed HR 3 Thursday, which would amend the Public Health Service Act to allow for additional embryonic stem cell research. In a press release issued after passage, the White House characterized embryonic stem cells as human life, and promised to veto the bill. President Bush’s first veto in office came this past summer, when he vetoed another embryonic stem cell research bill. Bill supporters had hoped that midterm elections would make the bill veto-proof, but Thursday’s 253-174 vote is still short of the required two-thirds majority.

"While it's not enough to override a veto, it's enough to show we have tremendous momentum," said Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., who spearheaded the House effort with Rep. Michael Castle, R-Del. With the Senate near having the two-thirds majority needed to override a veto, DeGette suggested that it is time for the president to begin negotiating with Congress over compromise language.

In 2001, Bush limited federal funding for research on embryonic stem cells to the then existing lines, of which only 21 remain viable. Researchers say that many of these lines are contaminated, and are not very useful, while research from 300 newer lines that were obtained from unused embryos destined to be thrown away from fertility clinics show far more promise.

The House-based bill would expand that pool of available cells to include those from any of the thousands of embryos that are discarded by fertility clinics each year, as long as those cells were freely donated for research by the parents. It would also impose some of the country's first ethics rules on embryo research.The vote came after about three hours of impassioned speeches by members on both sides of the issue.

Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md., spoke up for alternative methods of obtaining stem cells. "The assumption by many people that you have to kill human embryos to get embryonic stem cells just isn't true," Bart-lett said.



Luis Posada Carriles Indicted on Criminal Charges
Breaking Legal News | 2007/01/11 14:30

WASHINGTON— A federal grand jury in the Western District of Texas has returned a seven-count indictment charging Luis Posada Carriles with one count of naturalization fraud and six counts of making false statements in a naturalization proceeding, the Department of Justice announced today.

The indictment alleges that Posada, 78, a native of Cuba, knowingly attempted to obtain naturalization as a U.S. citizen unlawfully by making false statements on his application for naturalization on or about Sept. 10, 2005. The indictment also alleges that he knowingly made false statements under oath during his naturalization interview with Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials on April 25 and 26, 2006.

In his naturalization interview, Posada allegedly made several false statements regarding his March 2005 entry into the United States, including statements about the transportation routes and methods used, as well as individuals who accompanied him. For example, he stated that he traveled from Honduras through Belize and entered the United States over land near Matamoros, Mexico, and Brownsville, Texas, with the assistance of an unidentified alien smuggler. In fact, Posada entered the United States by sea aboard the motor vessel “Santrina” accompanied by four individuals, the indictment alleges.

Posada further stated in his naturalization interview that he had never had any type of documentation, passport or identification from the Republic of Guatemala, when, in fact, he had a fraudulent passport issued by that nation bearing his photograph in the name of “Manuel Enrique Castillo Lopez,” the indictment alleges.

Posada is currently detained by DHS’s U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on administrative immigration violations. His initial court appearance in connection with the criminal charges is expected to take place early next week before a U.S. magistrate judge in the Western District of Texas.

If convicted, the defendant faces a maximum sentence of ten years imprisonment for the naturalization fraud count and five years imprisonment for each of the false statement counts.

This case was investigated by ICE. The prosecution is being handled by David B. Deitch and Paul Ahern, Trial Attorneys with the Justice Department’s National Security Division.

The federal investigation of Posada continues.



Thirteen MS-13 Members Indicted for Conspiracy
Breaking Legal News | 2007/01/11 14:29

WASHINGTON – Thirteen alleged members of the street gang called La Mara Salvatrucha, or MS-13, have been indicted by a federal grand jury in the Middle District of Tennessee on charges that they conspired to participate in a violent RICO enterprise responsible for killings and other violent crimes in Nashville, Assistant Attorney General Alice S. Fisher of the Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Craig S. Morford for the Middle District of Tennessee announced today. The one-count racketeering indictment names the following 13 individuals, all of whom are currently in federal or state custody:

OSCAR SERRANO, a/k/a “Diablin”

ESCOLASTICO SERRANO, a/k/a “Chito”

OMAR HIRBIN GOMEZ, a/k/a “Lil Homie”

DAVID ALEXANDER GONZALEZ, a/k/a “Psycho”

ERNESTO ISAI MENDEZ-TOVAR, a/k/a “Joker,” a/k/a “Choey”

FRANCISCO DAGO MENDEZ, a/k/a “Silent” WALTER HERNANDEZ, a/k/a “Spanky”

HENRY GARBALLO-VASQUEZ, a/k/a “Cuervo”

ELISEO IGLESIAS, a/k/a “Smokey”

RONALD FUENTES, a/k/a “Spia”

ERICKA CORTEZ, a/k/a “Shorty”

GEOVANNI PENA, a/k/a “Rata,” and

JOSE ALFARO, a/k/a “Liche.”

“This indictment strikes at the heart of the MS-13 organization in Nashville, and continues our efforts to put members of gangs all across the nation on notice that they will be held responsible for the violence and mayhem they cause,” said Assistant Attorney General Fisher. “We will utilize the same tools we used to put Mafia leaders behind prison bars to confront the threat posed by violent criminal enterprises like the MS-13.”

“The facts alleged in this indictment reveal that MS-13 is a well-organized and extremely violent criminal enterprise that required an aggressive, cooperative response from local and federal authorities,” said U.S. Attorney Morford. “The indictment reflects the commitment of the Department of Justice and my office to continue to work with all law enforcement partners to ensure that those who engage in violent street gang activities in Middle Tennessee go to jail and do so on the most serious charges possible.”

U.S. Attorney Morford praised the cooperative partnership and outstanding efforts of the Nashville Metropolitan Police Department’s Gang Suppression Unit, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) at the Department of Homeland Security, the Davidson County District Attorney General’s Office, the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Middle District of Tennessee, and the Department of Justice’s newly formed National Gang Squad.

The indictment alleges that the defendants were members or associates of the MS-13 street gang, a violent international criminal organization composed primarily of immigrants or descendants of immigrants from El Salvador. The purpose of this enterprise was to preserve and protect the power, territory and profits of the MS-13 enterprise through violent assault, murder, threats of violence, and intimidation.

The indictment further alleges that MS-13 originated in Los Angeles and quickly spread across the country, including to Middle Tennessee. It currently includes approximately 10,000 members in at least 10 states, Mexico, Honduras and El Salvador, making it one of the largest street gangs in the United States.

MS-13 gang members regularly engage in violent criminal activity, including murders, assaults, and witness intimidation in order to maintain membership and discipline within MS-13 and rivalries against other gangs, according to the indictment. The violent nature of the enterprise and its members is reflected by one of their mottos: “Mata, Viola, Controla” (“Kill, Rape, Control”).

The indictment further alleges that MS-13 was organized in “cliques,” including the Thompson Place Locos Salvatruchos clique (TPLS), which operated in Nashville. The TPLS and other cliques allegedly worked together cooperatively to commit acts of violence and their members operated under the umbrella rules of MS-13.

According to the indictment, MS-13 members met on a regular basis to report on acts of violence committed by their members with the goal of inciting and encouraging even more violence. Leaders of MS-13 cliques from across the United States allegedly met to discuss gang rules, gang business, problem resolution, and issues involving members of different cliques, and to promote overall unity between MS-13 gang members. Members had to pay dues which were used to support MS-13 gang members imprisoned in various places within the United States, including Middle Tennessee, as well as those in El Salvador.

The indictment further alleges that Nashville-based MS-13 members and associates killed three people, attempted to kill at least seven others, and plotted to shoot or kill several more during 2006 in Nashville.

If convicted, the defendants face a maximum penalty of life in prison on the RICO conspiracy charge.

An indictment is merely an accusation and the defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty at trial beyond a reasonable doubt.



Court nominees are withdrawn
Breaking Legal News | 2007/01/10 18:34

President Bush bowed this week to opposition from Lindsey Graham and other senators, declining to renominate the Pentagon’s top lawyer to the federal appellate court that oversees South Carolina.

Bush’s decision not to send the Senate the nomination of William Haynes to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals acknowledges new political realities with a Democratic-controlled Congress.

The decision also is a victory for Graham, R-SC, a military lawyer who opposed Haynes’ appointment because of Haynes’ role as Defense Department general counsel in formulating tough interrogation techniques for accused terrorist detainees.

In a Dec. 19 letter to Bush, obtained Tuesday by McClatchy Newspapers, Haynes asked the president to withdraw his name from consideration.

Haynes was one of four controversial judicial nominees Bush chose not to renominate. The others were Terrence Boyle, William Myers and Michael Wallace.

PELOSI BANS SMOKING IN SPEAKER’S LOBBY

Smokers may be one minority in Congress with even fewer rights than newly demoted Republicans. Now they’re losing one of their last, cherished prerogatives — a smoke break in the ornate Speaker’s Lobby just off the House floor.

New House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., announced a ban Wednesday.

“The days of smoke-filled rooms in the United States Capitol are over,” Pelosi said. “Medical science has unquestionably established the dangerous effects of secondhand smoke, including an increased risk of cancer and respiratory diseases. I am a firm believer that Congress should lead by example.”

Lawmakers will still be free to light up in their own offices.

HIGH COURT WEIGHS UNION DISPUTE

Supreme Court justices indicated Wednesday they are inclined to uphold a Washington state law restricting unions from using workers’ fees for political activities.

The case involves a few thousand teachers and other education employees who are in the bargaining unit of the more than 70,000-member Washington Education Association — but who have chosen not to join the union.

The Washington Supreme Court struck down the law, but several justices said Wednesday that the law did not strike them as burdensome.



Supreme Court: Challenging patents OK
Breaking Legal News | 2007/01/10 08:16

The U.S. Supreme Court sided with MedImmune Inc. yesterday, ruling that the Gaithersburg biotech is allowed to sue over the validity of a patent - even while paying user fees to the patent holder. 

Legal scholars said the decision opens the door for more patent lawsuits across a variety of sectors. And some said it could have a chilling effect on licensing deals - particularly those in key Maryland industries such as biotechnology, which often relies on such collaboration to further drug development.

Previous legal interpretations have said that active licensing contracts between companies essentially act as a "covenant not to sue," according to the American Bar Association. As such, the "actual controversy" required to have a case under the U.S. Constitution doesn't exist.

But in an 8-1 opinion yesterday - with Justice Clarence Thomas dissenting - the court struck down that idea as "mistaken."

"Promising to pay royalties on patents that have not been held invalid does not amount to a promise not to seek a holding of their invalidity," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote on behalf of the majority. (Thomas contended the courts had no jurisdiction over the case because no controversy existed.)

Those who license access to patented technology may now decide it's more in their interests to try to have a suspect patent legally overturned. And patent holders may likely scrutinize potential partners more closely or charge higher fees to cover the risk of a lawsuit.

"Clearly, this will have some impact on how people look at licensing their technology," said Lawrence M. Sung, a professor and director of the Intellectual Property Law Program at University of Maryland School of Law.

"The difficult question is knowing how much of an impact there will be," Sung said.

For MedImmune, the opinion means a lower court will have to consider the company's original 2003 claim filed in California U.S. District Court. The case contends that a patent held by California competitor Genentech Inc. was obtained through improper collusion with a British biotechnology company and amounts to an illegal 12-year extension of an earlier patent.



Former acute-care service settles suit for $7.5 million
Breaking Legal News | 2007/01/09 12:47

Texas-based SCCI Health Services Corporation (SCCI) and its subsidiary, SCCI Hospital Ventures Inc., have paid the United States $7.5 million to settle allegations that the companies violated the Stark self-referral statute and the False Claims Act, the Justice Department announced today. SCCI, which was purchased by Triumph Hospital in 2005, operates long term acute care facilities across the United States.

The government complaint alleged that from November 1996 through at least 1999, SCCI entered into prohibited financial relationships with three physicians and paid these physicians illegal payments in violation of the Stark statute. The government further alleged that from November 1996 through at least 1999, SCCI either submitted or caused false claims to be submitted to the Medicare program, as a result of these prohibited financial relationships, in violation of the False Claims Act.

“The Justice Department is committed to investigating cases that threaten the integrity of the Medicare program, especially when providers fail to abide by federal laws prohibiting the referral of Medicare patients in exchange for a fee,” said Assistant Attorney General Peter D. Keisler.

The settlement resolves a civil case filed on behalf of the government on April 1, 1999 by former employees and an independent contractor who worked for SCCI Houston. Daryl Kaczymarczyk, Patricia Rocha, Michelle Pate, Michael Brigle and Theresa Taylor filed the case under the qui tam or whistleblower provisions of the False Claims Act, which authorize private parties to file lawsuits on behalf of the United States. On Oct. 2, 2002, the government intervened in the Stark Act claims as to the three physicians. The United States filed its complaint in the case on March 10, 2003. Of the total settlement amount, $1 million resolves additional allegations as to which the government did not intervene. As a result of the settlement, the five whistleblowers shared $1.7 million.

“The Justice Department and the United States Attorney’s Office are committed to preventing and punishing improper financial relationships between physicians and hospitals. Such relationships have great potential to adversely impact the physician’s judgment and result in Medicare funds being spent on unnecessary and expensive hospital stays,” said Donald J. DeGabrielle Jr., United States Attorney for the Southern District of Texas.

The case was handled by the Justice Department’s Civil Division and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Texas, with the assistance of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.



[PREV] [1] ..[242][243][244][245][246][247][248][249][250].. [256] [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
Former Georgia insurance com..
Alabama woman who faked kidn..
A Supreme Court ruling in a ..
Court upholds mandatory pris..
Trump wants N.Y. hush money ..
Supreme Court restores Trump..
Supreme Court casts doubt on..
Donald Trump appeals $454 mi..
Dani Alves found guilty of r..
Ken Paxton petitions to stop..
Attorney Jenna Ellis pleads ..
Trump arrives in federal cou..
Why Trump's bid for presiden..
UN court rejects most of Ukr..
Hong Kong court orders China..


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