|
|
|
Lawyer sentenced in insider trading scheme in NYC
Breaking Legal News |
2011/07/07 09:58
|
A New Jersey lawyer was sentenced Thursday to 2 1/2 years in prison for his role in a hedge fund insider trading scheme as the judge said it was important to send a message of deterrence to Wall Street and to lawyers nationwide.
Arthur Cutillo teamed with another lawyer at a prominent Manhattan law firm to provide tips about mergers and acquisitions of public companies to friends trading stocks professionally.
Cutillo must report to prison in September. U.S. District Judge Richard Sullivan also ordered the 34-year-old Newark, N.J., resident to forfeit $378,608, which represents a portion of the roughly $7 million that authorities estimate was illegally made by traders as a result of inside information from a variety of sources in the case.
Cutillo, who apologized before he was sentenced, was among those arrested in 2009 when U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara unveiled what he said was the biggest hedge fund insider trading case in history.
After the sentence was announced, Bharara said: "With today's sentence, he now joins a growing group of privileged professionals who are paying a high price for insider trading."
Cutillo admitted providing tips to a former college friend in 2007 and 2008 about secrets he learned at the international firm Ropes & Gray. In return, he received $32,500 in cash, part of $100,000 paid to Cutillo and another Ropes & Gray lawyer in return for stock tips.
The prosecution also resulted in the conviction of Raj Rajaratnam, a one-time billionaire who the government said made tens of millions of dollars through inside information provided by longtime friends carrying secrets about public companies.
Sullivan cited Cutillo's challenging family circumstances, including two children with special needs, as reasons that he did not boost the sentence beyond the minimum recommended in a plea deal with prosecutors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowers sue over apparent loan mod mishaps
Breaking Legal News |
2011/07/05 09:27
|
It seemed Maria Campusano's financial problems were behind her when the mortgage on her Victorian home in a Massachusetts mill town was chopped by hundreds of dollars a month.
She soon learned that her troubles had just begun.
Weeks after making her first payment under the new rate, the school district staffer began receiving past-due notices, documents showing wildly inaccurate loan balances and letters threatening foreclosure. She now fears she'll lose her home.
"How can they take away what I have worked so hard for?" Campusano said.
Campusano is one of two named plaintiffs in a proposed class-action lawsuit alleging breach of contract by Bank of America NA and subsidiary BAC Home Loans Servicing LP.
The suit, which was filed in Los Angeles federal court because BAC is located in nearby Calabasas, is among a growing number of legal complaints accusing banks of disregarding what should be binding agreements to reduce the monthly mortgage payments of troubled borrowers.
The suits involve permanent modifications through the U.S. Treasury-administered Home Affordable Modification Program, which offers incentives to loan servicers who extend modifications, as well as so-called proprietary modifications, which banks offer independently of the government guidelines.
They represent a new wave of complaints against banks that have already weathered years of criticism for their reluctance to modify loans and for foreclosing on borrowers after offering them trial modifications.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mich. man sues, wants Chevron stock at '04 price
Breaking Legal News |
2011/07/04 00:07
|
A former lawyer intrigued by the global demand for energy says he chose to invest $100,000 in oil giant Chevron Corp. back in 2004, a smart stock bet that now would have doubled seven years later. '
But Perry Christy has a big problem: He says Chevron's stock agent never deducted money from his bank account. As a result, he has no records to show he actually owns a certain number of shares.
So Christy, 69, is suing Chevron and Mellon Investor Services and seeking an extraordinary remedy. He wants a federal judge to declare that he should be credited with buying the stock at a June 2004 price, plus any additional shares that would have piled up by reinvesting dividends. Then he'll pay $100,000.
Based on the terrific rise in San Ramon, Calif.-based Chevron's stock, it would be like winning the lottery—and then buying a ticket.
"There was some kind of mix-up on the day I placed the order," Christy insisted in an interview at his home in the Detroit suburb of Northville. "Whether mechanical or electronic, I don't think we'll ever know. But it's their screw-up. When you deal with any large bureaucracy, people are focused on their own narrow niche."
After more than a year in court, Chevron and Mellon smell a scam and want the case dismissed, even suggesting that Christy's story of a genuine yet botched investment simply is a lie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BofA Near $8.5B Deal to Settle Big Investors' Claims
Breaking Legal News |
2011/06/28 22:21
|
Bank of America Corp. is close to finalizing a deal to pay $8.5 billion to settle claims by a group of investors that the bank sold them poor-quality mortgage-backed securities that went sour when the housing market tanked, according to a person familiar with the settlement talks.
The Charlotte, North Carolina, bank was continuing talks late Tuesday with the group, which includes the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Pimco Investment Management, the world's largest bondholder, and Blackrock Financial Management. It is expected to announce an agreement as early as Wednesday, the person said on condition of anonymity because the matter was still developing.
The deal comes eight months after the group fired off a letter to Bank of America demanding that it repurchase $47 billion in mortgages that its Countrywide unit sold to them in the form of bonds. The investors have argued that Countrywide's practice of modifying loans found to have faulty paperwork or those written outside of normal underwriting standards breached signed agreements with the investors. By continuing to service bad loans rather than speeding up foreclosures, the group has claimed that Countrywide ran up servicing fees, enriching itself at the expense of investors. The New York Fed is involved because it took over assets held by American International Group Inc., which faltered under the weight of bad home loans that it insured.
Bank of America, which paid $4 billion for Countrywide in 2008, has dismissed suggestions that its handling of loan modifications and other efforts to prevent foreclosure have violated the terms of the mortgage-backed securities that the investors hold. In November, CEO Brian Moynihan said he was in day-to-day "hand-to-hand combat" with investors' demands.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supreme Court limits Wal-Mart sex bias case
Breaking Legal News |
2011/06/20 08:08
|
The Supreme Court on Monday blocked a massive sex discrimination lawsuit against Wal-Mart on behalf of women who work there.
The court ruled unanimously that the lawsuit against Wal-Mart Stores Inc. cannot proceed as a class action, reversing a decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. The lawsuit could have involved up to 1.6 million women, with Wal-Mart facing potentially billions of dollars in damages.
Now, the handful of women who brought the lawsuit may pursue their claims on their own, with much less money at stake and less pressure on Wal-Mart to settle.
The justices divided 5-4 on another aspect of the ruling that could make it much harder to mount similar class-action discrimination lawsuits against large employers.
Justice Antonin Scalia's opinion for the court's conservative majority said there needs to be common elements tying together "literally millions of employment decisions at once."
But Scalia said that in the lawsuit against the nation's largest private employer, "That is entirely absent here."
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing for the court's four liberal justices, said there was more than enough uniting the claims. "Wal-Mart's delegation of discretion over pay and promotions is a policy uniform throughout all stores," Ginsburg said.
Business interests lined up with Wal-Mart while civil rights, women's and consumer groups have sided with the women plaintiffs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High-profile attorney facing disbarment in Ky.
Breaking Legal News |
2011/06/13 19:20
|
The Kentucky Bar Association Board of Governors is preparing to decide the fate of class-action legal specialist Stan Chesley, the Cincinnati attorney known as the "Master of Disaster."
The board is scheduled to hear oral arguments on Tuesday at a Lexington hotel. A trial commissioner who recommended disbarment also wants Chesley to return $7.6 million of the $20 million he was paid in fees from a Boone County settlement for people sickened by the diet drug fen-phen. The commissioner called Chesley's behavior "shocking and reprehensible."
Chesley could appeal any disbarment to the Kentucky Supreme Court, which has the final say on disciplinary matters. Since Kentucky has a reciprocal agreement with Ohio, Chesley could lose his law license in Ohio if he is disbarred in Kentucky, the Kentucky Enquirer reports.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court: No shield law for message boards posters
Breaking Legal News |
2011/06/07 05:19
|
The New Jersey Supreme Court says people posting in online message boards don't have the same protections for sources as mainstream journalists.
The court ruled Tuesday that New Jersey's shield law for journalists does not apply to such message boards.
The case involved a New Jersey-based software company named Too Much Media. It sued a Washington state blogger for defamation and wanted her to reveal sources she cited on message board posts.
Shellee Hale claimed customer information was compromised and that she should be protected from revealing her sources.
New Jersey's highest court says online message boards are little more than forums for discussion and don't fit the definition of news media as described by the law.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
