Today's Date: Add To Favorites
Overseas Shipholding Group to Pay Record Penalty
Breaking Legal News | 2006/12/19 14:17

BOSTON – Overseas Shipholding Group Inc. (OSG) has today agreed to plead guilty to 33 felony counts related to deliberate vessel pollution from nine ships and false pollution log entries in three additional ships, in six U.S. ports around the nation. OSG will pay a record $37 million—the largest-ever criminal penalty involving deliberate vessel pollution—and plead guilty to charges related to illegal dumping of waste oil, criminal violations of the Clean Water Act/Oil Pollution Act and the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships, conspiracy, false statements and obstruction of justice. This multi-district investigation was conducted in Boston, Mass.; Portland, Maine; Los Angeles.; San Francisco; Wilmington, N.C.; and Beaumont, Texas.

OSG is a U.S. corporation headquartered in New York and is one of the largest publicly traded tanker companies in the world. Today’s prosecution involves violations that occurred on 12 oil tankers. The $37 million penalty includes a $27.8 million criminal fine which will be divided among the districts and a $9.2 million organizational community service payment that will fund various marine environmental projects coast to coast. “OSG has engaged in repeated and deliberate pollution of our oceans,” said Acting Associate Attorney General William Mercer. “What is more disturbing is that OSG’s management failed to uncover or stop this illegal activity after allegations were brought to the attention of management on several occasions and again after the initiation of the government’s investigation. This penalty has secured justice against OSG and will serve as a deterrent for all other companies who attempt to circumvent the law for their own financial gain and at the expense of the environment.”

“The Coast Guard takes its obligation as a steward of the marine environment very seriously,” said Rear Adm. Tim Sullivan. “We are committed to achieving our ultimate goal—industry-wide compliance with international and domestic pollution prevention rules. The case demonstrates that scofflaws within maritime industry can no longer treat intentional discharging of oil and the penalties associated with those acts as a ‘cost of doing business.’ Instead, the industry must embrace a culture of compliance. Effective, transparent partnerships between industry and our regulators are vital to allow the international pollution prevention system to work as designed. Failure by industry to meet this challenge of change will only result in further investigations, prosecutions and expense to all.”

In addition to the plea agreement, a detailed joint statement of facts was filed today in court, in which OSG has admitted that the following information is accurate:

*OSG made illegal releases of oily waste from approximately August 2001 to October 2003 from the M/T Uranus into waters off the coast of New England, in close proximity to Maine and Massachusetts, including the island of Nantucket. Discharges were made from the M/T Uranus through a long flexible hose trailed overboard at night, then through a hard bypass pipe that the ship’s Fitter was forced to make, and at a later point in time, by flushing an oil detecting sensor with fresh water.

*OSG is responsible for dumping overboard sludge (concentrated black waste oil) at night from three ships. In the case of the M/T Overseas Shirley, the ship’s 1st Engineer wrote a letter to OSG senior management alleging the “habitual criminal of sludge discharge to sea” and estimated that approximately 40,600 gallons of sludge had been intentionally dumped overboard through a bypass hose. OSG discounted the allegations at the time, but they were corroborated by the government’s investigation.

*OSG violated the Clean Water Act by discharging approximately 2,640 gallons of oily waste and sludge from the M/T Neptune off the coast of North Carolina. OSG concluded no oil had been discharged at the time notwithstanding receipt of a “Private and Confidential” memo (initialed by three senior company managers,) from an outside auditor who told the company that he had observed oil leaking from a bypass hose and believed that the discharge was not an isolated event. *OSG made illegal discharges of oily waste in 2004-2005 from the M/T Pacific Ruby in U.S. waters in the Gulf of Mexico. Crew members contacted the Coast Guard alleging that the Chief Engineer had tricked pollution control equipment while making overboard discharges.

*OSG concealed deliberate and illegal discharges by deliberately falsifying official ship records, including the Oil Record Book, making discharges at night, and by hiding bypass equipment during U.S. port calls so that the Coast Guard would not discover the criminal activity.

*Numerous OSG crew members, including chief engineers, engaged in conspiracies to commit illegal pollution and falsify ship records while certain lower level crew members knowingly participated because they were explicitly or implicitly threatened by superiors with loss of employment if they refused.

*Shore-side management failed to provide and exercise sufficient supervision and management controls to prevent or detect criminal violations by its employees.

*A motive for the crimes was financial—OSG was saving the cost of offloading waste oil in port and the time it would take to comply with the law.

Criminal violations continued on some ships during the three years in which OSG was under investigation. On six vessels (M/T Ania, M/T Cabo Hellas, M/T Cleliamar, M/T Overseas Portland, M/T Vega, M/T Pacific Sapphire), OSG self-reported violations which prosecutors credited by imposing fewer charges and reduced criminal fines. OSG also implemented new technology on its ships designed to prevent illegal pollution. According to papers filed in court, prosecutors did not seek even higher penalties on account of OSG’s cooperation during the investigation and because of compliance measures taken before and during the investigation and those promised as part of a plea agreement with prosecutors.

Per the terms of the plea agreement, OSG is also subject to a three-year term of probation during which it must implement and follow a stringent environmental compliance program that includes a court-appointed monitor and outside independent auditing of OSG ships trading worldwide.

The government’s investigation was initiated after the Coast Guard in Boston received a referral from the Marine Safety Branch of Transport Canada, indicating that records for the M/T Uranus showed that bilge waste was being disposed while the official Oil Record Book failed to account for the disposal of waste. It was determined that these illegal discharges occurred within U.S. waters off-the-coast of Maine and Massachusetts. During this time, crew members discharged approximately 150,000 gallons of oil-contaminated waste while “tricking” the Oil Content Meter designed to detect and prevent discharges containing more than 15 parts per million oil, the international limit established by the MARPOL Protocol, an international treaty implemented by the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships.

The government’s investigation grew to include evidence of deliberate violations of the MARPOL Protocol and U.S. law by the following 12 oil tankers: M/T Ania, M/T Cabo Hellas, M/T Neptune, M/T Overseas Alcesmar, M/T Overseas Cleliamar, M/T Overseas Shirley, M/T Overseas Portland, M/T Pacific Sapphire, M/T Pacific Ruby, M/T Rebecca, M/T Uranus, and M/T Vega.

Today’s prosecution was made possible through the combined efforts of the U.S. Coast Guard units in each port, the Coast Guard Investigative Service, Coast Guard Office of Maritime and International Law, Coast Guard Office of Investigations and Analysis, and Environmental Protection Agency Criminal Investigations Division. The case was prosecuted by the Environmental Crimes Section of the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Attorney’s Offices in the affected districts.



States file Clean Air Act lawsuit against EPA
Breaking Legal News | 2006/12/19 08:51

Officials from 13 states, the District of Columbia, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District filed a lawsuit Monday against the US Environmental Protection Agency "for failing to mandate lower levels of disease-causing soot in the air."

More than a dozen states sued the EPA to lower soot levels from smokestacks and exhaust pipes, a move the state officials argue would save thousands of lives.

The lawsuit alleges that the EPA is failing to protect the environment and the public health by ignoring "overwhelming scientific evidence and the advice of its own experts" when setting standards for particulate matter and that the EPA is in violation of the Clean Air Act.

The "fine particulate matter" in soot contributes to premature death, chronic respiratory disease and asthma attacks, said New York Attorney General and governor-elect Eliot Spitzer. The pollution also leads to more hospital admissions and other public health costs, he said.

The states participating in the lawsuit are California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont.



State to pay legal fees in video-game lawsuit
Law Center | 2006/12/19 08:45

Gov. Rod Blagojevich's administration told a federal judge Monday night that it will pay legal fees in a lost lawsuit over video-game restrictions by late January.

Lawyers for Blagojevich and Atty. Gen. Lisa Madigan said they had decided to pay the $520,000 fee from unspent money in the budgets of several agencies under the governor.

The document filed in federal court in Chicago indicated necessary paperwork would be to the state comptroller by Friday.

Video-game industry representatives sued Blagojevich and Madigan last year over a law the governor promoted that made it a crime for retailers to sell violent or sexually explicit video games to minors.



Violent crime still on rise, FBI data show
Law Center | 2006/12/18 11:19

Violent crime in the US increased during the first half of 2006 when compared with the same period in 2005, according to the FBI's Preliminary Semiannual Uniform Crime Report  released Monday. Violent crime, including murder, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault, increased 3.7 percent since 2005 but property crimes, such as burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft, decreased 2.6 percent. The number of arsons increased 6.8 percent.

The overall 3.7 percent uptick in violent crime between January and June comes amid a still-incomplete Justice Department study of 18 cities for clues on why criminal activity is increasing.

Property crimes like auto theft and other larcenies were down by 2.6 percent over the same six-month period, the data show. But the number of arsons shot up by nearly 7 percent, the FBI reported.

If the numbers stay at the current pace, the rate of violent crime will increase in 2006 for the second year in a row. The FBI's 2005 annual report on violent crime showed that violent crimes increased in 2005 for the first time since 2001; the 2.3 percent increase was the largest jump since 1991. The US Justice Department has launched an investigation to examine why the violent crime rate has increased.

“This is a concern we’ve been focused on,” said Gene Voegtlin, legislative counsel for the International Association of Chiefs of Police, which represents an estimated 20,000 law enforcement officials and has been pushing for more crime-fighting funding. “A lot of (police) agencies are really stretched thin when it comes to the budget and their ability to aggressively combat crime.”

The Justice Department did not have an immediate comment.



Automakers Fight Global Warming Lawsuit
Breaking Legal News | 2006/12/17 15:16

The six largest automakers asked a federal judge to toss out a lawsuit by California that accuses them of harming human health and the environment by producing vehicles that contribute to global warming. California Attorney General filed the suit in September against Chrysler, General Motors Corporation, Ford, Toyota, Honda and Nissan, alleging that vehicles manufactured by the companies "currently account for nearly 20 percent of the carbon dioxide emissions in the United States and more that 30 percent in California." The automakers say that disagreements they may have with the state should be settled through the regulatory process, not litigation.

"It's the classic kind of case that the Supreme Court has said doesn't belong in federal court," said Theodore Boutrous, who represents Chrysler Motors Corp., General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co., Toyota Motor North America Inc., American Honda Motor Co. and Nissan North America Inc.

State Attorney General Bill Lockyer, who filed the suit in September, claims that automakers are violating public nuisance laws by producing high-emission vehicles and should pay damages for polluting. He says automakers could produce cleaner vehicles, but have chosen to fight instead.

"The thrust of what we're saying is the technology to produce vehicles that emit far less greenhouse gases exists," Lockyer spokeswoman Teresa Schilling said. "They fight any attempt to get them to cut back on their pollution."

The lawsuit contends the state is already dealing with the harmful effects of global warming caused by rising emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases. Vehicles are the state's largest single source of greenhouse gas emissions.

The complaint cites state reports that say rising temperatures will melt Sierra Nevada snowpack earlier each year, which will flood the Central Valley and threaten the state's water supply.

Automakers are also wrangling with California over a 2002 law requiring them to cut emissions. Under the law, the California Air Resources Board has adopted standards designed to cut carbon dioxide emissions from cars and light trucks by 25 percent and from sport utility vehicles by 18 percent starting in 2009.



17 Guantanamo detainees sent home
Legal Business | 2006/12/17 15:16

The U.S. military repatriated 18 detainees from Guantanamo Bay over the weekend to Afghanistan, Yemen, Kazakhstan, Libya and Bangladesh, a Pentagon spokesman said Sunday.

The men, flown out of the U.S. naval base in southeastern Cuba on Friday, were all transferred to the custody of governments in their native countries except for one Yemeni detainee, who was released without conditions, said Navy Lt. Cmdr. Chito Peppler.

The detainees, held for years at the isolated detention center without being charged, were cleared for departure by a military review process that assesses whether detainees have intelligence value or pose a threat to the United States. The military does not provide details about individual cases.

Since the prison opened in January 2002, about 380 detainees have been released from Guantanamo. About 395 prisoners are still held on suspicion of links to al-Qaida or the Taliban, including roughly 85 others cleared to leave for other countries, Peppler said.



Justice Department Suing Rader Center, Oklahoma.
Breaking Legal News | 2006/12/16 10:52

The Justice Department today filed a lawsuit challenging the conditions of confinement at the L.E. Rader Center, a juvenile facility in Sand Springs, Oklahoma.

The complaint alleges that conditions at the facility, which houses 215 boys up to 19 years old, routinely and systemically deprive youths of federally protected civil rights in violation of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 and the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act of 1980 (CRIPA). These statutes allow the federal government to identify and root out systemic abuses such as those allegedly discovered in Oklahoma.

This lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma follows an investigation of two and a half years, the findings of which were detailed in a letter sent to Oklahoma Governor Brad Henry in June 2005. That findings letter documented evidence of numerous alleged civil rights violations, including youth-on-youth violence, staff-on-youth violence, youth-on-staff violence, sexual misconduct between youths and staff, sexual misconduct among youths, an inadequate system to prevent suicide and self-injurious behavior, and inadequate psychotropic medication administration. The Civil Rights Division has successfully resolved investigations of other juvenile justice facilities in Arizona, Arkansas, California, Georgia, Hawaii, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, and Saipan. Investigations concerning juvenile justice facilities in California, Indiana, Maryland, New Jersey, Ohio, and Texas are pending.

In addition to juvenile facilities, CRIPA protects all institutionalized persons. Since 2001, the Department of Justice has opened 67 similar investigations into the conditions at nursing homes, mental health facilities and residences for persons with developmental disabilities, as well as similar institutions. These figures represent a significant increase over the 47 such investigations initiated over the preceding six years.



[PREV] [1] ..[1151][1152][1153][1154][1155][1156][1157][1158][1159].. [1177] [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
Judge in Trump case orders m..
Court makes it easier to sue..
Top Europe rights court cond..
Elon Musk will be investigat..
Retired Supreme Court Justic..
The Man Charged in an Illino..
Texas’ migrant arrest law w..
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..


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