|
|
|
Enron Broadband CEO sentenced to 27 months in plea deal
Court Watch |
2007/06/19 09:29
|
| Former Enron broadband division chief Kennith Rice was sentenced to 27 months in prison Monday and ordered to forfeit almost $15 million as part of a plea deal with prosecutors for his testimony against former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling and company founder Kenneth Lay . As CEO of Enron Broadband Services (EBS), Rice made numerous false statements about technology developments designed to mislead investors and artificially inflate the company's stock price. Without the plea deal, Rice faced up to 10 years in prison for his actions. Earlier this month, former EBS Chief Operating Officer Kevin Hannon was sentenced to two years in prison and fined $125,000 for defrauding investors. Hannon also was sentenced subject to a plea deal, but was convicted of lesser crimes and was facing a maximum of 5 years in prison. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Good Supreme Court Ruling on Traffic Stops
Court Watch |
2007/06/18 09:19
|
| The Supreme Court actually issued a good ruling on traffic stops today, and it was unanimous. In BRENDLIN v. CALIFORNIA, Bruce Brendlin, who was convicted of drug possession after a car in which he was a passenger was pulled over by a sheriff's deputy in Yuba County, California, appealed his conviction based on the fact that the traffic stop was later conceded by the state to be illegal. The state argued that because Brendlin was not the driver of the car, he was not the subject of the illegal stop, and so did not have the right to have the evidence suppressed because of the stop's illegality. In the unanimous opinion written by David Souter, the Court found: Brendlin was seized because no reasonable person in his position when the car was stopped would have believed himself free to "terminate the encounter" between the police and himself. Bostick, supra, at 436. Any reasonable passenger would have understood the officers to be exercising control to the point that no one in the car was free to depart without police permission.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sanford man pleads guilty to cocaine charges
Court Watch |
2007/06/18 07:24
|
| Christopher Knight, a 25-year-old resident of Sanford, Maine, pleaded guilty on Thursday to conspiring to sell cocaine in the Portsmouth area. During a hearing in U.S. District Court, Knight acknowledged that on several occasions in 2005 he purchased cocaine from another person and, with the knowledge of that person, sold the cocaine to other people, according to a press release from the U.S. Department of Justice. Knight is one of several people who were arrested and charged with drug-related offenses following an investigation of several months that was conducted by the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Portsmouth Police Department and other law enforcement agencies. The investigation focused on the distribution of Ecstacy, cocaine and marijuana in the Portsmouth area. Knight will be sentenced by U.S. District Court Judge Joseph DiClerico next September. The maximum prison sentence for the offense to which Knight pleaded guilty is 20 years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Archdiocese of St. Louis Drops Suit Against Law Firm
Court Watch |
2007/06/16 10:02
|
| The Archdiocese of St. Louis has dropped a lawsuit against a law firm that represents clients in clergy sexual abuse cases. The archdiocese had filed suit against Chackes, Carlson, Spritzer and Ghio last month seeking relief against disclosure of archdiocesan personnel and medical records to third parties. The suit alleged that one of those parties was the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. An editor for the Post-Dispatch previously noted the newspaper was not a party in the lawsuit, and the newspaper did not indicate if it had received documents. The church withdrew the lawsuit on Monday June 11 before a hearing called to discuss whether Archbishop Raymond Burke would have to testify under oath in a deposition for the case. The archdiocese said in a statement, "After discussing the issue with attorneys representing the Chackes law firm, we believe that our point of protecting the integrity of the mediation process has been understood and that we can proceed with the mediation of additional claims.'' Gerry Greiman, an attorney representing the firm, said, "We've always felt this case had no merit. I can only assume based on the archdiocese's actions today that they agree.'' |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Geddings found guilty of lobbying violation
Court Watch |
2007/06/16 05:05
|
| Former North Carolina state lottery commissioner Kevin Geddings was found guilty of a lobbying law violation in state court today and will be banned from lobbying in North Carolina for the next two years, the Raleigh News & Observer reported Friday. Geddings, 42, a former Charlotte public relations executive who now is the co-owner of WFOY-AM in St. Augustine, was not in court to enter the plea. He is to enter federal prison in the coming weeks to serve a four-year sentence. A jury in April convicted Geddings of five counts of mail fraud as part of a scheme to defraud the public of his honest services. Geddings had hid his ties to major lottery vendor Scientific Games as he sought and won a seat on the lottery commission.
His attorney, Tommy Manning of Raleigh, entered what is known as an Alford plea in court, said Wake Assistant District Attorney David Sherlin. An Alford plea allows defendants to maintain innocence but to nonetheless plead guilty because they see no other favorable alternative. Geddings has appealed his federal sentence. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
NJ Court Drops Suit Against Paint Makers
Court Watch |
2007/06/15 20:31
|
| The New Jersey Supreme Court on Friday scuttled what little remained of a lawsuit against paint makers by 26 towns and counties that wanted them to cover the cost of removing lead paint, which was banned in 1978 as a health hazard. The 4-2 ruling by the state's highest court was a victory for the manufacturers, which included American Cyanamid Co. (now part of Wyeth (nyse: WYE - news - people )), Sherwin-Williams Co. (nyse: SHW - news - people ) and DuPont (nyse: DD - news - people ). The court determined that the towns and counties failed to identify a special injury that could be compensated. It said the claim was essentially a products liability issue, and falls under the state Product Liability Act, which excludes coverage for exposure to toxic material. A lawyer for the towns and counties, Fidelma L. Fitzpatrick, said they were considering whether to ask the court to reconsider its decision, which dismissed the last remaining claim of the lawsuit. "It means that the New Jersey Supreme Court turned its back on lead-poisoned children of New Jersey, and they allowed the companies that profited from lead paint to turn their back on the children of New Jersey and the crisis that they created," Fitzpatrick said. Individuals have little recourse to sue because they cannot identify which manufacturer made the paint that is on the walls of their home, Fitzpatrick said. The paint makers praised the ruling, noting the Missouri Supreme Court had a similar decision on Tuesday. "These companies are not responsible for risks today from poorly maintained lead paint," said Bonnie J. Campbell, spokeswoman for the paint makers and a former attorney general of Iowa. New Jersey Public Advocate Ronald K. Chen, who had entered the case in support of the towns and counties, said the ruling was disappointing, but did recognize that landlords must maintain their properties to prevent lead paint from flaking and becoming a health hazard. The aged housing stock in New Jersey has at least 2 million units with lead paint, Chen said. As a result, 4,547, or nearly 2.5 percent of New Jersey children under 6, had high levels of lead, compared to 1.6 percent nationally, according to the state Department of Health and Senior Services. The lawsuit was originally filed in December 2001 by Newark, and was later joined by other towns and counties. A trial judge had dismissed the entire lawsuit, but an appellate panel reinstated the claim charging the manufacturers with creating a public nuisance. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Judge Suing Dry Cleaner Cries Over Pants
Court Watch |
2007/06/14 09:38
|
A judge had to leave the courtroom with tears running down his face Tuesday after recalling the lost pair of trousers that led to his $54 million lawsuit against a dry cleaner. Administrative law judge Roy L. Pearson had argued earlier in his opening statement that he is acting in the interest of all city residents against poor business practices. Defense attorneys called his claim "outlandish." He originally sued Custom Cleaners for about $65 million under the District of Columbia consumer protection act and almost $2 million in common law claims. He is no longer seeking damages related to the pants, instead focusing his claims on two signs in the shop that have since been removed.
He alleges that Jin Chung, Soo Chung and Ki Chung, owners of the mom-and-pop business, committed fraud and misled consumers with signs that claimed "Satisfaction Guaranteed" and "Same Day Service."
Pearson, representing himself, said in opening that he wanted to examine the culture that allowed "a group of defendants to engage in bad business practices for five years."
An attorney for the Chungs portrayed Pearson as a bitter man with financial troubles stemming from a recent divorce who is taking out his anger on a hardworking family.
"This case is very simple. It's about one sign and the plaintiff's outlandish interpretation," attorney Chris Manning said.
The Chungs were to present their case Wednesday. Manning asked D.C. Superior Court Judge Judith Bartnoff to award them reimbursement for their legal costs if they win.
Pearson called several witnesses Tuesday who testified that they stopped going to Custom Cleaners after problems with misplaced clothes.Pearson also called himself as a witness, saying his problems began in May 2005 when he brought in several suits for alterations. A pair of pants from a blue and maroon suit was missing when he requested it two days later. He said Soo Chung tried to give him a pair of charcoal gray pants.
As Pearson explained that those weren't the pants for the suit, he choked up and left the courtroom crying after asking Bartnoff for a break. Pearson originally asked the cleaners for the full price of the suit, which was more than $1,000. But because the Chungs insisted the pants had been found, they refused to pay.
Manning has said the cleaners made three settlement offers to Pearson, but the judge was not satisfied and increased his demands — including asking for money to rent a car so he could drive to another business. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 and help you redesign your existing law firm site to secure your place in the internet. |
Law Firm Directory
|
|