Today's Date: Add To Favorites   
Teen pleads not guilty in Ohio Craigslist killings
Court Watch | 2012/02/17 11:03
An Ohio teen has pleaded not guilty to killing one man and attempting to kill a second in a deadly Craigslist robbery scheme that targeted older and single out-of-work men.

Brogan Rafferty, his ankles and wrists cuffed, made a brief appearance Friday in adult felony court in Akron on charges originally filed in Noble County, where the case unfolded.

Rafferty, dressed in a white T-shirt and orange jail pants, also has been charged with three counts of aggravated murder in juvenile court in Summit County. Prosecutors eventually hope to merge the cases in adult court in Akron.

A magistrate continued Rafferty's $1 million bond. His attorney says Rafferty cannot afford it.

A onetime mentor of Rafferty, 52-year-old Richard Beasley of Akron, has pleaded not guilty in the killings.


Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. Announces A Securities Fraud Class Action
Securities Class Action | 2012/02/16 09:56
Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas on behalf of purchasers the common stock of Collective Brands, Inc. between December 1, 2010 and May 24, 2011, inclusive, alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against the Company and certain of its officers and/or directors.

If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact Timothy J. MacFall, Esquire or Scott J. Farrell, Esquire of Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., 825 East Gate Boulevard, Suite 300, Garden City, New York 11530 at (888) 969-4242, by e-mail to info@rigrodskylong.com, or at: http://www.rigrodskylong.com/investigations/collective-brands-inc-pss.

Collective Brands was formed in 2007 when Payless ShoeSource acquired the Collective Brands Performance + Lifestyle Group (formerly the Stride Rite Corporation) and Collective Licensing International. The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Collective Brands and certain of the Company’s directors and/or officers made materially false and misleading statements concerning its business and financial results. Specifically, it is alleged that defendants concealed from the investing public problems concerning the Company’s inventory level for Payless; significantly lower sales at the Company’s flagship Payless stores than expected due to deteriorating customer demand; and that the Company was forced to mark down Payless’s inventory at significant discounts, which negatively affected the Company’s margins and financial results for its first quarter.

On May 24, 2011, the Company disclosed its financial results for its first fiscal quarter ended April 30, 2011. As alleged in the Complaint, the Company reported earnings of $26.4 million or $0.42 diluted earnings per share (“EPS”) for the first quarter, which was nearly 50% less than the $0.82 diluted EPS expected by analysts. The Company also reported that net sales declined 1.1% to $869.0 million, due in substantial part to the Company’s 7.4% comparable store sales decline in its Payless Domestic segment. As a result, the price of Collective Brands common stock dropped $3.06 per share to close at $15.31 per share on May 25, 2011, a decline of approximately 17% on heavy trading volume.

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than March 26, 2012. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member’s claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. Any member of the proposed class may move the court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.

http://www.rigrodskylong.com



EU court: Web sites need not check for IP breaches
Court Watch | 2012/02/15 09:56
A European Union court ruled Thursday that social networking sites cannot be compelled to install general filters to prevent the illegal trading of music and other copyrighted material.

The decision is a victory for operators of social networking sites in the EU, but a setback for those who seek to protect copyrighted material from being distributed without payment or permission.

It also comes as protests are growing in Europe against ACTA, the proposed international Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, which is meant to protect intellectual property rights.

In Thursday's decision, the EU Court of Justice, which is based in Luxembourg, ruled that requiring general filters that would cover all the site's users would not sufficiently protect personal data or the freedom to receive and impart information.

SABAM, a Belgian company that represents authors, composers and music publishers, filed the lawsuit leading to Thursday's ruling. In it, the company objected to the practices of Netlog NV, a social networking site, saying users' profiles allowed protected works to be shared illegally.

Michael Gardner, head of the intellectual property practice at London law firm Wedlake Bell, called the ruling a further blow to copyright owners because it appears to rule out forcing operators of social network sites and Internet service providers — at their own expense — to impose blanket monitoring and filtering aimed at stopping infringements.


Why do law firms need a good SEO?
Attorney News | 2012/02/14 09:45
Most lawyers who are freshly introduced to the idea of internet marketing will build their website with a design company and then think visitors will start flowing in automatically after the website's initial launch. No matter how professional and aesthetically appealing your website may be, in the web environment today, visitors will never "automatically" attract and roll in. This is why law firms need good SEO and more importantly, why SEO matters if you want your business to be successful.

So what exactly is SEO you say? Surely, you must have heard talk about this recent buzz. And if you haven't, I am here to provide the 411 on everything you need to know about good SEO.

SEO is the acronym given for "search engine optimization" and choosing to invest in good SEO will be the huge factor in improving your law firm website and will also save time and money on other marketing strategies.  There is, however, a possibility at risking damage to your law firm's reputation and website if you do not do your research in advance and end up in the hand's of a careless SEO company. Good SEOs will provide useful services for law firm website owners, including but not limited to:

- content development
- keyword research
- expertise in marketing techniques
- review of your website's structure and content
- advice on technical aspects of website development

In short, SEO-friendly websites allow online robots to analyze the codes and contents of your site. Major search engines like Google and Yahoo then look specifically for keywords, phrases, and web coding in order to rank your website amongst the other competiting webpages. Organic search results is the better resort over Pay Per Click (PCC)
advertisement by increasing indexability and because of it's history. Pay Per Click services can cost a hefty sum and may not even produce effective results.

Why should you take my word for it? If I have still yet to convince you on why your law firm needs a good SEO, I'll dissect into all the benefits. A great search optimization company will do more than just generate leads for your website.  Creating a website without incorporating good SEO can pretty much equate to throwing money away. The money invested in building a great website alone will not cut it AND you might even be spending more on other marketing strategies like advertising through other avenues of media.


Italian court convicts 2 in asbestos-linked deaths
Headline Legal News | 2012/02/13 10:16
An Italian court Monday convicted two men of negligence in some 2,000 asbestos-related deaths blamed on contamination from a construction company, sentencing each of them to 16 years in prison and ordering them to pay millions in what officials called a historic case.

Italian Health Minister Renato Balduzzi hailed the verdict by the three-judge Turin court as "without exaggeration, truly historic," noting that it came after a long battle for justice.

"It's a great day, but that doesn't mean the battle against asbestos is over," he told Sky TG24 TV, stressing that it is a worldwide problem.

Prosecutors said Jean-Louise de Cartier of Belgium and Stephan Schmidheiny of Switzerland, both key shareholders in the Swiss construction firm Eternit, failed to stop asbestos fibers left over from production of roof coverings and pipes at its northern Italian factories from spreading across the region.

During the trial, which has stretched on since December 2009, some 2,100 deaths or illnesses were blamed on the asbestos fibers, which can cause grave lung problems, including cancer. Prosecutors said the contamination stretched over decades.

The defendants had denied wrongdoing.

Hundreds of people, many of them who had lost parents or spouses to asbestos-linked diseases, crowded the courtroom and two nearby halls to gather for the verdict. When the convictions were announced, some of the spectators wept.

Two hours after announcing the convictions, Judge Giuseppe Casalbore was still reading the court's complete verdict, which included awards of monetary damages from civil lawsuits from some 6,300 victims or their relatives who alleged that loved ones either died or were left ill from asbestos.


[PREV] [1] ..[371][372][373][374][375][376][377][378][379].. [606] [NEXT]
All
Securities Class Action
Headline Legal News
Stock Market News
Court News
Court Watch
Legal Interview
Securities Lawyers
Securities Law Firm
Topics in Legal News
Attorney News
Legal Focuses
Opinions
Legal Marketing
Law Firm News
Investment Fraud Litigation
TikTok content creators sue ..
Chad holds presidential elec..
Trump faces prospect of addi..
Retrial of Harvey Weinstein ..
Starbucks appears likely to ..
Supreme Court will weigh ban..
Supreme Court rejects appeal..
Supreme Court restores Trump..
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 ..


   Lawyer & Law Firm Links
St. Louis Missouri Criminal Defense Lawyer
St. Charles DUI Attorney
www.lynchlawonline.com
New York Adoption Lawyers
New York Foster Care Lawyers
Adoption Pre-Certification
www.lawrsm.com
Car Accident Lawyers
Sunnyvale, CA Personal Injury Attorney
www.esrajunglaw.com
Oregon Family Law Attorney
Divorce Lawyer Eugene. Family Law
www.mjmlawoffice.com
Family Law in East Greenwich, RI
Divorce Lawyer - Erica S. Janton
Post-Divorce Issues Attorney
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
   Legal Resource Links
Securities fraud, also known as stock fraud and investment fraud, is a practice that induces investors to make purchase or sale decisions on the basis of false information, frequently resulting in losses, in violation of the securities laws. Securities Arbitration. Generally speaking, securities fraud consists of deceptive practices in the stock and commodity markets, and occurs when investors are enticed to part with their money based on untrue statements.
 
 
 

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Securities Law News 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. | Affordable Law Firm Website Design by Law Promo