Today's Date: Add To Favorites   
Armstrong Teasdale Adds Three New Associates
Legal Focuses | 2010/08/23 08:57

Armstrong Teasdale LLP announces the arrival of associates Irina Sandler, Lauren Ashley Smith, and Adam R. Wuller.

“The subtle shift in the economy has brought about additional business and afforded us the opportunity to add talent,” said Michael A. Chivell, Armstrong Teasdale’s managing partner. “As we position Armstrong Teasdale as a premier firm in this region, we’ll continue to place a premium on attracting exceptional attorneys in key practice areas.”

Former legal counsel at the affiliate of Emerson Electric in Moscow, Irina Sandler joins the firm’s International practice group and will focus on international trade, import and export controls, Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and antitrust compliance. She earned her LL.M. in Intellectual Property and Technology Law from Washington University School of Law, was an Edmund S. Muskie Graduate Program Fellow at the University of Illinois College of Law, and received her Degree in Law from Russian Law Academy of the Russian Ministry of Justice.

Lauren Ashley Smith, a recent law school graduate, is a member of the firm’s Public Finance and Real Estate, and Financial Services practice groups. Drawing on her research and scholarship in land use, and state and local government law, she will focus on public/private real estate development and municipal finance. Additionally, Smith will assist lenders and other creditors seeking to maximize their recovery against debtors in litigation, liquidation, reorganization, and bankruptcy including all aspects of post-judgment collection efforts. She earned her J.D. from Washington University School of Law and her B.A. from Marquette University.

Adam R. Wuller, also a recent graduate, is a registered patent attorney with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and joins the firm’s Intellectual Property practice group. The majority of his work will involve the preparation and prosecution of U.S. and foreign patent applications in a wide range of technical disciplines, including mechanical and medical devices. Wuller received his J.D. from Saint Louis University School of Law and his B.S. in engineering physics from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.



Global Reach Of US Securities Class Actions Curbed
Headline Legal News | 2010/08/22 14:24

The Supreme Court's decision in Morrison v NAB curbs the extra-territorial operation of US securities laws.

The extra-territorial operation of US securities laws has been curbed by the United States Supreme Court in Morrison v National Australia Bank (08-1191), by requiring the purchase or sale of the security to be made in the United States, or involve a security listed on a domestic exchange.

The facts in Morrison v NAB

The plaintiffs are residents of Australia, who purchased National Australia Bank Limited's ("NAB") ordinary shares on an Australian exchange.

In February 1998, NAB acquired HomeSide Lending Inc., an American mortgage service provider. HomeSide calculated the present value of the fees it would generate from servicing mortgages in future years using a valuation method, booked that amount on its balance sheet as an asset called a Mortgage Servicing Right ("MSR"), and then amortised the value of the MSR over its expected life.

In 2001, NAB revealed that the interest assumptions and the valuation model used by HomeSide to calculate the MSR were incorrect and resulted in an overstatement in the value of its servicing rights. When NAB disclosed the error its share price fell.

Notwithstanding that they were Australian residents trading securities in an Australian company in Australia, the plaintiffs commenced their class action against NAB in the Southern District of New York.

They relied on section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 which prohibits any manipulative or deceptive device or contrivance in connection with the purchase or sale of any security registered on a national securities exchange or any security not so registered.

The trial judge, upheld on appeal, dismissed the claims on the basis that the court did not have jurisdiction. The Supreme Court of the United States agreed to hear the appeal.

Supreme Court upholds decision but substitutes new test

The Supreme Court relied on the longstanding principle of American law that legislation of Congress is meant to apply only within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, unless a contrary intent appears. The Court found that section 10(b) is not extra-territorial.

The US Supreme Court therefore adopted a transactional test for the application of section 10(b): whether the purchase or sale is made in the United States, or involves a security listed on a domestic exchange.

This replaced the previous tests for the application of section 10(b) that required either (1) an "effects test," ie. "whether the wrongful conduct had a substantial effect in the United States or upon United States citizens," or (2) a "conduct test," "whether the wrongful conduct occurred in the United States."

The Supreme Court's application of the presumption against extra-territorial operation was bolstered by the amicus briefs from a number of other countries, including Australia, which led the Court to observe:

"The probability of incompatibility with the applicable laws of other countries is so obvious that if Congress intended such foreign application "it would have addressed the subject of conflicts with foreign laws and procedures."

Like the United States, foreign countries regulate their domestic securities exchanges and securities transactions occurring within their territorial jurisdiction. And the regulation of other countries often differs from ours as to what constitutes fraud, what disclosures must be made, what damages are recoverable, what discovery is available in litigation, what individual actions may be joined in a single suit, what attorney's fees are recoverable, and many other matters."



Chicago law firm Brodsky & Odeh splits
Law Firm News/Illinois | 2010/08/20 09:34

The law firm of Brodsky & Odeh, the legal practice behind several of Chicago's biggest cases, is splitting up, partners Reem Odeh and Joel A. Brodsky jointly announced today.

"We have grown in different directions and our expertise is now in very different areas of law," says Brodsky. "After some soul searching and discussion it became obvious to both of us that it simply makes more sense to be in separate law firms."

Odeh, who teamed with Brodsky six years ago, says she is looking forward to forging ahead with developing her own practice.

"I learned a lot from practicing criminal law with Joel over the last six years, and now it is time for me to develop my own identity as an attorney," says Odeh.

Brodsky and Odeh are probably best known for their representation of former Bolingbrook police officer Drew Peterson.

Reem says that despite the breakup of the firm, she will remain a part of Peterson's defense team.



Robbins Umeda LLP Announces an Investigation of the Acquisition of McAfee, Inc.
Law Firm News/California | 2010/08/20 09:32

Robbins Umeda LLP has commenced an investigation into possible breaches of fiduciary duty and other violations of state law by members of the Board of Directors ("Board") of McAfee, Inc. ("McAfee" or the "Company") (NYSE: MFE) in connection with their efforts to sell McAfee to Intel Corporation ("Intel") (NASDAQ: INTC). If the transaction is completed, McAfee shareholders will receive $48.00 in cash for each share of McAfee common stock they hold.

Robbins Umeda LLP's investigation concerns whether the McAfee Board undertook a fair process to obtain fair consideration for all shareholders of McAfee. Specifically, our investigation concerns whether the Company's Board breached their fiduciary duties to McAfee shareholders by failing to adequately shop the Company before entering into the transaction with Intel. At least one analyst had a price target for the Company at $50 per share. Additionally, under the terms of the agreement, McAfee must pay Intel a $230 million termination fee if McAfee accepts a superior offer to the Intel offer.

If you are a shareholder of McAfee, plan to continue to hold your shares, and would like more information about your rights as a shareholder, please contact attorney Gregory E. Del Gaizo at 800-350-6003 or by e-mail at info@robbinsumeda.com.

Robbins Umeda LLP is a California-based law firm with significant experience representing investors in merger-related shareholder class actions, shareholder derivative actions, and securities fraud class actions. For more information about the firm, please go to http://www.robbinsumeda.com.



Legal Talk Show, Lawyer Websites - William Lerach
Legal Marketing | 2010/08/17 19:25

For more than 20 years, William S. Lerach was the most feared lawyer in America. He and his former firm, Milberg Weiss, were Jedi masters of security law, targeting Fortune 500 companies for corporate fraud and recovering a staggering $45 billion in judgments.

Tough and relentless, plaintiffs saw him as a savior, successfully suing WorldCom, Tyco, Disney,Merrill Lynch and Enron, among others. Lerach brought down high-flying CEOs and companies that routinely cooked the books to keep executives rich and shareholders broke. Famous for his class-action suits and novel legal tactics, he was the scourge of big business, forcing many companies, terrified of being “Lerached,” to settle out of court rather than fight.

In January 2008, he pleaded guilty to conspiracy to obstruct justice, admitting he paid a few regular plaintiffs millions in kickbacks to instigate cases that netted the firm some $200 million over two decades. (No plaintiff can benefit more than others in class-action suits.) He was fined nearly $8 million and sentenced to two years in prison.  He was just released in March 2010.
Lerach was famous for tracking stock prices — charting fluctuations against optimistic statements and insider selling — before a stock crashed. If company chiefs cashed in while investors lost their savings, Lerach smelled blood. If public investments were fueled by false claims, the charge was “fraud on the market.” Plus, any investment bank and Big 8 accounting firm that aided and abetted the principles were charged as secondary participants, unleashing a legal juggernaut.

Bill talks about himself,   the legal profession, and  his contributions on behalf of investors everywhere.
If there was ever a modern Greek tragedy about a man and his times, about corporate arrogance and illusions and the scorched-earth tactics to not only counteract corporate America but to beat it at its own game, Bill Lerach's story is it. 

attorney web site design

http://www.legalnewsbrief.blogspot.com

http://www.lawfirmmarketingnews.blogspot.com

http://metrolinkcomesclean.blogspot.com/

http://metrolinkclassaction.blogspot.com/



[PREV] [1] ..[520][521][522][523][524][525][526][527][528].. [627] [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
US completes deportation of ..
International Criminal Court..
What’s next for birthright ..
Nations react to US strikes ..
Nations react to US strikes ..
Court blocks Louisiana law r..
Court blocks Louisiana law r..
Judge blocks plan to allow i..
Getty Images and Stability A..
Supreme Court makes it easie..
Trump formally asks Congress..
World financial markets welc..
Cuban exiles were shielded f..
Arizona prosecutors ordered ..
Trump Seeks Supreme Court Ap..
Budget airline begins deport..


   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
Lane County, OR DUI Law Attorney
Eugene DUI Lawyer. Criminal Defense 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