|
|
|
Former Milberg Weiss Partner Sues
Attorney Blog News |
2008/06/18 07:58
|
pA former partner in Milberg Weiss has sued four of its founding partners - Melvyn Weiss, David Bershad, Steven Schulman, and William Lerach - claiming they lied to him and other attorneys about their secret kickbacks to plaintiffs in shareholder class actions. Michael Buchman sued his former partners in Federal Court on Tuesday, as the firm, now known as Milberg, agreed to pay $75 million to the United States to settle criminal complaints in the scheme.
Buchman says he joined Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes amp; Lerach in January 1997 and was made a partner in December 2000. He worked in the antitrust division until he left the firm in February 2007. When Lerach left to set up his own office in 2004, the firm changed its name to Milberg Weiss Bershad amp; Schulman.
Buchman says the defendants lied to him, and to other attorneys, after federal prosecutors unsealed an indictment in which Seymour Lazar and Paul Selzer alleged that certain partners of Milberg Weiss had secretly paid them kickbacks to serve as plaintiffs in securities class actions.
Buchman's complaint states: In various meetings that occurred at Milberg Weiss after the Lazar Indictment, Defendants Weiss, Bershad and Schulman, who were united in interest, repeatedly represented to plaintiff and to other partners in Milberg Weiss hat the accusations contained in the Lazar Indictment were untrue, politically motivated, and that the government's case rested on mischaracterization of legitimate referral fees paid to other law firms, which assertedly had been duly reported to the government of Forms 1099. Weiss, for example, vigorously denied that the alleged payments had been made to Lazar, and represented that Lazar's sold motivation for pursuing multiple class actions had been to recover for his own injuries and to serve as 'a crusader.'
Believing these representations of fact by defendants, plaintiff continued to serve as a partner in Milberg Weiss. Similarly, most other Milberg Weiss partners who had no prior knowledge of defendants' unlawful and unethical acts also continued throughout the rest of 2005 to serve as Milberg Weiss partners.
Defendants had a fiduciary duty to plaintiff and to other Milberg Weiss partners to be honest and forthcoming with government authorities. Were the allegations made in the Lazar Indictment true, defendants had a duty truthfully to reveal their unethical and unlawful conduct to the authorities and to take personal responsibility for such conduct. Instead, defendants refused to acknowledge the truth and continued to misrepresent the facts to government authorities, thereby putting Milberg Weiss as a firm, and the financial and professional interests of plaintiff and other innocent Milberg Weiss partners, in grave jeopardy./p |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subscription Bill for $11.83 Brings $5 Million Award
Attorney Blog News |
2008/06/13 07:33
|
A bill for $11.83 led a customer to file a federal class action accusing XM Satellite Radio of illegally renewing subscribers' contracts without proper notice. Damages are estimated at more than $5 million.
On behalf of all XM subscribers in New York, Richard Vacariello claims XM violates New York General Obligations Law §50903 by failing to notify subscribers 15 to 30 days before automatically renewing their subscriptions.
Vacariello took a 3-year subscription and used it in a leased automobile, then turned in the car and let the XM subscription expire - he thought. After he turned in the car, he says, XM sent him a bill for $359.64. (It is not clear from the complaint whether this was a bill for another year or for another three years.) Vacariello says he objected, and that XM told him it had automatically renewed the contract.
So Vacariello says he canceled the contract immediately, only to have XM send him another bill - for $11.83 - for the period after the 3-year contract expired, and before he canceled the automatic renewal.
Vacariello says XM refused to cancel the $11.83 bill, so he paid it under protest, for fear of harming his credit. Then he filed this class action. He estimates class damages at more than $5 million. He demands compensatory damages and an injunction. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class Claims 'QuickPick' Bets Didn't List Last Horse
Attorney Blog News |
2008/06/03 07:54
|
Scientific Games' machines excluded the last horse from every race in its QuickPick program for more than 6 months, a class action claims in Superior Court.
The complaint states in Paragraph 11 that the QuickPick program excluded the last horse in every race from the betting slips.
Two paragraphs later, it states, The glitch was finally admitted when a Bay Meadows bettor played 1,300 quick picks and noticed that not one included the number 20 horse.
The complaint does not elucidate specifically whether the last horse was excluded in races with fewer than 20 horses, though Paragraph 11 indicates that was the case.
The named plaintiff claims that Although Defendants were aware of the problem as of Nov. 1, 2007, the Defendants failed to notify the betting public. Instead, the Defendants kept the problem to itself [sic] and attempted to correct 'for' the problem with 'new software.' The glitch was finally admitted when a Bay Meadows bettor played 1,300 quick picks and noticed that not one included the number 20 horse. The public was not alerted to the problem until after May 19, 2008 - months after the Defendants knew of the problem and week after the Bay Meadows better complained to the State Board. As a result of the 'glitch,' thousands of Class members paid for 'QuickPick' bets without any chance of a 'QuickPick' payment.
Named plaintiff Angel Romero says he bought QuickPick tickets for races at Fairplex Race Track, Santa Anita, Hollywood park and Pacific Coast Quarter Horse, all in Southern California.
He is represented by William Audet of San Francisco and Thomas Ferlauto with King amp; Ferlauto of Los Angeles. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Louisville Slugger Crippled Little Leaguer
Attorney Blog News |
2008/05/30 14:03
|
Higher bat speed, and the resulting ball speed off an aluminum bat gave a Little Leaguer insufficient time to react, and the boy suffered cardiac arrest when hit by a batted ball during a game, the boy's family claims in lawsuits against Hillerich amp; Bradsby dba Louisville Slugger, and the Little League.
Aluminum bats have been controversial for precisely this reason, and because some baseball purists say the lighter bats give batters an unfair edge. In this case, the Domalewski family claims Steven, 12, was injured and hospitalized during a June 6, 2006 game in Wayne, N.J., from a ball bit by a Louisville Slugger TPX Platinum bat. The 31-inch bat weighs 19 ozs., the complaint states. Traditional wooden bats generally weight 30 ozs. or more.
As a result of the blow to his chest, Steven went into cardiac arrest ... was resuscitated and transported to St. Joseph's Medical Center in Paterson, according to the claim in Passaic County Court. It claims Steven suffered from anoxic encephalopathy secondary to comotio cordis and is multiple handicapped.
The Domalewskis accuse the defendants, among other things, with consumer fraud: minimizing the dangers of aluminum bats, though knowing of them. They demand punitive damages. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Democrats Sue Georgia Over Photo Voter Law
Attorney Blog News |
2008/05/27 13:53
|
The Georgia Democratic Party claims enforcement of the state's photo ID requirement violates the Georgia Constitution by discriminating against hundreds of thousands of registered voters, black voters particularly, who do not have driver's licenses, passports or other state-issued ID.
Unlike the civil rights claims of the 1960s, which appealed to the federal government to override racist Southern laws, this complaint asserts no claims that arise under the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States.
Plaintiffs claim the state's 2006 Photo ID Act - SB 84 - violates the Georgia Constitution because it imposes an unauthorized additional condition on the fundamental right to vote.
They claim the bill discriminates against African-American voters in particular.
And they claim that it is an illegal retroactive law because it applies to citizens of Georgia who were lawfully registered to vote before the effective date of the law. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Law Promo can construct your law firm a brand new responsive website, or help you redesign your existing site to secure your place in the internet world. Small Law Firm Web Design by Law Promo |
|
|
Recent Lawyer Blog Updates |
|
Lawyer News RSS
