Law Firm News
Today's Legal News Bookmark Page
Chile court orders halt to Anglo American sale
Legal Watch | 2011/11/16 17:49
A Chilean court on Tuesday ordered British-based mining company Anglo American to halt further sales of shares in a Chilean subsidiary.

The appeals court based in the capital of Santiago granted an injunction sought by Chile's state mining company, Codelco, which argues that it has first right of refusal on shares in Anglo American Sur, which has three operations in the country.

Anglo American PLC announced last week it had sold 24.5 percent of the subsidiary to Mitsubishi of Japan for $5.39 billion. Codelco has acknowledged that it cannot now overturn that sale, but its attorneys say they may ask for a review of its legality.

Codelco said in October that it planned to exercise its option to purchase 49 percent of the shares in Anglo American Sur for $6.57 billion. It said that option is open every third January under a contract signed in 1978 and modified in 2002.

Anglo American has announced it will fight the attempt to block its sale of the subsidiary. Its press office in Chile had no immediate comment on the court ruling.

Anglo American Sur operates the Los Bronces and El Soldado mines which produce about 261,000 tons of copper, as well as the Chagres smelter.


Court: Fla. must weigh arbitration in Madoff case
Legal Watch | 2011/11/07 20:30
The Supreme Court says the Florida courts should reconsider whether arbitration is required for claims against an auditing firm that worked on a fund that invested with Bernie Madoff.

The high court on Monday reversed a decision by a Florida appeals court. KPMG was sued by investors in the Rye Funds, which lost millions of dollars to Madoff's Ponzi scheme. KPMG was the auditor for the Rye Funds, and the investors said the company did not use proper auditing standards.

KPMG says its contract requires arbitration but the state courts would not allow it.

The Supreme Court ruled that the Florida courts only looked at part of the claims being brought against KPMG. The high court ordered the lower courts to investigate all of the claims before making a decision.


High court avoids dispute over highway crosses
Legal Watch | 2011/11/01 15:39
The Supreme Court won't hear an appeal of a ruling that 12-foot-high crosses along Utah highways in honor of dead state troopers violate the Constitution.

The justices voted 8-1 Monday to reject an appeal from Utah and a state troopers' group that wanted the court to throw out the ruling and take a more permissive view of religious symbols on public land.

Since 1998, the private Utah Highway Patrol Association has paid for and erected more than a dozen memorial crosses, most of them on state land. Texas-based American Atheists Inc. and three of its Utah members sued the state in 2005.

The federal appeals court in Denver said the crosses were an unconstitutional endorsement of Christianity by the Utah state government.

Justice Clarence Thomas issued a 19-page opinion dissenting from Monday's order. Thomas said the case offered the court the opportunity to clear up confusion over its approach to disputes over the First Amendment's Establishment Clause, the prohibition against governmental endorsement of religion.


Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP Announces Class Action
Legal Watch | 2011/10/17 17:09
The law firm of Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP is investigating potential securities law violations as alleged in a securities class action lawsuit filed on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of Imperial Holdings, Inc. pursuant and/or traceable to the Company’s initial public offering on or about February 7, 2011 through September 27, 2011, inclusive.

Imperial Holdings shareholders, or individuals with information relating to this investigation, who wish to learn more about the action should click here or contact Sharon M. Lee of Lieff Cabraser toll free at (800) 541-7358.

Background on the Imperial Holdings Securities Class Litigation

The action is brought against Imperial Holdings, certain of its officers and directors, and the underwriters of the IPO for violations of the Securities Act of 1933. Imperial Holdings is a specialty finance company that focuses on providing premium financing for individual life insurance policies.

The action alleges that the Company’s registration statement and prospectus for the IPO, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, were materially false and misleading because they failed to disclose that Imperial Holdings had engaged in wrongdoing with respect to its life insurance finance business that would expose the Company and certain of its employees to government investigations.

On September 27, 2011, Imperial Holdings announced that federal investigators had served the Company with a search warrant and that it and certain of its employees, including its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and its President and Chief Operating Officer, were under investigation in connection with the Company’s life insurance business. In response to this announcement and news of the raid on the Company's headquarters, the price of Imperial Holdings stock declined from $6.30 per share to close at $2.19 per share on September 28, 2011, on extremely heavy trading volume.

About Lieff Cabraser

Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, with offices in San Francisco, New York and Nashville, is a nationally recognized law firm committed to advancing the rights of investors and promoting corporate responsibility. Since 2003, the National Law Journal has selected Lieff Cabraser as one of the top plaintiffs’ law firms in the nation. In compiling the list, the National Law Journal examined recent verdicts and settlements in addition to overall track records. Lieff Cabraser is one of only two plaintiffs’ law firms in the United States to receive this honor for the last nine consecutive years. For more information about Lieff Cabraser and the firm’s representation of investors, please visit http://www.lieffcabraser.com.


Court won't hear NH presidential ballot question
Legal Watch | 2011/10/11 16:48
The Supreme Court won't hear an appeal from the Libertarian Party over whether New Hampshire officials should have let 2008 Libertarian candidate Bob Barr be the party's sole candidate on the presidential ballot.

The high court on Tuesday refused to hear an appeal from the party, which wanted Barr as the only candidate carrying its brand on the 2008 ballot.

A second candidate, George Phillies, also petitioned his way onto the New Hampshire ballot under the Libertarian banner. Barr and the party sued, saying Barr should have been the only Libertarian candidate on that ballot.

But the federal courts threw out the party's claim that Phillies' affiliation should have been removed because the national party didn't want his name on the ballot.


Hogan to be new courts administrative officer
Legal Watch | 2011/10/06 16:40
Senior U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan is the new director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.

Hogan, a former chief U.S. District Court judge in Washington, will serve a one-year term as the chief administrative officer for the federal court system. He will oversee the federal judiciary's 35,000 employees and its almost $7 billion annual budget.

The Judicial Conference of the United States is the principal policymaking body for the federal court system. As its presiding officer, Chief Justice John Roberts selected Hogan for the position.

Hogan will begin Oct. 17. He plans to resume work as a senior federal judge after his term ends.

The previous director, James Duff, left this summer to become president of the Freedom Forum.


Swiss sports court overturns Olympic doping rule
Legal Watch | 2011/10/05 16:39
Olympic champion LaShawn Merritt was cleared to defend his 400-meter title in London next year after the American won his appeal Thursday against an IOC rule banning doping offenders from the games.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport annulled the International Olympic Committee rule that bars any athlete who has received a doping suspension of more than six months from competing in the next summer or winter games.

The three-man CAS panel said the rule, adopted in 2008, was "invalid and unenforceable" because it amounted to a second sanction and did not comply with the World Anti-Doping Agency code. It said the rule amounted to a "disciplinary sanction" rather than a matter of eligibility.

Merritt, the American 400-meter gold medalist in Beijing, had been ineligible under the IOC rule to compete in London even though he completed his doping ban this year after testing positive for a banned substance found in a male-enhancement product.


[PREV] [1] ..[34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42].. [49] [NEXT]
All
Legal News
Law Firm Business
Headline News
Court Center
Legal Watch
Legal Interview
Top Legal News
Attorneys News
Press Releases
Opinions
Lawyer Blogs
Firm Websites
Politics & Law
Firm News
Former Georgia insurance com..
Alabama woman who faked kidn..
A Supreme Court ruling in a ..
Trump wants N.Y. hush money ..
Supreme Court restores Trump..
Supreme Court casts doubt on..
Donald Trump appeals $454 mi..
Dani Alves found guilty of r..
Ken Paxton petitions to stop..
Attorney Jenna Ellis pleads ..
Trump arrives in federal cou..
Why Trump's bid for presiden..
Samsung chief is acquitted o..
UN court rejects most of Ukr..
Hong Kong court orders China..
Man sentenced to death for a..
Court in Thailand acquits pr..
The top UN court is set to h..
   Law Firm News



San Francisco Trademark Lawyer
San Francisco Copyright Lawyer
www.onulawfirm.com
Family Law in East Greenwich, RI
Divorce Lawyer - Erica S. Janton
www.jantonfamilylaw.com/about
Rockville Family Law Attorney
Maryland Family Law Attorneys
familylawyersmd.com
 
 
© Legal World News Center. All rights reserved.

The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Legal World News Center 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. Legal Blog postings and hosted comments are available for general educational purposes only and should not be used to assess a specific legal situation. Business Lawyers Web Design.