|
|
|
Lawsuit says California mortgage money mishandled
Court Issues |
2014/03/17 20:43
|
Three community assistance organizations sued Gov. Jerry Brown and other state officials on Friday, alleging the state improperly diverted nearly $370 million that was intended to help homeowners struggling with foreclosures.
The lawsuit filed in Sacramento County Superior Court says the money was siphoned off to the state's general fund as California wrestled with a massive budget deficit and has never been repaid. The money was part of the $25 billion settlement between major banks and nearly every state in 2012, with California receiving the largest share.
H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the Department of Finance, said in a statement that the administration is confident that its budget actions are legally sound.
The suit was filed by attorney Neil Barofsky, who previously was inspector general for the federal bank bailout. The suit alleges the money is needed to help affected homeowners "weather the economic storm that continues to sweep so many families out of their homes."
"As a result of these diversions, large numbers of homeowners who are eligible for loan modifications or other relief have been left stranded, and countless fiscally imperiled California homeowners remain unaware of the full scope of their rights," the lawsuit states.
Barofsky filed the suit on behalf of three California-based community organizations that the suit says have helped thousands of homeowners: National Asian American Coalition, COR Community Development Corporation and National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court sides with parent who fled with child
Court Issues |
2014/03/07 22:48
|
The Supreme Court has made it harder for a parent in a custody dispute to seek the immediate return of a child under an international treaty to deter child abduction.
The justices ruled unanimously Wednesday that a one-year clock begins ticking when a child is taken out of its country of residence, even if the parent left behind cannot determine where the child is living. In the one-year period, the Hague Convention on child abduction gives judges little option but to return the child to its home country.
After a year, judges have more discretion and must take account of evidence that the child is settled in its new home. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court weighs securities fraud class-action cases
Court Issues |
2014/03/05 21:07
|
The Supreme Court is considering whether to abandon a quarter-century of precedent and make it tougher for investors to band together to sue corporations for securities fraud.
The justices hear arguments Wednesday in an appeal by Halliburton Co. that seeks to block a class-action lawsuit claiming the energy services company inflated its stock price.
A group of investors says it lost money when Halliburton's stock price dropped after revelations the company misrepresented revenues, understated its liability in asbestos litigation and overstated the benefits of a merger.
Justices threw out the company's first attempt to block the lawsuit in 2011. But Halliburton is now urging the court to overturn a 25-year-old decision that sparked a tidal wave of securities-related, class-action lawsuits against publicly traded companies and has led to billions in settlements.
The court's 1988 decision in Basic v. Levinson says shareholders who claim they were defrauded by false statements in securities filings don't have to prove they actually relied on the statements. Rather, the court reasoned that any misrepresentation would be reflected in the current stock price. Even if investors are not aware of the misstatements, they are presumed to be aware of them because they affect the stock price.
This presumption, known as the "fraud-on-the-market theory," has become the driving force for modern class-action securities cases. But some economists have questioned whether this theory makes sense anymore, saying it doesn't account for the sometimes random and arbitrary nature of stock trading. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
State high court assigns liability in liquor cases
Court Issues |
2014/02/28 21:50
|
California's high court has ruled that hosts who charge admission to parties may be held legally responsible if a drunken underage guest is hurt or injures someone else.
The state Supreme Court said in the unanimous ruling Monday that a cover charge amounts to a sale of alcohol, and state law creates liability for those who sell alcohol to obviously intoxicated minors.
The case stems from a 2007 party organized by then-20-year-old Jessica Manosa at a rental home owned by her parents. Nineteen-year-old Andrew Ennabe died after being hit outside the home by a car driven by another man who had been asked to leave the gathering.
Ennabe's family sought to hold Manosa liable for his death, through her parents and their homeowners insurance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Lawyer & Law Firm Websites |
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
