|
|
|
Alinghi, rivals call on BMW Oracle to drop lawsuit
Topics |
2008/10/31 02:41
|
| All 11 teams challenging for the next America's Cup have called on American syndicate BMW Oracle Racing to drop its legal fight with cup holder Alinghi. The request came at a meeting of Cup contenders Thursday called by Alinghi at its home yacht club in Geneva. Preparations for the 33rd America's Cup have been stalled for more than a year by legal problems. The BMW Oracle team based in San Francisco believes Alinghi has acted unfairly in the way it has drawn up rules for the next cup races. The team is waiting on an appeal ruling from a New York court. Swiss-owned Alinghi has invited teams from across the world to help it plan for an America's Cup in 2010. On Thursday they united to ask BMW Oracle to join them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hot-button social issues highlight state ballots
Topics |
2008/10/29 02:42
|
Social issues so volatile that the presidential campaigns sidestepped them will be on the ballots in several states next week, including measures that would criminalize most abortions, outlaw affirmative action and ban same-sex marriage in California, one of only three states that allows it. In all, there are 153 proposals on ballots in 36 states. In Washington, voters will decide whether to join Oregon as the only states offering terminally ill people the option of physician-assisted suicide. Massachusetts has three distinctive measures on its ballot — to ban dog racing, ease marijuana laws and scrap the state income tax, a step that could unleash budgetary tumult. The main presidential rivals, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain, have rarely made proactive comments during the campaign about same-sex marriage or affirmative action — issues on which the public is deeply divided. Abortion also has seemed like an uncomfortable topic for them at times, although Obama makes clear he supports abortion rights and McCain says he would like to ban most abortions. But in a half-dozen states, these three issues are front and center. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Attorney Need Not Deliver Subpoenaed Transcript
Topics |
2008/08/28 14:17
|
An attorney does not have to turn over the transcript of an interview with a son of his client, despite a grand jury subpoena, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled unanimously.
In a 6-0 decision, the state's high court ruled that the jury failed to show substantial need to have the transcript turned over and that the transcript is a product of attorney-client privilege.
The attorney, John Rogers, was representing a client who was a person of interest in the disappearance of the client's son. The client claimed his vehicle was stolen from a parking lot while his son, a 10-year-old with disabilities, was inside. The vehicle was later found, but the child's whereabouts remain a mystery. Rogers took the statement from his client's older son, while representing the client.
After receiving the subpoena, Rogers filed a motion to quash because he claimed it was an attorney work product and that it would be unreasonable and oppressive to release it.
The circuit court found that the transcript was not an attorney work product because it did not contain the attorney's opinions, theories or conclusions.
Because Missouri defines work product in criminal procedure only in regard to the attorney's opinions, theories or conclusions, the Missouri Supreme Court found that because grand jury proceedings do not take place before an indictment is filed, the discovery rules for criminal proceedings do not apply. "Historically, a lawyer is an officer of the court and is bound to work for the advancement of justice while faithfully protecting the rightful interests of his clients," Judge Patricia Breckenridge wrote. "In performing his various duties, however, it is essential that a lawyer work with a certain degree of privacy, free from unnecessary intrusion by opposing parties and their counsel. Proper preparation of a client's case demands that he assemble information, sift what he considers to be the relevant from the irrelevant facts, prepare his legal theories and plan his strategy without undue and needless interference. ... Were such materials open to opposing counsel on mere demand, much of what is now put down in writing would remain unwritten. An attorney's thoughts, heretofore inviolate, would not be his own. Inefficiency, unfairness and sharp practices would inevitably develop in the giving of legal advice and in the preparation of cases for trial. The effect on the legal profession would be demoralizing. And the interests of the clients and the cause of justice would be poorly served."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Citibank Stole From 53,000 Customers
Topics |
2008/08/27 18:24
|
Citibank agreed Tuesday to repay $14 million taken from 53,000 customer credit accounts, plus interest and penalties, after after a three-year investigation by the California Attorney General's office revealed the bank's policy of clearing positive balances off customer credit accounts.
Citibank used a computerized process between 1992 and 2003, which automatically and immediately erased positive balances from credit-card accounts. The Attorney General's office quotes a bank executive saying, "Stealing from our customers is a business decision, not a legal decision."
Underscoring the intentional nature of the bank's actions, the Attorney General said an insider at Citibank reported the credit sweeps to an internal audit team in 2001, and was first ignored and then fired.
The investigation took three years to complete because the state investigators had to overcome legal trench warfare from Citibank which resisted subpoenas from the state to third parties who had information about the theft, said a spokesman for the Attorney General.
"The company knowingly stole from its customers, mostly poor people and the recently deceased when it... implemented the sweeps," said California Attorney General Jerry Brown Jr.
Positive balances happen when a customer over-pays, or when a customer returns a purchase for credit. A spokesman for Brown's office, Dana Simas, said the poor and the dead tend to be less financially organized, which accounts for their increased exposure to Citibank's credit sweeps.
$1.6 million was swiped from Californians alone.
Citibank was represented in the matter by Julia Strickland and Julie Nelson with the Stroock law firm.
The settlement calls on Citibank to refund the victims for the amount stolen, along with a 10% interest. It also imposes a $3.5 million fine to be paid to California, and prevents Citibank from re-initiating the credit sweeps.
Once Citibank has complied, an independent auditor will ensure that Citibank has fulfilled its requirements.
The state's investigation was led by Frederick Acker. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Lawyer & Law Firm Websites |
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
