Law Firm News

---

Law Firm News

Firm Name

News Title

News

News Date

25383 matches |  960-966 displayed

1  136 137 138 139 140  3627

---

Karr Tuttle Campbell

Karr Tuttle Campbell Wins Unanimous Supreme Court Ruling
"In a unanimous decision filed on August 9, the Washington Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals (Division One) and affirmed summary judgment on behalf of Todd Shipyards Corporation in a case brought by a former shipyard worker who contracted a fatal cancer after allegedly being exposed to asbestos.

The plaintiff, Roger Herring, had sued Todd (among other defendants) in 2003 alleging that Todd was responsible for his exposure to asbestos. Mr. Herring had filed a similar lawsuit in 1989, in which Todd was not named as a defendant, stating that he had been diagnosed with an asbestos-related disease in 1986. It was that lawsuit and the allegations contained in it that eventually led to dismissal of Mr. Herring's (and, later, his estate's) claims against Todd in the 2003 action.

After Mr. Herring's 1986 diagnosis, Todd filed a voluntary petition for Chapter 11 reorganization in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey. Creditors were required to file proofs of claims in Todd's bankruptcy by June 6, 1988. As ordered by the bankruptcy court, Todd published notice of its bankruptcy on March 16, 1988, and sent notice of the bankruptcy to its known creditors. Claims of creditors who received effective notice were discharged by the bankruptcy court when Todd emerged from bankruptcy in 1990

The issue presented to the Supreme Court was whether Mr. Herring had received sufficient notice of Todd's bankruptcy via the notices published in local and national newspapers and, thus, whether his claim had been discharged, effectively barring his lawsuit against Todd. As held by the Court, ""It [was] undisputed that because Herring was diagnosed with pleural thickening in 1986, his claim against Todd accrued before the bankruptcy bar date and was potentially dischargeable."" Mr. Herring's counsel argued that Todd had not made the requisite ""diligent efforts"" to identify and notify potential creditors before publishing notice of its bankruptcy and, therefore, should have made further effort to do so, including -- specifically -- providing actual notice to Mr. Herring's union, which was not a creditor in Todd's bankruptcy. Todd successfully argued that it had complied with its notice duties under federal law because neither Mr. Herring nor his claim were known to it at the time of its bankruptcy and that the union, as a non-creditor, was not entitled to any notice of Todd's bankruptcy. The Court held:

"[B]ecause it is undisputed that Todd did not have knowledge of Herring's claim, Todd could not have given actual notice to Herring. Herring argues that notice should have been given to his union. It certainly would have been desirable for the bankruptcy court to have required such notice, or for Todd to have taken the extra step and given notice to Herring's union. But, under current federal case law, it appears to us that Todd had no duty to inform Herring's union. It was not any sort of creditor. Nor do we find support for the theory that notice to Herring's union would have acted as a constitutionally sufficient conduit to provide notice to Herring if he was in fact a known creditor. The record reflects that the most the union would have done would have been to publish notice of Todd's bankruptcy in union publications or at union meetings. The union would, at best, have provided publication notice to Herring. Notice to Herring's union would not have been actual notice to Herring, nor would such notice satisfy due process had Herring been a known creditor. ... Herring was unknown to Todd, and notice to the union would not be actual notice to Herring.... We conclude that Herring was only entitled to notice by publication. Accordingly, we reverse the Court of Appeals[.]"

08-31-2007

---

Hahn & Hessen, LLP

Firm Closes $500 Million Cross Border Syndicated Facility
H&H's Business Finance Group represented the agent's in connection with a $500 Million senior secured cross border syndicated credit facility structured and agented by one of the country's largest diversified financial institutions and provided to a major global participant in the wireless industry. Partners Steve Seif and Dan Krauss, Counsel Mark Cohen and Associate Emily Fishman handled the matter

08-31-2007

---

Gordon & Rees, LLP

Gordon & Rees Health Care Group in Expansion Mode
Gordon & Ress LLP now serves its health care clients in six states having recently added partners Tom Quinn and John Palmeri to the Denver office. The Health Care Group at Gordon & Rees offers a comprehensive range of legal services on behalf of the health care profession including the defense of professional negligence claims, business transactions, and corporate structure and employment law. The professional liability team has a proven track record in defending medical malpractice, elder abuse and class action lawsuits, unfair business practices, and staffing claims as well as regulatory compliance and licensure matters, including matters specific to the False Claims Act and Qui Tam actions. We have expertise in employment counseling, employee termination and discipline, discrimination and harassment claims, wage and hour issues, development and review of employee handbooks, and ERISA claims. Our attorneys are also well versed in all aspects of business matters specific to the health care industry such as entity formation and dissolution, facility purchases, and sales and leases.

08-31-2007

---

Goodkind, Labaton, Rudoff & Sucharow, L.L.P.

Labaton Sucharow LLP Files Class Action Lawsuit Against Countrywide Financial Corporation Extending The Class Period
Labaton Sucharow LLP filed a class action lawsuit on August 31, 2007 in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, on behalf of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of Countrywide Financial Corporation (“Countrywide” or the “Company”) (NYSE: CFC) between April 24, 2004 and August 9, 2007, inclusive, (the “Class Period”). The lawsuit was filed against Countrywide and Angelo R. Mozilo, David Sambol, Eric P. Sieracki and Stanford L. Kurland (“Defendants”).

If you are a member of this class you can view a copy of the complaint online at http://www.labaton.com/get/?case=.

The complaint alleges that Defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. Specifically, the complaint alleges that Defendants misled investors by falsely representing that Countrywide had strict and selective underwriting and loan origination practices, ample liquidity that would not be jeopardized by negative changes in the credit markets, and a conservative approach that set it apart from other lenders. Additionally, the complaint alleges that Countrywide also improperly inflated its reported income by understating its loan loss reserves in SEC filings.

On July 24, 2007, Countrywide announced that it was taking a $417 million impairment charge and would add $292.9 million to its loan loss reserves, and noted defaults were increasing in the prime market. In reaction to this news, shares of Countrywide fell 10.5% to close at $30.50 per share. Then on August 9, 2007, the Company warned of potential short-term liquidity issues. Shares reacted negatively to the news, falling $1.00 per share to close at $27.86 per share.

If you bought Countrywide securities between April 24, 2004 and August 9, 2007, inclusive, you may qualify to serve as Lead Plaintiff. Lead Plaintiff papers must be filed with the court no later than October 15, 2007.

08-31-2007

---

Gallagher & Kennedy, P.A.

G&K Adds Of Counsel to Environmental Practice
Phoenix-based Gallagher & Kennedy, P.A., a full service business law firm, today announced the addition of Thomas C.H. Mills as of counsel in the firm’s environmental and natural resources practice. Mr. Mills will be based in the firm’s office in Santa Fe, N.M.

Mr. Mills will specialize in natural resources law, governmental relations, real estate law, land use law and general business law at the firm. Mr. Mills’ extensive legal background includes creating coalitions to advance legislative initiatives, drafting legislation and advocating its passage, obtaining entitlements for real estate projects, handling complex real estate transactions and administrative proceedings.

Prior to joining Gallagher & Kennedy, Mr. Mills was appointed by New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson in 2002 to serve first as deputy secretary of the Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department and then as general counsel for both the Departments of Economic Development and Tourism. He was also a shareholder in the Santa Fe law firm of Potter & Mills, P.A. for 16 years, where some of his representative clients included Unifirst Corporation, Catellus Development Corporation, the Eldorado Hotel and the City of Santa Fe.

Mr. Mills’ experience also includes serving as general counsel for the New Mexico Energy and Minerals Department where he helped to develop new mine safety regulations, represented the State Mine Inspector in mine fatality hearings and served as legal counsel to the then Energy Research and Development Institute. In this position, Mr. Mills developed and negotiated legal documentation with the New Mexico banks for the “first ever” solar power program.

A member of the State Bar of New Mexico, Mr. Mills completed his juris doctor in 1976 from the University of California Hastings College of the Law and bachelor’s degree in political science in 1972 from Stanford University.

08-31-2007

---

Elliott Greenleaf & Balaban

EG&S WINS SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR BOROUGH AND ITS POLICE CHIEF
EG&S won summary judgment for the Borough of Hughestown and its police chief on August 9, 2007 when the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania granted the firm’s Motion for Summary Judgment, finding that EG&S had established that the Plaintiff suffered no constitutional violation. Golya v. Borough of Hughestown, (M.D. Pa 2007).

In this constitutional tort case, theft charges were dismissed by a state District Justice who found a lack of a prima facie case against the Plaintiff, who then filed a Federal Civil Rights Action against the Borough and its police chief for allegedly reporting the theft charges without probable cause. EG&S successfully argued that the Plaintiff was not “seized”, which is an element of a Fourth Amendment malicious prosecution claim. Specifically, while the Plaintiff had to appear at pre-trial criminal proceedings, he was not required to post bond, he was not formally arrested, and he was not placed on “onerous” travel restrictions. The District Court found EG&S’s argument persuasive, entered summary judgment against the Plaintiff, and dismissed the claims against EG&S’s clients.

John G. Dean and Joel M. Wolff of the firm’s Scranton office represented the Borough and its police chief.

08-31-2007

---

Woodcock Washburn LLP

Jeffrey Rosedale of Woodcock Washburn Elected VP/Program Chair of Benjamin Franklin American Inn of Court
The national intellectual property law firm Woodcock Washburn LLP is pleased to announce that Jeffrey H. Rosedale has been elected as Vice President/Program Chair of the Benjamin Franklin American Inn of Court for 2007-2008. He assumes office Sept. 1, 2007.

Rosedale concentrates his practice on helping high technology clients develop, protect and profit from their intellectual property and is a member of the Firm's nanotechnology practice group.

08-31-2007

---

25383 matches |  960-966 displayed

1  136 137 138 139 140  3627