Law Firm News

---

Law Firm News

Firm Name

News Title

News

News Date

25383 matches |  4194-4200 displayed

1  596 597 598 599 600  3627

---

Haynes & Boone, LLP

Arthur A. Howard Joins Haynes and Boone Houston Office
Arthur A. Howard, an attorney who blends a wide business management background with extensive legal experience, has accepted an of counsel position with the Haynes and Boone, LLP Houston office.

Mr. Howard’s diverse background in the business world has involved counseling organizations ranging from start-up ventures to industry leaders, including companies in highly regulated industries. His practice centers on corporate, securities, finance, mergers, acquisitions, business transactions and advisory services.

In the years following graduation from the University of Arkansas School of Law in 1990, Mr. Howard has served as chief executive officer, president, chief operating officer, general counsel and director in the manufacturing, construction, investment advisory, pension consulting and financial services industries.

He has also been an advisor to boards of directors and executive management on day-to-day management issues, strategic development, structuring routine business transactions and complex mergers and acquisitions, banking, finance, securities offerings, joint ventures and real estate transactions in both domestic and international transactions.

Mr. Howard earned his B.S. at Northeastern State University in Tahlequah, OK, in 1987. He is a member of the Houston, Texas and American Bar associations and is currently the advisory board chairman for the Mickey Mantle Museum Trust.

Haynes and Boone's Houston office, opened in 1990, is the firm’s second-largest with 111 attorneys, including a past president of the State Bar of Texas, a former U.S. attorney and a former deputy assistant attorney general for the antitrust division of the U.S. Department of Justice. The Houston office boasts a diverse group of clients, including some of the world’s largest companies in the energy and banking industries.

06-21-2007

---

Masuda Funai

Nancy E. Sasamoto Inducted into the Litigation Counsel of America
Chicago attorney Nancy E. Sasamoto, of Masuda, Funai, Eifert & Mitchell Ltd., was inducted into the Litigation Counsel of America at the LCA's Spring Conference and Induction of Fellows in New York.

The Litigation Counsel of America is a trial lawyer honorary society composed of less than one-half of one percent of American lawyers. Fellowship in the LCA is highly selective and by invitation only. Fellows are selected based upon effectiveness and accomplishment in litigation, both at the trial and appellate levels, and superior ethical reputation. The LCA is aggressively diverse in its composition. Established as a trial and appellate lawyer honorary society reflecting the American bar in the twenty-first century, the LCA represents the best in law among its membership.

06-21-2007

---

Patton Boggs LLP

Patton Boggs LLP Receives Numerous Top Rankings in Chambers USA Survey
Patton Boggs LLP is pleased to announce that a number of partners and practice areas have been recognized in the 2007 edition of Chambers USA. This well-respected survey ranks the nation’s top firms and attorneys who are considered leaders in their field.

Chambers USA singled out several of the firm’s practice groups for recognition, including:

· A Number 1 ranking in Government: Government Relations (National)

· Number 2 rankings in Environment, Natural Resources & Regulated Industries (Alaska); Government: Political Law (National); Litigation: General Commercial (Alaska); and Native American Law (National)

· Number 3 rankings in Food & Beverages (National) and Litigation: General Commercial (New Jersey)

A number of the firm’s partners were listed in the individual rankings, including:

· Firm Chairman Thomas Hale Boggs Jr., ranked # 1 in Government: Government Relations (National)

· Firm Managing Partner Stuart M. Pape, ranked # 1 in Food & Beverages (National)

· Benjamin L. Ginsberg, ranked #1 in Government: Political Law (National)

· Douglas J. Serdahely, ranked #2 in Environment, Natural Resources & Regulated Industries (Alaska); and ranked # 2 in Litigation: General Commercial (Alaska)

· Greater New York Metropolitan Area Managing Partner James E. Tyrrell, ranked # 2 in Litigation: Products Liability (New Jersey)

Chambers’ methodology is based on interviewing a vast range of lawyers and their clients (i.e. commercial users of legal services). Greater weighting is given to the views of the clients. All interviews are conducted purely for research purposes and are entirely confidential and un-attributed.

According to Chambers, for the current U.S. directory, more than 14,000 of these interviews were conducted throughout the United States by over 40 full-time researchers during a six-month period.

06-21-2007

---

Merchant & Gould P.C.

Allen W. Hinderaker Inducted into the Litigation Counsel of America
Minneapolis attorney Allen W. Hinderaker , of Merchant & Gould, P.C., was inducted into the Litigation Counsel of America at the LCA's Spring Conference and Induction of Fellows in New York.

Litigation is the exclusive focus of Allen's practice, representing clients in court, before administrative tribunals, and in private arbitration. Allen is privileged to work with clients on important matters, and understands that case strategies, tactics and outcomes must align with business objectives: the litigation and the management of the litigation must serve the client's business requirements. Allen's litigation practice is limited to patent infringement, trademark and trade dress infringement, including contested cases before the TTAB, commercial contract and licensing disputes, trade secret misappropriation and claims of unfair competition. Allen is currently the Chair of Merchant & Gould's litigation practice group.

The Litigation Counsel of America is a trial lawyer honorary society composed of less than one-half of one percent of American lawyers. Fellowship in the LCA is highly selective and by invitation only. Fellows are selected based upon effectiveness and accomplishment in litigation, both at the trial and appellate levels, and superior ethical reputation. The LCA is aggressively diverse in its composition. Established as a trial and appellate lawyer honorary society reflecting the American bar in the twenty-first century, the LCA represents the best in law among its membership.

06-21-2007

---

Hinckley, Allen & Snyder LLP

Pasco Gasbarro, Jr. Elected to World Affairs Council of RI Board
Hinckley, Allen & Snyder LLP is pleased to announce that Pasco Gasbarro, Jr., Partner in the firm’s Corporate & Business law practice, was elected to Chairman of the Board of the World Affairs Council of Rhode Island (WACRI).
WACRI is a non-profit, non-partisan group comprised of Southeastern New England’s leading business and political figures. The council hosts regular meetings with some of the world’s leading experts on world affairs, an international visitors program and a series of special school programs, among other activities.

06-21-2007

---

King & Spalding

King & Spalding Earns $140 Million Arbitration Award For Creditors of Enron and Ponderosa
King & Spalding, a leading international law firm, announced today that its international arbitration team has earned a key victory for creditors of Enron Corporation and Ponderosa Assets, L.P., in their claim against the government of Argentina. King & Spalding won approximately $140 million for its clients, making this award one of the five largest ever granted by the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), an organization of the World Bank Group.

The dispute arose from the passage of Argentina's so-called "Emergency Law" in January 2002, during the height of Argentina's 2001-2002 economic crisis. The law "pesified" (i.e., converted from U.S. dollars to Argentine pesos) and froze all public utility tariffs, including those of Enron’s Argentine gas transportation subsidiary, TGS. The effect of these measures made TGS insolvent by reducing its revenues by nearly two-thirds.

Enron and Ponderosa claimed that the “Emergency Law” measures violated the terms of TGS's license and Argentina's obligations to them under the bilateral investment treaty (BIT) between the United States and Argentina. Argentina defended the measures as justified on the basis of the economic crisis the country faced. The ICSID tribunal accepted Enron's claim and rejected Argentina's defenses, finding that Argentina's measures violated the provisions in the BIT guaranteeing fair and equitable treatment and the observation of all obligations entered into with regard to Enron's investment in TGS.

06-21-2007

---

Hagens, Berman, Sobol & Shapiro, L.L.P.

Judge Rules Against Drug Companies in AWP Case
Today a group of plaintiffs won a major victory in a case involving major drug companies and how they price medication.

The named defendants, AstraZeneca (NYSE: AZN), Schering-Plough (NYSE: SGP) and Bristol-Myers Squib (NYSE: BMY) have engaged in unfair and deceptive trade practices that are in violation of Massachusetts general laws, the ruling states.

The suit, led by attorney Steve W. Berman, managing partner of Seattle-based Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP, targets the companies' practice of inflating the average wholesale prices (AWP) that the companies reported through publications for certain drugs, including costly chemotherapy agents.

Berman said his clients are ecstatic that Judge Saris found that defendants "unfairly and deceptively caused false AWPs to be published knowing that payers and the government did not understand the truth and the severity of the markups."

"We are also grateful that she found the biggest victims were the patients who had to pay these outrageous prices out of pocket as a result of the defendants wrongful conduct," Berman went on to say.

After considering hundreds of documents and the testimony of nearly 40 witnesses, including industry experts, the court ruled that the companies "unscrupulously took advantage" of the AWP reimbursement system "by establishing secret mega-spreads between the fictitious reimbursement price they reported and the actual acquisition costs of doctors and pharmacies."

The ruling affects patients who paid for prescription medication from December 1997 to 2003 and have been reimbursed by Medicare, private insurers and those patients making coinsurance payments based on AWP. Most drugs involved in the case include those for cancer and other serious ailments.

The original filings claim that the defendants' published AWPs are fictitious because they do not reflect the true average sales price. The inflation is decided upon by drug companies to create a spread between the doctor's acquisition costs and the fictitious AWP, the industry benchmark for determining drug pricing. This spread ultimately works to gain market share over a competitor.

"We found this case to be so disturbing because the pharmaceutical companies were running their business to benefit their bottom line, period," said Berman. "Because of the actions of these companies patients who rely on these drugs, often times to save their lives, have been critically injured through the grossly inflated prices."

The ruling lists several of the markups on commonly prescribed drugs and the results are egregious. The most severe culprit being Bristol-Meyers Squibb with an 1131 percent markup on its drug Vepesid. Other companies mark ups range from 28 percent to almost 700.

Today's ruling affects two of the three originally named classes. Third-party payors in Massachusetts that reimburse Medicare beneficiaries for their statutory twenty percent coinsurance are eligible. These individuals fall under Medigap insurance or supplemental insurance.

The second class includes all third-party payors, end-payors, consumers who make coinsurance payments and consumers who have no insurance for these drugs in Massachusetts and pay for the stated drugs based on AWP.

The Massachusetts ruling was a test case with trials for the rest of the states to follow. Berman sees some companies like Astra Zeneca facing exposure in the hundreds of millions.

"We are looking forward to continuing the prosecution of this case against the remaining defendants who perpetrated similar if not identical wrongs against patients and insurers nationwide," said Berman. "We view this ruling as a big win that should serve notice to all defendants that they will be called to account for their wrongdoing."

In 2003 Congress finally took notice of the AWP problem and moved to a reimbursement program that isn't based on AWP, the result was the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act.

06-21-2007

---

25383 matches |  4194-4200 displayed

1  596 597 598 599 600  3627