|
|
|
State Supreme Court rules on illegal taxes
Legal Business |
2011/08/01 09:04
|
The state Supreme Court made it easier this week for California taxpayers to seek refunds from cities and counties, ruling that a claim of an illegal local tax can be pursued as a class action on behalf of everyone who was overcharged.
The unanimous decision Monday in a Los Angeles case overturned lower-court rulings requiring local taxpayers to file individual refund claims.
In a class action, a representative can win damages that are distributed to an entire group of people affected by the same unlawful action. Class-action status often determines whether a tax can be effectively challenged, said Paul Heidenreich, a lawyer for consumer organizations in the case.
When only one person can sue at a time, there's little incentive to do so with small amounts at stake, he said.
The ruling may not affect San Francisco, however. Deputy City Attorney Peter Keith said the city has ordinances that set rules for tax refund claims and prohibit class actions. He said the court allowed class-wide suits only when a city or county has no laws of its own regulating tax refunds.
Francis Gregorek, lawyer for the plaintiff in the Los Angeles case, said a future ruling may be needed to determine whether a city can shield itself from class actions.
Class actions have become a hotly contested legal battleground. The U.S. Supreme Court restricted their use in two California cases earlier this year, refusing to allow as many as 1.5 million women to sue Wal-Mart Stores Inc. as a group over pay and promotion practices, and rejecting class-wide arbitration of a cell phone customer's overcharge claim against ATamp;T.
Gregorek's client, Estuardo Ardon, sued Los Angeles in 2006, claiming that a city telephone tax was illegal because it was linked to a federal excise tax that had been ruled invalid. Gregorek said the suit seeks millions of dollars in refunds for all phone customers in the city and has led to challenges against similar taxes in other communities.
The case has remained on hold while state courts determined whether Ardon can represent other customers. An appellate court said he could sue only as an individual, citing the state Supreme Court's 1992 ruling that rejected class-action status for a challenge to the state's taxes on vehicles bought by Californians in other states. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
DeMocker defense says former lawyer will keep mum
Legal Career News |
2011/08/01 07:03
|
Lawyers for a Prescott stockbroker facing a murder retrial say they won't allow his former defense attorney to give a deposition in the case.
John Sears is one of two attorneys who quit Steven DeMocker's case in October, citing a conflict of interest. The move triggered a mistrial in November.
Deputy Yavapai County Attorney Jeffrey Paupore filed a motion last week that Sears be deposed as a material witness.
But DeMocker's current lawyer says any communications between Sears and DeMocker remains confidential and privileged.
The 56-year-old DeMocker is accused of killing his ex-wife, Carol Kennedy, with a golf club in July 2008 to avoid paying hefty alimony bills. He faces a life sentence if convicted. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Rosen Law Firm Announces Class Action Lawsuit Against JBI, Inc.
Press Release |
2011/08/01 04:04
|
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. announces that a class action lawsuit for violations of the federal securities laws has been filed against JBI, Inc. /quotes/zigman/573088 JBII +5.11% based on allegations that the company issued materially misleading financial statements to the investing public. If you purchased JBI stock during the period from August 28, 2009 to July 20, 2011 you can join the class action and seek to recover your investment losses.
To join the JBI class action, visit the firm's website at http://www.rosenlegal.com , or call Jonathan Horne, Esq., toll-free, at 866-767-3653; you may also email jhorne@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action. The case is pending the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada.
NO CLASS HAS YET BEEN CERTIFIED IN THE ABOVE ACTION. UNTIL A CLASS IS CERTIFIED, YOU ARE NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL UNLESS YOU RETAIN ONE. YOU MAY CHOOSE TO DO NOTHING AT THIS POINT AND REMAIN AN ABSENT CLASS MEMBER.
The Complaint alleges that JBI materially overstated its income in connection with its acquisition of JavaCo, Inc. in 2009. As part of the transaction JBI exchanged 1 million shares of its stock for $9,997,134 worth of media credits. The Complaint alleges that JBI's financial statements were false and misleading because (1) the media credits acquired by the Company in connection with the acquisition of JavaCo were substantially overvalued; (2) that the Company was improperly accounting for acquisitions; (3) that, as such, the Company's financial results were not prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP); (4) that the Company lacked adequate internal and financial controls; and (5) that, as a result of the above, the Company's financial statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
On May 21, 2010, JBI disclosed that its previously issued financial statements for the 2009 fiscal year and third quarter should no longer be relied upon. On July 14, 2011, the Securities and Exchange Commission advised the Company that it was recommending enforcement action against it and possibly one or more of its former officers in connection with the Company's issuing materially inaccurate financial statements.
News that JBI was required to restate its financial statements and was subject to an SEC enforcement action for violation of the federal securities laws has caused its stock price to drop substantially, damaging investors.
You may participate in the securities class action lawsuit to recover your investment losses. If you purchased JBI stock, please visit the website at http://rosenlegal.com to participate in the class action and to obtain more information. You may also contact Laurence Rosen or Phillip Kim of The Rosen Law Firm toll free at 866-767-3653 or via e-mail at or lrosen@rosenlegal.com or pkim@rosenlegal.com.
The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court upholds Chinese journalist's jail sentence
Legal World News |
2011/08/01 01:03
|
The lawyer for a Chinese journalist behind bars after writing about suspected corruption says a court has rejected an appeal against a new sentence ordered just before the reporter was to be released.
Beijing attorney Wang Quanzhang says he received on Monday the decision on the case of reporter Qi Chonghuai by a court in Shandong province.
Wang says the case sets a dangerous precedent because Qi was being tried a second time in June on similar charges to those which he faced in 2008. Qi was near the end of a four-year jail term when the second trial resulted in another eight years' imprisonment.
Rights groups say Qi was arrested in 2007 after he wrote about a local official who had beaten a woman for coming late to work. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
NJ court rules against son in Plain estate dispute
Headline Legal News |
2011/07/26 09:02
|
A New Jersey court has ruled against the son of Belva Plain in a dispute over the late author's estate.
John Plain had claimed his mother, the bestselling author of more than 20 novels, and sisters had schemed to cut him out of her will.
Attorneys for Belva Plain's estate argued that her son had signed an agreement in the 1990s vowing not to contest her will.
Friday's decision in state Superior Court in Essex County dismissed John Plain's claim. Plain's lawyer said he was reviewing the decision.
Belva Plain began writing her novels after raising her children and becoming a grandmother. When she died in her sleep last fall at her home in New Jersey at age 95, more than 28 million copies of her books were in print. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
