|
|
|
Business
[06/11]
Rude traveling salespeople evicted from Minn. hotel
[07/02]
Fugitive hedge-fund swindler surrenders in Mass.
More...
Financial Services
[07/03]
Hedge fund scammer tells NY judge he tried suicide
[07/03]
Indiana hopes low-interest loans will help farmers
More...
Litigation
[07/03]
Continental ordered to trial in Concorde explosion
[07/03]
Florida Supreme Court nixes Indian casino pact
More...
Securities
[07/02]
Circuit City shares fall as Blockbuster yanks bid
[07/02]
Microsoft and Yahoo rise on deal talks report
More...
Mergers and Acquisitions
[07/02]
EU clears Nokia to buy mapmaker Navteq
[07/02]
Circuit City shares fall as Blockbuster yanks bid
More...
Case Summaries
Banking Law
[07/03]
Gen. Elec. Capital Corp. v. Future Media Prods., Inc.
In an appeal brought by an oversecured creditor in a bankruptcy matter, an order denying the creditor default interest and attorney's fees is reversed and remanded where: 1) the bankruptcy court improperly applied the circuit court's rule from In re Entz-White Lumber and Supply, Inc., 850 F.2d 1338 (9th Cir. 1988), to the facts of this case; and 2) the bankruptcy court should apply a presumption of allowability for the contracted for default rate, "provided that the rate is not unenforceable under applicable non-bankruptcy law."
[07/02]
Cavin v. Home Loan Ctr., Inc.
In a suit involving a mailer sent by defendant announcing its mortgage program and claiming that defendant violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by failing to present plaintiffs' with a firm offer of credit, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) the letter at issue presented a firm offer of credit, despite the absence of some material terms and the minimal number of consumers who obtained the loan; and 2) thus, defendant did not violate the FCRA.
More...
Commercial Law
[07/02]
Deckers Corp. v. US
In a suit contesting the proper classification of three styles of sports sandals under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, a decision holding that the merchandise was properly classified under subheading 6404.19.35 is affirmed where the sandals at issue have open toes and open heels, and lack the features of the named exemplars of 6406.11.80, and thus the imported goods are not classifiable under that subheading notwithstanding their claimed status as athletic footwear.
[07/02]
Cavin v. Home Loan Ctr., Inc.
In a suit involving a mailer sent by defendant announcing its mortgage program and claiming that defendant violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by failing to present plaintiffs' with a firm offer of credit, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) the letter at issue presented a firm offer of credit, despite the absence of some material terms and the minimal number of consumers who obtained the loan; and 2) thus, defendant did not violate the FCRA.
More...
Securities Law
[07/01]
Donell v. Kowell
In a suit arising to recover gains made by defendant, an innocent investor, from a Ponzi scheme, a judgment requiring him to disgorge his profits as fraudulent transfers under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act is affirmed where the circuit court: 1) adopted the largely uniform analysis used for applying the UFTA to allow recovery from investors in a Ponzi scheme, and describes a two-step process for determining the existence and amount of liability; 2) found there was no error in the district court's application of such analysis; 3) rejected arguments that courts should not be allowed to require innocent investors to disgorge net profits; and 4) declined to permit good faith investors to claim offsets for taxes or other expenses paid in connection with receipt and management of income from a Ponzi scheme.
[07/01]
JPMorgan Chase & Co. v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue
In a case involving the taxation of JPMorgan's income from swap transactions, a ruling that certain income deferrals it attempted were not proper and that JPMorgan's valuation methodology did not clearly reflect income, is affirmed where there was no error in a tax court's acceptance of the Commissioner's computations regarding the amounts of certain carve-outs.
More...
Workers' Comp
[07/03]
State Comp. Ins. Fund v. WCAB
The California Supreme Court finds that the Legislature intended to require employers to conduct utilization review when considering requests for medical treatment, and employers may not use Labor Code section 4062 as an alternative method for disputing employees' treatment requests.
[07/03]
BNSF Ry. Co. v. Swanson
Provisions of Minnesota Statute sections 609.849(a)(1) and (a)(2), governing a railroad's treatment of injured workers, are both preempted by the Internal Control Plans regulations adopted by the Federal Railroad Administration pursuant to the Federal Railroad Safety Act.
More...
|
|
|
