Utah's Supreme Court has rejected a petition from members of a southern Utah-based polygamous sect seeking a reversal of changes made to its communal land trust.

In a ruling issued Friday, justices say members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints waited too long to challenge the state's intervention in the United Effort Plan Trust.

Valued at $110 million, the trust holds the property in Hildale, Utah and Colorado City, Ariz., the twin border towns where most church members live.

Utah seized the trust in 2005 after allegations of mismanagement by church leaders. A court-appointed accountant has since converted the trust into a secular entity.

FLDS members consider state control of the UEP a violation of their religious rights.

Law firm Shapiro & Fishman has accused Attorney General Bill McCollum of pre-election grandstanding and “abuse of power” in connection with McCollum’s recent announcement that his office is conducting a foreclosure fraud investigation into that firm and two others.

The allegations are in response to a coordinated investigation announced by McCollum during an Aug. 10 press conference. McCollum said his office is looking at whether the three South Florida firms engaged in unfair and deceptive actions in their handling of foreclosure cases.

The other firms were the Law Offices of Marshall C. Watson in Fort Lauderdale and the Law Offices of David J. Stern, P.A. in Plantation.

The firm’s response came Friday in a motion to quash a subpoena in Palm Beach County Circuit Court.

Armstrong Teasdale LLP announces the arrival of associates Irina Sandler, Lauren Ashley Smith, and Adam R. Wuller.

“The subtle shift in the economy has brought about additional business and afforded us the opportunity to add talent,” said Michael A. Chivell, Armstrong Teasdale’s managing partner. “As we position Armstrong Teasdale as a premier firm in this region, we’ll continue to place a premium on attracting exceptional attorneys in key practice areas.”

Former legal counsel at the affiliate of Emerson Electric in Moscow, Irina Sandler joins the firm’s International practice group and will focus on international trade, import and export controls, Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and antitrust compliance. She earned her LL.M. in Intellectual Property and Technology Law from Washington University School of Law, was an Edmund S. Muskie Graduate Program Fellow at the University of Illinois College of Law, and received her Degree in Law from Russian Law Academy of the Russian Ministry of Justice.

Lauren Ashley Smith, a recent law school graduate, is a member of the firm’s Public Finance and Real Estate, and Financial Services practice groups. Drawing on her research and scholarship in land use, and state and local government law, she will focus on public/private real estate development and municipal finance. Additionally, Smith will assist lenders and other creditors seeking to maximize their recovery against debtors in litigation, liquidation, reorganization, and bankruptcy including all aspects of post-judgment collection efforts. She earned her J.D. from Washington University School of Law and her B.A. from Marquette University.

Adam R. Wuller, also a recent graduate, is a registered patent attorney with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and joins the firm’s Intellectual Property practice group. The majority of his work will involve the preparation and prosecution of U.S. and foreign patent applications in a wide range of technical disciplines, including mechanical and medical devices. Wuller received his J.D. from Saint Louis University School of Law and his B.S. in engineering physics from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

The law firm of Brodsky & Odeh, the legal practice behind several of Chicago's biggest cases, is splitting up, partners Reem Odeh and Joel A. Brodsky jointly announced today.

"We have grown in different directions and our expertise is now in very different areas of law," says Brodsky. "After some soul searching and discussion it became obvious to both of us that it simply makes more sense to be in separate law firms."

Odeh, who teamed with Brodsky six years ago, says she is looking forward to forging ahead with developing her own practice.

"I learned a lot from practicing criminal law with Joel over the last six years, and now it is time for me to develop my own identity as an attorney," says Odeh.

Brodsky and Odeh are probably best known for their representation of former Bolingbrook police officer Drew Peterson.

Reem says that despite the breakup of the firm, she will remain a part of Peterson's defense team.

Robbins Umeda LLP has commenced an investigation into possible breaches of fiduciary duty and other violations of state law by members of the Board of Directors ("Board") of McAfee, Inc. ("McAfee" or the "Company") (NYSE: MFE) in connection with their efforts to sell McAfee to Intel Corporation ("Intel") (NASDAQ: INTC). If the transaction is completed, McAfee shareholders will receive $48.00 in cash for each share of McAfee common stock they hold.

Robbins Umeda LLP's investigation concerns whether the McAfee Board undertook a fair process to obtain fair consideration for all shareholders of McAfee. Specifically, our investigation concerns whether the Company's Board breached their fiduciary duties to McAfee shareholders by failing to adequately shop the Company before entering into the transaction with Intel. At least one analyst had a price target for the Company at $50 per share. Additionally, under the terms of the agreement, McAfee must pay Intel a $230 million termination fee if McAfee accepts a superior offer to the Intel offer.

If you are a shareholder of McAfee, plan to continue to hold your shares, and would like more information about your rights as a shareholder, please contact attorney Gregory E. Del Gaizo at 800-350-6003 or by e-mail at info@robbinsumeda.com.

Robbins Umeda LLP is a California-based law firm with significant experience representing investors in merger-related shareholder class actions, shareholder derivative actions, and securities fraud class actions. For more information about the firm, please go to http://www.robbinsumeda.com.

For more than 20 years, William S. Lerach was the most feared lawyer in America. He and his former firm, Milberg Weiss, were Jedi masters of security law, targeting Fortune 500 companies for corporate fraud and recovering a staggering $45 billion in judgments.

Tough and relentless, plaintiffs saw him as a savior, successfully suing WorldCom, Tyco, Disney,Merrill Lynch and Enron, among others. Lerach brought down high-flying CEOs and companies that routinely cooked the books to keep executives rich and shareholders broke. Famous for his class-action suits and novel legal tactics, he was the scourge of big business, forcing many companies, terrified of being “Lerached,” to settle out of court rather than fight.

In January 2008, he pleaded guilty to conspiracy to obstruct justice, admitting he paid a few regular plaintiffs millions in kickbacks to instigate cases that netted the firm some $200 million over two decades. (No plaintiff can benefit more than others in class-action suits.) He was fined nearly $8 million and sentenced to two years in prison.  He was just released in March 2010.
Lerach was famous for tracking stock prices — charting fluctuations against optimistic statements and insider selling — before a stock crashed. If company chiefs cashed in while investors lost their savings, Lerach smelled blood. If public investments were fueled by false claims, the charge was “fraud on the market.” Plus, any investment bank and Big 8 accounting firm that aided and abetted the principles were charged as secondary participants, unleashing a legal juggernaut.

Bill talks about himself,   the legal profession, and  his contributions on behalf of investors everywhere.
If there was ever a modern Greek tragedy about a man and his times, about corporate arrogance and illusions and the scorched-earth tactics to not only counteract corporate America but to beat it at its own game, Bill Lerach's story is it. 

attorney web site design

http://www.legalnewsbrief.blogspot.com

http://www.lawfirmmarketingnews.blogspot.com

http://metrolinkcomesclean.blogspot.com/

http://metrolinkclassaction.blogspot.com/

Nobody disputes that driving under the influence of alcohol is dangerous. In fact, it's one of the most deadly crimes. You won't get any serious arguments from anybody that people should be allowed to drive while impaired. Nobody would dispute that you are far more likely to die at the hands of a DUI driver than at the hands of a serial killer or by gang violence.

The dispute is not about the problem of impaired driving, but rather about what to do about it. Every year, many states increase the jail time, fines and other penalties for DUI offenders. There is little evidence that increased punishment deters impaired driving. In fact, there's no conclusive evidence that suggests that the average would-be drunk driver even considers the penalties before turning on the ignition and hitting the road.

Most state lawmakers increase the penalties because it is politically popular to do so, and it’s the only thing they can think of doing. In most states, the average DUI convict spends no more than a day or two in jail for a first offense, and no longer than a year for a third offense. After that, the states have a tremendous range.

It seems for most offenders, a first, second or third DUI arrest is the wake-up call they need, and very few people get caught more than three times in their lifetime. In states such as Washington that have systems that treat and educate for alcohol and drug issues, there is a ray of hope that recidivism may be reduced. In states such as Arizona, where the focus is on punishment rather than treatment, DWI convictions often do little for a would-be repeat offender than take them off the road temprarily while they are incarcerated.

- attorney webdesign
- law firm website design
- lawyer web designers
- attorney web design