|
|
|
Dutch Supreme Court: Fortis was mismanaged
Headline News |
2013/12/09 13:28
|
The Netherlands' Supreme Court has upheld rulings that the now-defunct Belgian bank Fortis NV was mismanaged from September 2007 to September 2008, and its then-management board can be held accountable.
Friday's ruling opens the door for investor claims against former CEO Jean-Paul Votron, among others, though not former supervisory Chairman Count Maurice Lippens, whom lower courts found was too far removed from decision making to be held liable.
Fortis, Royal Bank of Scotland and Spain's Santander bought Dutch bank ABN Amro in a hostile takeover in 2007, nominally the largest in banking history.
Fortis agreed to buy ABN's Dutch operations for 24 billion euros in its part of the deal but was unable to finance the buy — which represented around half of its own total size — and eventually spiraled toward bankruptcy. The Dutch state ultimately nationalized all Fortis-ABN operations in the Netherlands in 2008 to avoid a meltdown of the country's financial system. The rescue has cost taxpayers at least 32 billion euros. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
New Calif. court date set for ex-Nevada lawmaker
Legal Focuses |
2013/12/09 13:28
|
A California court date was pushed back again for a former Las Vegas-area lawmaker jailed since a freeway chase and scuffle with police the day he was expelled last March from the Nevada Assembly.
Prosecutor Shannon Faherty said a Friday court date for Steven Brooks was reset to Jan. 10 in San Bernardino County Superior Court in Victorville at his lawyer's request.
Brooks' defense attorney, Sean O'Connor, didn't immediately respond to a message.
Brooks pleaded not guilty Aug. 6 to felony evasion, obstructing an officer and throwing a substance at a police vehicle charges and misdemeanor harming a police animal.
He's being held at the San Bernardino County Jail on $100,000 bail.
The former North Las Vegas Democrat was expelled from the Legislature March 28 as a security threat. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court Won't Hear Appeal Of New York Internet Taxation
Legal Focuses |
2013/12/05 13:36
|
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to consider throwing out New York state's taxes on Internet purchases on websites like Amazon.com, a move that could change the way Internet commerce works.
The high court refused without comment to hear appeals from Amazon.com LLC and Overstock.com Inc., in their fights against a state law that forces them to remit sales tax the same way in-state businesses do.
Web retailers generally have not had to charge sales taxes in states where they lack a store or some other physical presence. But New York and other states say that a retailer has a physical presence when it uses affiliates — people and businesses that refer customers to the retailer's website and collect a commission on sales. These affiliates range from one-person blogs promoting the latest gadgets to companies that run coupon and deal sites.
Amazon and Overstock both use affiliate programs. Amazon has been collecting sales tax in New York as it fights the state over a 2008 law that was the first to consider local affiliates enough of an in-state presence to require sales tax collection. Overstock ended its affiliate program in 2008 after the law passed.
The Supreme Court refusal to hear the websites' appeal likely will prompt more and more states to attempt to collect taxes from website purchases. Around 20 states, including New York, already have similar laws on the books. The National Council of State Legislatures estimated that states lost an estimated $23.3 billion in 2012 from being prohibited from collecting sales tax from online and catalog purchases. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court Declines To Take Liberty University's Obamacare Lawsuit
Headline News |
2013/12/05 13:35
|
The Supreme Court has turned away a Christian university's attempt to overturn a key part of the Obama administration's health care law.
The justices did not comment Monday in leaving in place a federal appeals court ruling dismissing Liberty University's lawsuit.
Liberty made several arguments in challenging the portion of the health care law that requires most employers to provide health insurance to their workers or pay a fine. The 4th U.S. Circuit of Appeals in Richmond, Va., rejected those claims.
The Supreme Court separately is considering whether for-profit corporations can mount religious objections to the law's requirement to include birth control among preventive health benefits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appeals court to take up San Francisco jail suit
Legal Focuses |
2013/12/02 12:33
|
A federal appeals court is set to take up a lawsuit over a former San Francisco sheriff's decision to remove male deputies from female housing units at the county's jail.
San Francisco Sheriff Michael Hennessey made the decision in 2006 in response to inmate complaints of sexual misconduct. More than two dozen male and female deputies have since sued, saying it is discriminatory.
The San Francisco Chronicle reports (http://bit.ly/1adufFe) that a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is scheduled to consider the case next Wednesday.
Attorneys for the deputies say not one sexual misconduct claim made by a female inmate against a male deputy was sustained in the 16 years before the sheriff' policy change.
City attorneys dispute that, saying three deputies resigned and two others were suspended. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nevada Supreme Court upholds ethics laws
Legal Focuses |
2013/12/02 12:33
|
The Nevada Supreme Court upheld the state's ethics laws on Wednesday while backing the censure of a Sparks councilman for his 2005 vote on a casino project involving his former campaign manager.
In a 5-2 opinion, justices rejected arguments from Sparks Councilman Michael Carrigan that the conflict of interest laws are overly vague and violate constitutional protections of right of association.
Chief Justice Kris Pickering, writing for the majority, said the law serves to ensure that public officers "avoid conflicts between (their) private interests and those of the general public whom (they) serve."
At issue was whether a catch-all phrase in Nevada law extending defined voting prohibitions — such as in matter involving family members, business partners or employers — to any other substantially similar relationship is vague and unconstitutional.
Carrigan was censured by the state Ethics Commission for voting on the Lazy 8 hotel-casino project. Carlos Vasquez, a lobbyist for the project, had served as Carrigan's campaign manager free of charge and placed media ads for the campaign at cost, according to court documents. He also lobbied for the project before the Sparks City Council.
The Lazy 8 was backed by one-time developer and Nevada political powerhouse Harvey Whittemore, who was convicted this year in federal court on felony charges related to illegal campaign contributions made to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
