|
|
|
Palm Beach Construction Law Attorney
Law Firm News |
2012/02/06 10:00
|
Palm Beach Construction Law Attorney
Heitman Law Firm serves its clients by first comprehending the specific issues our clients face and then tailoring our representation to those specific needs. Construction law cases often involve legal, technical, engineering, design, constructability and scheduling issues. We speak the language of construction. We understand your business. We know how to read a set of plans. Our client service is based on the idea that the client should not be required to pay to
bring us up to speed on the construction issues. Instead, we make it our business to be ahead of the learning curve.
Our law firm's Florida construction law practice includes the following areas:
• Land Use Planning
• Permitting
• Bid Preparation
• Bid Protests
• Contract Drafting
• Contract Review
• Contract Negotiation
• Contract Administration
• Design-Build Contracts
• Contract Claims Preparation
• Contract Dispute Resolution
• Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
• Dispute Review Board Hearings
• Administrative Hearings
• We represent both domestic and international clients
• Private Construction Projects
• Public Construction Projects
• Projects Nationwide
• Design Professional Negligence
Heitman Law Firm combines experience and efficiency in construction law to render their clients high quality legal representation. With years of experience building real world construction projects, Mr. Heitman is an expert in construction law and efficiently resolve construction disputes. Visit www.palmbeachconstructionlaw.org for more information. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Izard Nobel LLP Announces Class Action
Court Watch |
2012/02/06 09:59
|
The law firm of Izard Nobel LLP, which has significant experience representing investors in prosecuting claims of securities fraud, announces that a lawsuit seeking class action status has been filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of Cablevision Systems Corporation between February 16, 2011 and October 28, 2011, inclusive (the "Class Period").
The Complaint alleges that Cablevision and certain of its officers and directors violated the federal securities laws. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose the following adverse facts: (i) that Cablevision was experiencing higher retention and advertising costs; (ii) that Cablevision was losing more video customers than expected, especially in the New York area -- the Company's main service area -- due to increased competition; and (iii) as a result of the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company and its prospects.
On October 28, 2011, Cablevision announced its financial results for the third quarter of 2011, the period ended September 30, 2011. On that same day, Cablevision held a conference call with analysts and investors to discuss the earnings announcement and the Company's operations, including the Company's subscriber loss. In reaction to the Company's announcement, the price of Cablevision stock fell $2.17 per share, or 13%, to close at $15.14 per share.
While Izard Nobel LLP has not filed a lawsuit against the defendants, to view a copy of the Complaint initiating the class action or for more information about the case, and your rights, visit: www.izardnobel.com/cablevision |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Norway mass killer demands medal at court hearing
Headline Legal News |
2012/02/06 09:59
|
The right-wing extremist who has admitted killing 77 people in the worst peacetime massacre that Norway has ever seen told a court Monday that he deserves a medal of honor for the bloodshed and demanded to be set free.
Anders Behring Breivik smirked as he was led in to the Oslo district court, handcuffed and dressed in a dark suit, for his last scheduled detention hearing before the trial starts in April. He stretched out his arms in what his lawyer Geir Lippestad said was "some kind of right-wing extremist greeting."
Reading from prepared remarks, the 32-year-old Norwegian told the court that the July 22 massacre — carried out with a bomb, a rifle and a handgun — was a strike against "traitors" he said are embracing immigration to promote "an Islamic colonization of Norway."
Like in previous hearings, Breivik admitted to setting off the bomb outside the government headquarters in Oslo and opening fire at a Labor Party youth camp on Utoya island, outside the capital, but denied criminal responsibility and rejected the authority of the court.
About 100 survivors and relatives of victims watched in disbelief, as Breivik asked to be released, and told the judge he should receive a military honor for Norway's most deadly peacetime attacks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman to face mortgage debt class-action lawsuit
Court Watch |
2012/02/03 10:04
|
Goldman Sachs Group Inc was ordered by a federal judge to face a securities class-action lawsuit accusing it of defrauding investors about a 2006 offering of securities backed by risky mortgage loans from a now-defunct lender.
U.S. District Judge Harold Baer in Manhattan certified a class-action lawsuit by investors led by the Public Employees' Retirement System of Mississippi.
These investors claimed they lost money in the GSAMP Trust 2006-S2, a $698 million offering of certificates backed by second-lien home loans made by New Century Financial Corp, a California subprime mortgage specialist that went bankrupt in 2007.
Thursday's decision is a setback for Goldman, which had sought to force investors to bring their cases individually.
Class certification lets investors pool resources, which can cut costs, and can lead to larger recoveries than if investors are forced to sue individually.
Goldman spokesman Michael Duvally declined to comment.
The bank is one of many accused by Congress, regulators and others of having fueled the nation's housing crisis and 2008 financial crisis in part by having misled investors about the quality of mortgage debt they sold.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Murray Frank LLP Files Class Action
Court Watch |
2012/02/02 10:04
|
Murray Frank LLP has filed a class action complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 12 Civ. 0672) on behalf of all individuals and institutions who purchased securities of GLG Life Tech Corporation during the period between February 1, 2011 and November 13, 2011 (the “Class Period”), seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”).
The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, the Defendants made false and misleading statements about or knew but failed to disclose that: (1) the Company’s original equipment manufacturers were experiencing production issues that impacted the packaging and appearance quality of its products; (2) consumers were responding poorly to the Company’s AN0C and stevia products; and/or (3) the Company would not meet its earnings projections.
On October 6, 2011, GLG Life Tech issued a press release disclosing for the first time a negative outlook concerning its AN0C and stevia products. On the news, the Company’s stock price dropped by 42% from a close of $3.45 per share on October 5, 2011 to a close of $1.99 per share on October 6, 2011.
Subsequently, on November 14, 2011, the Company announced financial results for the period ending September 30, 2011. Revenue for the period was $1.7 million, versus revenue of $20.9 million for the same period in the previous year. EBITDA for the period was negative $8.8 million, versus EBITDA of $6.1 million for the same period in the previous year. Following its announcement of these disappointing results, the Company’s management declined to provide any further formal guidance on revenues, EBITDA, or capital expenditures. On the news, the Company’s stock price continued to drop, from a close of $2.32 per share on November 11, 2011 (the last trading day before the announcement) to a close of $2.01 on November 14, 2011.
If you purchased GLG Life Tech securities during the period between February 1, 2011 and November 13, 2011, you may move the Court, not later than February 13, 2012, to serve as Lead Plaintiff for the Class. A Lead Plaintiff is a representative chosen by the Court who acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. You do not need to be a Lead Plaintiff to be included in the class.
www.murrayfrank.com |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
