Attorneys Press High Court To Hear Enron Investor Suit
Lawyer Blogs
A $40 billion lawsuit by Enron investors against several banks for orchestrating financing deals for the now-defunct energy trader is not dead, despite a recent Supreme Court decision that helps protect such third parties.
In fact, some lawyers who represent investors argue the high court decision involving cable company Charter Communications and two of its suppliers, made a clear distinction that justifies hearing the Enron case.
The Supreme Court ruled 5-3 that shareholders cannot sue third parties in securities fraud cases, unless investors relied on their statements or representations when making investment decisions.
Stoneridge Investment Partners, on behalf of Charter shareholders, had accused the two suppliers of scheming to inflate company revenues in 2000.
Lawyers for investors point to sections of Justice Anthony Kennedy's majority opinion, which they say makes a distinction between third parties involved in the goods and services arena and those involved in the investment sector.
"He repeatedly made that distinction. That distinction distinguishes Enron from Stoneridge," said Pamela Gilbert, a consultant for the American Association for Justice, the world's largest trial bar association.
"Stoneridge involves a customer relationship. In Enron, the major wrongdoers are the investment banks involved in the financial transactions," Gilbert said.
Related listings
-
Court Upholds NY Judicial Nominee System
Lawyer Blogs 01/17/2008[##_1L|1122958543.jpg|width="120" height="93" alt=""|_##]A U.S. Supreme Court ruling that upholds New York's system of choosing trial judges is likely to renew calls for legislative reform, but even some proponents of change say their chances of succ...
-
Court limits investor suits against 3rd parties
Lawyer Blogs 01/16/2008In a case born of the accounting scandals that rocked the nation in the first half of the decade the Supreme Court Tuesday limited the ability of defrauded investors to sue accountants, bankers and lawyers who may have helped a company commit the fra...
-
MySpace agrees to social-networking safety plan
Lawyer Blogs 01/15/2008MySpace, the country’s largest social-networking Web site, has agreed with attorneys general of 49 states to take new steps to protect children from sexual predators on its site. It also agreed to lead a nationwide effort to develop technology to ver...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.