White House backs banks in Supreme Court case
Lawyer Blogs
Such a move could expose customers, vendors and others to "billions of dollars in liability when issuers of securities make misstatements to the market," he wrote.
The case, Stoneridge Investment Partners v. Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., has attracted considerable interest from lawmakers and industry associations. On Tuesday, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., asked President Bush to back the SEC's position.
Meanwhile, Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association President Marc Lackritz said allowing third parties to be held liable would result in skyrocketing litigation costs for companies.
"Investors already receive substantial protections under the law, and the Securities and Exchange Commission and other securities regulators are already armed with all the necessary regulatory tools to recoup lost money for investors," Lackritz said.
"Congress authorized the SEC to enforce securities laws against third parties and disburse funds to harmed investors," said Robin Conrad, executive vice president of the National Chamber Litigation Center.
"The Supreme Court should not upset that legislative decision by allowing class action lawyers to increase litigation risk and further hamper the competitiveness of American markets," Conrad said.
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear the case in its fall term.
Related listings
-
Brodsky & Smith, LLC Announces Settlement of Class Action
Lawyer Blogs 08/16/2007Brodsky & Smith, LLC announces that a Court has preliminarily approved a class action settlement in TDH Partners v. The Ryland Group, Inc., et. al. involving all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired common stock of the Ryland Group, Inc. (...
-
Ex-NBA Referee Pleads Guilty to Charges
Lawyer Blogs 08/15/2007[##_1L|1124047923.jpg|width="120" height="101" alt=""|_##]Former referee Tim Donaghy pleaded guilty to two felony charges Wednesday in connection with the NBA betting scandal. Donaghy faces a maximum of 25 years in prison when he is sentenced for con...
-
Appeals court rules in Hanford downwinders' case
Lawyer Blogs 08/15/2007In a sweeping ruling Tuesday, a federal appeals court overturned a judgment in favor of a woman who had sued contractors at the Hanford nuclear reservation for causing her thyroid cancer, but opened the door for three other plaintiffs to get a new tr...
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.