We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo






  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 2,512

Fraud conviction entitles insurer to rescind malpractice policy and recoup previously advanced defense costs

  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 12 2007

The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, applying federal and New York state law, has held that a legal malpractice policy was void from its inception where the attorney who signed the application denied knowledge of circumstances that could give rise to a claim in the application while at the same time the attorney was engaging in fraudulent activities

Establishing common issues of loss causation not required to certify class

  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 4 2008

Granting plaintiffs’ motion for class certification in a securities fraud action, a federal district court held, among other things, that for purposes of their motion plaintiffs did not have to demonstrate common issues of loss causation

A significant threshold to establish fraud under Rule 60(b)

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 28 2007

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s grant of summary judgment which held that, in order to prove a prima facie case of fraud and set aside a prior judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), a party must demonstrate mistake, inadvertence or excusable neglect on the part of the opposing party or present newly discovered evidence showing such conduct

Federal court dismissed securities fraud claims

  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 4 2008

Dismissing plaintiff corporation’s securities fraud action, a district court held, among other things, that plaintiff failed to plead scienter with the particularity required by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (PSLRA

Lender shielded from RICO claim by careful commitment letter

  • Reed Smith LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 19 2007

The District Court for the District of New Jersey has held in an unpublished opinion that a lender may protect itself against Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization Act (“RICO”) claims through the careful drafting of its loan commitment documentation

“Storm warnings” triggered running of statute of limitations

  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 23 2007

Former employees of a private company that merged with defendant company brought securities fraud claims under 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 against defendant company and its principals after steep share value declines followed certain company statements, announcements and filings between February 2001 and January 2005

Bankruptcy court orders return of over $140 million of margin payments made by hedge fund to prime broker

  • Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 16 2007

A recent bankruptcy court decision in the Southern District of New York may raise concern among brokerage firms which execute and clear brokerage transactions for hedge funds and similar investment vehicles

Federal court dismisses RICO claim

  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 16 2007

The District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed a RICO conspiracy claim against defendants because plaintiff failed to allege an agreement to commit the predicate acts in furtherance of a RICO violation, which the Court stated was “the most basic element of a RICO conspiracy claim.”

DOJ will not appeal dismissal of indictment-- amnesty agreement upheld

  • Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 4 2008

In late December, the Department of Justice's Antitrust Division (“Division”) announced it would not appeal a federal district court's dismissal of the indictment in U.S. v. Stolt-Nielson S.A., stating that “it respects the role of the court in making the factual determination” that the amnesty agreement the government had entered into with the defendants had not been breached

Daewoo Engineering & Constr. Co, Ltd. v. United States

  • Alston & Bird LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 20 2007

In Daewoo Engineering & Constr. Co, Ltd. v. United States, the United States Court of Federal Claims concluded that the contractor was liable to the government for $50 million for the contractor’s violation of the fraud provision of the CDA in connection with the contractor’s submission of a claim for additional compensation

Current Search

Suggested Facets

Author

Firm Name

Jurisdiction

Workarea

© Copyright 2006-2013 Globe Business Publishing Ltd | Cookies | Disclaimer | Privacy policy