AFP: US indicts ex S.Korean airline execs for price fixing

Two former Asiana Airlines executives were indicted in New York on Thursday for a price-fixing scheme involving economy class airfares for travel between the United States and South Korea.

A grand jury in Brooklyn, New York issued the one-count indictment against Joo Ahn Kang and Chung Sik Kwak, both former Asiana vice presidents and South Korean nationals. Kang also served as airline president from 2005 to 2008.

The pair were charged with “conspiring with others to suppress and eliminate competition by fixing passenger fares” from about January 2000 to February 2006, the Justice Department said in a statement.

“As a part of the conspiracy, Kang, Kwak and co-conspirators monitored and enforced adherence to the agreed-upon, noncompetitive rates charged to passengers traveling between the United States and Korea,” it added.

via AFP: US indicts ex S.Korean airline execs for price fixing.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

Judge OKs iPhone class action against Apple, AT&T – USATODAY.com

A federal judge says a monopoly abuse lawsuit against Apple and AT&T’s mobile phone unit can move forward as a class action.

The lawsuit consolidates several filed by iPhone buyers starting in late 2007, a few months after the first generation of Apple’s smart phone went on sale.

An amended complaint filed in June 2008 takes issue with Apple’s practice of “locking” iPhones so they can only be used on AT&T’s network and Apple’s absolute control over what applications iPhone owners can and cannot install on the gadgets.

via Judge OKs iPhone class action against Apple, AT&T – USATODAY.com.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

Judge OKs iPhone class action against Apple, AT&T | The Associated Press

A federal judge says a monopoly abuse lawsuit against Apple Inc. and AT&T Inc.’s mobile phone unit can move forward as a class action.

The lawsuit consolidates several filed by iPhone buyers starting in late 2007, a few months after the first generation of Apple’s smart phone went on sale.

An amended complaint filed in June 2008 takes issue with Apple’s practice of “locking” iPhones so they can only be used on AT&T’s network, and its absolute control over what applications iPhone owners can and cannot install on the gadgets.

The lawsuit also says Apple secretly made AT&T its exclusive iPhone partner in the U.S. for five years. Consumers agreed to two-year contracts with the Dallas-based wireless carrier when they purchased their phones, but were in effect locked into a five-year relationship with AT&T, the lawsuit argued.

via The Associated Press: Judge OKs iPhone class action against Apple, AT&T.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

Parties in Toyota Securities Suit Told to Resolve Discovery Fight | National Law Journal

A federal judge in Los Angeles has declined a request by plaintiffs lawyers in a shareholder class action to force attorneys for Toyota Motor Corp. to turn over documents that were provided to Congress, which has been investigating vehicle recalls associated with sudden unintended acceleration defects.

Instead, U.S. District Judge Dale Fischer of the Central District of California on Monday ordered the parties to reach a discovery agreement on their own within a week.

The suit, filed on Feb. 8, is the first shareholder class action to allege that Toyota’s executives and directors made false and misleading statements to shareholders regarding the defects. The recall caused Toyota’s stock price to drop from $90.42 on Jan. 21 to $71.78 on Feb. 4.

In court documents, lawyers for the plaintiff, Harry Stackhouse, had asked Fischer to lift a stay on discovery and instead order that documents relevant to the case be preserved or turned over. Under securities law, discovery is stayed in a shareholder case if a judge has yet to rule on pleading motions, such as a motion to dismiss.

To support their argument, the lawyers pointed to “serious allegations” that Toyota failed to disclose the defects. They specifically mentioned a $16.4 million fine that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration imposed after finding that Toyota waited four months to report the defects.

via Law.com – Parties in Toyota Securities Suit Told to Resolve Discovery Fight.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

High Court Ruling May Fuel Battle Over Class Arbitration | National Law Journal

The U.S. Supreme Court likely ignited an intense battle in state and federal courts with its decision Tuesday that class arbitration may not be imposed on parties who have not agreed to it.

“The sword of Damocles is hanging over class arbitration now,” said F. Paul Bland of Public Justice, a Washington-based public interest law firm. “I think you are about to see a huge battle begin for what the implications of the case are. Consumer and employee advocates are going to take a view very, very different from what you’re going to see from the defense bar.”

Bland predicted that “within a week” defendants in more than 100 class action arbitration cases will seek supplemental briefing to argue that all state laws that have been used to strike down bans on class arbitrations are now pre-empted by the high court’s ruling in Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. AnimalFeeds International Corp.

“We have already received notice in one of our cases that the defendant wants supplemental briefing to make that argument,” said Bland, who filed an amicus brief on behalf of Public Justice and Public Good in the high court case, supporting AnimalFeeds.

Seth Waxman, a Washington partner at Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr, argued the case on behalf of Stolt-Nielsen and other shipping companies. Nina Pillard of Georgetown University Law Center represented AnimalFeeds before the justices.

Hugh Verrier, the White & Case chairman and counsel to Stolt-Nielsen, said the ruling’s impact will be felt in future antitrust arbitration cases as well as in other areas of the law.

“Class arbitration is one of the most hotly contested legal issues of the new decade,” said Verrier in a statement. “This decision is another cutting-edge legal victory by our antitrust group.”

A number of potential class arbitrations are now under way and could be affected by the decision, said Archis Parasharami, co-chairman of Mayer Brown‘s consumer litigation and class action practice. “In an amicus brief we filed with the Court, we pointed out that, in most of those cases, the defendant was referred to a potential class arbitration despite the fact that the arbitration agreement did not expressly authorize, or in some cases expressly precluded, class arbitration,” said Parasharami, whose firm’s amicus brief on behalf of CTIA-The Wireless Association supported Stolt-Nielsen. “Defendants in those cases now have a compelling argument that the class arbitrations to which they have been subjected are ultra vires.”

via Law.com – High Court Ruling May Fuel Battle Over Class Arbitration.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

Customers sue Countywide over insider data theft – Security

Sixteen Countrywide Financial customers have filed a class action suit related to the insider theft and subsequent sale of information. The suit, filed in Ventura County Court in California, seeks millions in damages and the release of information.

The plaintiffs are suing for invasion of privacy and the exposure to identity theft, after Countrywide Financial employees stole and sold “tens of thousands, or millions” of customers’ financial records. Along with a $20 million dollar settlement for invasion of privacy and aiding and abetting, plus punitive damages, the class action also inquires as to if Countrywide merely aided and abetted the theft, or if it was an architect of the plan.

As written, the suit wants to know “whether the dissemination was intended as a plan or scheme, or was intentional; whether any of the defendants was simply aiding and abetting, rather than an architect of the plan to disseminate the personal information.”

In 2008, “coincidentally after they sold their mortgage portfolios under wrongful and fraudulent ‘securitization pools,’ and coincidentally after their mortgage portfolio went into massive default as a result thereof,” the suit says, Countywide learned that one of their own had illegally accessed and sold customer information.

After an investigation, the FBI arrested Rene L. Rebollo Jr. (36), of Pasadena, who was a former employee of Countrywide Home Loan. According to both the FBI and statements from Rebollo, he used his access to Countrywide’s computer databases to collect account information and sell it. Over two years, the sales of this information netted him about $50,000 to $70,000 USD.

At the time of the initial reports, it was discovered that an IT policy breakdown failed to detect the download of more than 2 million records. The preventative measure was to seal the USB ports on systems used by employees, opting for a physical barrier, instead of policy lockdowns and hardened DLP. One system was missed, and Rebollo used it to download the data.

However, the class action claims Countrywide was slow to admit to the data breach, and when they came clean they offered little help. The allegations in the court records say that one of the reasons for the delay was to “gain time and money”.

“Countrywide delayed several months before informing their customers. Finally, Countrywide informed only certain of their customers by letter and offered in settlement to refer the customers/borrowers to counseling, when it was Countrywide that needed to review and repair its internal procedures and it was Countrywide that needed to repair damages done to the credit of its customers.”

via Customers sue Countywide over insider data theft – Security.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

Justices to Consider a Border Battle Over Lawsuits | Law.com

“Foreign-cubed” is the name of the latest legal nemesis that keeps lawyers for companies ranging from Toyota to Vivendi up at night.

The term refers to securities class action litigation in which the investors are foreign, the issuers are foreign and the fraudulent conduct took place on foreign soil. And yet, because of some company tie to the United States, large or minuscule, they end up in U.S. courts, where plaintiffs usually can do a lot better than if the suits were filed abroad.

Six years after the moniker was first coined, a foreign-cubed suit has made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which will hear the case, Morrison v. National Australia Bank, today. Foreign investors accused Australia’s largest bank of fraud involving a Florida subsidiary, but the bank insists all of the disputed activity took place in Australia. So far, the bank has won.

Foreign companies and countries have flooded the Court with friend of the court briefs, signaling the importance of the case worldwide. Even parties litigating over the Toyota safety meltdown are watching; several securities class actions have been filed in federal courts against the company, which trades on the Tokyo Stock Exchange, based on statements made by Toyota officials in Japan.

The case comes to a Court that has grown increasingly skeptical about U.S. courts exerting extraterritorial jurisdiction. In the 2007 case Microsoft v. AT&T, a 7-1 majority spoke approvingly of the presumption that “United States law governs domestically but does not rule the world.” Three years earlier, in Hoffman-LaRoche v. Empagran, a unanimous Court said extending the reach of American antitrust laws too far into foreign situations would be “an act of legal imperialism.”

via Law.com – Justices to Consider a Border Battle Over Lawsuits.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

Attorneys Argue Over Venue for Toyota Litigation | Law.com

More than 100 lawyers packed a downtown San Diego federal courtroom on Thursday to hear arguments about which court is best prepared to hear the increasing number of lawsuits filed against Toyota Motor Sales USA Inc. over sudden unintended acceleration in millions of its vehicles.

In all, 24 lawyers made brief statements before a panel, arguing for courts and judges in California, Louisiana, Kentucky, Ohio, Minnesota, Florida, South Carolina, West Virginia and New Jersey.

Cari Dawson, a partner at Alston and Bird who is lead counsel for Toyota, argued for the Central District of California, where one-third of the cases have been filed and where her client is located.

The panel of five judges who regularly hear jurisdictional issues for multidistrict litigation raised few questions about the locations but asked lawyers to address whether the class actions should be separated from the personal injury suits. Most of the lawyers appeared to favor keeping the cases together.

The panel is expected to rule within a few weeks.

Since last fall, more than 10 million Toyota vehicles have been recalled in order to repair problems with accelerator pedals, floor mats and brakes, all of which have been identified as causing sudden and unintended acceleration. Toyota's problems have multiplied, with new reports coming out each week indicating that the Japanese automaker might have known about the acceleration issue years ago.

The vast majority of the lawsuits — nearly 90 — have been filed on behalf of a class of consumers who are seeking economic damages because their recalled Toyota vehicles have lost value. A smaller group of personal injury suits have been filed on behalf of individuals who claim to have died or been injured in an accident because their Toyota vehicles suddenly accelerated.

via Law.com – Attorneys Argue Over Venue for Toyota Litigation.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

The Securities-Fraud Tide Is Rising – Law Blog – WSJ

Cornerstone Research today released its annual report on securities-fraud class action settlements. Shareholders last year pocketed $3.8 billion in settlements, a 35% increase over 2008. Not a bad haul, huh?

“We anticipate that as cases brought in conjunction with the 2008 stock market decline and surrounding credit-crisis issues are resolved, settlements are likely to continue to increase both in number and value,” Laura Simmons, a professor at the William & Mary’s Mason School of Business and a Cornerstone advisor, said in a statement.

via The Securities-Fraud Tide Is Rising – Law Blog – WSJ.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

Toyota Class Action Lawsuits Could Cost Auto Maker $3B: AP Report – AboutLawsuits.com

Class action litigation springing from Toyota recalls over unintended acceleration could end up costing the company $3 billion or more, according to an Associated Press report.

The Japanese automaker currently faces at least 89 Toyota class action lawsuits sparked by recalls involving problems with Toyota gas pedals and brakes. An analysis done by the Associated Press estimates that the company’s legal bills on those cases alone could top $3 billion, and that does not include the costs of a number of individual Toyota accident personal injury lawsuits, product liability lawsuits and wrongful death lawsuits that have also been filed against the company.

Toyota has recalled about 9 million Toyota and Lexus vehicles since September 2009. About 8.5 million of those vehicles were recalled due to problems with sudden acceleration, which the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) says have been involved in as many as 52 deaths. More than 400,000 additional Toyota Prius and Lexus HS250h vehicles have also been recalled due to brake problems.

via Toyota Class Action Lawsuits Could Cost Auto Maker $3B: AP Report – AboutLawsuits.com.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare