ReportWire

Tag: Business law

  • Moritt Hock & Hamroff forms business divorce law group | Long Island Business News

    [ad_1]

    Moritt Hock & Hamroff, a law firm with offices in Garden City, has formed its Business Divorce Practice Group, led by litigation partner Stephen Ginsberg.

    The group comprises seasoned attorneys who are dedicated to handling complex disputes among co-owners of closely held businesses.

    “Whether they stem from deadlock, financial misconduct or just differing visions for a company’s future, partnership disputes can be as intense as any personal split, frequently charged with emotion and requiring significant time, energy, and strategic expertise to resolve,” Ginsberg said in a news release about the group’s launch.

    The practice’s formation comes at a time when technological advancements are driving greater efficiency, profitability and business valuations across industries. In many cases, this rapid growth has strained existing business relationships and organizational structures, according to Moritt Hock & Hamroff.

    At the same time, a growing number of founders reaching retirement age has intensified challenges, contributing to what the law firm describes as a rise in involving dissolution, asset sales, ownership rights, compensation, succession and buyout terms.

    “The Business Divorce Practice group will draw on the full breadth of our firm’s experience in resolving commercial disputes, which spans a range of sectors including eCommerce, healthcare, finance, real estate, fashion, professional services and automotive sales,” Ginsberg said.

    Michael Cardello III, managing partner at Moritt Hock & Hamroff, said in the news release that the Business Divorce Practice Group “reflects our extensive capabilities, while building on the expertise we offer to clients nationwide.”

    Ginsberg, Cardello said, “has assembled an exceptional team of attorneys with a deep understanding of the unique sensitivities involved in working with closely held businesses and their owners.”

    The firm, which has offices in Manhattan, is in growth mode, having recently acquired a Fort Lauderdale boutique law firm, bringing the number of its locations in Florida to three.


    [ad_2]

    Adina Genn

    Source link

  • Republic expects better service this week amid ongoing strike

    [ad_1]

    Republic Services Inc. and the striking Teamsters Local 25 have still not scheduled any new negotiations sessions as of Sunday afternoon.

    The two parties last negotiated on July 18, without reaching a new contract that would end the now 28-day strike of local waste collection workers.


    This page requires Javascript.

    Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

    kAm%96 %62>DE6CD 4@?E:?F6 E@ 2D< 7@C 36EE6C H286D 2?5 E96 23:=:EJ E@ E2<6 E96 F?:@?’D 962=E9 42C6 A24<286 @G6C #6AF3=:4’D[ H9:=6 #6AF3=:4 92D 5@F3=65 5@H? @? :ED 4=2:>D E92E :E 92D E96 36DE H286D 😕 E96 2C62 2>@?8 4@>A2C23=6 4@>A2?:6D 2?5 DF77:4:6?E 962=E9 42C6 4@G6C286]k^Am

    kAm(9:=6 4@==64E:@? 56=2JD 92G6 A=28F65 4@>>F?:E:6D 27764E65 3J E96 DEC:<6[ #6AF3=:4 6IA64ED E@ :>AC@G6 :ED 4@==64E:@? C2E6D E9:D H66< 3J 3C:?8:?8 😕 C6A=246>6?E H@C<6CD 7C@> @E96C 2C62D @7 E96 4@F?ECJ H96C6 D:>:=2C DEC:<6D 92G6 6?565]k^Am

    kAms6=2JD 92G6 366? 42FD65 3J 2 D9@CE286 @7 H@C<6CD[ 56=2JD 😕 ECF46?E H@C<6CD ?@E 36:?8 72>:=:2C H:E9 C68F=2C C@FE6D]k^Am

    kAm&?E:= E9:D H66<[ #6AF3=:4 92D ?@E 4@==64E65 C64J4=:?8 😕 >@DE 27764E65 4@>>F?:E:6Dk^Am

    [ad_2]

    By Caroline Enos | Staff Writer

    Source link

  • Nurse’s union blasts changes by new hospital owners

    Nurse’s union blasts changes by new hospital owners

    [ad_1]

    Unionized nurses at Holy Family Hospital’s campuses in Haverhill and Methuen are accusing the new owners of violating the terms of their contracts by making “unilateral” changes to their health care coverage and other benefits.

    Lawrence General Hospital formally took over ownership of the hospitals last week as part of the sale of bankrupt Steward Health Care System’s Massachusetts hospitals in a $28 million deal signed off on by a federal judge in Texas.

    The sale was heralded by Gov. Maura Healey, health care leaders and local elected officials as a way to preserve jobs, improve working conditions and prevent the closure of the hospitals.

    But the Massachusetts Nurses Association alleges that Lawrence General is violating the terms of the court-approved sale and collective bargaining agreements for registered nurses who work at Holy Family’s two campuses.

    In an emergency motion, filed in U.S. Bankruptcy Court on Wednesday, the union alleges that LGH unilaterally imposed changes to the nurses’ health plans that will increase premiums, out-of-pocket costs and deductibles, and removed credits for uninsured members.

    The hospital also required nurses at Holy Family to switch to a different, more costly type of retirement plan, and reduced coverage through its life insurance plans, according to the union, which estimates the changes will cost nurses thousands of dollars in lost wages.

    “Unless immediately addressed, Lawrence’s improper actions will cause significant economic injury to MNA and its members by reducing benefits while imposing significantly higher costs, including increased deductibles and copays,” lawyers for the union wrote in the 91-page complaint.

    The complaint asks the bankruptcy judge to declare the hospital in violation of the terms of the sale and require it to honor existing collective bargaining agreements with unionized nurses.

    “We remain an active and engaged participant in discussions with the Massachusetts Nurses Association, just as we have from the outset,” a spokesperson from Lawrence General Hospital said in a statement. “The court filings will not impact or interrupt our ability to deliver high-quality, compassionate, and culturally competent care. We continue to work together with the MNA and all of our staff to meet the health care needs of our patients, their families, and the communities we serve.”

    In the court filing, the union said shortly after the sale of Holy Family hospitals was announced in September nurses entered into negotiations with Lawrence General for new employment terms.

    But the union said hospital officials rejected several offers and then “threatened” to impose the changes on nurses if they didn’t agree to the new terms. After the sale of the hospitals closed on Oct. 1, Lawrence General imposed the new employment terms by “fiat,” according to the complaint.

    “Lawrence’s actions cannot be excused as inadvertent mistakes or transitional hiccups,” the union’s lawyers wrote. “Rather, they are its most recent attempt to impose significant economic changes on MNA-represented nurses.”

    The Dallas-based Steward operated about 30 hospitals nationwide before it filed for bankruptcy protection earlier this year to pay down $9 billion in debt to its creditors.

    In September, a federal judge approved plans to transfer ownership of several of Steward’s Massachusetts hospitals, including Holy Family, Morton Hospital in Taunton and St. Anne’s Hospital in Fall River. Morton and St. Anne’s were purchased by Lifespan, a Rhode Island-based company, a deal valued at more than $175 million.

    The state took over a fifth Steward hospital — St. Elizabeth’s Hospital in Brighton — by eminent domain until Boston Medical Center takes it over as its new owner.

    Steward closed its hospitals in Dorchester and Ayer at the end of August after failing to reach adequate terms with prospective buyers.

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Question 3: Should ride-hailing drivers be allowed to unionize?

    Question 3: Should ride-hailing drivers be allowed to unionize?

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Voters in November will get a chance to resolve a fight over unionizing Uber and Lyft workers with a proposal that calls for reshaping the employment status of ride-hailing drivers who work now as independent contractors.

    Question 3, which appears on the Nov. 5 ballot, would authorize ride-hailing drivers to form unions to collectively bargain with so-called transportation network companies for better wages, benefits, and improved terms and conditions of work.

    A yes vote would create an exemption to the state’s collective bargaining laws and set up a system allowing drivers unionize. A no vote would keep the status quo, where ride-hailing drivers are considered independent contractors with a limited wage and benefit guarantees.

    Backers of the measure say while pay and benefits for the job have increased under a settlement in June with the Attorney General’s Office – including a guaranteed $32.50 minimum wage and other new driver benefits, such as earned sick pay – they want the security of unionization.

    “We help our neighbors get to work and school and bring them home to their families, and we deserve the pay and treatment on the job that will let us support our families and keep a roof over our heads,” Betania Gonell, an Uber and Lyft driver from North Andover, said at a rally at the Statehouse last month.

    “We want a union to help us negotiate for better pay, working conditions and job protections, just like nurses, bus drivers and millions of other workers in Massachusetts.”

    Over the past year, supporters of the measure collected tens of thousands of signatures to put the question before voters in November and survived a legal challenge seeking to strike it from the ballot.

    Among those backing the changes are the Service Employees International Union Local 32BJ and International Association of Machinists, which formed a coalition with progressive and social justice groups earlier this year to push for its approval.

    The outcome of the ballot question could have far-reaching impacts. Massachusetts has seen the number of ride-hailing trips rise from 39.7 million in 2021 to 60.6 million in 2022 – a more than 52% increase, according to state data. There are more than 200,000 approved ride-hailing drivers in the state, but it is not clear if all of them are now working.

    Like most states, Massachusetts has wrestled for years with the issue of how to classify ride hailing drivers. Uber, Lyft and other companies have long argued that their drivers prefer the flexibility of working as independent contractors, not employees. They have cited surveys of drivers saying they prefer contractual work.

    In June, Uber and Lyft dropped plans for a separate ballot question to classify their drivers’ employment status after reaching a deal with the state Attorney General’s Office to boost wages and benefits. The companies also agreed to pay $175 million to the state to resolve the AG’s allegations that they violated the state’s wage and hour laws.

    The agreement requires the companies to pay drivers a minimum wage of $32.50 per hour. Drivers also receive expanded benefits, including paid sick leave and a stipend to buy into the Massachusetts paid family and medical leave program.

    The settlement stems from a lawsuit originally filed in July 2020 by then-Attorney General Maura Healey, who is now the state’s governor.

    But drivers who support Question 3 argue that the proposal would provide more job security and the ability to bargain collectively for better pay and benefits in the future.

    While there is no organized opposition to Question 3, critics argue the move could lead to higher prices for Uber and Lyft rides if the companies pass along the added labor costs to consumers.

    That includes the state’s Republican Party, which says approval of the referendum “threatens the flexibility and affordability” that make ride-hailing services so popular for drivers and those who use the services.

    “It would also set an unfairly low threshold for unionization votes, potentially violating federal labor laws,” MassGOP Chairwoman Amy Carnevale said in a recent statement. “With Massachusetts already being one of the most expensive states to live and do business in, adding more red tape and higher costs is the wrong approach.”

    The conservative Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, which also opposes Question 3, argues that its approval would not improve the situation for most ride-haling drivers because they will “have no control over leadership of the union and will pay significant dues without real representation.”

    Recent polls have shown a slim majority of voters support approval of Question 3, one of five questions before voters in the November elections.

    A report by Tufts University’s Center for State Policy Analysis found that Question 3, if approved, will likely face significant legal challenges, but it could give workers new power to bargain for better wages and benefits.

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Objections filed as Steward pushes for sale of hospitals

    Objections filed as Steward pushes for sale of hospitals

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — As Steward Health Care prepares to make the case in federal court Wednesday that the deals it reached to sell four Massachusetts hospital facilities should be quickly approved, a number of others would like to have a word — including key lenders for the bankrupt company, the Archdiocese of Boston, and the Internal Revenue Service.

    The blur of activity includes ongoing negotiations between Steward and Massachusetts state government over a second, and larger, infusion of public funding that the company says is required to keep its hospitals here open until the sales close, possibly on Sept. 30.

    Massachusetts aided Steward with $30 million to stay afloat in August and now is poised to provide the company another $42 million in payments and advances by the end of this week, according to a court filing late Monday.

    An array of objections have been lodged in U.S. Bankruptcy Court since Steward announced the hospital sales. A sale hearing is scheduled for 11 a.m. Wednesday, when Judge Christopher Lopez will weigh whether the deals are the best possible way for the company to wind down operations and maximize the value the assets return for its lenders and creditors. Steward says they are and should be approved.

    The court is likely to consider an objection filed by the “first in, last out” or FILO lenders that have pumped hundreds of millions of dollars into Steward as the company headed for bankruptcy. Those lenders said they “cannot possibly consent to the proposed sales of the Massachusetts Hospitals in their current form, and they do not.”

    “The Debtors’ sale process has resulted in bids for the Massachusetts Hospitals for an aggregate purchase price of $343 million, subject to certain adjustments … However, this figure is misleading as the entirety of the Purchase Price will be allocated towards the real property and therefore flow to benefit the purported landlord (MPT and Macquarie) and more specifically will flow to the purported landlord’s secured lender,” the FILO lenders wrote in the objection.

    The objection from the IRS relates to a section of each asset purchase agreement that says Steward has filed all of its tax returns. The federal government says that isn’t actually the case, echoing the way state government was repeatedly frustrated by Steward’s failure to file financial disclosures.

    “The United States states that either the terms of the respective Asset Purchase Agreements should be revised to correctly reflect that certain required federal tax returns for certain of the Seller Debtors have not been filed with the IRS and that the applicable Seller Debtor has a legal obligation to file such tax return,” or the court should require Steward to file the returns in question before the transactions close, the U.S. Department of Justice wrote on behalf of the IRS.

    The limited objection from the Archdiocese of Boston stems back to the history of many Steward hospitals as part of the Caritas Christi network. The church said its sale of the hospitals to Steward in 2010 was the best option “that would allow the Hospitals to continue to operate as Catholic health care facilities.”

    An agreement between the archdiocese and Steward requires the company to return any and all religious items and remove “all symbols of Catholic identity (e.g. interior signage, trade and service marks associated with Catholic identity in both paper and electronic form) and cease using a list of Catholic-related names.

    The church said it would object to the hospital sales “to the extent that the Debtors seek to transfer the Restricted Names or the Religious Items or authorize the buyers to continue to use symbols of Catholic identity,” but added that it appears no such transfer is contemplated. That suggests that there will be new names for St. Elizabeth’s Medical Center, the Holy Family hospitals, St. Anne’s Hospital and Good Samaritan Medical Center, since the church says Steward “acknowledged and agreed that the … names were ‘integrally related’ to the Hospitals’ Catholic identity.”

    [ad_2]

    By Colin A. Young | State House News Service

    Source link

  • Steward’s creditors accused of ‘brinkmanship’

    Steward’s creditors accused of ‘brinkmanship’

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — The Healey administration is lashing out at Steward Health Care System’s creditors for seeking to block $30 million in state funding to help transition the bankrupt company’s hospitals to new owners.

    In a new filing in U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Assistant Attorney General Andrew Troop accuses a group representing creditors seeking to collect $9 billion in debt from Steward of engaging in “brinksmanship” in an effort “to wring out more value from qualified bidders or the commonwealth to salvage their own bad financial, investment or lending decisions.”

    “Many of these creditors seem to have lost sight of the importance of providing safe healthcare over the long term, and instead seem intent on saddling bidders with potentially critical levels of debt or obligations, which will only make this crisis a recurring one,” Troop wrote in the seven-page statement.

    While the state is “unable” to stop Steward from closing the two hospitals, Troop said it still has “significant police powers” to intervene in the federal bankruptcy process if it “does not result in a clear path to the sale of the hospitals.”

    The fiery statement comes as a federal judge in Texas weighs a request from a group representing Steward’s myriad creditors to reject Gov. Maura Healey’s plan to devote $30 million in repurposed Medicaid funding to help transition the sale of six of Steward’s hospitals as part of the company’s bankruptcy proceedings.

    Steward plans to put its 31 U.S. hospitals – including Holy Family’s locations in Methuen and Haverhill – up for sale to pay down $9 billion in outstanding liabilities owed to creditors. The company filed for federal bankruptcy protections in May.

    Steward said it was not able to find buyers for Carney Hospital in Dorchester and Nashoba Valley Medical Center in Ayer and announced plans to shut down the facilities in the next 30 days.

    U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Lopez, who is overseeing the case, approved the request to close the hospitals following a hearing Wednesday in a Texas courtroom.

    Bids on Steward’s Massachusetts hospitals and other states were due last week, but the company has not disclosed prospective buyers. A hearing on the sales was scheduled for Thursday, but the company asked the federal judge presiding over the case to postpone the proceedings until Aug. 13, without citing a reason.

    Last week, Healey officials announced plans to provide $30 million in Medicaid funding to help ensure a “smooth transition” to new ownership for the company’s six remaining hospitals. Healey told reporters earlier this week that “not a dime” of the money will go to Steward or its management team.

    But in a court filing this week, a committee representing Steward’s creditors asked Lopez to block the move, arguing that the transition funding would come “at the expense of the rest of debtors, their estates and their creditors.”

    On Wednesday, Lopez approved a request by Steward and others to reject a master lease for all the hospital properties, saying the move “is in the best interests of the Debtors, their respective estates, creditors, and all parties in interest.”

    The Attorney General’s Office sided with Steward on the lease issue and has accused the hospitals’ landlords – Medical Properties Trust and Macquarie Asset Management – of trying to block the move “to extract concessions from the Steward estate and their mortgagee.

    “These hospitals – while each in name a lessee – have been forced to pay the costs typically associated with property ownership, including real estate taxes, maintenance, and insurance,” Troop said in the latest court filing.

    Steward’s landlords objected to the request to reject the master lease, arguing in court filings that federal law prohibits the company from stopping rent payments “when their express intention is to continue conducting business in the landlords’ property pending a proposed sale.”

    “If a debtor were permitted to reject a lease and stop paying rent, while continuing to conduct business in the landlord’s property, every debtor would do that,” lawyers for the two property owners wrote in a legal filing. “But of course that is not allowed.”

    During the hearing Wednesday, Lopez also heard arguments for approving the Healey administration’s request to use the $30 million for transition costs, but it was not clear when he would issue his ruling on the funding.

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Steward’s creditors accused of ‘brinkmanship’

    Steward’s creditors accused of ‘brinkmanship’

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — The Healey administration is lashing out at Steward Health Care System’s creditors for seeking to block $30 million in state funding to help transition the bankrupt company’s hospitals to new owners.

    In a new filing in U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Assistant Attorney General Andrew Troop accuses a group representing creditors seeking to collect $9 billion in debt from Steward of engaging in “brinksmanship” in an effort “to wring out more value from qualified bidders or the commonwealth to salvage their own bad financial, investment or lending decisions.”

    “Many of these creditors seem to have lost sight of the importance of providing safe healthcare over the long term, and instead seem intent on saddling bidders with potentially critical levels of debt or obligations, which will only make this crisis a recurring one,” Troop wrote in the seven-page statement.

    While the state is “unable” to stop Steward from closing the two hospitals, Troop said it still has “significant police powers” to intervene in the federal bankruptcy process if it “does not result in a clear path to the sale of the hospitals.”

    The fiery statement comes as a federal judge in Texas weighs a request from a group representing Steward’s myriad creditors to reject Gov. Maura Healey’s plan to devote $30 million in repurposed Medicaid funds to help transition the sale of six of Steward’s hospitals as part of the company’s bankruptcy proceedings.

    Steward plans to put its 31 U.S. hospitals — including Holy Family’s locations in Methuen and Haverhill — up for sale to pay down $9 billion in outstanding liabilities owed to creditors. The company filed for federal bankruptcy protections in May.

    Steward said it wasn’t able to find buyers for Carney Hospital in Dorchester and Nashoba Valley Medical Center in Ayer and announced plans to shut down the facilities in the next 30 days.

    U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Lopez, who is overseeing the case, approved the request to close the hospitals following a Wednesday hearing in a Texas courtroom.

    Bids on Steward’s Massachusetts hospitals and other states were due last week, but the company hasn’t disclosed prospective buyers. A hearing on the sales was scheduled for Thursday, but the company asked the federal judge presiding over the case to postpone the proceedings until Aug. 13, without citing a reason.

    Last week, Healey officials announced plans to provide $30 million in Medicaid funds to help ensure a “smooth transition” to new ownership for the company’s six remaining hospitals. Healey told reporters earlier this week that “not a dime” of the funds will go to Steward or its management team.

    But in a court filing this week, a committee representing Steward’s creditors asked Lopez to block the move, arguing that the transition funding would come “at the expense of the rest of debtors, their estates and their creditors.”

    On Wednesday, Lopez approved a request by Steward and others to reject a master lease for all the hospital properties, saying the move “is in the best interests of the Debtors, their respective estates, creditors, and all parties in interest.”

    The Attorney General’s office sided with Steward on the lease issue and has accused the hospitals’ landlords — Medical Properties Trust and Macquarie Asset Management — of trying to block the move “to extract concessions from the Steward estate and their mortgagee.

    “These hospitals – while each in name a lessee – have been forced to pay the costs typically associated with property ownership, including real estate taxes, maintenance, and insurance,” Troop said in the latest court filing.

    Steward’s landlords objected to the request to reject the master lease, arguing in court filings that federal law prohibits the company from stopping rent payments “when their express intention is to continue conducting business in the landlords’ property pending a proposed sale.”

    “If a debtor were permitted to reject a lease and stop paying rent, while continuing to conduct business in the landlord’s property, every debtor would do that,” lawyers for the two property owners wrote in a legal filing. “But of course that is not allowed.”

    During Wednesday’s hearing, Lopez also heard arguments for approving the Healey administration’s request to use the $30 million for transition costs, but it wasn’t clear when he would issue his ruling on the funding.

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Steward delays hearings on hospital sales

    Steward delays hearings on hospital sales

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Bankrupt Steward Health Care System is delaying hearings on the sale of its Massachusetts hospitals by another two weeks, as the company finalizes lease terms and state funding, according to a new court filing.

    The delay, which pushes back the hearing date to Aug. 13, comes two days before the company was scheduled to appear before a federal bankruptcy judge in Texas to receive approval to sell its hospitals in Massachusetts, Arkansas, Louisiana, Ohio and Pennsylvania to pay off creditors.

    The company didn’t cite a reason for the delay and it is not clear if U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Lopez will approve the request.

    Steward, which filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in May, is putting its 31 U.S. hospitals up for sale beginning this month to pay down $9 billion in outstanding liabilities owed to creditors as part of the bankruptcy proceedings. The company has eight hospitals in Massachusetts, two of which are being closed.

    Steward has received bids for the six hospitals, including Holy Family Hospital in Methuen and Haverhill, but has yet to identify bidders or disclose the sale prices. It plans to sell its hospitals in Dorchester and Ayer after failing to reach adequate terms with prospective buyers.

    Meanwhile, the state’s taxpayers could be on the hook for $30 million to support Steward’s hospitals as they are shut down or transitioned to new owners.

    A proposal filed by Steward on Friday as an emergency motion seeks approval of the payment and an expedited plan to close Carney Hospital in Dorchester and Nashoba Valley Medical Center in Ayer as part of the bankruptcy proceedings. It’s not clear if that request has been approved.

    Karissa Hand, a spokeswoman for Gov. Maura Healey, said the $30 million, which does not require legislative approval, will “ensure that patients can continue to access care and workers can keep their jobs until Carney and Nashoba Valley close and the remaining hospitals are transitioned to new owners.”

    “Because of Steward and Ralph de la Torre’s greed and mismanagement, these hospitals are in bankruptcy and starved of the resources needed to keep operating for another month,” she said in a statement.

    The payments are “advances” on Medicaid funding that the state owes Steward, according to the Healey administration, and cannot be used for rent payments, debt service or management fees.

    Healey has blasted the company’s decision to close the two hospitals and called on the company to disclose details of the sale of the other hospitals.

    “It is time for Steward and their real estate partners to finally put the communities they serve over their own selfish greed,” she said in a statement Friday. “They need to finalize these deals that are in their best interest and the best interest of patients and workers.”

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • George Santos Funds Legal Defense By Selling Official Ray-Bans For 90% Off

    George Santos Funds Legal Defense By Selling Official Ray-Bans For 90% Off

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON—Reeling in the wake of his indictment on 13 federal charges, including wire fraud and money laundering, Rep. George Santos (R-NY) revealed Thursday that he would fund his legal defense by selling official Ray-Bans for 90% off. “These are the real deal and going for much, much cheaper than market price,” the embattled representative said in a fundraising email to his constituents, which included a 500-character-long hyperlink ending in a .tz domain name. “One day only, tell you friends [sic]. I had a buddy and apparently they just fall off his truck. There’s nothing wrong with them. See, the picutres [sic]. These are the real deal w/ frames and lenses. Color your choice. Just input your info and social. They ship in twenty weeks.” The email went on to say that if supporters acted quickly in helping Santos defeat the charges, he could throw in a “Guci [sic] bag” at a massive discount.

    High School Student, Teacher Applying For Same Summer Waitressing Job

    [ad_2]

    Source link