ReportWire

Tag: Corporate legal affairs

  • Mississippi grain company’s ex-CEO indicted on fraud charges

    Mississippi grain company’s ex-CEO indicted on fraud charges

    [ad_1]

    GREENVILLE, Miss. — The former leader of a Mississippi grain storage and processing company has been indicted on federal and state charges, more than a year after the company filed for bankruptcy, prosecutors said Tuesday.

    John R. Coleman, 46, of Greenwood, Mississippi, is the former CEO of Express Grain Terminals, LLC.

    A federal grand jury indicted Coleman on charges of defrauding farmers, banks and the Mississippi Department of Agriculture, U.S. Attorney Clay Joyner and Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch said in a news release.

    Coleman made his initial appearance Tuesday before U.S. Magistrate Judge Jane M. Virden in Greenville. Federal court records did not list an attorney for him.

    Federal court documents say that from June 2018 to October 2022, Coleman altered Express Grain’s audited financial statements to receive a state warehouse license and lied about the amount of debt he owed on corn, wheat, soybeans or other crops held at the facility.

    The federal indictment said farmers delivered grain to Express Grain throughout the 2021 harvest season but did not receive payment.

    The indictment said that Express Grain sent an email to customers on Sept. 28, 2021, with wording approved by Coleman. The message said the company was in good financial shape.

    “We have funding from multiple sources to make sure everyone gets paid on time,” the company email said. “Stay safe out there and keep those combines rolling!”

    The next day, Express Grain eventually filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

    “Coleman’s fraud caused widespread financial hardship and suffering throughout the Mississippi Delta and elsewhere,” the federal indictment said.

    In September 2021, Express Grain had $70 million in outstanding loans from UMB Bank in Kansas City, Missouri.

    If convicted on the federal charges, Coleman would face up to 180 years in prison.

    Fitch also said a Leflore County grand jury has indicted Coleman on five counts of making false representations to defraud government and one count of false pretenses.

    The FBI, the Mississippi Attorney General’s Office, the U.S. Department of Agriculture Office of Inspector General and the Internal Revenue Service are investigating the case.

    Law enforcement agents raided the Express Grain offices and Coleman’s home in February, days before the company’s properties were sold at auction, the Greenwood Commonwealth reported. A legal battle over Express Grain’s proceeds was settled earlier this year. Farmers who chose to participate in the settlement were able to claim a share of $9 million.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Lawsuits claim negligence in Massachusetts Apple store crash

    Lawsuits claim negligence in Massachusetts Apple store crash

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — The family of a man who was badly hurt when an SUV crashed into an Apple store in Massachusetts, killing one person and injuring 20, sued the company, the driver and the property owners Tuesday in one of the first lawsuits filed over the crash.

    Matthew Timberger, of Falmouth, suffered broken bones and other serious injuries when the vehicle drove into the store in Hingham on Nov. 21, the lawsuit said. He and his family accuse the driver of negligently operating the vehicle, and Apple and the property owners of negligently failing to place barriers that might have prevented a car from entering the store.

    “The frontage of the Apple Store features tall glass windows and doors, reaching all the way to the ground. These glass windows and doors are not designed or engineered or reinforced in such a way where they would act as an effective barrier against a moving motor vehicle,” the lawsuit said.

    Neither Apple nor property owners and managers WS Development immediately responded to messages seeking comment.

    Doug Sheff, an attorney for the family, said that while there were no protective barriers in front of the store, the shopping plaza did have them in front of electrical fixtures and trash receptacles behind the building.

    Two store employees have also sued over the crash, though they did not name Apple as a defendant.

    Driver Bradley Rein has pleaded not guilty to charges that he was reckless when the SUV crashed through the window.

    Rein told police he was looking for an eyeglass store at the shopping center when his right foot became stuck on the accelerator, according to court documents. He said he used his left foot to try to brake but couldn’t stop the vehicle.

    A phone number could not be located for Rein, who was being represented by a public defender on the criminal charges. It wasn’t immediately clear if he had a lawyer representing him in the lawsuits.

    The Timberger family, including Timberger’s wife, Christina, and their two children, are seeking damages that include compensation for his injuries, lost earnings and harm to their family relationships.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Gas driller pleads no contest to polluting town’s water

    Gas driller pleads no contest to polluting town’s water

    [ad_1]

    MONTROSE, Pa. — Pennsylvania’s most active gas driller pleaded no contest Tuesday to criminal charges, capping a landmark environmental case against a company that prosecutors say polluted a rural community’s drinking water 14 years ago and then tried to evade responsibility.

    Residents of the tiny crossroads of Dimock in northeastern Pennsylvania say they have gone more than a decade without a clean, reliable source of drinking water after their aquifer was ruined by Houston-based Coterra Energy Inc.

    Under a plea deal entered in Susquehanna County Court, Coterra agreed to pay $16.29 million to fund construction of a new public water system and pay the impacted residents’ water bills for the next 75 years.

    “After more than decade of denials, of shirking responsibility and accountability, Coterra pleaded to their crime, and the people of Dimock finally had their day in court,” Attorney General Josh Shapiro, the state’s incoming governor, said outside the courtroom. “Today is further proof that you don’t get to just walk away from the harm you do here in Pennsylvania.”

    The plea — the result of years of negotiations between Coterra and the attorney general’s office — represents a milestone in one of the most prominent pollution cases ever to emerge from the U.S. drilling and fracking boom. Dimock drew national notoriety after residents were filmed lighting their tap water on fire in the Emmy Award-winning 2010 documentary “Gasland.”

    Coterra’s corporate predecessor, Cabot Oil & Gas Corp., was charged in June 2020 with 15 criminal counts, most of them felonies, after a grand jury investigation found the company drilled faulty gas wells that leaked flammable methane into residential water supplies in Dimock and surrounding communities.

    The grand jury blasted what it called Cabot’s “long-term indifference to the damage it caused to the environment and citizens of Susquehanna County.”

    Cabot, which merged with Denver-based Cimarex Energy Co. to form Coterra, has long maintained the gas in residents’ water was naturally occurring.

    Coterra pleaded no contest to a misdemeanor charge of prohibition against discharge of industrial wastes under the state’s Clean Streams Law. The plea means Coterra does not admit guilt but agreed to accept criminal responsibility.

    “Coterra has worked closely with the Office of Attorney General to resolve historical matters and create a path forward for all parties,” company spokesperson George Stark said via email. He said Coterra ”strives to follow best practices, exceed industry standards, and to continue to be a valuable community partner.”

    Many residents have avoided using their well water since the aquifer was contaminated with methane and heavy metals, using bottled water, bulk water purchased commercially, and even water drawn from creeks and artesian wells instead.

    “These people had to find very creative ways to get water for their homes, water for their families, their kids, their critters, and it was not pretty,” Dimock resident Victoria Switzer said Tuesday. “It was just crazy, people trying to find water.”

    Switzer, whose house will be connected to the new water line, called it “wonderful news” — and a long time coming.

    Another resident, Scott Ely, said some of his neighbors had moved away or developed health problems as a result of Coterra’s practices, while his own children, now in college, had grown up “without a safe water source.”

    “There’s so much heartache,” he said.

    Residents were informed of the plea deal last week. A public utility, Pennsylvania American Water, plans to drill two wells — what it calls a “public groundwater system” — and build a treatment plant that will remove any contaminants from the water before piping it to about 20 homes in Dimock. The utility estimates that construction will take about three years, during which Coterra will be required to provide individual treatment systems and bottled water to impacted residents.

    The settlement comes near the end of Shapiro’s tenure as attorney general.

    On Tuesday, Shapiro, a Democrat who will be sworn in as governor in January, pledged more aggressive regulatory oversight of the industry.

    “We have to change our regulatory structure here in the commonwealth,” Shapiro said. “We have to make sure we are setting clear rules of the road and holding industry accountable. If the regulators fail to do that, then industry is not going to be constrained and they’re going to go ahead and put profits before people. And that’s where the danger comes in.”

    Shapiro demurred on the question of whether Coterra would be permitted to resume drilling in a 9-square-mile (23-square-kilometer) area of Dimock where it has long been banned. Shpairo said he would review the matter with his new environmental secretary after taking office as governor.

    The criminal case has not slowed Coterra’s business. It is the leading shale gas driller in the nation’s No. 2 natural gas-producing state.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Virginia Walmart mass shooting survivor files $50M lawsuit

    Virginia Walmart mass shooting survivor files $50M lawsuit

    [ad_1]

    NORFOLK, Va. — A Walmart employee who survived last week’s mass shooting at a store in Virginia has filed a $50 million lawsuit against the company for allegedly continuing to employ the shooter — a store supervisor — “who had known propensities for violence, threats and strange behavior.”

    The lawsuit, which appears to be the first to stem from the shooting, was filed Tuesday in Chesapeake Circuit Court by Donya Prioleau.

    Walmart, which is headquartered in Bentonville, Arkansas, said in a statement that it was reviewing the complaint and will respond “as appropriate with the court.”

    “The entire Walmart family is heartbroken by the loss of the valued members of our team,” the company said. “Our deepest sympathies go out to our associates and everyone impacted, including those who were injured. We are focused on supporting all our associates with significant resources, including counseling.”

    Prioleau’s suit alleges that she has experienced post-traumatic stress disorder, including physical and emotional distress, from witnessing the rampage in the store’s breakroom on Nov. 22. Her lawsuit offers fresh details of the terrifying attack and provides a long list of troubling signs displayed by the shooter that she claims managers failed to address.

    “Bullets whizzed by Plaintiff Donya Prioleau’s face and left side, barely missing her,” the lawsuit states. “She witnessed several of her coworkers being brutally murdered on either side of her.”

    The lawsuit adds: “Ms. Prioleau looked at one of her coworkers in the eyes right after she had been shot in the neck. Ms. Prioleau saw the bullet wound in her coworker’s neck, the blood rushing out of it, and the shocked look on her coworker’s helpless face.”

    Store supervisor Andre Bing, 31, fatally shot six employees and wounded several others before he died of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot, police said.

    The lawsuit alleges that Bing “had a personal vendetta against several Walmart employees and kept a ‘kill list’ of potential targets prior to the shooting.”

    The list is in reference to a “death note” found on Bing’s phone and released Friday by authorities. The note appeared to contain specific references to people he worked with, but authorities redacted their names.

    Bing was a Walmart team leader who had worked for the company since 2010. He was responsible for managing the overnight stocking crew, including Prioleau, who started her job in May 2021, the lawsuit says.

    The lawsuit claims management knew or should have known about Bing’s disturbing behavior and lists several instances of alarming conduct.

    “Prior to the shooting, Mr. Bing repeatedly asked coworkers if they had received their active shooter training,” the suit states. “When coworkers responded that they had, Mr. Bing just smiled and walked away without saying anything.”

    Bing “made comments to other Walmart employees and managers suggesting that he would be violent if fired or disciplined,” according to the suit, which also says Bing “was disciplined leading up to the shooting, making his violent outburst predictable.”

    In another instance, Bing told co-workers “he ran over a turtle with a lawnmower just to see its (guts) spray out, which made him hungry and reminded him of ramen noodles,” the lawsuit says.

    Bing was previously disciplined for bad behavior and harassing employees, but Walmart “kept employing him anyway,” the suit says.

    In her court filing, Prioleau states that she and her mother attempted to take action against Bing.

    Prioleau had submitted a formal complaint on a Walmart Global Ethics Statement Form indicating that Bing had “bizarrely and inappropriately commented on Ms. Prioleau’s age,” the lawsuit stated.

    The lawsuit alleges that Bing told her: “Isn’t your lady clock ticking? Shouldn’t you be having kids?”

    Prioleau also complained that Bing had harassed her for “being poor and being short,” according to the lawsuit.

    The lawsuit states that she also informed Walmart that Bing called her a “bitch” under his breath.

    In September, Prioleau’s mother expressed concerns to a Walmart manager about her daughter’s safety “because it appeared their concerns were falling on deaf ears,” the lawsuit states.

    The manager said “there was nothing that could be done about Mr. Bing because he was liked by management,” according to the suit.

    Before the shooting, Bing told co-workers that “the government was watching him,” the suit says. “He kept black tape on his phone camera so no one could spy on him.”

    In the note left on his phone, Bing claimed he was harassed and said he was pushed to the brink by a perception that his phone was hacked. The note also accused colleagues of mocking him.

    Bing’s death note rambles at times through 11 paragraphs, with references to nontraditional cancer treatments and songwriting. He says people unfairly compared him to serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer.

    Jessica Wilczewski, a Walmart employee who witnessed the shooting, told The Associated Press last week that Bing seemed to target certain people.

    “The way he was acting — he was going hunting,” she said.

    In a note to employees on Tuesday, Walmart president and CEO John Furner wrote that the people who were killed were “amazing, irreplaceable members of our family.”

    “The Walmart Foundation also intends to contribute $1 million to the United Way of South Hampton Roads’ Hope & Healing Fund, which will support those impacted by the shooting and the broader Chesapeake community,” Furner wrote.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Survivor of Virginia Walmart mass shooting files $50M suit

    Survivor of Virginia Walmart mass shooting files $50M suit

    [ad_1]

    NORFOLK, Va. — A Walmart employee who survived last week’s mass shooting at a store in Virginia has filed a $50 million lawsuit against the company for allegedly continuing to employ the shooter — a store supervisor — “who had known propensities for violence, threats and strange behavior.”

    The lawsuit, which appears to be the first to stem from the shooting, was filed Tuesday in Chesapeake Circuit Court by Donya Prioleau. Walmart, which is headquartered in Bentonville, Arkansas, did not immediately respond to a written request seeking comment on the litigation.

    Prioleau’s suit alleges that she has experienced post-traumatic stress disorder, including physical and emotional distress, from witnessing the rampage in the store’s breakroom on Nov. 22.

    “Bullets whizzed by Plaintiff Donya Prioleau’s face and left side, barely missing her,” the lawsuit states. “She witnessed several of her coworkers being brutally murdered on either side of her.”

    The lawsuit adds: “Ms. Prioleau looked at one of her coworkers in the eyes right after she had been shot in the neck. Ms. Prioleau saw the bullet wound in her coworker’s neck, the blood rushing out of it, and the shocked look on her coworker’s helpless face.”

    Store supervisor Andre Bing, 31, fatally shot six employees and wounded several others before he died of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot, police said.

    The lawsuit alleges that Bing “had a personal vendetta against several Walmart employees and kept a ‘kill list’ of potential targets prior to the shooting.”

    The lawsuit also states that Prioleau had submitted a formal complaint on a Walmart Global Ethics Statement Form indicating that Bing had “bizarrely and inappropriately commented on Ms. Prioleau’s age.”

    The lawsuit alleges that Bing told her: “Isn’t your lady clock ticking? Shouldn’t you be having kids?”

    Prioleau also complained that Bing had harassed her for “being poor and being short,” according to the lawsuit.

    The lawsuit states that she also informed Walmart that Bing called her a “bitch” under his breath.

    “Despite Mr. Bing’s long-standing pattern of disturbing and threatening behavior, Walmart knew or should have known about Mr. Bing’s disturbing and threatening behavior, but failed to terminate Mr. Bing, restrict his access to common areas, conduct a thorough background investigation, or subject him to a mental health examination,” the lawsuit states.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Dominican sugar imports tied to forced labor rejected by US

    Dominican sugar imports tied to forced labor rejected by US

    [ad_1]

    SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico — The U.S. government announced Wednesday that it will detain all imports of sugar and related products made in the Dominican Republic by Central Romana Corporation, Ltd. amid allegations that it uses forced labor.

    A U.S. Customs and Border Protection investigation found that the company allegedly isolated workers, withheld wages, fostered abusive working and living conditions and pushed for excessive overtime, the agency said in a news release.

    “Manufacturers like Central Romana, who fail to abide by our laws, will face consequences as we root out these inhumane practices from U.S. supply chains,” said AnnMarie Highsmith with the CBP’s Office of Trade.

    A spokeswoman for the company did not immediately return a text message seeking comment. La Central Romana, which has long faced those types of accusations, is the Dominican Republic’s largest sugar producer.

    The announcement was cheered by activists who have long decried the treatment of tens of thousands of workers who live and work on sprawling sugarcane fields, many of them Haitian migrants or descendants of them.

    “This is needed to improve their situation,” Roudy Joseph, a labor rights activist in the Dominican Republic, said in a phone interview. “We’ve been asking for improvements for decades.”

    The Associated Press last year visited several sugarcane fields owned by Central Romana where workers complained about a lack of wages, being forced to live in cramped housing that lacked water and restrictive rules including not being allowed to grow a garden to feed their families since transportation to the nearest grocery store miles away was too costly.

    Joseph noted that at least 6,000 workers also are demanding pensions they never obtained despite paying their dues.

    Sugarcane workers also have organized several protests this year to demand permanent residencies after working for decades in the Dominican Republic as the country cracks down on Haitian migrants under the administration of President Luis Abinader in a move that has drawn heavy international criticism.

    Central Romana produced nearly 400,000 tons (363,000 metric tons) of sugar in the harvest period that ended last year after grinding more than 3.4 million tons (3 million metric tons) of cane, according to the company.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Justices asked to hear dog toy dispute. Will they bite?

    Justices asked to hear dog toy dispute. Will they bite?

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — The company that makes Jack Daniel’s is howling mad over a squeaking dog toy that parodies the whiskey’s signature bottle. Now, the liquor company is barking at the door of the Supreme Court.

    Jack Daniel’s has asked the justices to hear its case against the manufacturer of the plastic Bad Spaniels toy. The high court could say as soon as Monday whether the justices will agree. A number of major companies from the makers of Campbell Soup to outdoor brand Patagonia and jeans maker Levi Strauss have urged the justices to take what they say is an important case for trademark law.

    The toy that has Jack Daniel’s so doggone mad mimics the square shape of its whisky bottle as well as its black-and-white label and amber-colored liquor while adding what it calls “poop humor.” While the original bottle has the words “Old No. 7 brand” and “Tennessee Sour Mash Whiskey,” the parody proclaims: “The Old No. 2 on Your Tennessee Carpet.” Instead of the original’s note that it is 40% alcohol by volume, the parody says it’s “43% Poo by Vol.” and “100% Smelly.”

    The back of the toy, which retails for about $13 to $20, says in small font “this product is not affiliated with Jack Daniel Distillery.”

    The toy’s maker says Jack Daniel’s can’t take a joke. “It is ironic that America’s leading distiller of whiskey both lacks a sense of humor and does not recognize when it — and everyone else — has had enough,” lawyers for Arizona-based VIP Products wrote the high court. They told the justices that Jack Daniel’s has “waged war” against the company for “having the temerity to produce a pun-filled parody” of its bottle.

    But Jack Daniel’s lead attorney, Lisa Blatt, made no bones about the company’s position in her filing.

    “To be sure, everyone likes a good joke. But VIP’s profit-motivated ‘joke’ confuses consumers by taking advantage of Jack Daniel’s hard-earned goodwill,” she wrote for the Louisville, Kentucky-based Brown-Forman Corp., Jack Daniel’s parent company.

    Blatt wrote that a lower court decision provides “near-blanket protection” to humorous trademark infringement. And she said it has “broad and dangerous consequences,” pointing to children who were hospitalized after eating marijuana-infused products that mimicked candy packaging.

    If VIP Products is allowed to confuse consumers with dog toys, “other funny infringers can do the same with juice boxes or marijuana-infused candy,” Blatt wrote.

    The toy is part of a line of VIP Products called Silly Squeakers that mimic liquor, beer, wine and soda bottles. They include Mountain Drool, which parodies Mountain Dew, and Heini Sniff’n, which parodies Heineken. A court in 2008 barred the company from selling its Budweiser parody, ButtWiper.

    After the company began selling its Bad Spaniels toy in 2014, Jack Daniel’s told the company to stop, but VIP went to court to be allowed to continue to sell its product. Jack Daniel’s won the first round in court but lost an appeal. The case reached the Supreme Court at an earlier stage, but the justices didn’t bite.

    Bad Spaniels isn’t the only parody puppy toy to draw the ire of the brand it imitated. Luxury bag maker Louis Vuitton sued the makers of Chewy Vuiton over their plush purse dog toys. In 2007 a federal appeals court sided with the chew toy’s manufacturers, Nevada-based Haute Diggity Dog. Louis Vuitton didn’t appeal to the Supreme Court.

    The case is Jack Daniel’s Properties Inc. v. VIP Products LLC, 22-148.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Justices asked to hear dog toy dispute. Will they bite?

    Justices asked to hear dog toy dispute. Will they bite?

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — The company that makes Jack Daniel’s is howling mad over a squeaking dog toy that parodies the whiskey’s signature bottle. Now, the liquor company is barking at the door of the Supreme Court.

    Jack Daniel’s has asked the justices to hear its case against the manufacturer of the plastic Bad Spaniels toy. The high court could say as soon as Monday whether the justices will agree. A number of major companies from the makers of Campbell Soup to outdoor brand Patagonia and jeans maker Levi Strauss have urged the justices to take what they say is an important case for trademark law.

    The toy that has Jack Daniel’s so doggone mad mimics the square shape of its whisky bottle as well as its black-and-white label and amber-colored liquor while adding what it calls “poop humor.” While the original bottle has the words “Old No. 7 brand” and “Tennessee Sour Mash Whiskey,” the parody proclaims: “The Old No. 2 on Your Tennessee Carpet.” Instead of the original’s note that it is 40% alcohol by volume, the parody says it’s “43% Poo by Vol.” and “100% Smelly.”

    The back of the toy, which retails for about $13 to $20, says in small font “this product is not affiliated with Jack Daniel Distillery.”

    The toy’s maker says Jack Daniel’s can’t take a joke. “It is ironic that America’s leading distiller of whiskey both lacks a sense of humor and does not recognize when it — and everyone else — has had enough,” lawyers for Arizona-based VIP Products wrote the high court. They told the justices that Jack Daniel’s has “waged war” against the company for “having the temerity to produce a pun-filled parody” of its bottle.

    But Jack Daniel’s lead attorney, Lisa Blatt, made no bones about the company’s position in her filing.

    “To be sure, everyone likes a good joke. But VIP’s profit-motivated ‘joke’ confuses consumers by taking advantage of Jack Daniel’s hard-earned goodwill,” she wrote for the Louisville, Kentucky-based Brown-Forman Corp., Jack Daniel’s parent company.

    Blatt wrote that a lower court decision provides “near-blanket protection” to humorous trademark infringement. And she said it has “broad and dangerous consequences,” pointing to children who were hospitalized after eating marijuana-infused products that mimicked candy packaging.

    If VIP Products is allowed to confuse consumers with dog toys, “other funny infringers can do the same with juice boxes or marijuana-infused candy,” Blatt wrote.

    The toy is part of a line of VIP Products called Silly Squeakers that mimic liquor, beer, wine and soda bottles. They include Mountain Drool, which parodies Mountain Dew, and Heini Sniff’n, which parodies Heineken. A court in 2008 barred the company from selling its Budweiser parody, ButtWiper.

    After the company began selling its Bad Spaniels toy in 2014, Jack Daniel’s told the company to stop, but VIP went to court to be allowed to continue to sell its product. Jack Daniel’s won the first round in court but lost an appeal. The case reached the Supreme Court at an earlier stage, but the justices didn’t bite.

    Bad Spaniels isn’t the only parody puppy toy to draw the ire of the brand it imitated. Luxury bag maker Louis Vuitton sued the makers of Chewy Vuiton over their plush purse dog toys. In 2007 a federal appeals court sided with the chew toy’s manufacturers, Nevada-based Haute Diggity Dog. Louis Vuitton didn’t appeal to the Supreme Court.

    The case is Jack Daniel’s Properties Inc. v. VIP Products LLC, 22-148.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Missouri summer camp operators sued over abuse settlement

    Missouri summer camp operators sued over abuse settlement

    [ad_1]

    A Tennessee man filed a lawsuit Friday claiming that operators of the Kanakuk Camps in Branson, Missouri, lied to him and his parents while persuading them to sign a settlement over sexual abuse by a camp counselor.

    Logan Yandell, 27, of Hendersonville, Tennessee, and his parents reached a confidential settlement with Kanakuk in 2010 that included a non-disclosure agreement after Yandell was abused by Peter Newman, who is serving two life sentences for sexually abusing multiple children while working for the Christian summer camps.

    The lawsuit names Kanakuk Ministries, Kanakuk CEO Joe White, Kanakuk Heritage Inc., Westchester Fire Insurance Company and a John Doe.

    A statement from Kanakuk said the company just received the lawsuit on Friday and does not comment on pending litigation.

    “We will respond further if or when appropriate,” the company said. “In the meantime, we continue to pray for all who have been affected by Pete Newman’s behavior.

    Yandell was sexually abused while attending the summer camp and other activities between 2005 and 2008.

    The lawsuit alleges that Kanakuk officials claimed they did not know about Newman’s sexual abuse of children prior to his arrest but the Yandell family later learned that wasn’t true.

    In December 2021, the conservative online news outlet The Dispatch reported that Newman’s supervisor, Will Cunningham, recommended in 2003 that Newman be fired because of reports of child sexual abuse, including participating in several activities with children while nude, “counseling” them in a hot tub and sleeping alone with children.

    The lawsuit filed Friday contains an affidavit from Cunningham confirming that he wanted Newman fired. Instead, White overruled the suggestion and promoted Newman to camp director, according to the lawsuit.

    The family would not have signed the settlement and non-disclosure agreement if they had known that Kanakuk officials had lied to them, Brian Kent, one of the family’s attorneys, said Friday.

    He said company officials took advantage of the family.

    “Knowing that the Yandells were really trying to deal with making sure their child is OK and getting him better, this was a clear effort by Joe White and Kanakuk to advise them this is something they should do. And they lied to them in order to get them to sign.”

    The lawsuit is not a class action but Kent said it’s possible more of Newman’s victims will file similar lawsuits because of the new information.

    The Associated Press generally does not name victims of sexual abuse but Yandell is named in the lawsuit and has publicly discussed his case.

    One of the reasons the family decided to file the lawsuit 12 years after signing the settlement was to allow Yandell to “get his voice back and have his voice heard,” Kent said.

    Newman is serving two life sentences plus 30 years in state prison after his 2010 sentencing on seven felony counts of sexually abusing boys while he was a Kanakuk counselor. The number of victims is believed to be in the hundreds, according to the lawsuit.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elizabeth Holmes faces sentencing for her Theranos crimes

    Elizabeth Holmes faces sentencing for her Theranos crimes

    [ad_1]

    A federal judge on Friday will decide whether disgraced Theranos CEO Elizabeth Holmes should serve a lengthy prison sentence for duping investors and endangering patients while peddling a bogus blood-testing technology.

    Holmes’ sentencing in the same San Jose, California, courtroom where she was convicted on four counts of investor fraud and conspiracy in January marks a climactic moment in a saga that has been dissected in an HBO documentary and an award-winning Hulu TV series about her meteoric rise and mortifying downfall.

    U.S. District Judge Edward Davila will take center stage as he weighs the federal government’s recommendation to send Holmes, 38, to federal prison for 15 years. That’s less than the maximum sentence of 20 years she could face, but her legal team is asking for incarceration of no more than 18 months, preferably served in home confinement.

    Her lawyers have argued that Holmes deserves more lenient treatment as a well-meaning entrepreneur who is now a devoted mother with another child on the way. Their arguments were supported by more than 130 letters submitted by family, friends and former colleagues praising Holmes.

    A probation report also submitted to Davila recommended a nine-year prison sentence for Holmes.

    Prosecutors want Holmes to pay $804 million in restitution. The amount covers most of the nearly $1 billion that Holmes raised from a list of sophisticated investors that included software magnate Larry Ellison, media mogul Rupert Murdoch, and the Walton family behind Walmart.

    While wooing investors, Holmes leveraged a high-powered Theranos board that included former U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis, who testified against her during her trial, and two former U.S. Secretaries of State, Henry Kissinger and the late George Shultz, whose son submitted a statement blasting Holmes for concocting a scheme that played Shultz “for the fool.”

    Davila’s judgment – and Holmes’ reporting date for a potential stint in prison — could be affected by her second pregnancy in two years. After giving birth to a son shortly before her trial started last year, Holmes became pregnant at some point while free on bail this year.

    Although her lawyers didn’t mention the pregnancy in a 82-page memo submitted to Davila last week, the pregnancy was confirmed in a letter from her current partner, William “Billy” Evans, that urged the judge to be merciful.

    In that 12-page letter, which included pictures of Holmes doting on their 1-year-old son, Evans mentioned that Holmes participated in a Golden Gate Bridge swimming event earlier this year while pregnant. He also noted Holmes suffered through a case of COVID-19 in August while pregnant. Evans didn’t disclose Holmes’ due date in his letter.

    Duncan Levin, a former federal prosecutor who is now a defense attorney, predicted that Davila’s sentencing decision won’t be swayed by the pregnancy, but expects the judge to allow her to remain free until after the baby is born.

    “She will be no more of a flight risk after she is sentenced than she was while awaiting sentencing,” Levin said. “We have to temper our sentences with some measure of humanity.”

    The pregnancy makes it more likely Davila will be criticized no matter what sentence he imposes, predicted Amanda Kramer, another former federal prosecutor.

    “There is a pretty healthy debate about what kind of sentence is needed to effect general deterrence to send a message to others who are thinking of crossing that line from sharp salesmanship into material misrepresentation,” Kramer said.

    Federal prosecutor Robert Leach emphatically declared Holmes deserves a severe punishment for engineering a scam that he described as one of the most egregious white-collar crimes ever committed in Silicon Valley. In a scathing 46-page memo, Leach told the judge he has an opportunity to send a message that curbs the hubris and hyperbole unleashed by the tech boom of the past decade.

    Holmes “preyed on hopes of her investors that a young, dynamic entrepreneur had changed healthcare,” Leach wrote. “And through her deceit, she attained spectacular fame, adoration, and billions of dollars of wealth.”

    Even though Holmes was acquitted by a jury on four counts of fraud and conspiracy tied to patients who took Theranos blood tests, Leach also asked Davila to factor in the health threats posed by Holmes’ conduct.

    Holmes’ lawyer Kevin Downey painted her as a selfless visionary who spent 14 years of her life trying to revolutionize health care with a technology that was supposed to be able to scan for hundreds of diseases and other aliments with just a few drops of blood.

    Although evidence submitted during her trial showed the tests produced wildly unreliable results that could have steered patients in the wrong direction, her lawyers asserted Holmes never stopped trying to perfect the technology until Theranos collapsed in 2018. They also pointed out that Holmes never sold any of her Theranos shares — a stake valued at $4.5 billion in 2014 when Holmes was being hailed as the next Steve Jobs on the covers of business magazines.

    Defending herself against criminal charges has left Holmes with “substantial debt from which she is unlikely to recover,” Downey wrote, suggesting that she is unlikely ever to pay any restitution that Davila might order as part of her sentence.

    “Holmes is not a danger to society,” Downey wrote.

    Downey also asked Davila to consider the alleged sexual and emotional abuse Holmes suffered while she was involved romantically with Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani, who became a Theranos investor, top executive and eventually an accomplice in her crimes. Balwani, 57, is scheduled to be sentenced Dec. 7 after being convicted in a July trial on 12 counts of fraud and conspiracy.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Lawsuit accuses largest US meat producers of wage fixing

    Lawsuit accuses largest US meat producers of wage fixing

    [ad_1]

    DENVER — Three meat plant workers have filed a federal lawsuit accusing 11 of the United States’ largest beef and pork producers of conspiring to depress wages and benefits.

    The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Denver on Friday, seeks class-action status and alleges the producers have worked together since at least 2014 to keep workers’ compensation lower than the market would allow, violating the Sherman Antitrust Act.

    It was brought by two meat plant workers from Iowa and one from Georgia but seeks to represent hundreds of thousands of other people who have worked in jobs from slaughtering to production at the companies’ collective 140 plants. Together the plants produce about 80% of the red meat sold to U.S. consumers, according to the lawsuit.

    The companies are JBS USA Food Company, Cargill Inc., Hormel Foods Corp., American Foods Group LLC, Triumph Foods LLC, Seaboard Foods LLC, National Beef Packing Co. LLC, Iowa Premium LLC, Smithfield Foods Inc., Agri Beef Co. and Perdue Farms Inc., along with some subsidiaries.

    Cargill denied any wrongdoing.

    “While we cannot comment with specificity during the pendency of litigation, Cargill sets compensation independently to ensure that it pays fair and competitive wages to employees in each of the company’s plants,” company spokesman Daniel Sullivan said.

    Perdue Farms spokesperson Andrea Staub declined to comment, saying the company does not discuss pending lawsuits. Smithfield spokesperson Jim Monroe said the company has not had a chance to review the allegations and had no comment at this time. Representatives of the other companies did not immediately return emails and telephone messages seeking comment Wednesday.

    Two consulting companies that allegedly helped the meat producers exchange compensation information are also named as defendants in the lawsuit, which was filed by lawyers from Hagens Berman.

    “Our firm has secured $195 million in the poultry processing industry for the same antitrust behavior. The meat industry’s gravy train ends here,” the law firm’s managing partner, Steve Berman, said in an announcement of the lawsuit on Wednesday.

    The lawsuit alleges that the meat producers had secret meetings to discuss wages and communicated about them surreptitiously to avoid having any written records of the conversations.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Musk testifies in lawsuit over Tesla compensation package

    Musk testifies in lawsuit over Tesla compensation package

    [ad_1]

    WILMINGTON, Del. — Tesla CEO Elon Musk took the witness stand Wednesday to defend himself in a shareholder lawsuit challenging a compensation package he was awarded by the company’s board of directors that is potentially worth more than $55 billion.

    Musk denied that he dictated terms of the compensation package or attended any meetings at which the plan was discussed by the board, its compensation committee, or a working group that helped develop it.

    “I was entirely focused on the execution of the company,” he said.

    Plaintiff’s attorney Greg Varallo spent much of his early cross-examination trying to draw Musk into admitting that he controls Tesla to such an extent that he can sway the board to do his bidding. Among other things, Varallo questioned Musk about his title of “Technoking,” a role that Musk has previously noted comes with “panache” and “great dance moves.”

    “I think comedy is legal,” Musk told Varallo, who had questioned whether Musk was “stone-cold sober” when he came up with the title.

    Varallo also suggested that one of the reasons that Musk developed a “master plan” for Tesla was to let people know he was in charge. He also noted that Musk makes recommendations regarding compensation for senior executives, and that he unilaterally made the decision to pause Tesla’s policy of accepting bitcoin from vehicle purchasers.

    “You’re asking complex questions that can’t be answered ‘yes’ or ‘no’,” Musk said when Varallo asked whether he came up with the vision for Tesla.

    The lawsuit alleges that the performance-based stock option grant was negotiated by the compensation committee and approved by Tesla board members who had conflicts interest due to personal and professional ties to Musk, including investments in his companies. It also alleges the shareholder vote approving the compensation plan was based on a misleading proxy statement.

    The shareholder plaintiff alleges that the proxy wrongly described members of the compensation committee as “independent,” and characterized all of the milestones that triggered vesting in the stock options as “stretch” goals meant to be difficult to achieve, even though internal projections indicated that three operational milestones were likely to be achieved within 18 months of the stockholder vote.

    Attorneys for the defendants have noted that two institutional proxy advising firms that urged shareholders to reject the plan nevertheless noted that it would require “significant and perhaps historic achievements” and require growth that “appear stretching by any benchmark.”

    The plan called for Musk to reap billions if Tesla hit certain market capitalization and operational milestones. For each incidence of simultaneously meeting a market cap milestone and an operational milestone, Musk, who owned about 22% of Tesla when the plan was approved, would get stock equal to 1% of outstanding shares at the time of the grant. His interest in the company would grow to about 28% if the company’s market capitalization grew by $600 billion.

    Each milestone in the plan includes growing Tesla’s market capitalization by $50 billion and meeting aggressive revenue and pretax profit growth targets. Musk would receive the full benefit of the pay plan, $55.8 billion, only if Tesla hit a market capitalization of $650 billion and unprecedented revenue and earnings within a decade.

    To date, Tesla has achieved all 12 of the market capitalization milestones and 11 operational milestones, resulting in the vesting of 11 of the grant’s 12 tranches and providing Musk over $52.4 billion in stock option gains, according to the lawsuit. Since the grant was awarded, Tesla’s market capitalization has increased from $59 billion to more than $613 billion now, having briefly hit $1 trillion early this year. Musk has sold Tesla stock to finance the Twitter purchase, adding downward pressure on the shares.

    Shares of Tesla and other automakers have been battered this year, but the Austin, Texas, company earned $5.5 billion in 2021, blowing away the previous year’s profit of $721 million. It also produced a record 936,000 vehicles, nearly double vehicle production in 2020.

    Attorneys for the plaintiff have suggested that incentivizing Musk to remain at Tesla’s helm by offering a huge compensation package was unnecessary, because he’s never suggested that he might leave. They’ve also suggested that Musk’s true motive in negotiating the package was to fund his dream to colonize Mars.

    In a November 2017 email to former Tesla General Counsel Todd Maron, Musk expressed optimism that the compensation package would be seen in a favorable light.

    “Given that this will all go to causes that at least aspirationally maximize the probability of a good future for humanity, plus all Tesla shareholders will be super happy, I think this will be received well,” he wrote, adding that “it should come across as an ultra bullish view of the future.”

    While on the stand, Musk also said that he does not want to be the CEO of any company.

    “I expect to reduce my time at Twitter and find somebody else to run Twitter over time,” Musk said, according to multiple media reports.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump Org.’s longtime CFO testifies at company’s fraud trial

    Trump Org.’s longtime CFO testifies at company’s fraud trial

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — Donald Trump’s longtime finance chief took the witness stand Tuesday at the Trump Organization’s criminal tax fraud trial, making his long-awaited turn as the star prosecution witness after pleading guilty to evading taxes on $1.7 million in company-paid perks, including a Manhattan apartment and luxury cars.

    Allen Weisselberg, a senior adviser and former chief financial officer at Trump’s company, has intimate knowledge of the company’s financial dealings from his nearly five decades working there. But he is not expected to implicate Trump or any members of the Trump family in his testimony.

    Weisselberg’s testimony is required as part of a plea agreement he reached in August. If he testifies truthfully and meets other terms of the deal, he’ll be sentenced to five months in jail and could be released with good behavior after about 100 days. Otherwise, he could be sentenced to up to 15 years in prison.

    Weisselberg will remain free on bail until he is formally sentenced following the company’s trial.

    The Trump Organization — the entity through which former President Donald Trump manages his real estate holdings, marketing deals and other ventures — is accused of helping some top executives avoid paying income taxes on compensation they got in addition to their salaries over a 15-year span.

    Prosecutors argue that the Trump Organization — through its subsidiaries Trump Corp. and Trump Payroll Corp. — is liable for the scheme because Weisselberg, the longtime finance chief, was a “high managerial agent” entrusted to act on behalf of the company and its various entities.

    In pleading guilty, the 75-year-old Weisselberg pinned blame for the scheme on himself and other top company executives, including senior vice president and controller, Jeffrey McConney, who testified for the trial’s first five days.

    The Trump Organization has denied wrongdoing. Its lawyers allege that Weisselberg concocted the scheme on his own, without Trump or the Trump family’s knowledge, and that the company didn’t benefit from his actions. If convicted, the company could be fined more than $1 million.

    The company’s lawyers spent part of Monday and Tuesday’s court sessions attempting to preempt Weisselberg testimony, using their cross-examination questioning to underscore their assertion that others at the company, including Trump, knew nothing about the scheme.

    The first two prosecution witnesses — McConney and company accounts payable supervisor Deborah Tarasoff — portrayed Weisselberg as a rogue agent who stressed secrecy about his various financial arrangements.

    Both witnesses worked under Weisselberg, and both testified that they aided him in hiding benefits — telling jurors that they were just following orders. Tarasoff agreed with a defense lawyer’s description of Weisselberg as an exacting, authoritarian but deeply trusted micromanager.

    Tarasoff said she prepared company checks for Weisselberg to pay his apartment rent and car lease payments. She said she prepared checks from Trump’s private account to pay tuition for private schooling for Weisselberg’s grandchildren.

    In September 2016, as Trump’s presidential election neared, Tarasoff said Weisselberg ordered her to start deleting notations about some of the transactions in the company’s bookkeeping system. Tarasoff said she didn’t think Weisselberg was asking her to do anything illegal. But even if he had, she said: “I guess I would because he’s the boss and he told me to do it.”

    Weisselberg is the only person to face criminal charges so far in the Manhattan district attorney’s investigation of the company.

    Weisselberg started working for the company in 1973, when it was run by Trump’s father, Fred. Following his July 2021 arrest, the company changed his title from CFO to senior adviser. The CFO position remains vacant.

    Prosecutors alleged that the Trump Organization gave untaxed fringe benefits to senior executives, including Weisselberg, for 15 years. Weisselberg alone was accused of defrauding the federal government, state and city out of more than $900,000 in unpaid taxes and undeserved tax refunds.

    ———

    Follow Michael Sisak on Twitter at twitter.com/mikesisak and send confidential tips by visiting https://www.ap.org/tips/.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • 40 states settle Google location-tracking charges for $392M

    40 states settle Google location-tracking charges for $392M

    [ad_1]

    HARTFORD, Conn. — Search giant Google has agreed to a $391.5 million settlement with 40 states to resolve an investigation into how the company tracked users’ locations, state attorneys general announced Monday.

    The states’ investigation was sparked by a 2018 Associated Press story, which found that Google continued to track people’s location data even after they opted out of such tracking by disabling a feature the company called “location history.”

    The attorneys general called the settlement a historic win for consumers, and the largest multistate settlement in U.S history dealing with privacy.

    It comes at a time of mounting unease over privacy and surveillance by tech companies that has drawn growing outrage from politicians and scrutiny by regulators. The Supreme Court’s ruling in June ending the constitutional protections for abortion raised potential privacy concerns for women seeking the procedure or related information online.

    “This $391.5 million settlement is a historic win for consumers in an era of increasing reliance on technology,” Connecticut Attorney General William Tong said in a statement. “Location data is among the most sensitive and valuable personal information Google collects, and there are so many reasons why a consumer may opt-out of tracking.”

    Google, based in Mountain View, California, said it fixed the problems several years ago.

    “Consistent with improvements we’ve made in recent years, we have settled this investigation, which was based on outdated product policies that we changed years ago,” company spokesperson Jose Castaneda said in a statement.

    Location tracking can help tech companies sell digital ads to marketers looking to connect with consumers within their vicinity. It’s another tool in a data-gathering toolkit that generates more than $200 billion in annual ad revenue for Google, accounting for most of the profits pouring into the coffers of its corporate parent, Alphabet — which has a market value of $1.2 trillion.

    In its 2018 story, The AP reported that many Google services on Android devices and iPhones store users’ location data even if they’ve used a privacy setting that says it will prevent Google from doing so. Computer-science researchers at Princeton confirmed these findings at the AP’s request.

    Storing such data carries privacy risks and has been used by police to determine the location of suspects.

    The AP reported that the privacy issue with location tracking affected some 2 billion users of devices that run Google’s Android operating software and hundreds of millions of worldwide iPhone users who rely on Google for maps or search.

    The attorneys general who investigated Google said a key part of the company’s digital advertising business is location data, which they called the most sensitive and valuable personal data the company collects. Even a small amount of location data can reveal a person’s identity and routines, they said.

    Google uses the location information to target consumers with ads by its customers, the state officials said.

    The attorneys general said Google misled users about its location tracking practices since at least 2014, violating state consumer protection laws.

    As part of the settlement, Google also agreed to make those practices more transparent to users. That includes showing them more information when they turn location account settings on and off and keeping a webpage that gives users information about the data Google collects.

    The shadowy surveillance brought to light by The AP troubled even some Google engineers, who recognized the company might be confronting a massive legal headache after the story was published, according to internal documents that have subsequently surfaced in consumer-fraud lawsuits.

    Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich filed the first state action against Google in May 2020, alleging that the company had defrauded its users by misleading them into believing they could keep their whereabouts private by turning off location tracking in the settings of their software.

    Arizona settled its case with Google for $85 million last month, but by then attorneys general in several other states and the District of Columbia had also pounced on the company with their own lawsuits seeking to hold Google accountable for its alleged deception.

    ———

    Gordon reported from Washington, D.C. AP Technology writer Michael Liedtke in San Ramon, California, contributed to this report.

    ———

    This story has been updated to reflect that the Supreme Court ruling on abortion was issued in June, not last month.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Prosecutors push 15-year sentence for Theranos’ CEO Holmes

    Prosecutors push 15-year sentence for Theranos’ CEO Holmes

    [ad_1]

    Federal prosecutors have asked a judge to sentence disgraced Theranos CE0 Elizabeth Holmes to 15 years in prison, arguing she deserves a lengthy prison term because her massive scheme duped investors out of hundreds of millions of dollars by falsely convincing them her company had developed a revolutionary blood testing device.

    Calling the case “one of the most substantial white collar offenses Silicon Valley or any other District has seen,” prosecutors vehemently rejected defense attorneys’ characterization that Holmes had been unfairly victimized, in part by media coverage.

    Holmes is set to appear for sentencing on Nov. 18 in federal court in San Jose, California, nearly a year after she was convicted of three felony counts of wire fraud and one felony count of conspiracy to commit fraud. She faces up to 20 years in prison for each count.

    “She repeatedly chose lies, hype and the prospect of billions of dollars over patient safety and fair dealing with investors,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert S. Leach wrote in a 46-page brief filed Friday. “Elizabeth Holmes’ crimes were not failing, they were lying — lying in the most serious context, where everyone needed her to tell the truth.”

    Holmes’ attorneys filed an 82-page document late Thursday calling for a lenient sentence of no more than 18 months, saying her reputation was permanently destroyed, turning her into a “caricature to be mocked and vilified.”

    Besides asking that Holmes receive a lengthy prison sentence, prosecutors called for the 38-year-old pay $803,840,309 in restitution for her role in the yearslong scheme that turned her into one of the most widely respected and immensely wealthy entrepreneurs in the Silicon Valley and the United States.

    “She preyed on hopes of her investors that a young, dynamic entrepreneur had changed healthcare. She leveraged the credibility of her illustrious board,” Leach wrote. “And, through her deceit, she attained spectacular fame, adoration, and billions of dollars of wealth.”

    Leach also pointed to how, after Wall Street Journal reporter John Carreyrou exposed the scheme, Holmes “attacked him, along with his sources” and desperately tried to pin the blame on others.

    “At trial, she blamed her COO (and longtime boyfriend), her board, her scientists, her business partners, her investors, her marketing firm, her attorneys, the media — everyone, that is, but herself,” Leach wrote.

    The company’s former chief operating officer, 57-year-old Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani, was convicted on 12 felony counts of investor and patient fraud in July during separate trial. He is scheduled to be sentenced Dec. 7.

    And Leach wrote that the health of actual patients was put into jeopardy by what Holmes had done.

    “As money was drying up, she went to market with an unproven and unreliable medical device,” he wrote. “When her lead assay developer quit as Theranos launched, she chillingly told the scientist: ‘she has a promise to deliver to the customer, she doesn’t have much of a choice but to go ahead with the launch.’”

    Holmes’ attorneys have argued that if U.S. District Judge Edward Davila does decide to send her to prison, she deserves a lenient sentence because she poses no danger to the public and has no prior criminal history.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • California sues over ‘forever chemicals’ that taint water

    California sues over ‘forever chemicals’ that taint water

    [ad_1]

    SAN FRANCISCO — A lawsuit filed Thursday by the state of California accuses 3M, Dupont and 16 smaller companies of covering up the harm caused to the environment and the public from chemicals manufactured by the firms that have over decades found their way into waterways and human bloodstreams.

    Attorney General Rob Bonta announced the lawsuit against the manufacturers of compounds that have been used in consumer goods and industry since the 1940s. The chemicals are found in firefighting foams, nonstick frying pans, cleaning sprays, water-repellent sports gear, stain-resistant rugs, cosmetics and countless other products.

    Bonta said these so-called forever chemicals are so strong that they do not degrade or do so only slowly in the environment and remain in a person’s bloodstream indefinitely.

    The companies knew for decades that the chemicals are “toxic and harmful to human health and the environment, yet they continued to produce them for mass use and concealed their harms from the public,” Bonta said.

    He said the court action comes following a multiyear investigation that found the companies marketed products containing PFAS, short for polyfluoroalkyl substances, despite knowing they cause cancer, developmental defects, reduced bone density and other health problems.

    Minnesota-based 3M said in a statement after the court filing that it “acted responsibly in connection with products containing PFAS and will defend its record of environmental stewardship.”

    Dupont, based in Delaware, said the company as it now exists should not have been named in the lawsuit.

    “In 2019, DuPont de Nemours was established as a new multi-industrial specialty products company. DuPont de Nemours has never manufactured PFOA, PFOS or firefighting foam. While we don’t comment on pending litigation, we believe these complaints are without merit, and the latest example of DuPont de Nemours being improperly named in litigation,” the statement said.

    The lawsuit, filed in Alameda County, is the first statewide legal action over PFAS contamination.

    It alleges violations of state consumer protection and environmental statutes and invokes a federal law that establishes a path to recoup the costs of cleaning up hazardous substances in soil and water.

    Bonta estimated penalties and cleanup costs sought by the lawsuit would reach hundreds of millions of dollars.

    U.S. manufacturers have voluntarily phased out compounds such as PFAS, but there are a limited number of ongoing uses and the chemicals remain in the environment because they do not degrade over time.

    The federal Environmental Protection Agency in June invited states and territories to apply for $1 billion under the new bipartisan infrastructure law to address PFAS and other contaminants in drinking water. Money can be used for technical assistance, water quality testing, contractor training and installation of centralized treatment, officials said.

    The EPA warned then that the chemicals are more dangerous than previously thought and pose health risks even at levels so low they cannot currently be detected.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump Org. trial off until Thursday after witness gets COVID

    Trump Org. trial off until Thursday after witness gets COVID

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — A criminal trial involving tax fraud charges against Donald Trump’s company won’t resume until late next week at the earliest as a key witness continues to recover from COVID-19.

    Court spokesperson Lucian Chalfen said the trial, in state court in Manhattan, is slated to resume on Thursday — not Monday, as the judge had previously hoped.

    The Trump Organization trial was abruptly halted Tuesday when longtime company senior vice president and controller Jeffrey McConney tested positive for the virus.

    McConney was on the witness stand for the first two days of testimony, Monday and Tuesday. He coughed off and on as he walked prosecutors through the company’s bookkeeping and payroll practices.

    By Tuesday’s lunch break, McConney’s symptoms had worsened, prompting him to take a COVID test. Chalfen said he was not aware of anyone else involved in the case testing positive.

    If the trial resumes Thursday, it will be the only day the case is in court next week.

    Court is closed Tuesday for Election Day and Friday for Veterans Day. The judge, Juan Manuel Merchan, previously said he would not hold the trial on Wednesdays.

    Merchan has said he expected the trial to take at least four weeks. The prolonged delay could push it into mid-December or beyond.

    The Trump Organization is accused of helping some of its top executives avoid income taxes on lavish company-paid perks, including a Manhattan apartment and luxury cars.

    McConney was granted immunity to testify last year before a grand jury and again to testify at the criminal trial.

    Before Tuesday’s adjournment, McConney told jurors he altered company pay records to reduce one executive’s income tax bill and recounted how the company changed its pay practices and financial arrangements once Trump was elected president in 2016.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • $6 million awarded in asbestos lawsuit against Ford, others

    $6 million awarded in asbestos lawsuit against Ford, others

    [ad_1]

    A St. Louis jury has ruled that Ford Motor Co. and other companies must pay $6 million to a Missouri family over claims that a woman’s death was caused by asbestos exposure, including from dust generated during brake repairs

    ST. LOUIS — A St. Louis jury has ruled that Ford Motor Co. and other companies must pay $6 million to a Missouri family over claims that a woman’s death was caused by exposure to asbestos, including from dust generated during brake repairs.

    Linda Behling of Springfield died of mesothelioma at age 70 in 2019. Late Monday, jurors sided with Behling’s husband, son and daughter after a trial that lasted more than two weeks.

    Behling and her husband worked at manufacturing companies in the Springfield area, and the lawsuit alleged that work was connected to her illness.

    Lawyers for the family said Ford failed to provide warning that asbestos was present in dust created during repairs of vehicle brakes. Ford attorneys said Behling’s exposure to the dust was limited and the family failed to prove it contributed to her illness.

    A statement from Ford offered sympathy to the family but said an appeal is planned.

    In another case heard in St. Louis in March, a jury awarded $20 million to a St. Louis County man who sued Ford. William Trokey claimed exposure to asbestos while fixing Ford brakes as a gas station mechanic in the 1960s led to his mesothelioma. Ford appealed that verdict.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump Organization faces criminal tax fraud trial over perks

    Trump Organization faces criminal tax fraud trial over perks

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — For years, as Donald Trump was soaring from reality TV star to the White House, his real estate empire was bankrolling big perks for some of his most trusted senior executives, including apartments and luxury cars.

    Now Trump’s company, the Trump Organization, is on trial this week for criminal tax fraud — on the hook for what prosecutors say was a 15-year scheme by top officials to hide the plums and avoid paying taxes.

    Opening statements and the first witnesses are expected Monday in New York. Last week, 12 jurors and six alternates were picked for the case, the only criminal trial to arise from the Manhattan district attorney’s three-year investigation of the former president.

    Among the key prosecution witnesses: Trump’s longtime finance chief Allen Weisselberg, who pleaded guilty and has agreed to testify against the company in exchange for a five-month jail sentence.

    If convicted, the Trump Organization could be fined more than $1 million and could face difficulty in securing new loans and deals. Some partners and government entities could seek to cut ties with the company. It could also hamper its ability to do business with the U.S. Secret Service, which sometimes pays the company for lodging and services while protecting Trump as a former president.

    Neither Trump nor any of his children who have worked as Trump Organization executives are charged or accused of wrongdoing. Trump is not expected to testify or even attend the trial.

    Prosecutors have said they do not need to prove Trump knew about the scheme to get a conviction and that the case is “not about Donald Trump.” But a defense lawyer, William J. Brennan, said even if he’s not physically there, Trump is “ever present, like the mist in the room.”

    That’s because Trump is synonymous with the Trump Organization, the entity through which he manages his many ventures, including his investments in golf courses, luxury towers and other real estate, his many marketing deals and his TV pursuits.

    Trump signed some of the checks at the center of the case. His name is on memos and other company documents. Witnesses could testify about conversations they had with Trump. They are even expected to enter Trump’s personal general ledgers as evidence.

    Prosecutors say The Trump Organization — through its subsidiaries Trump Corp. and Trump Payroll Corp. — is liable in part because former Weisselberg was a “high managerial agent” entrusted to act on behalf of the company and its various entities.

    The Trump Organization has said it did nothing wrong. The company’s lawyers argue that Weisselberg and other executives acted on their own and that, if anything, their actions harmed the company financially.

    Weisselberg, who has pleaded guilty to taking $1.7 million in off-the-books compensation, pinned blame on himself and other top Trump Organization executives, including senior vice president and controller Jeffrey McConney.

    But he disagreed with the notion that the company was harmed, saying the perks actually saved the company money because it avoiding having to give raises.

    Prosecutors have said they expect to call 15 witnesses, including Weisselberg and McConney, who was granted limited immunity to testify last year before a grand jury.

    Judge Juan Manuel Merchan expects the trial to take at least four weeks, though a defense lawyer estimated last week that the prosecution case alone could go on for two months. Court will meet for a full day on Mondays, Tuesdays and Thursday and for a half-day on Friday. The trial is off on Wednesday so the judge can attend to other matters.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Boeing crashes: Passengers’ families deemed crime victims

    Boeing crashes: Passengers’ families deemed crime victims

    [ad_1]

    FORT WORTH, Texas — A federal judge ruled Friday that relatives of people killed in the crashes of two Boeing 737 Max planes are crime victims under federal law and should have been told about private negotiations over a settlement that spared Boeing from criminal prosecution.

    The full impact of the ruling is not yet clear, however. The judge said the next step is to decide what remedies the families should get for not being told of the talks with Boeing.

    Some relatives are pushing to scrap the government’s January 2021 settlement with Boeing, and they have expressed anger that no one in the company has been held criminally responsible.

    Boeing Co., which is based in Arlington, Virginia, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    Boeing, which misled safety regulators who approved the Max, agreed to pay $2.5 billion including a $243.6 million fine. The Justice Department agreed not to prosecute the company for conspiracy to defraud the government.

    The Justice Department, in explaining why it didn’t tell families about the negotiations, argued that the relatives are not crime victims. However, U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor in Fort Worth, Texas, said the crashes were a foreseeable consequence of Boeing’s conspiracy, making the relatives representatives of crime victims.

    “In sum, but for Boeing’s criminal conspiracy to defraud the FAA, 346 people would not have lost their lives in the crashes,” he wrote.

    Naoise Connolly Ryan, whose husband died in the second Max crash, in Ethiopia, said Boeing is responsible for his death.

    “Families like mine are the true victims of Boeing’s criminal misconduct, and our views should have been considered before the government gave them a sweetheart deal,” she said in a statement issued by a lawyer for the families.

    The first Max crashed Indonesia in October 2018, killing 189, and another crashed five months later in Ethiopia, killing 157. All Max jets were grounded worldwide for nearly two years. They were cleared to fly again after Boeing overhauled an automated flight-control system that activated erroneously in both crashes.

    [ad_2]

    Source link