Contingency Business Litigation Attorney Blog

Holston Investments. v. LanLogistics Illustrates that Jurisdiction is a Critical Component in Business Litigation Cases

Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:41:35 -0500

Business litigation is very complex and it is important to have an experienced business litigation attorney guiding you.

One of the most complicated components of business litigation cases can be determining which court has the jurisdiction to hear and decide on your case. This problem arises because a business is created and incorporated in one state and may be headquartered in another state; however, it does business in many states. Determining in which state the business has citizenship is integral to establishing which court can hear the case. Therefore, when a case involves two businesses, it becomes incrementally more intricate a determination.

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals discussed the complexity involved in determining the citizenship of a dissolved corporation. Holston Investments In. B.V.I., et al., v. LanLogistics, Corp., No. 11-11122 (11th Cir. Apr. 17, 2012). LanBox Inc. (LanBox) was owned by LanLogistics and its principal business was to deliver consumer purchases throughout the United States, Europe and Latin America. In 2007, LanLogistics decided to sell LanBox and two other companies to Paul Gartlan (Gartlan) for a total of $3.5 million. A little less than half a million was allocated to LanBox from the funds of the Gartlan purchase.

The problem in this case arose because LanLogistics (defendant) had previously signed a contract with Holston Investments Inc. (Holston) giving Holston the right of first refusal (ROFR). This right indicates that defendant is required to negotiate with Holston first in the sale of LanBox. Additionally, where an offer is made regarding LanBox, Holston was supposed to be given the opportunity to match any offer and purchase the company itself. Because LanLogistics had failed to abide by the contractual obligation giving Holston the ROFR, Holston filed suit in federal court.

LanLogistics was incorporated in Delaware but its corporate headquarters were in the state of Florida. Right before Holston filed suit, LanLogistics forfeited its right to conduct business in Florida and was dissolved.

After two years of litigation in the federal courts, LanLogistics argued that it was a citizen of Florida and because of this the case should have been heard in the state of Florida.

When establishing the citizenship of a corporation, a corporation is considered to be a citizen of the state where it is incorporated and any state that is its principal place of business. Because LanLogistics was dissolved it did not have a principal state of business. Thus, it was determined that because LanLogistics was incorporated in Delaware it was a Delaware resident. This was why Holston filed suit against LanLogistics in federal court claiming diversity jurisdiction.

Diversity jurisdiction is a type of jurisdiction used where the citizen of each plaintiff is different from the citizenship of each defendant. At the time the complaint is filed, jurisdiction is determined. In applying this law to the facts, diversity jurisdiction was granted because at the time Holston filed the complaint it was a citizen of Florida and LanLogistics was a citizen of Delaware. So the federal court was given the authority because of this diversity jurisdiction to hear this case, and the state courts were avoided.

Therefore the rule coming out of this case is that when a corporation is dissolved before the entry of suit, the state where it was incorporated is the state of citizenship. The state where the now dissolved corporation had its principal place of business is irrelevant.

Financial Crimes Allegations Lodged Against Sprint-Nextel

Mon, 23 Apr 2012 08:53:35 -0500

Sprint-Nextel is being sued for New York financial crimes by the attorney general, who is alleging that the company made a deliberate effort to under-collect and underpay more than $100 million in sales taxes.

Our New York business litigation attorneys understand that the cell phone company is accused of doing this to keep its competitive prices down.

The lawsuit, filed by Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, is the first of its kind under a new state law that allows the government to a sue a company over loss of taxes as a result of fraud. Under the law's guidelines, Sprint-Nextel could be compelled to pay three times the amount it is accused of underpaying.

The attorney general has said that the company, and not the customers, will be held liable for the back taxes. What's more, he said attorneys in his office are trying to make it so that customers of Sprint-Nextel who were affected can move to another cell phone carrier without having to pay the early termination costs, which sometimes can top $200 each.

This could have big implications for Sprint-Nextel, whose representatives deny any wrongdoing. They say they have paid every cent that it and its customers owe to the government.

At issue is a 2002 tax law in New York that mandates cell phone companies to collect and pay sales taxes on the total amount of their monthly access fee for calling plans. The attorney general says other cell phone companies - AT&T, MetroPCS, T-Mobile and Verizon - have had no issue paying these taxes.

The lawsuit, which was filed in the state's Supreme Court, alleges that Sprint-Nextel has underpaid the sales tax by about 25 percent in the last seven years. It's also alleged that the company falsified records and that company officials reasoned they didn't have to pay state taxes on top of the interstate phone service fees.

The state sales tax rate for mobile phones (and other electronic devices) currently stands at 4 percent. In New York City, the rate is 4.5 percent - a standard most other counties use as well. In some cases, there are surcharges of about 0.375 percent ,making for a total sales and use tax of 8.875 percent.

Because Sprint has continued with its practices, the amount of the allegedly owed back taxes has continued to balloon. The state is asking for $300 million total back from the company. The case was brought on by an investigative whistleblower from Empire State Ventures LLC.

Sprint says this is an issue of consumer rights. It intends to mount a vigorous defense, saying New York consumers pay some of the highest taxes in the nation and are now unfairly being asked to pay more.

Back in 2010, state legislators re-crafted fraud laws to include the provision that the government could sue companies for tax fraud. At the time, Schneiderman was a state senator, and strongly backed the measure. The reasoning, he says, was to have more people scrutinizing scams on local and state governments.

If there is a settlement, an estimated 15 to 20 percent could go to the whistleblower in the case.

Sprint has about 55 million customers, with about 2 million of those in New York.

Business Formation and Member Liability: 16 Jade Street v. R. Design Construction

Thu, 12 Apr 2012 11:48:28 -0500

When establishing a business, it is important to do a liability cost benefit analysis. There are different ways to structure your business, and a business law attorney can help you identify the right corporate or partnership structure for you.

A contingency business litigation attorney may also assist with litigation on a contingency-fee basis, a cost-effective way to protect your business interests in many situations.

16 Jade Street v. R. Design Construction is a recent case decision regarding personal liability for company members.

Carl Aten (Aten) and his wife are the only members of a limited liability company called R. Design Construction Co., LLC. (R. Design). R. Design was a building company that was planning the development of a four-unit condominium project. The company was unable to obtain the financing for this project so a colleague (Green) created a new company (16 Jade Street) in order to enter a contract with R. Design to construct this project. Aten acted as the general contractor for this project and he was responsible for choosing subcontractors for this project and the supervision of all workers. Aten chose Catterson & Sons Construction (Construction Company) as the specialty subcontractor. Construction Company was run by Michael Catterson (Catterson) who acted as a liaison between the foreman and the workers and directed all questions to Aten.

When the structural engineer performed the property inspection, he found that there were several problems surrounding the area the Construction Company had worked on. These problems were not fixed and because of payroll disputes, Construction Company ceased working on the job site. Soon after this, conflicts arose between Aten and his colleague, and Aten left the project.

Green and 16 Jade Street sued R. Design, Aten, Construction Company, and Catterson for negligence and breach of implied warranties. The question for the court was whether a member acting within his capacity as a member of an LLC can be held personally liable for his actions associated with the business.

A limited liability company (LLC) is a hybrid company structure, combining elements of partnerships and corporations. This protection of company owners from personal liability is based on the primary characteristics of corporations. A company member cannot be held liable for actions taken in furtherance of the business unless the member breaches his or her fiduciary duties, such as by commingling personal funds with company funds.

The court in this case looked to the relevant statute to analyze the questions of liability in an LLC. The South Carolina Statute says that LLC members or managers are shielded from personal liability for any civil wrong committed while fulfilling obligations associated with their job position. Additionally, the court looked to the statute that says that the only way vicarious liability can be imposed on the company is if the negligent actions of a member were authorized or accepted by the other members.

However, the court felt that the legislative intent of the statutes was not to protect company members from liability for their negligent actions, as this would be an inequitable result. Thus they looked to the obligations placed on those who have a home builder's license.

The court held that liability would attach to Aten because of the civil liability imposed on license holders. Basically, Aten is held personally liable for his negligence not through the company but through the violation of his obligations in holding a home builders license.

As to Catterson, the court held that the law does not allow personal liability to attach to him. This holding was because the law states that a corporate shareholder is not personally liable for debts or acts of the corporation but is personally liable for his negligent actions. Because the negligence action involved the actions of the corporation as a whole, Catterson was not held personally liable.

How you organize and register your business is very important. You must understand the differences within corporate and partnership structures in order to make an informed decision about your business.

Business Litigation Attorneys Can Help Start-Up Avoid False Ownership Claims

Thu, 29 Mar 2012 10:14:28 -0500

Forensics have become central in the most recent business litigation lawsuit claiming part-ownership in the social media giant, Facebook.

Our contingency business litigation attorneys follow cases such as these with great interest, particularly when they involve the ever-expanding technology of the internet and computer forensics.

In this situation, the suit involves a rather unlikely plaintiff: a wood pellet salesman from New York named Paul Ceglia. He claims that he owns half of Facebook, and has produced a contract signed by Facebook Founder Mark Zuckerberg during his days at Harvard.

Ceglia's claim follows those made by Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, who sued Facebook for $140 million, claiming Zuckerberg stole their idea to create a social networking site. A reported $65 million settlement was reached in that dispute.

Facebook's attorneys, however, have countered that the salesman's efforts are nothing short of a shakedown. To prove it, Zuckerberg's legal team has gone the CSI-route.

They say Ceglia forged a number of documents and even created some of his own to make it appear as if deals were signed when they were not.

Both sides agree that Zuckerberg had met Ceglia through Craigslist and had done some contract programming work for StreetFax, Ceglia's company, while Zuckerberg was a student at Harvard.

Ceglia said Zuckerberg signed a contract with him in 2003 that entitled him to 50 percent ownership of Facebook, which is now worth an estimated $5 billion. He said he forgot about that contract for about 7 years. However, he found it while scouring his files after he was charged with sales fraud. Ceglia has offered up e-mail documents that appear to show correspondence between he and Zuckerberg that discusses work that is scheduled to be done on "The Face Book."

But Facebook's attorneys say he forged those documents to include references to the company where there weren't any before. In fact, the legal team's forensic analysts say that Ceglia even put one of the documents out in the sun, so it would have the appearance of age.

What's more, the e-mails, they say, were made up, with Ceglia even going so far as to reset the year on his computer. None of those e-mails could be located on the Harvard servers, where Zuckerberg would have been e-mailing from during the time frame alleged.

Their experts even found that the ink on the documents Ceglia claims to be from 2003 and 2004 is less than two years old.

Lawyers also showed that Ceglia offered a note of congratulations to Zuckerberg on the launch of the site. But when they examined the time frame, that note was sent before the web site went online.

While these are all methods that a skilled contingency business litigation firm could employ in order to protect their client from false claims of ownership, the better alternative for any start-up business is to consult with an experienced attorney at the outset of the company's formation.

Gardner v. Leitgeb & Vitelli, LLP Warns Businesses To Do Their Research on Potential Clients

Thu, 15 Mar 2012 12:46:11 -0500

It is an invaluable asset to have an experienced business litigation attorney protecting the rights and reputation of your business. Business litigation is a complex area of practice that requires the skill and knowledge of a veteran law firm.

Litigation is the result of inability of the parties to settle the pending claims through mediation or alternative dispute resolution. Business litigation is an area of law where there is a lawsuit involving a business. As such, you want the law firm standing behind your business to be ready to stand behind their work in a court of law.

Because this area of law is so complex, law firms less confident in their trial abilities usually do not take these types of litigation cases on a contingency fee basis. Our firm is confident in the abilities of our qualified attorneys and staff to get the result you desire.

Gardner v. Leitgeb & Vitelli, LLP is a case arising out of issues surrounding business ownership. This dispute involved the Robert and Carmela Gardener ("plaintiffs") and their son James Gardener ("son") over the corporate ownership of a restaurant called CJEFA. Plaintiffs contend that they were the sole owners of CJEFA for the fifteen years it was in business. However, the son claims that he became the sole shareholder for four of those years until the plaintiffs took over the operation of the business illegally.

Leitgeb & Vitelli, LLP ("firm") is an accounting firm that was hired by James Gardner to provide accounting services for the business. The firm alleges the James Gardner held himself out to be the president and sole shareholder of CJEFA.

There was a retainer agreement signed between the firm and the defendant indicating the scope of services for the firm was threefold. The firm was hired to represent CJEFA in connection with an ongoing sales-and-use tax audit being done by the New York Department of Taxation, to prepare New York sales tax returns for CJEFA, and to prepare federal and state income taxes for CJEFA for the fiscal year ending on December 31, 2001.

The firm further stipulated that the defendant had indicated that his parents were engaging in a "systematic scheme" to convert the business assets to their name. James Gardner terminated the firm in 2003, thus the firm returned all of the business documents relating to CJEFA to James Gardner. Plaintiffs requested these documents and the firm refused because they were under the belief that James Gardner was the sole shareholder of that business.

Plaintiffs sued the accounting firm for failing to file the federal and state income taxes for the years of 2001 and 2002 and for providing copies of the corporate documents to James Gardner. The complaint against the firm cites four causes of action: breach of fiduciary duty, malpractice, breach of contract, and conversion.

The court in this case cites controlling case law in the state of New York which finds that there is no fiduciary relationship between an accountant and his client. A fiduciary duty exists where there is a legal relationship of confidence or trust between two or more parties. The fiduciary is the party that holds the good faith confidence on which the other party is relying. While trustees and attorneys owe this fiduciary duty to their clients, accountants generally have no such duty. Therefore the court dismissed this argument.

The causes of action for malpractice and breach of contract were also dismissed because the court held that the retainer agreement clearly stipulated the responsibilities of the firm. The court says that this retainer agreement governs the relationship of the parties and this agreement predetermined that the firm was responsible for the tax returns for the fiscal year ending on December 31, 2001. Furthermore, there was no extrinsic evidence admissible to change the facts contained within retainer agreement, nor was there a subsequent retainer. Additionally, the court held that the defendants were not guilty of malpractice because it is the duty of the plaintiffs, not the defendants, to assure that their own income taxes were prepared.

The last of the plaintiff's contentions was that by not giving the tax records to the plaintiffs the firm is liable for conversion. Conversion is when a party takes unauthorized dominion and control over something when the other party has the legal ownership of that identifiable thing. The court was unable to decide this issue because there was significant confusion as to who the verifiable owner of CJEFA was.

This case demonstrates the intricacy of business litigation and the thresholds that need to be met. There are many causes of action and even equitable remedies available, however, it is essential to have the right attorney guiding you through this complex process.

Motorola Settles Trade Secret Lawsuit Over Cell Phone Technology

Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:02:01 -0500

The Chicago Sun-Times is reporting that Motorola Solutions and Motorola Mobility have settled a lawsuit with a suburban Chicago company over stolen trade secret allegations.

Our Contingency Business Litigation Attorney Blog reported on this case in November, detailing how Motorola hired an engineer from Lemko. At the time, Motorola phones didn't have the technology that allowed law enforcement to track cell phone users' emergency calls.

Shortly after hiring the engineer, who created computer codes that calculated the location of a mobile phone, the company sent this technology to China, where the phones were produced. A lawsuit alleged Motorola destroyed computer files that showed Lemko's computer code. The engineer was later fired.

Our contingency business litigation attorneys recognize that business can be ruthless, and companies are constantly trying to get an advantage. Sometimes, this is done illegally, such as through trade secret theft. This often requires companies to fight for their protected ideas through litigation.

Small businesses with sound ideas and products often can't afford to take on large corporations with teams of attorneys. A contingency business litigation attorney can help by incurring the fees up front that it will take to fight the lawsuit. This allows the business to keep its capital in-house, and to reinvest in the business while a lawsuit is ongoing.

When a company believes its secrets have been stolen by another company, they can either fight back or let theft destroy what they have worked to accomplish. If they choose to fight, the cost of the fight could be overwhelming. But with a contingency business lawyer, the process could be beneficial.

According to the Sun-Times, the companies recently settled the lawsuit, though the amount of the settlement hasn't been released. According to the news article, Lemko was started by former Motorola employees. Initially, the two Motorola companies split from the original Motorola Inc. and filed lawsuits about four years ago against Lemko, as well as a software engineer.

The software engineer is accused of downloading hundreds of documents from Motorola as she negotiated a job in China with a competitor. As she was prepared to board a flight to China in 2007, she was stopped at O'Hare Airport and spotted with the documents, including classified documents and information about cellular technology.

Lemko and Motorola had filed initial lawsuits as well as counter lawsuits against each other for various allegations of trade secret theft. The cell phone industry is extremely competitive and companies are sometimes willing to step over anyone who gets in their way. Companies must fight back to ensure they are protecting themselves.

As stated, the cost can be high. Depositions, court hearings, research and other expenses can add up and case sometimes take years to resolve. On a contingency basis, lawyers don't get paid unless there is a victory, so the company loses nothing out of pocket.

Whistleblower Lawsuit Aimed at Planned Parenthood

Mon, 13 Feb 2012 10:49:11 -0500

Planned Parenthood, always a topic of controversy, has been in the news a lot lately. Most recently, the breast cancer organization Susan G. Komen for the Cure came under fire for pulling funding to Planned Parenthood, saying they had adopted a new policy of not funding organizations that are under investigation.

That controversy died down when the cancer-fighting organization dropped its policy amid supporters' protest and again continued funding the women's organization. But Planned Parenthood is now enduring more heat, this time in Texas, where it is being named in a federal lawsuit by a whistleblower who claims the organization ran a multi-million dollar billing scam, The Lufkin News reports.

Whistleblower cases are those where an insider at a company makes allegations that there is wrongdoing - potentially of a criminal nature - within the organization. Often, these are people who notice accounting issues and bring them to the attention of bosses, only to be turned away. Sometimes, the issue relates to personnel problems.

Small businesses can be slapped with official complaints or state and federal investigations by employees who act as whistleblowers. If this is the case, the company requires a contingency business litigation attorney who can uphold the rights of the company and seek a quick and cost-effective resolution.

If an employee begins making allegations to regulators about conduct within the business, it can be distracting. Not only that, but it can ruin employee morale and turn off both potential business partners and investors. It is best that these matters be addressed quickly in order to minimize the potential damage.

Our whistleblower attorneys know that dealing with state and federal laws as well as possible lawsuits is a headache for businesses. Entrusting these matters to an experienced law firm may be the best plan to keep the company on track as the issues are ongoing. On a contingency basis, the company is able to get legal representation without fees upfront. In the event the case is successful, that's when the law firm gets paid.

The Ferraro Law Firm also handles Qui Tam Whistleblower cases. In such cases, a whistleblower may come forward about government waste, often the result of fraudulent billing or invoicing, and is entitled to a percentage of the proceeds.

In the Planned Parenthood lawsuit, a woman who worked for the company 10 years alleges she was instructed to maximize billing revenue when Medicaid and the Women's Health Program was being billed. That was the procedure in 12 locations in Texas and Louisiana.

The lawsuit claims the organization, which receives funding for women's health issues, falsified patient records, billed the government for unwarranted procedures and also billed the government for things patients didn't get.

This type of lawsuit can be damaging because it alleges criminal activity. This could lead to a larger investigation by law enforcement authorities. That would bring more bad news for the organization, which is already dealing with the negative publicity from a whistleblower lawsuit.

In cases where businesses need to minimize the negative publicity and still fight back against the allegations in order to protect their name and reputation, a contingency business litigation lawyer can be useful.

Insider Trading Claims Can Derail a Business Trying to Attract Investors

Thu, 26 Jan 2012 10:34:34 -0500

Recent news broke that hedge fund Diamondback paid federal prosecutors $9 million to settle claims of insider trading on Wall Street after allegedly profiting illegally from trading shares of Nvidia and Dell, the Financial Times reports.

Allegations of insider trading are serious and can leave a mark on a company from which it may be difficult to break free. The skills of a contingency business litigation lawyer may be beneficial to a business in this situation, however.

Contingency law work is helpful to the company because they aren't required to put down any money. The law firm puts up the money and only is paid in the case of a victory or positive outcome.

At a time when the company may be in hot water and may need its capital to be fluid in order to pay fines, do public relations work or make other types of payments, having a law firm working for them and doing it with no money out of their pocket can be a big benefit. Whether the lawyers are needed to weed out bad employees or work with prosecutors to deal with the allegations, this setup can help a company in need.

The New York-based hedge fund worked with federal prosecutors in Manhattan to avoid company officials from being prosecuted criminally, according to the news report. They forfeited $6 million and agreed to a statement of facts that laid out the conduct of two employees. The company also will continue operating with the government.

The fund also paid out $3 million to resolve civil insider trading charges brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Some believe that the non-prosecution agreement was the first involving a hedge fund adviser.

Federal prosecutors so far have secured 56 convictions of traders, consultants and lawyers as part of an FBI operation regarding insider trading. The Diamondback settlement relates to trades from 2008 and 2009.

But some Diamondback employees have been prosecuted criminally. Recently, a former employee was one of seven people charged in an alleged $62 million insider trading scheme. A former employee recently entered a guilty plea. The news report states that the company managed $5.9 billion in December 2010, but that number has shrunk to $2.5 billion, following a November 2010 FBI raid.

It's obvious that these high-profile cases involving corporate misdeeds and employee ethical or criminal violations can be a major problem for the businesses that have to deal with this type of situation. Investors and other corporations that may do business with the company may also be bringing legal action.

Businesses who find themselves in this tough position may get served with legal notices from seemingly every angle. They need sound legal representation. For companies that don't have a team of experienced attorneys in-house, the next best thing is to find a strong team of lawyers willing to work on a contingency basis.

Foreclosures Continue Slamming Investors, Businesses With Major Losses

Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:23:30 -0500

It's no secret that the real estate market has been devastated by foreclosures, which has caused a domino effect of unemployment and market turbulence that our country still hasn't figured a way out of.

The sometimes unseen victims of this whole collapse isn't the homeowners themselves, who have missed payments and caused their homes to go into foreclosure, but the investors who were fooled by banks into buying loans that were bad from the start. Often, this requires litigation in order to recover money that was taken through unethical and unlawful means. In other cases, businesses may be facing foreclosure of commercial property for a variety of reasons.

In cases like this, contingency business litigation lawyers can be helpful for investors who don't have expendable income left to spend on lawsuits, but who want justice done. With this set up, clients pay nothing up front, but only pay if they've won.

Right now, we're experiencing a time when lawsuits are flying from every direction. We're seeing banks suing homeowners to foreclose on homes where payments have been missed. Then, there are homeowners suing back, alleging that banks used robo-signing tactics -- where documents were signed and authenticated by people other than the signature -- as well as created false documents in support of a foreclosure.

On the other hand, there are investors suing banks because the mortgage-backed securities they bought were flawed from the start and fraught with bad documents, but those facts weren't revealed up front. As housingwire reports, more and more mortgage bond investors are filing legal actions. In fact, the Patton Bogs Mortgage Litigation Index, which follows mortgage lawsuits, rose to its highest level in four years recently.

According to the news article, there were only 23 cases of mortgage litigation in the third quarter of 2010, but that number doubled to 50 in the second quarter of 2012 and 82 in the third quarter.

News recently came out that bankers were encouraged by their bosses to funnel minorities into high-risk subprime mortgages even though many of the people were qualified for regular loans. This has sparked a new round of lawsuits against banks.

Foreclosure tracking company RealtyTrac reported that there were 1.4 million homes in foreclosure nationwide in November, with the average foreclosure sale price at $169,451. California and Florida continued leading the way in foreclosures. In California, there were nearly 64,000 foreclosures filed, while Florida checked in at 24,739. Six other states had more than 10,000 foreclosures filed that month.

And then there's a couple in Florida who is now facing a foreclosure lawsuit on a house they have already paid off because of a typo filed nine years ago. The couple sold their home and paid their mortgage in full in 2003, but because the legal description on the deed is incorrect -- the house has been sold three times since then -- and the current owner is going into foreclosure, this family is being forced to defend themselves.

These are examples of the major problems that are arising in the real estate market right now. They are problems that happened years ago and people are looking to the court system to fix the wrongs. Our contingency business litigation attorneys are prepared to handle any aspect of the real estate collapse.

Apple Opened Up to $1.5 Billion Trademark Lawsuit in China

Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:40:51 -0500

CNET is reporting that a Chinese judge recently rejected a lawsuit Apple filed against Chinese company Proview Technology for illegally using the iPad name. Now, a counter lawsuit could be filed against Apple to the tune of $1.5 billion.

As technology continues to evolve, companies will do whatever it takes to get on top. It is such a powerful and profitable field that any company working in telecommunications, computer networking, gaming or other technology-based consumer products may break laws now and deal with the consequences later.

As our Contingency Business Litigation Attorney Blog recently reported, cell phone giant Motorola has been slapped with a lawsuit alleging trade secret violations after a person working for Lemko Corp., which developed technology that uses cell networks to find emergency callers, went to Motorola and developed the technology for that company.

Our contingency business litigation lawyers
have seen countless examples of situations where companies are accused of stealing technology, trade secrets or infringing on copyrights in order to gain an advantage. In business, often the big fish eats the small fish.

Well, our lawyers work with companies to ensure a proper defense. Every small business has a right to thrive and when bigger companies attempt to snuff them out by breaking laws, they need to fight back. Lying down is the equivalent of allowing the business to fold.

But many small businesses simply don't have the cash flow to continuously go to court or to fight off an expensive lawsuit filed by a bigger company, which may have a team of lawyers fighting on its behalf. That's where our firm comes into play.

Our experienced lawyers are prepared to put up the cost of fighting a lawsuit -- perhaps in the hundreds of thousands of dollars or more -- in order to fight on your company's behalf. We only get paid if you win the case. This allows the small business to continue thriving, even while a lawsuit is ongoing.

In the Apple case, according to CNET, the iPad name had already been legally registered as a trademark in China and other countries by Proview Technology, going back as far as 2000.

China has been a tough place to litigate for many companies, including Apple. Fake Apple Stores, counterfeited iPhones and iPods and other trademark infringements have been issues the giant American technology company has had to battle there.

According to China Briefing, Apple may either be forced to change the name of its tablet products in China or pay off Proview. The two companies have been battling in court since 2006, the article states. IPad is also register in the European Union, Mexico, South Korea, Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam as late as 2004, years before Apple launched the product.

The article reports that in 2006, Proview sold its "global trademark" for iPad to a company called IP Application Development for $55,000. The company was an agent secretly working for Apple. The deal had a hangup, though. The parties disagreed about whether the package included China.

It's obvious that companies will do anything to get ahead and that means stomping on each other. Fighting back is the only option. Choose an experienced contingency business litigation law firm that can help your company thrive.

Copyright Lawsuit Between Gaming Companies Settled

Tue, 06 Dec 2011 09:51:29 -0500

Zynga, a company made popular through Facebook and smartphone-based games, recently reached a settlement with a South American company it says stole its ideas for games.

The copyright infringement lawsuit sought to stop the gaming company from taking its ideas from its most popular mobile phone games.

Copyright issues are among the most important to work out for competing businesses. And given the competition in the marketplace, legal action may be necessary, as it was in this case. For many small businesses, a lawsuit may not be feasible. It costs a lot of money to file a lawsuit and put in the time and effort to ensure it is successful.

But seeking out an experienced business contingency lawyer may be beneficial to a small company. Our lawyers have decades of experience and we are willing to take a case without money up front and only seek to be paid if we win. We will put in the time and effort fighting for a small business.

Copyright issues are among the most important to sort out in the ever-changing world of electronics and technology. The system is designed to reward those who have presented strong ideas and who have taken the steps to secure those ideas.

This information is made public and sadly other companies will sometimes try to steal it and deal with the consequences later. That's why legal action is necessary in many cases. Without a company standing up for its rights, they can be eliminated from the market.

In this case, Zynga took action. The U.S.-based company filed lawsuits against Vostu, from South America, in June. It filed copyright lawsuits both in the United States and Brazil, alleging the company stole its ideas from its most popular mobile phone games. Zynga is best known for its games Words with Friends, Mafia Wars, Zynga Poker, CityVille and FarmVille.

According to Business Insider, the companies released a joint statement stating the two have settled lawsuits and counter lawsuits filed against each other. Vostu paid Zynga and made changes to four of its games.

The article reports that Vostu first called the lawsuit "frivolous" when it was filed and alleged Zynga had copied many of its games. The company stated initially that the lawsuit was designed to bully the company of 500 employees. Vostu raised $30 million in 2010 and more than half of Brazil play its games.

The gaming industry is a multi-million dollar industry and scores of companies are getting on board and offering financial support to these game makers to put them on the AppStore and Android Market and sell advertising on the games. While many of these are free to smart phone and Facebook users, they generate millions in ads and have changed the gaming landscape.

This is true of many forms of technology and entertainment in recent years, which is why it is so critical to be protected from competitors. Without a strong legal backing, a company can get run over in the marketplace. With a contingency business law firm behind it, the company can fend off lawsuits, bring lawsuits and maintain their success without worrying about the costs of doing so.

Motorola Accused of Trade Secret Violations in Cell Phone Technology Lawsuit

Fri, 18 Nov 2011 16:31:43 -0500

A major lawsuit was filed recently, Bloomberg reports, with cell phone giant Motorola being accused by Lemko Corp. of misappropriating trade secrets involving technology that uses cellular networks to find emergency callers.

Allegations of trade secret violations are major issues because companies rely on their in-house ideas in order to stay competitive in the marketplace. Without keeping their ideas, designs and plans close to the vest, they can easily be replaced.

When companies work with other companies on designs for products, use of technology and other highly secret plans, these insider secrets cannot be leaked outside. If they are, it puts both companies at risk for losing business.

This is especially true for small businesses. When they are attempting to move up the ranks of their particular field, they must have protection. If they are violated by another company (or by an employee who leaves and takes that information illegally to a competitor), they must take legal action.

Many times, however, they must weigh the threat of losing business to the high cost of fighting a legal battle. But hiring an experienced contingency business lawyer may be a solution that works. In this scenario, the law firm puts up the money in order to take the case to trial, to do the research necessary to prepare and to follow through with it.

This saves a small business a lot of money in up-front costs. They don't have to pay out of pocket and only pay the law firm if there is a victory in the case. This is attractive for many small businesses without disposable revenue to spend. It also ensures the law firm is fighting hard for justice.

In Motorola's case, it is being accused of hiring a former Lemko engineer who created computer codes that calculate the location of mobile phones. He left Lemko in 2006 to work for Motorola Mobility, which didn't have that technology at the time, the lawsuit states. The engineer was hired because she knew of Lemko's trade secrets, the lawsuit alleges.

After Motorola developed the technology, it sent it to its China facility, where it made its way into the company's mobile phones. It allegedly destroyed computer files that showed Lemko's computer code. The engineer was later fired.

Google Inc. is in the process of acquiring Motorola Mobility, though Google isn't named in the lawsuit, which seeks royalties and unspecified damages. That deal is expected to go through next year, Bloomberg reports.

In cases like this, there will be a lot of money spent on research, subpoenas, depositions, countless court hearings and the case could take several years to work itself out. The bills in these cases can easily reach the millions of dollars.

This sometimes makes it impossible for businesses to fight. They can go by the wayside if they aren't handled aggressively. And financial barriers can hamper their efforts. An experienced and skilled contingency business litigation law firm must be considered for such a situation.

Small Businesses Facing Embezzlement Require Contingency Business Litigation Counsel

Tue, 08 Nov 2011 12:26:38 -0500

Embezzlement is a fancy word that means theft, but it is theft from the business you work for and can lead to serious criminal penalties.

And if employees are caught by the business owners themselves or law enforcement authorities, they can be forced to spent years behind bars and possibly be forced to pay back the money that was stolen.

A contingency business litigation law firm can aid small business owners who may have been victimized by their own employees. With the economy in bad shape and most employees surviving without raises for several years, employees sometimes make bad decisions. Money stolen from a company can lead to business closure. Having legal counsel to protect your rights and seek full and timely restitution is critical.

At a time when the company has become the victim of a financial crime, the last thing it needs to endure is expensive legal bills. A law firm that works on a contingency basis will accept clients who pay nothing up front, but who agree to an amount to be paid if they are victorious.

That means the business isn't required to put up money to ensure they get back the money that was stolen from them. In many embezzlement cases, the prosecution can convince a judge to order restitution, which means the defendant would be forced to pay back all or most of the money stolen.

But there are limitations on what a criminal court can order a defendant to pay, which is why a civil lawyer can be used to help the business recover. And embezzlement is happening all across the country in different business settings.

The Associated Press reports that a Catholic church business manager in Michigan is accused of stealing $73,000 from the church.

An Oregon woman now faces charges of stealing more than $148,000 from an organic herbal supplement company by using her position as company accountant to access funds. She now faces more than a dozen charges.

In Maine, a woman who used to work for the Maine Trial Lawyers Association faces charges of embezzling $166,000 from the organization. She will go to trial in December and could face five years in prison.

These are all examples of people who were in a position of trust within their businesses or organizations and who allegedly took advantage of that position of power to take money from their bosses.

None have yet been convicted, but it shows that people are willing to take the chance of stealing from their companies at a time when money is so tight. For businesses fighting for survival in this tough economy, a loss of cash can put them out of business, so action must be swift.

A contingency business litigation firm can hit the ground running and begin pursuing your case quickly. Our lawyers will be able to investigate the situation, parallel to the criminal investigation, and work to recover the money as soon as possible. The quicker the company can recover its resources, the quicker it can return to solid financial footing.

Celebrity Endorsement, Investment Bring High Upside, Risk to Small Biz

Fri, 21 Oct 2011 13:52:13 -0500

Any small business, whether struggling or looking to take it to the next level, would welcome the help a celebrity investor or endorsement can provide a company.

But as USA Today recently pointed out, there is a high price to pay if that celebrity attracts business lawsuits or is later surrounded by controversy.

Contingency business litigation attorneys represent companies that don't have the means to fight lawsuits against outside competitors, customers or agencies.

These businesses often need a law firm with the experience to help.

As the USA Today article points out, many small businesses can get a huge boost from a celebrity investment or endorsement. But such endorsements can also come with risks that leave that company open to lawsuits.

Celebrities, especially professional athletes and entertainers, are paid millions to endorse products. It's a business and often a retirement fund for these wealthy wage earners and a way to invest.

Such is the case of New York Yankees star Alex Rodriguez, who a few years ago invested in Zico coconut water, yet recently publicly endorsed rival brand Vita Coco. His words of approval went out in a press release.

Zico was likely thrilled that Rodriguez and his millions were interested in helping out the company. I'm sure they were also devastated that he publicly dissed their brand and then switched to endorse a rival.

Usually, only board members of a company know when an investor has a problem with the company and it is handled internally without much fanfare. But when a celebrity is involved, that is rarely the case. Because of the media and public's attention, they can make big news and quickly.

Most companies agree that there are big risks by having a big-name investor get involved with their company, but the reward can outweigh the risk.

Fans may sometimes be interested in trying a product that their favorite star or athlete says is good. Sales can be boosted. Also, other high-dollar investors may jump on board after seeing press releases, TV interviews or commercials.

However, the endorser's behavior may forever be associated with the business or brand. Witness the dropping of Tiger Woods by a number of sponsors. And from the standpoint of the endorser, any negative actions by the company can damage a reputation. The Kardashian sisters recently got negative press over a high-interest credit card that they quickly began disassociating themselves with.

Of course, most business contracts don't involve celebrities. But experienced legal counsel is vital at every stage of your company's maturation, including incorporation, capital investments, mergers, acquisitions and sales. Such matters can typically be planned and budgeted.

In many cases, its reputation is its most valuable asset. And a business needs additional legal help to defend itself. In such cases, contingency fee litigation may be a solution. The business will benefit from the extensive legal knowledge and experience of a law firm while only encountering legal costs if successful in court. This can relieve the financial burden on a company while ensuring legal help will be paid in accordance with success.

Whistleblower Lawsuit Claims Banks Added Fees to Veterans in Miami, Nationwide

Tue, 11 Oct 2011 10:21:07 -0500

A federal lawsuit out of Atlanta claims that several big banks and mortgage companies ripped off military veterans and taxpayers out of hundreds of millions of dollars in order to hide what they call illegal fees, the Associated Press reports.

Whistleblower lawsuits mean that workers or people with inside knowledge of a scam bring forward the information in the form of a lawsuit in order to stop the company from committing the illegal acts. Under the Federal False Claims Act, a qui tam action can result in the whistleblowers collecting a portion of the penalty, if successful at trial.

But this isn't an endeavor someone should attempt on their own. An experienced whistleblower attorney must be consulted. A whistleblower often faces job loss at a minimum and in some cases may even be in physical danger. Poorly handled cases can result in ruined careers and financial devastation.

On the flip side, a business often finds itself in need of legal advice. Business litigation on a contingency fee basis can provide management and board members with experienced legal counsel without upfront legal costs.

In this case, two mortgage brokers claim 13 banks and mortgage firms over-charged veterans who were applying for special home loans guaranteed by the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Rules set by the federal government allow lenders to charge "reasonable and customary" fees and taxes, but they can't charge veterans attorneys' fees and settlement closing costs on the loans. The lawsuit claims the banks changed attorneys' fees and called them "title examination" or "title search" fees to hide them.

Banks including JPMorgan Chase & Co., Wells Fargo and Bank of America are all listed as defendants. In court documents, they have denied wrongdoing.

The lawsuit was initially filed in 2006, but it was sealed for five years while the case was being investigated. It was unsealed recently. The lawsuit seeks to recover damages and penalties on behalf of the federal government, which has said it won't intervene.

The Associated Press reports that more than 1.2 million refinanced loans have been made to veterans and their families in the last decade and up to 90 percent were handled with these excess fees. In each case, between $300 and $1,000 may have been collected.

This has the makings of a major lawsuit on behalf of military veterans everywhere.

In a situation where military veterans are allowed some perks -- to get a home loan free of excess fees -- banks are accused of tricking them by changing the name of the fee and charging them more than they should be charged under federal laws.

Whistleblowers are increasingly important as big corporations are willing to break rules to make money and hope they don't get caught. They consider the possible penalties they will have to pay later an after-thought and the price of doing business. Conversely, firms making legitimate business decisions must protect themselves against such allegations.

This is why our country needs whistleblowers -- people willing to stand up to what is good and right and willing to risk their reputation and friends to do it. And these people require solid legal representation at every step of the way in order to ensure justice is done.