Entries in the 'In the News' Category ↓

Medical Malpractice in the News – The Quaid Twins

In 2007, actor Dennis Quaid’s newborn twins were accidentally given an extremely inaccurate does of a blood thinner medicine. Although this action nearly killed them, twins Zoe Grace and Thomas Boone recovered quickly – long-term damage, on the other hand, is unknown.

Quaid and wife, Kimberley, filed a lawsuit against pharmaceutical company, Baxter Healthcare Corp and Cedars-Sinai hospital. The lawsuit against Baxter was dismissed, partly because the lawsuit was filed in Illinois but the incident had occurred in California. Court papers indicated that the Quaids have the option to re-file the lawsuit in California, though there hasn’t been any new information to confirm that. They agreed to a $750,000 settlement with Cedars-Sinai in late 2008.

In light of this incident, it is important to communicate with any hospital staff or outside physicians administering medical care to you or a family member. You have a right to know what kind of medication a physician is prescribing or a nurse is handing to you. Ask questions about any possible complications from a test or procedure. If you have any doubts, seek a second opinion. Remember that medical professionals are human beings first and can easily make a dangerous medical mistake.

Keep in mind that the risk of medical malpractice affects everyone – whether you are going to your physician for a yearly physical, to a hospital for routine surgery or even a physical therapy appointment.

If you or a loved one has been injured or are a victim of medical malpractice in New Jersey, the medical malpractice attorneys in NJ can help you with your case. Contact the NJ personal injury lawyers at The Law Offices of James C. DeZao to learn more.

Hawaii Inmates Removed due to Sexual Assault Allegations

Hawaii Inmates Removed due to Sexual Assault Allegations

Honolulu criminal defense attorney Myles S. Breiner is representing a Hawaiian woman who was incarcerated at Otter Creek Correctional facility in  Kentucky and has filed a suit against the corporation running the prison. Mr. Breiner’s client is one of 19 women in the facility who came forward with allegations that she had been sexually abused by prison guards.

Hawaii prison officials disclosed that all 168 female inmates at the privately operated Kentucky prison will be relocated due to charges of sexual abuse by the prison guards. Forty of those inmates returned to Hawaii.

Investigators in Hawaii discovered that at least five corrections officials of the prison, including a chaplain, were charged with having sexual relations with the inmates within the last three years, and four have been convicted.

Three cases of rape involving guards and Hawaii inmates were recently turned over to the authorities. Kentucky State Police voiced that another case of sexual assault would lead right to a grand jury.

Tommy Johnson, deputy director of the Hawaii Department of Public Safety said he found that 81 percent of the Otter Creek workers were men and 19 percent were women, the reverse of what he said the ratio should be for a women’s prison. Mr. Johnson asked the company to hire more women, and it began a bonus program to do so.

For Honolulu criminal attorney Myles S. Breiner, “it is important for the clients to have their day in court and it is important to the state of Hawaii that they are responsible for all their citizens.”

Myles S. Breiner – Honolulu Hawaii Criminal Attorney
841 Bishop Street, Suite 2115
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
Phone: 1-808-526-3426
Fax: 808-521-7680

Recent Predatory Lending and Mortgage Fraud Cases in the News

Predatory Lending & Big Banks

Even the big banks are guilty of predatory lending, the practice of misleading or providing unfair, unlawful information to loan applicants and debtors.

Many times, the big banks settle because the publicity and expense of a trial would be disastrous for them, but the truth is that these practices continue throughout the United States when consumers are not vigilant about the terms of their loans or how those loans are sold to them.

Countrywide Financial

The mortgage lender was sued for $8.4 billion after it was acquired by Bank of America. The plaintiffs, a group of bond investors, claimed fraud and the bank settled.

Bank of America

This major bank was sued by a group of bond investors and then turned around and tried to say the original plaintiffs were unlawfully asserting rights of trust. Sounds like a lot of noise and finger-pointing when they should be focusing on fair lending.

KB Homes

Plaintiffs asserted that the builder’s exclusive mortgage company, Countrywide Financial, misled people into buying homes with inflated values. The homes were sold in Arizona and Nevada.

Various California Lenders

The State of California’s Department of Real Estate has had to shift resources in order to accommodate the huge influx of calls it is receiving in regard to loan modification complaints.

If you think you may have been the victim of predatory lending practices, the best thing to do is contact a predatory lending attorney in Los Angeles who can help you with these issues. Lawyers understand what practices are fair and what practices are unlawful. You deserve to work with honest banks.

Milton & DeKruif
Predatory Lending Lawyer in Los Angeles
1110 South Glendale Avenue
Glendale, CA 91205
1.866.399.1589

Verdict: San Jose Suspect Innocent

San Jose Criminal Law : VIB Law Firm Verdict: Innocent

On April 29, 2008 at about 12 PM two residential burglaries took place in the City of Morgan Hill.

A witness saw 3 persons running through her backyard on the day of the incident.  This witness stated that she could clearly see the face of one the burglars and noticed distinctive  “buck teeth” on this burglary suspect.

Our client was identified in an “in field show up” where the police brought him handcuffed to the location of the witness who made a positive ID on the client.  The witness stated she was positive due to the distinctive teeth of the burglar.

By the time our firm was hired, the client’s prior attorney had negotiated a 2 year Prison sentence and was strongly pressuring the client to settle his case.  We were hired and immediately investigated the matter thoroughly.

We were able to find a very strong alibi existed for the client.  In fact, independent witnesses remembered him eating at a Round Table restaurant at the time in question.  In fact, the manager even found a receipt with the date and time the client had been there on it.

Due to our efforts, the case was dismissed by the District Attorney’s Office after the results of our investigation was turned over to them.  Our client went from a 2 year Prison sentence to being set free by his decision to hire experienced San Jose Criminal Attorneys, Valencia, Ippolito and Bowman.

Law Offices of Valencia, Ippolito and Bowman
991 W. Hedding Street, Suite 202
San Jose, CA 95126
P: 408-920-9720
F: 408-882-0699

Robert E. Cartwright, Jr., San Francisco Personal Injury Attorney – Cartwright Law Firm

Rob received his J.D., in 1982 from Golden Gate University, School of Law. While at Golden Gate Law School, Rob served as the Research Coordinator Editor for the California Tort Reporter for two years. Rob graduated from the University of Puget Sound in 1979 and received a B.A. in Psychology. Rob was also a member of Theta Chi fraternity.

Recent Victories:

Muni Bus Drags & Injures Plaintiff- $555,000 The plaintiff was riding a San Francisco Muni bus, and while exiting was caught in the door of the vehicle and dragged under the bus.  The vehicle ran over him causing serious bodily injuries.

Vioxx Settlement:  A retired, married man in perfect health, had five children, and took Vioxx.  As a result of the drug, he had a heart attack and died.  His family received a settlement of $319,200.

Dangerous Condition of Property-$199,000 Our client suffered serious injuries as a result of landscape negligence on a property where a dangerous condition existed and the landowner knew about it, but failed to notify our client.

The Cartwright Law Firm

222 Front Street 5th Floor
San Francisco, California 94111
866.968.1584

Yahoo PPC Class Action Settlement Proposed

I received this message today regarding a proposed Yahoo! PPC class action settlement. It boils down to alleged mis-representation of PPC distribution channels used by Yahoo. The full text is:

NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT
TO: ALL PERSONS THAT PURCHASED, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, YAHOO! PAY-PER-CLICK TEXT ADVERTISING IN THE U.S. MARKETPLACE
PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY AND IN ITS ENTIRETY. YOUR RIGHTS MAY BE AFFECTED BY PROCEEDINGS IN THIS LITIGATION. IF YOU ARE A CLASS MEMBER, YOU MAY BE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE BENEFITS UNDER THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT DESCRIBED IN THIS NOTICE.

I. Why Did I Get This Notice?
You received this Notice to inform you of a proposed class action settlement (the “Settlement”) that may affect you. The Settlement was entered into by the parties in an action entitled In re Yahoo! Litigation, Case No. CV-06-2737 CAS (C.D. Cal.) (the “Action”). The purpose of this Notice is to inform you that a class has been certified in the Action and to inform you of the terms of the Settlement. You may have received this Notice because you were identified as a present or former pay-per-click advertising customer of Yahoo! Inc., Overture Services, Inc., or GoTo.com, Inc. (collectively “Yahoo!”). This Notice explains your legal rights, and how and by when you need to act.

II. What Is A Class Action Lawsuit?
In a class action, persons or business entities known as class representatives sue on behalf of persons or business entities with similar claims. All of these persons or business entities make up the class and are called class members. One court then resolves the issues for all class members, except for those who exclude themselves from the class. The Honorable Christina A. Snyder of the United States District Court for the Central District of California is presiding over this class action lawsuit.

III. What Is This Class Action About?
This class action was brought in 2006 by several Yahoo! pay-per-click search advertising customers. They allege that customers contracted for targeted ad placements through two products, “Sponsored Search” and “Content Match” (and predecessor products provided by Overture Services, Inc. and GoTo.com, Inc.) and that Yahoo! breached its contract with its customers by allowing Yahoo! ads to be displayed in spyware, domain name parking sites (also known as bulk registration sites), pop-ups, pop-unders, and typosquatting sites. Plaintiffs brought claims for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, misrepresentation, civil conspiracy, and unfair business practices.

IV. Why Is There A Settlement?
After several years of hard-fought litigation, counsel for the parties negotiated the Settlement described in this Notice. Those negotiations have included four mediations, the most recent of which was before the Honorable Gary L. Taylor, United States District Judge (Retired).

The Settlement was reached only after the parties conducted extensive pre-trial discovery. During the course of the Action, Yahoo! produced over 1.5 million pages of documents and hundreds of gigabytes of data. Yahoo! employees testified at deposition. In addition, the plaintiffs who brought the Action (referred to in this Notice as the “Class Representatives”) produced documents to Yahoo! and testified at deposition. In deciding to settle the Action, the Class Representatives and Class Counsel have taken into account the substantial expense and length of time necessary to prosecute the litigation through trial, post-trial motions and likely appeals, as well as the significant uncertainties in predicting the outcome of this complex litigation.
Class Counsel believe that the Settlement provides substantial benefits to the Class. Class Counsel believe that the Settlement is fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the best interests of the Class.

Yahoo! believes that it has valid defenses to the Class Representatives’ claims and denies any liability or wrongdoing. Yahoo! has nevertheless entered into the Settlement to avoid further expense, inconvenience and the burden of drawn-out litigation.

This Notice is not an expression of any opinion by the Court as to the merits of any claims or any defenses asserted by any party in the Action.

V. Who Is A Class Member?
The Class consists of all individuals or entities that purchased pay-per-click text advertising (referred to in this Notice as “Yahoo! Ads”) in the U.S. Marketplace, whether directly from Yahoo! or its predecessors Overture Services, Inc. or GoTo.com, Inc., or indirectly from an advertising agent, at any time from May 1, 2000 until September 22, 2009.

Pay-per-click text advertising includes the Yahoo! Search Marketing products currently known as “Sponsored Search” and “Content Match,” as well as predecessor products provided by Overture Services, Inc. and GoTo.com, Inc.

Excluded from the Class are Yahoo!, Overture Services, Inc. or GoTo.com, Inc. customers that did not purchase pay-per-click text advertising in the U.S. Marketplace. (For example, any Yahoo! customer that only purchased banner advertising, but not pay-per-click text advertising, is not part of the Class.) The “U.S. Marketplace” refers to Yahoo!’s ad “marketplace” covering the United States and English-speaking Canada.

VI. What Are The Settlement Benefits?
The Settlement Agreement is available online at www.inreyahoosettlement.com . A summary of the benefits to the Class is as follows:

A. “Ad Placement Option”
As a result of the Action, Yahoo! has agreed to develop and offer a new ad placement option (referred to in this Notice and in the Settlement Agreement as the “Ad Placement Option,” but which may have a different name once launched) that will enable Yahoo! Ad customers to control where their Yahoo! Ads appear. The Ad Placement Option will allow Yahoo! Ad customers to specify that their Sponsored Search ads should be displayed only on websites and other Internet properties owned or operated by Yahoo!, and the websites of certain “Premium” distribution partners. In response to plaintiffs’ claims in the Action, Yahoo! Ad placements by “Premium” distribution partners will be subject to limitations. Please review paragraph 22 of the Settlement Agreement, which is available at www.inreyahoosettlement.com or from the Claims Administrator, for complete details about these limitations.

Yahoo! has agreed to make best efforts to launch the Ad Placement Option as early as the first quarter of 2010, but in no event later than September 30, 2010. Before the Ad Placement Option is launched, Yahoo! will post additional information about the Ad Placement Option on the “Traffic Quality” portion of its website ( http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/trafficquality/index.php ).

Yahoo! will maintain the Ad Placement Option for at least two years from the date of its launch, subject to the condition discussed in Paragraph D below. Should Yahoo! decide to remove or materially alter the Ad Placement Option after the two-year commitment, Yahoo! will provide individual notice by email or postal mail to its then-existing Yahoo! Ad customers of the planned alteration or elimination of the Ad Placement Option. The notice will explain why the Ad Placement Option is being eliminated or altered, and will remind its customers that they may discontinue advertising with Yahoo! at any time.

B. Enhanced Disclosures
Yahoo! will post enhanced disclosures on the “Traffic Quality” portion of its website ( http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/trafficquality/index.php ) about where Yahoo! Ads may appear on the Internet. These disclosures will provide information about the Ad Placement Option, including a link to a Yahoo! webpage with instructions for using the Ad Placement Option.

C. Enhancements to the Click Investigation Request Tool
Yahoo! will also modify its click investigation request tool to allow advertisers to ask questions or request investigations regarding certain Yahoo! advertising partners. Yahoo! will also add language to the Traffic Quality section of Yahoo!’s website notifying advertisers that they can request investigations of partners.

D. Potential Impact of Yahoo!-Microsoft Agreement
On July 29, 2009, Yahoo! and Microsoft Corporation entered into a binding letter agreement pursuant to which Yahoo! and Microsoft will negotiate definitive agreements that would, upon regulatory approvals and at full implementation, make Microsoft the exclusive paid search advertising platform for Yahoo! (“Microsoft Transaction”) for a ten-year period. Yahoo! is hopeful that regulatory approval of the Microsoft Transaction could occur in early 2010. Full implementation of the Microsoft Transaction is estimated to occur within two years following the necessary regulatory approvals. Yahoo! agrees to provide the Ad Placement Option on its own paid search advertising platform for a period of two years from the date it first launches the Ad Placement Option and while it offers its own paid search advertising platform, or through the date of full implementation of the Microsoft Transaction, whichever occurs first. Yahoo! agrees to provide each of the benefits specified in Paragraphs VI.B and VI.C for a period of two years from the date each benefit is first made available, or through the date of full implementation of the Microsoft Transaction, whichever occurs first. Yahoo! represents and warrants that the definitive agreements for the Microsoft Transaction will contain language to the effect that Microsoft will agree to implement ad distribution controls on the Microsoft paid search platform. If any Class members are transitioned to Microsoft’s paid search advertising platform earlier than two years from the launch of the Ad Placement Option by Yahoo!, and before Microsoft implements the ad distribution controls on its paid search platform, Yahoo! will notify those affected Class members that ad distribution controls are not available at the time of their transition to the Microsoft paid search services platform.

For more information concerning the Yahoo!-Microsoft agreement as it relates to the Settlement, please review paragraph 48 of the Settlement Agreement, which is available at www.inreyahoosettlement.com or from the Claims Administrator.

E. Refunds to Class Members who are Out of Business
Yahoo! will pay a $20 refund (“Refund”) to eligible Class members who are out of business.
In order to apply for a Refund, you must: complete the Claim Form online at www.inreyahoosettlement.com, or in paper form if you download the paper version of the Claim Form on www.inreyahoosettlement.com or request a paper Claim Form from the Claims Administrator at the telephone number or address listed below. A Claim Form will be considered valid only if: (1) you owned, or held a controlling interest in, the business that was a Yahoo! advertiser at the time it went out of business; (2) you did not owe Yahoo! money in connection with your Yahoo! Ads account(s) when your company went out of business; (3) you complete all portions of the Claim Form in their entirety, date the Claim Form, and certify the accuracy of your responses under penalty of perjury, including that you owned, or held a controlling interest in, the business at the time it went out of business; and (4) the information you provide on the Claim Form matches Yahoo!’s account records. Your Claim Form must be submitted to the Claims Administrator by March 22, 2010. Claim Forms submitted after March 22, 2010 are invalid and will not be considered.

If there is a conflict between your information and Yahoo!’s records, then the Claims Administrator will notify you of the basis for the conflict (for example, the Client Identification number does not match Yahoo!’s records), and you will have one opportunity to attempt to resolve the conflict by resubmitting a new, fully completed Claim Form to the Claims Administrator. The Claims Administrator will forward completed Claim Forms to Yahoo! for a determination of eligibility for a Refund. If Yahoo! determines that you are eligible, you will be sent a check in the amount of $20.00 by postal mail.

In the event Yahoo! determines that you are not eligible for a Refund, Yahoo! will send a “Notice of Denied Claim,” and you may seek an independent review of Yahoo!’s determination by a Special Master by submitting a “Written Review Request,” which will be provided to you along with the Notice of Denied Claim. If you wish to seek an independent review of Yahoo!’s denial of your claim, you must, within thirty (30) calendar days of the date as shown on the email or postmark of Yahoo!’s sending the Notice of Denied Claim, send by email or postal mail the completed “Written Review Request,” together with any documents or other evidence you wish to include in such request, to the Claims Administrator. Paragraph 50(j)-(m) of the Settlement Agreement contains details concerning the Special Master’s independent review.

F. Yahoo! to Pay Costs of Notice, Claims Administration, Attorneys’ Fees and Costs and Service Awards to the Class Representatives
Yahoo! will pay the costs of notice and claims administration. Yahoo! will also pay the plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees and costs, and service awards to the Class Representatives. Yahoo! will pay those fees, costs and service awards in addition to providing the other settlement benefits described above in Section VI.A through VI.E. Attorneys’ fees, reimbursement of costs, and service awards to the Class Representatives must be approved by the Court.

VII. What Am I Giving Up If I Participate In The Settlement?
The Settlement will release Class members’ Released Claims against Yahoo!. The complete definition of “Released Claims” is set out in the Settlement Agreement, which is available at www.inreyahoosettlement.com or from the Claims Administrator. In summary, and without limiting the definition of “Released Claims” set forth in the Settlement Agreement, Released Claims include any and all claims, causes of action, demands, rights, liens, obligations, suits, appeals, sums of money, accounts, covenants, contracts, controversies, attorneys’ fees and costs, expenses, losses, damages, judgments, orders, promises whatsoever, known or unknown, matured or unmatured, suspected or unsuspected, concealed or hidden, whether sounding in law, equity, bankruptcy, or in any other forum, from January 1, 2000 through and including September 22, 2009, that have been or could have been asserted in the Action. This release includes without limitation any and all claims concerning domain parking sites and pages; typosquatting sites and pages; bulk-registered domain name sites and pages; software applications; downloadable applications; pop-ups; pop-unders; “sliders”; “sidebars”; “injected ads”; adware; spyware; malware; malicious software; error implementations and pages; email campaigns; clicks that result from self-targeting; untargeted or random placements within the Distribution Network; ads displayed on sites or pages that lack any bona fide content, or any content at all; or ads shown to Internet users who have not conducted a search or viewed bona fide content related to a Yahoo! pay-per-click text advertisement.

The Settlement will also release any and all claims that you (or the Class Representatives or any other Class member) do not know or suspect to exist in your favor, even if knowledge of such a claim might have affected your decisions with respect to the Settlement Agreement and the Settlement with Yahoo!.
The release of Released Claims against Yahoo! includes the entities Yahoo! Inc., its subsidiaries – including without limitation Overture Services, Inc. (formerly known as GoTo.com, Inc.), which did business as Yahoo! Search Marketing – together with their predecessors, related entities, affiliated and sister corporations, divisions, officers, principals, owners, directors, minority or controlling shareholders, employers, employees, representatives and agents.

Upon the Effective Date of the Settlement, the Class Representatives and Class members – and their heirs, predecessors, successors, assigns, present and former partners, parents, subsidiaries, related entities, affiliated and sister corporations, divisions, officers, principals, owners, directors, minority or controlling shareholders, employers, employees, representatives or agents – shall be deemed to have released and forever discharged, and shall forever be enjoined from filing, commencing, prosecuting, intervening in, participating in or otherwise facilitating any and all Released Claims against Yahoo! in any court or forum whatsoever.

VIII. Final Approval Hearing
The Court will hold a hearing (“Final Approval Hearing”) on January 11, 2010 at 10:00 a.m., at the United States Courthouse, 312 N. Spring St., Los Angeles, CA 90012, in Courtroom No. 5. The purpose of the Final Approval Hearing will be: (1) to determine whether the proposed Settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate to the Class and should be approved by the Court and, therefore, whether the Action should be dismissed, and (2) to consider the reasonableness of an application by Class Counsel for payment of attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of costs incurred in connection with the Action and for service awards to the Class Representatives.

Your attendance is not required. Class Counsel are prepared to answer the Court’s questions on your behalf. If you or your lawyer wishes to attend the Final Approval Hearing, you may do so at your own expense.

IX. What Are My Rights And Options As A Class Member?
Class members have the following options:

A. Remain in the Class.
If you wish to remain a member of the Class, you do not need to take any action. As a Class member, you will be represented by the Class Representatives and Class Counsel, unless you wish to be represented by counsel of your own choice at your own expense. You are not required to retain your own counsel, but if you choose to do so, your counsel must file an appearance on your behalf on or before December 14, 2009, and must serve copies of such appearance on the attorneys listed below.

If you remain in the Class, you will release the Released Claims against Yahoo!, as described above in Section VII.

B. Exclude Yourself from the Settlement.
You may exclude yourself from the Class by following the instructions below. If you exclude yourself from the Class, you will not be eligible to receive a Refund and will not be considered to have released any claims against Yahoo! under the Settlement.

You will be bound by all determinations and judgments in this Action concerning the Settlement, whether favorable or unfavorable, unless you submit a request for exclusion on or before December 14, 2009. You may exclude yourself online at www.inreyahoosettlement.com by completing the online opt-out form, or by sending an opt-out request to the Claims Administrator by postal mail. The date of your online request, or the postmark on the envelope containing your mailed request, will determine whether your request for exclusion is timely.

To be effective, all items on the online opt-out form must be completed. If you send in your request for exclusion by postal mail, you must include the business name, address and Yahoo! Ads Client ID number(s) of the Yahoo! advertiser seeking exclusion, indicate that you wish to be excluded from the Class, sign the request and mail it to:

Class Counsel:
Michael J. Boni
Joshua D. Snyder
Boni & Zack LLC
15 Saint Asaphs Road
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
mboni@bonizack.com
jsnyder@bonizack.com

Michael D. Donovan
Donovan Searles, LLC
1845 Walnut Street, Suite 1100
Philadelphia, PA 19103
mdonovan@donovansearles.com
Yahoo!’s Counsel:
Larry W. McFarland, Esq.
Dennis L. Wilson, Esq.
Keats McFarland & Wilson LLP
9720 Wilshire Boulevard
Penthouse Suite
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
lmcfarland@kmwlaw.com
dwilson@kmwlaw.com

C. Appear and Object to the Proposed Settlement.
If you do not exclude yourself from the Settlement, you have the right to object to or comment on the Settlement and the request for attorneys’ fees and costs and service awards to the Class Representatives. If you wish to object to the Settlement, you must, on or before December 14, 2009, file your objection with the Court at:

Office of the Clerk
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division
312 N. Spring Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012

You must also serve copies of your objection by email or First-Class Mail on Class Counsel and Yahoo!’s Counsel at the addresses listed above.

Any objection must contain: (a) the objector’s business name, address, and Yahoo! Ads Client ID number(s); (b) a statement of whether the objector intends to appear at the Final Approval Hearing, either in person or through counsel, and, if through counsel, identifying counsel by name, address, and phone number; and (c) a statement of the grounds for the objection.

You may appear at the hearing in person or, if you are represented by an attorney, your attorney may appear in person, and state why the Settlement or any part of the Settlement should not be approved. However, you will not be entitled to be heard at the Final Approval Hearing, whether individually or through counsel, unless written notice of your intention to appear at the Final Approval Hearing is timely filed with the Court and served on Class Counsel and Yahoo!’s Counsel. The date of the postmark on the mailing envelope will determine whether an objection and/or notice of intention to appear is timely.

Unless you object as provided in this Notice, you will not be entitled to contest the terms and conditions of the Settlement, and anyone that does not object as provided in this Notice will be deemed to have given up the right to raise any such objections at the Final Approval Hearing or at any time in the future.

X. Do I Have A Lawyer Representing My Interests In This Case?
Yes. The Court has appointed the attorneys listed above, Michael J. Boni and Michael D. Donovan, to represent you and other Class members.

XI. How Will The Lawyers Be Paid? Will The Class Representatives Receive Service Awards?
Class Counsel will apply for attorneys’ fees of $4,170,000, plus reimbursement of expenses of approximately $100,000, and for service awards to the three Class Representatives of $10,000 each. Yahoo! has agreed to pay those fees, expenses and service awards, in the total amount of $4.3 million, in addition to providing the other settlement benefits described above in Section VI. Attorneys’ fees, reimbursement of costs, and service awards to Class Representatives must be approved by the Court.

XII. Where May I Obtain Further Information?
The Settlement Agreement, its attachments and the other legal documents that have been filed with the Court in this lawsuit contain more details about the Settlement, and are available online at www.inreyahoosettlement.com. The documents are also available during regular office hours at the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division, 312 N. Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012. If you have questions about the Settlement, you may write to or call the Claims Administrator:
In re Yahoo! Settlement Administrator
c/o Rust Consulting, Inc.
P.O. Box 2241
Faribault, MN 55021-1641
1-877-434-3068

You may also obtain further information regarding the Settlement by contacting Class Counsel at the contact information listed above.

Melody Morales ‘ too ghetto’ for Hawaiian Tropic Zone?

New York City Employment Attorney, Derek T. Smith was interviewed for this article regarding New York City employment law.

Courtesy of the NY Daily News:

A luscious Latina who sued the Hawaiian Tropic Zone will leave it to a jury to decide whether she’s “too ghetto” to sling drinks in a bikini at the infamous eatery.

Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Edward Lehner on Tuesday greenlighted the discrimination lawsuit by Melody Morales, who charged that she was denied her dream job because she didn’t “speak white.”

“I don’t think accent should play any role in service at a restaurant where the waitresses serve drinks and meals in bikinis,” said Derek Smith, a lawyer for the top-heavy former Hooters girl.

Morales, 22, sued the Times Square restaurant in January after the stunner with a 34-D cup size says she was twice rejected for a job by managers who didn’t much care for her “Latin accent.”

“They’re going to see that she speaks very well,” Smith said. “And I intend to depose all of the waitresses who work there because I am interested to see how well they speak.”

Lawyers for the recently reopened Hawaiian Tropic Zone had tried to have Morales’ suit tossed – and they strongly hinted that she was a hooker after her photos appeared on what they called “very filthy” Web sites.

Smith insisted that Morales is no call girl – merely a busty beauty who who fantasized about working in a skimpy swimsuit. Morales has boasted that she would have done a “perfect job” because of her ample assets that look good in a bikini.

Read more

Akin & Smith, LLC
305 Broadway, Suite 1101,
New York City (NYC) , New York 10007

Locke Clifford Attends White Collar Crime Program

On February 25,26 and 27, 2009, Locke Clifford attended the 23rd Annual National Institute on White Collar Crime presented by the American Bar Association Criminal Justice Section and the ABA Center for Continuing Legal Education in cooperation with the General Practice, Solo & Small Firm Division and the Young Lawyers Division of the ABA. The Institute was held in San Francisco, California at the Westin St. Francis Hotel.

While in San Francisco, he attended a private reception of the Wong Sun Society of San Francisco, established in 1992, to recognize the 50th Anniversary of the Arrest of Blackie Toy.

Locke T. Clifford and Andrew C. Clifford of The Clifford Division proudly represent the tradition of legal excellence begun by Locke and his colleague 35 years ago in Greensboro, North Carolina. Our lawyers focus on criminal law and defend both individuals and businesses in their criminal cases.

The Clifford Division
Clifford Clendenin & O’Hale, LLP
415 West Friendly Avenue,
Greensboro, North Carolina 27401
Toll Free: 877-645-2354

Peter Schroeter Named to Best Lawyers in America

Peter Schroeter of Saco, managing partner of  Smith Elliott Smith & Garmey of  Saco and Portland, has been chosen by his peers for inclusion in the 2009 edition of The Best Lawyers in America.  Schroeter, who has practiced law for 28 years, specializes in alternative dispute resolution.

Peter is the managing partner of the law firm and has practiced law for 28 years, concentrating on Mediation/Arbitration services and civil litigation.  He mediates more than 100 cases a year involving a wide variety of civil litigation matters, including business, construction, contracts, employment, insurance, personal injury, medical malpractice, probate and real estate.

Smith Elliott Smith & Garmey
199 Main Street
Saco, Maine 04072
Toll Free:  (866) 767-4359

Evan Kaine – Atlanta Car Accident Attorney | Kaine Law Firm

Evan was selected as a Rising Star for inclusion in 2009 Georgia Super Lawyers.
The selections for Super Lawyers are made by Law & Politics, a division of Key Professional Media, Inc. of Minneapolis, Minn. Each year, Law & Politics undertakes a rigorous multi-phase selection process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, independent evaluation of candidates by Law & Politics’ attorney-led research staff, a peer review of candidates by practice area, and a good-standing and disciplinary check.

Kaine Law – Car accidents in Atlanta
Lenox Center – Auto accident in Atlanta
3355 Lenox Road Suite 850
Atlanta, Georgia 30326
877.884.8579