As previously reported here, on January 16, 2008, a jury in the Apollo Group securities class action found that Apollo Group misled investors and held the company liable for $277 million in compensatory damages.  However, the district court recently overturned the jury’s verdict. …
Read More Apollo Group Securities Class Action Jury Verdict Overturned

Apparently prompted by investigations of other brokers and overtures from the New York Attorney General and other regulators, three more broker-dealers have announced intentions to buy back auction rate securities (ARS) or otherwise settle ARS claims. 

…
Read More Auction Rate Securities: Voluntary Buy-Backs, Settlements and Settlement Reserves

The Venezuelan Supreme Court recently upheld the constitutionality of blocking 272 mostly opposition candidates from running for office on the basis of suspicion of corruption.  The court rejected arguments that the blacklist was unconstitutional because many of the listed candidates had merely been accused, but not convicted, of corruption. 

…
Read More Venezuelan Supreme Court Upholds Constitutionality of Candidate Blacklist

Nancy Praeger, President of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”), sent a letter last month to the U.S. House Financial Services Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises (the “Subcommittee”) and the co-sponsors of H.R. 5792, Increasing Insurance Coverage Option for Consumers Act of 2008 (the “Bill”).

…
Read More NAIC Comments On Proposed Reforms Of Liability Risk Retention Act

Syndicate 980 v. Sinco S.A. [2008] EWHC 1842 (Comm), concerned a jurisdiction dispute for claims made in England and in Greece. The Syndicates and Sinco were party to contracts which contained an exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of the English courts. The Syndicates had commenced proceedings in England which concerned breaches of contract. 

…
Read More UK: Commercial Court Considers Aspects of the EC Regulation on Jurisdiction

The recent judgment in Ace Capital Ltd v CMS Energy Corp [2008] EWHC 1843 (Comm) has provided welcome clarification on the effect of a US service of suit clause in a policy that contains an English arbitration provision.

…
Read More UK: English High Court Examines the Interaction Between an English Arbitration Clause and a US Service of Suit Clause

As we previously reported here, the Rhode Island Supreme Court recently ruled that the public nuisance suit filed by the State’s Attorney General against various former lead paint manufacturers, resulting in a jury verdict against the manufacturers, should have been dismissed by the trial justice. 

…
Read More Defendants in Rhode Island’s Lead Paint Public Nuisance Suit Seek Reimbursement of Costs

In a recent decision of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, Jeld-Wen, Inc. v. Van Brunt, Adv. Proc. No. 07-51602 (Bankr. D. Del. June 9, 2008), the court held that a claim for injury allegedly due to exposure to asbestos was not discharged, survived the company’s exit from Chapter 11, and could be asserted against the successor company in a State court action under the circumstances presented: (i) under applicable governing non-bankruptcy law, such a claim does not arise until  injury manifests; (ii) the injury was not discovered until after the company had emerged from bankruptcy; (iii) the company’s confirmed plan of reorganization did not include a channeling injunction accommodating future asbestos related claims; and (iv) the published notice of the plan of reorganization did not provide notice to potential future asbestos claimants that their claims would be discharged by confirmation of the plan. …
Read More Bankruptcy Court Rules That Asbestos Claims Were Not Discharged By Plan of Reorganization

The Massachusetts Appeals Court recently ruled that an Insured’s willful, unexcused refusal to submit to an examination under oath violated the cooperation clause in its policy resulting in a material breach on the part of the Insured. …
Read More Massachusetts Appeals Court Rules that Insured Cannot Cure Material Breach of Policy Based on its Failure to Cooperate