San Antonio Criminal Lawyer Carl Lobitz is a Texas Board Certified Criminal Law Specialist with 25 years experience. Call Carl 24 hours a day at 210.573.6645. Initial consultation is always free.
San Antonio Criminal Lawyer Carl Lobitz is a Texas Board Certified Criminal Law Specialist with 25 years experience. Call Carl 24 hours a day at 210.573.6645. Initial consultation is always free.
Primary global, full tilt poker, bp, bof a in court newsvincentjohn174
A former executive at expert- networking firm Primary Global Research LLC, James Fleishman, was found guilty of helping pass confidential information to fund managers as part of an insider-trading scheme. Fleishman, of Santa Clara, California, was found guilty yesterday by a Manhattan federal jury of conspiracy to commit securities fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud. The jury deliberated for about six hours before reaching a verdict. U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff set sentencing for Dec. 21. Until then, Fleishman, who faces as long as 25 years in prison, remains free on bond. He and his lawyer, Ethan Balogh, declined to comment as they left the courthouse. “We had enough evidence to find the defendant guilty of both counts,” said jury foreman Ben Stein, who works in the information-technology sector of a financial-services business. “It was not easy, but we had lots of evidence.” Since November, 15 people have been charged by federal prosecutors in the office of Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara in a probe of expert networkers and hedge fund managers. Twelve have pleaded guilty, including Noah Freeman, a former portfolio manager with SAC Capital Advisors LP, and Samir Barai, the founder of Barai Capital Management LP. Fleishman, 42, was the second to go to trial. Winifred Jiau, a former Primary Global consultant who was convicted at trial in June of securities fraud and conspiracy, is scheduled to be sentenced today in Manhattan federal court. Prosecutors said Fleishman obtained and passed confidential data from technology company employees who were moonlighting as consultants for Mountain View, California-based Primary Global. The secret tips were given to fund managers who paid Primary Global for consultation calls, prosecutors said.
The case is U.S. v. Nguyen, 11-cr-32, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).
Lawsuits/Pretrial
Full Tilt Paid Board With Players’ $440 Million, U.S. Says Full Tilt Poker paid board members more than $440 million using funds it had told its online poker players would be available to them for withdrawal at any time, U.S. prosecutors said. Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara’s office yesterday asked U.S. District Judge Leonard B. Sand for permission to add the new allegations to a civil forfeiture case first filed against Full Tilt, PokerStars, Absolute Poker and other businesses in April. “Full Tilt insiders lined their own pockets with funds picked from the pockets of their most loyal customers while blithely lying to both players and public alike about the safety and security of the money deposited with the company,” Bharara said in statement. The forfeiture action parallels criminal charges also brought by Bharara against the poker companies and 11 people, alleging bank fraud, money laundering and illegal gambling. Prosecutors said that after the U.S. enacted a law in 2006 barring banks from processing payments to offshore gambling websites, Full Tilt, PokerStars
Primary global, full tilt poker, bp, bof a in court newsvincentjohn174
A former executive at expert- networking firm Primary Global Research LLC, James Fleishman, was found guilty of helping pass confidential information to fund managers as part of an insider-trading scheme. Fleishman, of Santa Clara, California, was found guilty yesterday by a Manhattan federal jury of conspiracy to commit securities fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud. The jury deliberated for about six hours before reaching a verdict. U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff set sentencing for Dec. 21. Until then, Fleishman, who faces as long as 25 years in prison, remains free on bond. He and his lawyer, Ethan Balogh, declined to comment as they left the courthouse. “We had enough evidence to find the defendant guilty of both counts,” said jury foreman Ben Stein, who works in the information-technology sector of a financial-services business. “It was not easy, but we had lots of evidence.” Since November, 15 people have been charged by federal prosecutors in the office of Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara in a probe of expert networkers and hedge fund managers. Twelve have pleaded guilty, including Noah Freeman, a former portfolio manager with SAC Capital Advisors LP, and Samir Barai, the founder of Barai Capital Management LP. Fleishman, 42, was the second to go to trial. Winifred Jiau, a former Primary Global consultant who was convicted at trial in June of securities fraud and conspiracy, is scheduled to be sentenced today in Manhattan federal court. Prosecutors said Fleishman obtained and passed confidential data from technology company employees who were moonlighting as consultants for Mountain View, California-based Primary Global. The secret tips were given to fund managers who paid Primary Global for consultation calls, prosecutors said.
The case is U.S. v. Nguyen, 11-cr-32, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).
Lawsuits/Pretrial
Full Tilt Paid Board With Players’ $440 Million, U.S. Says Full Tilt Poker paid board members more than $440 million using funds it had told its online poker players would be available to them for withdrawal at any time, U.S. prosecutors said. Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara’s office yesterday asked U.S. District Judge Leonard B. Sand for permission to add the new allegations to a civil forfeiture case first filed against Full Tilt, PokerStars, Absolute Poker and other businesses in April. “Full Tilt insiders lined their own pockets with funds picked from the pockets of their most loyal customers while blithely lying to both players and public alike about the safety and security of the money deposited with the company,” Bharara said in statement. The forfeiture action parallels criminal charges also brought by Bharara against the poker companies and 11 people, alleging bank fraud, money laundering and illegal gambling. Prosecutors said that after the U.S. enacted a law in 2006 barring banks from processing payments to offshore gambling websites, Full Tilt, PokerStars
Defendant's Motion to dismiss for violation of speedy trial rightsRich Bergeron
I prepared a very crisp and professional motion to dismiss just to watch Judge James D. O'Neill shoot it down with junk logic and misrepresentation of the law. He continues to show his blind loyalty to the bumbling prosecutors on my case. I had more than one lawyer tell me this was an excellent motion and hit on all the right points. This is where an appeal would expose how biased the judge really is.
PAGE 4Financial Institutions and PolicyAssignment 1Instruct.docxalfred4lewis58146
PAGE
4Financial Institutions and PolicyAssignment 1
Instructions: Attempt the following exercises
Exercise 1
A) Read the attached article and answer the following question using arguments based on the article.
a) Summarize the article
b) Do banks themselves represent a moral hazard and adverse selection problem for their depositors and the financial system? How does the government protect the financial system against adverse selection and moral hazard that certain banks pose for the financial system?
B) The following questions are independent of the previous questions.
Let
s
P
be the present discounted value of the incomes from the assets (or the interest payments on liabilities) over the average duration T of the assets (or liabilities) when the interest rate
i
is low or
s
i
i
=
. Let
h
P
be the present discounted value of the incomes from the assets (or the interest payments on liabilities) over the average duration T of the assets (or liabilities) when the interest rate
i
is high or
h
i
i
=
. If we express the interest rate in decimal form then
s
s
h
s
s
h
i
i
i
T
P
P
P
+
-
-
»
-
1
We define the net worth of the bank as the difference between the present discounted value of the incomes from the assets and the present discounted value of the interest payments on its deposits. Define, the interest rate risk as the change in the net worth of the bank as the consequence of change in the interest rate or as the difference between the change in the present discounted value of the assets and the change in the present discounted value of deposits.
A bank has $100 million of assets with an average duration of 4 years and $90 million of deposits with an average duration of 6 years.
c) Estimate the interest rate risk when the interest rate increases from 0.02 (=2%) to 0.04 (=4%)? .
d) To reduce its interest rate risk should the bank try to change and in which direction the average durations of its assets and its liabilities?
Exercise 2
a) If people were free to join or not a defined contribution pension plan, would most of them choose not to be members?
b) What is the difference between a defined benefit plan and the Canadian Pension Plan?
Read pages 20-26 of the paper “The Relative Roles of Monetary Policy and Financial Regulations in the development of Financial Crises” By Hassouna Moussa. Answer the following questions using the arguments and data contained in the article.
c) Consider the following assertion: “Some people claim that the banking regulation and supervision in Canada allowed the Canadian financial system to escape unscathed from the 2009-2009 financial crises”.
What are the major differences between the US and Canadian systems of banking regulation and supervision that could justify the previous assertion?End Bank of America liable for Countrywide mortgage fraud
By Nate Raymond, NEW YORK Wed Oct 23, 2014 6:57pm EDT
(Reuters) - Bank of America Corp was found liable for fraud on Wednesda.
As the Boy Scouts of America goes through a contentious bankruptcy, dozens of lawyers are working on the case. Many are charging more than $1,000 an hour.
SAMPLE CASE BRIEFFollow this format (except type double spa.docxrtodd599
SAMPLE CASE BRIEF
Follow this format (except type double spaced). Your brief should be no more than
two or three double-spaced pages.
=============================================================
NEAR V. MINNESOTA, 283 U.S. 697 (1931) [complete name of case, citation, date]
decision by Supreme Court of United States [name of court issuing the opinion]
FACTS: J. M. Near published the Saturday Press in Minneapolis. In a series of articles he
charged, in substance, that a Jewish gangster was in control of gambling, bootlegging and
racketeering in the city, and that the city government and its law enforcement agencies and
officers were not energetically performing their duties.
A Minnesota statute (referred to as a “gag law” provided for the abatement, as a public
nuisance, of a “malicious, scandalous and defamatory newspaper, magazine or other periodical.”
Near was cited as being in violating of this law and brought into court. An injunction was
issued by a district court that halted all activity of the Saturday Press. Near was prohibited from
ever publishing the newspaper again unless he could convince the court that he could operate a
newspaper free of objectionable material.
Near appealed this ruling. The Minnesota Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the
law, holding that under its broad police power the state could regulate public nuisances, including
defamatory and scandalous newspapers. The U. S. Supreme Court granted Near's petition for
certiorari.
LEGAL QUESTION: Is the action by the state of Minnesota against the newspaper (a
prior restraint) a violation of Near’s Fourteenth Amendment rights, which guarantees that “no
state shall deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law”?
DECISION: Yes. (5-4, Chief Justice Hughes wrote the majority opinion.)
COURT'S RATIONALE: The Minnesota statute is not designed to redress the wrongs of
the individuals who have been attacked by Near. Instead, it is directed at suppression of the
offending newspaper or periodical and puts the publisher under an effective suppression. The
object of the law is not punishment but suppression, and not only of the offending issue but of all
future issues as well. The statute is not consistent with the conception of liberty of the press as it
has been historically conceived and guaranteed.
It is true that the principle as to immunity from previous restraint is stated too broadly; this
immunity is not absolutely unlimited. But the limitation has been recognized only in exceptional
cases. These cases include (1) certain utterances during wartime, (2) the publication of obscene
matter, (3) or material that incites acts of violence and the overthrow by force of orderly
government.
However, there are occasions in which limiting freedom of the press to only freedom of
prior restraint is not enough. Punishment after publication can impose a kind of prior restraint
upon the individual. A citizen must have the .
Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita says the Disciplinary Commission is bowing to "political pressure" in its effort to make his confidential agreement public.
Judge Posner Dismisses "Frivolous" Appeal of Contempt Order in Subrogation Ca...NationalUnderwriter
From FC&S Legal: Judge Posner Dismisses "Frivolous" Appeal of Contempt Order in Subrogation Case and Orders District Court to Consider Whether Lawyer and Client Should Be Jailed
Judge Richard Posner of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has written the opinion for a panel of three judges dismissing a “frivolous” appeal by a lawyer and his client from a district court order holding them in contempt in a subrogation case.
The Case
As Judge Posner explained, Beverly Lewis was injured in an automobile accident in Georgia and her health plan paid approximately $180,000 for the cost of her medical treatment. Represented by Georgia lawyer David T. Lashgari, Ms. Lewis brought a tort suit in Georgia state court against the driver of the car involved in the accident (her son-in-law), and obtained a $500,000 settlement. The health plan had, and, Judge Posner wrote, Mr. Lashgari “knew it had,” a subrogation lien that granted it the right to offset the cost that the plan had incurred as a result of the accident against any money that Ms. Lewis obtained in a suit arising out of the accident.
These are essentially mortgages that the banks knew they did not own, but were willing to break the law in order to put homeowners out on the streets to satisfy their insatiable greed for even more money.
Andrew Livernois and Keith Cormier of the Belknap County Attorney's Office Ta...Rich Bergeron
This is the Amicus Brief filed by Gilles R. Bissonnette, Esq. (N.H. Bar No. 265393) and Henry Klementowicz, Esq. (N.H. Bar No. 21177) of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire Foundation. This is in response to the Belknap County Attorney's Office asking for a gag order on the case. Andrew Livernois and Deputy Keith Cormier appear to have misjudged the power of the press here. Stay tuned.
“The problem is that when lenders foreclose, they have to have all their ducks in a row,” says Rob Napolitano, a New Jersey mortgage expert. “They’re trying to doctor up these assignments in order to create an ownership trail that didn’t exist in the first place.”
Attorney Paul Allen Glendale Mendoza Paul Allen Mendoza Paul Allencurrentnews2013
2013 will undoubtedly be a year of change. Society has, both on a global and national spectrum undergone many political, geopolitical, social and ideological changes. For this particular short, let us emphasize the dramatic social change in regards to the Middle East. Egypt has adopted a relatively new style of government, yet, since its foundation it has been laden with controversy, perhaps time shall tell us of it’s effectiveness
An astonishing, first-of-its-kind, report by the NYT assessing damage in Ukraine. Even if the war ends tomorrow, in many places there will be nothing to go back to.
01062024_First India Newspaper Jaipur.pdfFIRST INDIA
Find Latest India News and Breaking News these days from India on Politics, Business, Entertainment, Technology, Sports, Lifestyle and Coronavirus News in India and the world over that you can't miss. For real time update Visit our social media handle. Read First India NewsPaper in your morning replace. Visit First India.
CLICK:- https://firstindia.co.in/
#First_India_NewsPaper
हम आग्रह करते हैं कि जो भी सत्ता में आए, वह संविधान का पालन करे, उसकी रक्षा करे और उसे बनाए रखे।" प्रस्ताव में कुल तीन प्रमुख हस्तक्षेप और उनके तंत्र भी प्रस्तुत किए गए। पहला हस्तक्षेप स्वतंत्र मीडिया को प्रोत्साहित करके, वास्तविकता पर आधारित काउंटर नैरेटिव का निर्माण करके और सत्तारूढ़ सरकार द्वारा नियोजित मनोवैज्ञानिक हेरफेर की रणनीति का मुकाबला करके लोगों द्वारा निर्धारित कथा को बनाए रखना और उस पर कार्यकरना था।
31052024_First India Newspaper Jaipur.pdfFIRST INDIA
Find Latest India News and Breaking News these days from India on Politics, Business, Entertainment, Technology, Sports, Lifestyle and Coronavirus News in India and the world over that you can't miss. For real time update Visit our social media handle. Read First India NewsPaper in your morning replace. Visit First India.
CLICK:- https://firstindia.co.in/
#First_India_NewsPaper
03062024_First India Newspaper Jaipur.pdfFIRST INDIA
Find Latest India News and Breaking News these days from India on Politics, Business, Entertainment, Technology, Sports, Lifestyle and Coronavirus News in India and the world over that you can't miss. For real time update Visit our social media handle. Read First India NewsPaper in your morning replace. Visit First India.
CLICK:- https://firstindia.co.in/
#First_India_NewsPaper
‘वोटर्स विल मस्ट प्रीवेल’ (मतदाताओं को जीतना होगा) अभियान द्वारा जारी हेल्पलाइन नंबर, 4 जून को सुबह 7 बजे से दोपहर 12 बजे तक मतगणना प्रक्रिया में कहीं भी किसी भी तरह के उल्लंघन की रिपोर्ट करने के लिए खुला रहेगा।
In a May 9, 2024 paper, Juri Opitz from the University of Zurich, along with Shira Wein and Nathan Schneider form Georgetown University, discussed the importance of linguistic expertise in natural language processing (NLP) in an era dominated by large language models (LLMs).
The authors explained that while machine translation (MT) previously relied heavily on linguists, the landscape has shifted. “Linguistics is no longer front and center in the way we build NLP systems,” they said. With the emergence of LLMs, which can generate fluent text without the need for specialized modules to handle grammar or semantic coherence, the need for linguistic expertise in NLP is being questioned.
Do Linguistics Still Matter in the Age of Large Language Models.pptx
Bander escapes trial
1. Bander escapes trial; Settlement with State Bar reached
By Rhony Laigo
Once again, Atty. Joel Bander will not be tried because a settlement has been reached
between him and the State Bar. This became definite after the State Bar cancelled the
Joel Bander case that was supposed to begin Monday, April 8, and the court calendar
showing that a stipulation – the agreement that enumerates the provisions that Bander
will need to comply with – is marked "to be filed."
The settlement was expected, however, after last week's settlement conference at the
courtroom of Judge Richard Platel in downtown Los Angeles. Earlier, Judge Richard A.
Honn – who was supposed to hear the case –instructed both Bander and the State Bar
to settle the case, calling it “costly.” The criminal lawyer was facing charges for allegedly
violating California State Bar rules relating to the loan litigation program his law firm –
the Bander Law Firm – initiated but failed after signing up over 800 clients in 2008 and
2009.
Clerk of Court Johnny Smith, who is assigned to VSC Judge Richard Platel has said
that details of the settlement will not be made public until the terms have been
submitted and accepted by Judge Platel. Viselman also has yet to return our calls as of
this writing to inquire about the details of the new settlement. But State Bar
spokesperson Amee Yarborough on Monday said she will provide the details of that
settlement as soon as they're available.
Bander was suspended for three months last year that ended last September. Bander’s
latest State Bar case was filed three months later – on December 20, 2012 – and it
involves 20 cases based on complaints by 10 homeowners. Prior to Tuesday’s
settlement, a pre-trial was held last March 28 at the courtroom of Judge Honn, where
Bander tried to exclude this reporter from covering the conference, which was marked
“Public Matter.”
Meanwhile, a review of Bander’s disciplinary record showed that it was also Judge
Platel who was assigned to the first case of Bander. The same record indicated that
Bander also tried to “Modify Terms of (his) Probation” and that he also filed a motion to
extend the provisions regarding restitution, both of which were denied by Judge Platel
last January 24. Court records showed that the first complaint against Bander racked up
more than $20,000 in fees that Bander will have to pay. More fees are expected to be
added to that amount after the second case.
In his first suspension, Bander must pass a professional responsibility test. The State
Bar had stated in the stipulation that Bander’s “misconduct evidences multiple acts of
2. wrongdoing or demonstrates a pattern of misconduct as there were 20 client matters
involved.” Bander had pleaded "no contest" to those charges and is under probation for
three years.
Just like most of the complainants in the first one, the new cases were all about
homeowners who signed up for the so-called “Save Your Home, Sue the Banks” loan
litigation program, where Bander promised to sue their lenders and force the latter to
reduce their mortgage payments or modify their loans. Back then, Bander ran weekly
full page advertisements in a competing newspaper in 2008 and 2009 to promote the
failed program. In early 2010, the 25-year-old Bander Law Firm filed for bankruptcy.
A few attorneys who have dealt with Bander in the past and who thought that Bander’s
three-month suspension was a “slap on the wrist” were not surprised to learn that the
same attorney, who is described as a “public figure” on three different Facebook pages,
was again charged by the State Bar. Some of them said they expect a longer
suspension for Bander this time. A former lawyer – who had worked at the Bander Law
firm – opined that Bander may have to serve the rest of his stayed two-year suspension
that Bander stipulated in the first case.
According to San Francisco-based State Bar defense lawyer Jerome Fishkin, “some
attorneys, because of the severity of the offense or the little likelihood of success, will
choose to resign rather than face State Bar prosecution. Others will lose a contested
case and will be disbarred,” as posted in his website www.fishskinlaw.com.”
Fishkin also described that “The State Bar is an adversary system” and that the “people
do not become State Bar investigators and prosecutors (like Viselman) because they
want to help attorneys. The prosecutorial mentality in general is to find fault and fix
blame.” Fishkin also warned that “in recent years, State Bar prosecutors (have) become
seemingly petty and mean-spirited.”
Although Fishskin recommends that lawyers get a State Bar defense counsel, Bander
has represented himself. Bander, who did not have any disciplinary record prior to last
year’s suspension, will soon have two suspension records that will be permanently
displayed under his name in the roster of attorneys.
Viselman had told the court that they were prepared to call 35 witnesses against
Bander, including former clients and lawyers of the Bander Law Firm.