|
|
|
Court papers: NYC officer shooting suspect sorry
Topics |
2012/01/04 17:39
|
The man charged with murder in the shooting death of a police officer during a botched break-in apologized and said he didn't mean to fire the gun, according to court papers released Wednesday.
Lamont Pride, 27, and four others have pleaded not guilty in the death of Officer Peter Figoski, who was shot once in the face Dec. 12 as he tried to enter the basement apartment, the scene of a reported burglary. While Pride was being driven in a police car to central booking, he told police he was sorry, according to the papers.
"I didn't mean for this to happen," he said. "I didn't want to kill a cop. It went wrong and I'm sorry. I can't take it back," he said, according to the papers.
Through the stack of messy, hand-written statements gleaned from investigators, the plot emerges as a badly-conceived attempt to rob a drug dealer. Authorities said Pride and the others hatched the plot the day before to rob the apartment. Michael Velez, 21, stayed in the getaway car as the four others went in to the dingy, barely finished apartment at 25 Pine St. Ariel Tejada, 22, and Nelson Morales, 27, pistol-whipped the tenant and beat him while they ransacked the place, authorities charged. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. Files Securities Fraud Class Action
Press Release |
2012/01/02 23:20
|
Rigrodsky & Long, P.A. announces that it has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of IntraLinks Holdings, Inc. between February 17, 2011 and November 10, 2011, inclusive, alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The case is entitled Thaler v. IntraLinks Holdings, Inc., C.A. No. 11-CV-9528 (S.D.N.Y.). The Complaint names IntraLinks and certain of its officers and directors as defendants.
If you wish to view a copy of the Complaint, discuss this action, or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact Timothy J. MacFall, Esquire or Noah R. Wortman, Case Development Director of Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., 919 North Market Street, Suite 980 Wilmington, Delaware, 19801 at (888) 969-4242, by e-mail to info@rigrodskylong.com, or at: http://www.rigrodskylong.com/news/intralinks-il.
IntraLinks, together with its subsidiaries, provides software-as-a-service (SaaS) solutions for securely managing content, exchanging critical business information, and collaborating within and among organizations worldwide.
The Complaint asserts that during the Class Period, defendants knew, or recklessly disregarded, that the positive statements concerning the Company’s business prospects, as well as the full year guidance provided by Defendants on February 17, 2011, were materially false and misleading because by end of the first quarter of 2011 a large Enterprise customer informed the Company that it was dramatically reducing its use of IntraLinks’ products going forward and that the Company would have to reducing its earnings expectations as a result. Despite their knowledge of the foregoing, however, defendants failed to disclose that their positive statements about the Company’s business prospects, or the financial guidance issued in February 2011, were no longer accurate in light of the reduced use of the Company’s products by the large Enterprise customer.
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than February 4, 2012. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member’s claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. Any member of the proposed class may move the court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.
Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., with offices in Wilmington, Delaware and Garden City, New York, regularly litigates securities class, derivative and direct actions, shareholder rights litigation and corporate governance litigation, including claims for breach of fiduciary duty and proxy violations in the Delaware Court of Chancery and in state and federal courts throughout the United States. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Madoff's ex-controller pleads guilty in NYC
Court Issues |
2012/01/02 23:20
|
The former controller for imprisoned financier Bernard Madoff blamed him Monday for directing her to deceive investors, regulators and the Internal Revenue Service as she pleaded guilty to conspiracy and other charges.
"I did not know that Madoff and others were stealing investors' money," Enrica Cotellessa-Pitz said as she entered the plea in U.S. District Court in Manhattan, becoming the sixth person to plead guilty and admit a role in a fraud that Madoff claimed he carried out alone. "For that, I am terribly sorry."
Cotellessa-Pitz , 53, said she wanted investors and the public to know that she is cooperating fully with prosecutors. Besides conspiracy, she pleaded guilty to falsifying books and records and making false filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The charges carry a potential of up to 50 years in prison for a woman who admitted a major role in the multi-decade fraud that cheated thousands of investors out of the roughly $20 billion they invested with a man whose once-sterling reputation on Wall Street caused many people to feel honored to be allowed to rest their money with his private investment business.
Cotellessa-Pitz said she started working at Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC in 1978 while she was studying economics in college. She was named controller in late 1998. She said Madoff and others within months were directing her to put false entries in the company's books to make it appear profitable trades were being made and that losses were not incurred. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
High court to hear environmental case from Idaho
Court Issues |
2012/01/02 23:19
|
Mike Sackett remembers what he thought when he saw the eye-popping fines of more than $30,000 a day that the Environmental Protection Agency was threatening to impose on him over a piece of Idaho property worth less than one day's penalty.
"If they do this to us, we're going to lose everything we have," Sackett said.
The EPA said that Sackett and his wife, Chantell, illegally filled in most of their 0.63-acre lot with dirt and rocks in preparation for building a home. The agency said the property is a wetlands that cannot be disturbed without a permit. The Sacketts had none.
They say they considered walking away from the property, near scenic Priest Lake, and a difficult fight with the federal government. Instead, they went to court and now the Supreme Court is hearing their case, with implications well beyond their property.
The justices are considering how and when people can challenge the kind of order the Sacketts got. The EPA issues nearly 3,000 administrative compliance orders a year that call on alleged violators of environmental laws to stop what they're doing and repair the harm they've caused.
Major business groups, homebuilders, road builders and agricultural interests all have joined the Sacketts in urging the court to make it easier to contest EPA compliance orders issued under several environmental laws. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Lawyer & Law Firm Websites |
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
