|
|
|
Farmers Insurance Settles Class Action Lawsuit
Topics in Legal News |
2011/12/01 02:28
|
Farmers Insurance entered into a settlement of a nationwide class action lawsuit, In Re Farmers Med-Pay Litigation, pending in the District Court of Canadian County, Oklahoma. The settlement includes Farmers Insurance Company, Inc., Farmers Insurance Exchange, Truck Insurance Exchange, Fire Insurance Exchange, Mid-Century Insurance Company, Farmers Group, Inc., Illinois Farmers Insurance Company, and certain related entities. The Court entered a final order approving the settlement on November 29, 2011.
Plaintiffs alleged that Farmers failed to pay reasonable expenses for necessary medical services related to automobile accidents under Medical Payments and Personal Injury Protection (PIP) coverage in automobile policies based on Farmers' use of certain claim adjustment systems and procedures. Farmers denies all of Plaintiffs' claims in the lawsuit. However, Farmers agreed to resolve the lawsuit to avoid the burden and expense of continued litigation.
The Settlement Class includes all persons who submitted claims for payment of medical bills related to an automobile accident under Med-pay or PIP coverage if (a) the claim was adjusted from January 1, 2001 to February 9, 2009 based upon a recommended reduction from Zurich Services Corporation (ZSC), (b) the claim was paid at less than the amount billed, and (c) total Med-pay or PIP payments were less than the respective limits of coverage. The Class also includes medical providers who were assigned the right to assert these claims.
Those affected by this settlement must complete and submit a valid claim form postmarked no later than December 29, 2011. Further information and claim forms can be obtained by visiting www.MedpayClaimsAdministration.com. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scott+Scott LLP Announces Securities Class Action
Press Release |
2011/11/29 09:51
|
On November 28, 2011, Scott+Scott LLP filed a class action complaint against The Cooper Companies, Inc. and certain of the Company's senior officers and directors in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The action for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is brought on behalf of those purchasing the common stock of Cooper between March 4, 2011 and November 15, 2011, inclusive.
If you purchased the common stock of Cooper during the Class Period and wish to serve as a lead plaintiff in the action, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from today. Any member of the investor class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of its choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. If you wish to discuss this action or have questions concerning this notice or your rights, please contact Scott+Scott at (800) 404-7770, (860) 537-5537 or visit the Scott+Scott website http://www.scott-scott.com/cases/coopercos.html for more information. There is no cost or fee to you.
The complaint filed in the action alleges that, during the Class Period, Cooper issued false and misleading statements concealing known quality control problems and process defects at the Company's new overseas contact lens manufacturing facilities.
The complaint alleges that following the announcement of a small voluntary recall, the significance of which Cooper and its senior executives intentionally downplayed, on November 15, 2011, Cooper was forced to disclose a much larger product recall and to finally disclose the seriousness of the potential injuries. As the market learned the true extent of the Company's production issues, product safety defects and the harm to Cooper's reputation and product marketability, the Company's stock price declined precipitously. The class action seeks recovery under the federal securities laws for those who purchased Cooper's common stock between March 4, 2011 and November 15, 2011.
Scott+Scott has significant experience in prosecuting major securities, antitrust and employee retirement plan actions throughout the United States. The firm represents pension funds, foundations, individuals and other entities worldwide. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas, Kagan asked to sit out health care case
Headline Legal News |
2011/11/28 09:44
|
Conservative interest groups and Republican lawmakers want Justice Elena Kagan off the health care case. Liberals and Democrats in Congress say it's Justice Clarence Thomas who should sit it out.
Neither justice is budging — the right decision, according to many ethicists and legal experts.
None of the parties in the case has asked the justices to excuse themselves. But underlying the calls on both sides is their belief that the conservative Thomas is a sure vote to strike down President Barack Obama's health care law and that the liberal Kagan is certain to uphold the main domestic achievement of the man who appointed her.
The stakes are high in the court's election-year review of a law aimed at extending coverage to more than 30 million people. Both sides have engaged in broad legal and political maneuvering for the most favorable conditions surrounding the court's consideration of the case.
Taking away just one vote potentially could tip the outcome on the nine-justice court.
Republican lawmakers recently have stepped up their effort against Kagan, complaining that the Justice Department has not fully revealed Kagan's involvement in planning the response to challenges to the law. Kagan was Obama's solicitor general, the administration's top Supreme Court lawyer, until he nominated her to the high court last year. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
US court won't block its Texas redistricting map
Court Line News |
2011/11/28 09:44
|
A federal court refused late Friday to block a congressional redistricting map it drew up for Texas, rejecting a request from the state's attorney general just hours after the Republican accused the court of undermining the democratic process.
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott had asked the San Antonio-based court to stay the implementation of its interim map, which the court drafted when minority groups challenged the original plan passed by the Republican-dominated state Legislature.
The court-drawn map would ensure minorities made up the majority in three additional Texas congressional districts. If the 2012 elections were held under the court's map, Democrats would have an advantage as they try to win back the U.S. House.
Abbott said he would appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. The court-ordered map will remain in place until the legal fights are resolved.
The court drew the maps after minority groups filed a lawsuit, claiming a redistricting plan devised by Republican lawmakers didn't reflect growth in the state's Hispanic and black populations. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court will decide question on crack sentencing
Topics in Legal News |
2011/11/28 09:44
|
The Supreme Court will decide whether a law meant to reduce the disparity between crack and powder cocaine prison sentences can apply those who were convicted — but not sentenced — before its enactment.
The high court on Monday agreed to hear an appeal from Edward Dorsey and Corey Hill, who were both convicted of crack cocaine crimes.
However, the men were not sentenced until after The Fair Sentencing Act went into effect. That law reduces the difference between sentences for crimes committed by crack cocaine and powder cocaine users.
The two men argue that because their sentences came after the law's effective date, they should get its lesser prison time. The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed, and the high court will review that decision. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Texas asks court to stop redistricting plan
Lawyer Media News |
2011/11/28 09:43
|
The Supreme Court has been asked to stop a federal court from implementing a state redistricting map in Texas that could increase minority representation in the state Legislature.
The state's attorney general, Greg Abbott, filed the request with the high court on Monday. The court-drawn map was drafted after minority groups challenged the original plan passed by the Republican-dominated state Legislature.
The map drawn by the San Antonio-based federal court could lead to greater minority representation and give Democrats a chance to add as many as a dozen seats in the Legislature. Abbott and other Republican leaders have denied that any of the legislature's redistricting maps would diminish minority voting power.
The court-ordered map will remain in place until the legal fights are resolved. |
|
|
|
|
|
Legal News RSS Feed
