Criminal Law Library Blog
BANKING LAW, CIVIL PROCEDURE, SECURITIES LAW Morrison v. Nat’l Australia Bank, Ltd., No. 070583 In a securities matter involving defendant-foreign bank, dismissal of claims is affirmed where court did not have subject matter jurisdiction based on the fact that: 1) the fraudulent statements at issue emanated from defendant’s corporate headquarters in Australia; 2) the complete lack of any effect on America or Americans; and 3) the lengthy chain of causation between defendant’s acquired lending company’s actions and the statements that reached investors.
CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE US v. Oberoi, No. 044545 Conviction for mail fraud and health care fraud is affirmed over claims of error that defendant was denied a speedy trial in violation of the Speedy Trial Act on the grounds that: 1) the pre-indictment delay exceeded 30 days; and 2) the pretrial delay exceeded 70 days.
CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE, EVIDENCE US v. Kapelioujnvy, No. 073353 Conviction for conspiracy to sell stolen property is reversed where: 1) the government failed to prove that the defendant believed that the stolen property was worth at least five thousand dollars; and 2) the government failed to prove the defendant was involved in a conspiracy involving goods that moved in interstate commerce. .
GOVERNMENT LAW, LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW Havey v. Homebound Mortgage, Inc., No. 060978 Grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants on plaintiff’s claims for violation of the overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) is affirmed where: 1) prospective adjustments to an employee’s salary based on the quality of work which do not reduce the “predetermined amount” of salary do not violate the “salary-basis test” of the FLSA so long as the salary scheme was not designed to circumvent the requirements of the FLSA; and 2) prospective adjustments to an employee’s salary based on projected quantity of work performed do not necessarily violate that test.
ANTITRUST & TRADE REGULATION, BANKING LAW, CIVIL PROCEDURE, CLASS ACTIONS, DISPUTE RESOLUTION & ARBITRATION Ross v. Am. Express Co., No. 064598 In an appeal from the district court’s holding that defendants-American Express may avail themselves of the arbitration clauses in the cardholder agreements and compel the plaintiffs to arbitrate their claims related to a multi-district class action antitrust litigation against defendants, plaintiffs’ appeal is granted and defendants’ appeal is denied where the district court erred in holding that the cardholder agreements provided a sufficient contractual basis for sending this case to arbitration.
CONTRACTS, CORPORATION & ENTERPRISE LAW, GOVERNMENT LAW, INDIAN LAW Catskill Dev., LLC v. Park Place Entm’t Corp., No. 065860 In a claim that defendant tortiously interfered with plaintiff’s contractual and business relations with the non-party Mohawk Indian Tribe when it entered into an exclusive agreement with the Tribe, dismissal of plaintiff’s tortious interference claim and grant of summary judgment in favor defendant are affirmed where: 1) the contract with the Tribe were void and otherwise unenforceable at the time of defendant’s alleged interference; and 2) plaintiff failed to establish a triable issue of fact that defendant used wrongful means to interfere