Category Archives: Legal News

Spain hunts ‘mafia-linked’ Russians including state officials

A top Spanish judge has issued international arrest warrants for 12 Russians suspected of organised crime, including high-ranking state officials.

The 12 are accused of links to Gennady Petrov, an alleged Russian mafia boss arrested in Spain in 2008 who later fled back to Russia.

Some of the accused are officials close to President Vladimir Putin’s circle, Spanish media report.

One of them, Nikolai Aulov, dismissed the Spanish move as “political”.

Mr Aulov is deputy head of the Russian Federal Anti-Narcotics Service (FSKN).

An FSKN statement (in Russian), quoted by the Lenta.ru news agency, said the order was “another move to fulfil a political instruction to discredit Russian Federation officials”.

According to the warrant issued by Judge Jose de la Mata, of Spain’s top criminal court, the 12 had links to Gennady Petrov’s Tambovskaya mafia syndicate, accused of contract killings, arms- and drug-trafficking, extortion, forgery and money-laundering.

Powerful figures

The suspects wanted by Spain include Igor Sobolevsky, ex-deputy head of the Russian Investigative Committee (SK) – a powerful state agency similar to the American FBI.

The list also includes Vladislav Reznik, an MP who previously chaired the Russian parliament’s financial markets committee. His wife Diana Gindin is on the list too.

Some of the 12 were also named in an indictment issued by Spanish prosecutors last year, which listed 27 Russian suspects.

Petrov was among 20 people arrested as part of a major investigation known as Operation Troika.

Spanish prosecutors say Petrov’s group had contacts with some senior government officials, including former defence minister Anatoly Serdyukov and former prime minister Viktor Zubkov.

Former Russian intelligence agent Alexander Litvinenko, murdered in London with radioactive polonium-210 in 2006, had been helping Spanish officials to investigate Russian organised crime. His activities in Spain emerged in the official British inquiry into his death.

Read Full Article – http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36194899

FBI searches alleged Mafia member’s home in bid to crack 1990 art heist

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Updated: Tuesday, May 3, 2016, 1:10 PM

A suspected Connecticut mobster may be in on the largest art heist in U.S. history — a $500 million mystery that has remained unsolved for 26 years.

FBI agents returned to the Manchester home of Robert Gentile Monday, marking the third time they’ve raided the 79-year-old alleged mob member’s house.

Federal prosecutors believe Gentile — who is currently behind bars for illegally selling prescription drugs and possessing guns — knows about the 1990 theft at the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum in Boston.

Thirteen pieces of art worth an estimated $500 million were stolen and never recovered. The swiped haul included the only seascape legendary Dutch painter Rembrandt ever painted, several paintings by Edgar Degas and one by Johannes Vermeer, a Dutch artist who left behind just 31 known works.

No one was ever arrested.

Federal officials declined to say why FBI agents went to Gentile’s home Monday. Gentile’s lawyer, A. Ryan McGuigan, also declined to comment.

“The FBI is conducting court-authorized activity … in connection with an ongoing federal investigation,” said Kristen Setera, a spokeswoman for the FBI in Boston. “We will have no further comment at this time.”

Gentile has told authorities that he doesn’t know anything about the stolen paintings, and McGuigan has denied prosecutors’ allegations that Gentile is a made member of the Philadelphia Mafia.

But prosecutors said that locked-up Gentile has bragged about his knowledge of the paintings: He talked about the stolen works with at least three fellow prisoners at his Rhode Island jail, giving them information on who to call about the art and what code name to use.

Read Full Article – http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/fbi-searches-mafia-home-bid-crack-1990-art-heist-article-1.2623304

Merely doing business in Delaware not enough for lawsuit

, The News Journal 11:44 a.m. EDT April 21, 2016

High court overturns decision regarding whether Delaware has legal oversight over businesses registered in state

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

  • The Delaware Supreme Court has issued a ruling over a decades-old decision regarding jurisdiction.
  • It overturns a ruling that says corporations registered in Delaware are subject to state jurisdiction.
  • The ruling was 4-1 and involves an Atlanta auto-parts supplier.

An out-of-state company can no longer be sued in Delaware merely because it does business within the state, the Delaware Supreme Court has ruled.

Under a 1988 state Supreme Court ruling, a plaintiff could sue a company in Delaware for a personal injury or other tort claim that occurred in another state. That meant a large retail chain operating a store in Delaware or a company with an office in the state could be vulnerable to a Delaware lawsuit simply because it did business here.

However, in this week’s rare 4-1 split decision, the Supreme Court reversed that holding in Genuine Parts Co. v. Cepec. The opinion was authored by Delaware Supreme Court Chief Justice Leo E. Strine.

“This is a positive for companies not incorporated in Delaware, but do business in Delaware,” said Donald W. Durandetta, a professor of business at Wilmington University. “It is increased protection for doing business in Delaware.”

Plaintiffs Ralph and Sandra Cepec are Georgia residents who sued automobile equipment supplier Genuine Parts Co., the parent company of NAPA AutoParts. Genuine is a Georgia corporation headquartered in Atlanta and operates more than 60,000 retail stores throughout the nation, including about 15 in Delaware.

Ralph Cepec worked for Genuine Parts in a Jacksonville, Florida, warehouse between 1988 and 1991. He filed a personal injury lawsuit in Delaware saying he was exposed to asbestos during his employment, causing mesothelioma and other illnesses.

Last year, the Cepecs sued Genuine Parts in Delaware, despite that than 1 percent of its stores and employees are based in Delaware and less than 1 percent of its revenue comes from the state, according to the court’s opinion. Genuine Parts is registered to do business in Delaware, giving the state’s court system general jurisdiction over the company under Delaware law.

The case started in the Delaware Superior Court, which upheld the state’s jurisdiction over Genuine Parts, citing the state Supreme Court’s 1988 decision in Sternberg v. O’Neil. Genuine Parts appealed to the Supreme Court, which reversed the lower court. In the decision, the high court ruled plaintiffs can only file a lawsuit against a company in Delaware if the claim resulted from the defendant’s connection to the state. A plaintiff no longer pursue a claim in Delaware just because a company does business here.

Plaintiffs can still file lawsuits in Delaware against national corporations if the injury occurred in the state or there is some other connection.

Read Full Article – http://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/2016/04/20/merely-doing-business-delaware-not-enough-lawsuit/83293736/

Canada violating international law with Saudi arms sale: expert

OTTAWA — The Globe and Mail

A controversial rationale the Trudeau Liberals are using to justify approving exports of combat vehicles to Saudi Arabia – that these machines could help Riyadh prosecute a war in neighbouring Yemen – is figuring prominently in a Federal Court challenge aimed at stopping the shipments.

Eric David, a renowned human rights legal scholar from Belgium who has acted in major international cases, is lending support to a March 21 lawsuit led by University of Montreal professor Daniel Turp that seeks to block exports of the weaponized armoured vehicles from Canada.

In an affidavit being added to the lawsuit, Prof. David of the Free University in Brussels says he believes Canada is violating international law by shipping arms to a country already accused of massive human-rights violations in Yemen. A United Nations panel investigating the Saudi-led bombing campaign in Yemen found “widespread and systematic” attacks on civilian targets in violation of international humanitarian law.

Allowing the “sale of armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia … would violate the obligation to respect and ensure the respect of human rights and international humanitarian law,” Prof. David wrote in a 196-page filing.

“The sale of armoured vehicles … becomes an “internationally wrongful act.”

As The Globe and Mail first reported, Foreign Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion last week quietly approved export permits covering more than 70 per cent of the $15-billion transaction with Saudi Arabia – a decision that represents the most vital step in determining whether a weapons shipment to a foreign country can proceed or whether it’s “illegal,” as Ottawa calls it.

The revelation that Mr. Dion greenlighted the bulk of this deal runs contrary to the Liberal claim that the Trudeau government’s hands were tied on the Saudi deal.

Many observers had assumed the Conservatives had granted export permits when they signed the deal.

The Liberal signature on the export permits means the Trudeau government has taken full ownership of a decision to sell arms to a country notorious for human-rights abuses.

In the memorandum justifying the export permits, the department of Global Affairs reasons that the light armoured vehicles will help Riyadh in its efforts at “countering instability in Yemen,” where the Saudis are fighting Houthi rebels aligned with Iran, as well as combatting Islamic State threats.

“The acquisition of state-of-the-art armoured vehicles will assist Saudi Arabia in these goals,” the memo approved and signed by Mr. Dion said.

When it comes to Yemen, the Canadian government is choosing its words carefully, noting that so far the Saudis have not been found to be using Canadian-made combat vehicles previously sold to Riyadh to commit rights violations there.

Asked about the Saudis’ conduct in Yemen on Thursday, Mr. Dion said they’re not the only ones that need be held to account. “There are serious concerns that should be raised about all of the parties” fighting in Yemen, Mr. Dion told the Commons foreign affairs committee Thursday, widening the matter to include the conduct of Houthi rebels.

“As far as Yemen is concerned, our priority is to have a peaceful solution found.”

Separately, Thursday, Mr. Dion offered only mild support for an NDP proposal by MP Hélène Laverdière to create a Commons committee that would scrutinize arms exports. “I think it’s an interesting proposal. I am not sure it’s the priority right now – but the committee can certainly decide,” the minister told the foreign affairs committee.

Saudi Arabia is regularly ranked among the “worst of the worst” on human rights by Freedom House.

Sourced From – http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-violating-international-law-with-saudi-arms-sale-expert/article29640135/

Top 10 Questions to Ask a Prospective Divorce Attorney

We’ve provided a few questions you might consider asking during your initial interview with a family law attorney. These may help you determine whether this lawyer is right for your case.

1. Do you specialize in divorces, or are divorces just a part of your practice? How long have you been practicing family law? How many family law cases have you handled? Are you a “certified family law specialist?”

2. What is your strategy for my case? How long will it take to resolve my case?

3. How long do you take to return phone calls? How do I get a hold of you if there is an emergency? What do you consider to be an emergency?

4. Will anyone else in your office be working on my case? What experience do they have? Can I meet them?

5. How will you charge me? What is your hourly rate? Do you charge for the time I spend with other lawyers, with paralegals, and/or with secretaries? If so, at what rate? What is your retainer up front?

6. What costs (other than your own) do you expect will be involved (for example, for private investigators, forensic accountants, physicians, and/or psychologists), and how will you charge me for them?

7. What’s your estimate of the total cost of this divorce? (Do not be alarmed that most divorce attorneys will resist answering this question as the cost of the divorce depends greatly upon the level of conflict in your case. However, the way attorneys answer this question may help you size them up. An honest attorney will often answer that it is difficult to estimate the costs in advance. An attorney that gives you an unrealistically low amount may just be trying to get your business).

8. Do you allow me to negotiate directly with my spouse? How can I keep the cost of my divorce down? Are there tasks that I can do myself to cut down on the amount you will charge me?

9. Based on what you know about my case, how would you predict a judge would rule on it?

10. What can you do to help me understand the tax effect of the decisions I will have to make?

sourced from – http://www.divorcenet.com/states/california/top_10_questions_to_ask_a_prospective_divorce_attorney#b