OUTCOME: Settlement after public statement from Governor
Don Blankenship, the President, CEO and chairman of the Richmond, Va.-based Massey Energy Corporation, alleged that West Virginia Governor Joe Manchin III sought to retaliate against him amid a propose...d multibillion-dollar pension bond campaign in 2005.
During the heated campaign, Manchin made a comment to a newspaper reporter that Blankenship should expect tougher scrutiny of his business affairs since launching a media campaign against the proposal.
On December 14, 2007, the Governor expressed regret over the remarks he made, prompting the suit to be dropped.
Bankruptcy and debt
In re Greater Southest Community Hospital Corporation
Oct 22, 2007
OUTCOME: Settlement
Represented co-insureds in Bankruptcy Trustee's action for damages.
Class action
In re HCA Inc. Securities Litigation
Oct 15, 2007
OUTCOME: Settlement with class action plaintiffs
Parties agreed to settle securities class action litigation involving allegedly false and/or misleading public statements made in violation of Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of ...1934, and SEC Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.
Immigration
In re John Doe
Nov 15, 2006
OUTCOME: Our client was granted political asylum
Successfully applied for political asylum in the United States on behalf of pro-democracy student activist from Togo. He had been jailed and tortured in his home country before coming to the United Sta...tes, and he feared the same - or worse - if forced to return. Our work on this case included multiple client and witness interviews, drafting all briefs and pre-hearing motions, and conducting a full-day hearing before Judge Bruce M. Barrett in the Baltimore Immigration Court.
Immigration
In re John Doe
Sep 06, 2006
OUTCOME: Our client was granted political asylum
Successfully applied for political asylum for our client, a 20 year-old pro-democracy student activist from the West African nation of Togo. Our team interviewed our client and witnesses, prepared affi...davits, pre-hearing motions, and the comprehensive brief. I was fortunate enough to have lead responsibility throughout this case, including arguing the day-long hearing before Judge Jill H. Dufresne, a United States Immigration Judge sitting in the Baltimore Immigration Court. Because our asylum application was opposed by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, the hearing was much like a trial, where we put our client and supporting witnesses on the stand for direct examination. I handled both the direct and re-direct examinations for our client, as well as the opening and closing arguments.
In granting asylum to our client, Judge Dufresne issued a 23-page written decision that fully vindicated his story.
Environmental and natural resources
The Humane Society of the United States v. Department of Commerce
May 26, 2006
OUTCOME: Summary judgment granted in our client's favor
The Humane Society of the United States initiated this action against the United States Secretary of Commerce and the National Marine Fisheries Service, inter alia, alleging that the issuance of resear...ch permits related to endangered populations of Steller sea lions violated the National Environmental Policy Act, Endangered Species Act, and Marine Mammal Protection Act.
On cross-motions for summary judgment, Judge Huvelle held that the government's decision to issue the research permits in the absence of an environmental impact statement was made without the requisite “hard look†at the relevant environmental issues.
Litigation
America Online, Inc. v. John Does 1-20
Dec 06, 2005
OUTCOME: Court granted summary judgment in our favor
Suit brought on behalf of our client, American Online, Inc., against spammers. Sought, and was granted, damages based on the federal CAN-SPAM Act.
Litigation
Linda Marshall v. Milberg, Weiss, Bershad & Schulman, LLP
N/A
OUTCOME: Currently pending
Defending class action complaint alleging violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and a breach of fiduciary duty related to the criminal indictment of a law firm.
Litigation
David J. Bershad v. Edith M. Kallas
N/A
OUTCOME: Currently pending
Peititon to stay arbitration of claims improperly sought by several attorneys and their current law firm against their former law firm and one of its current partners and also against various partners ...not now associated with the former firm. The proposed arbitration raises allegations against Milberg Weiss, Petitioner, Mr. Weiss, and Mr. Schulman and rests its demand for arbitration upon the Partnership Agreement. Respondents principally claim to be owed monies from Milberg Weiss pursuant to the terms of the Partnership Agreement. Onto this central claim Respondents seek to graft three additional claims of fraudulent inducement, breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment, none of which Respondents base on the Partnership Agreement.
Constitutional
Mohammed Zawahiri v. Raghad Z. Alwattar
N/A
OUTCOME: Currently pending
Mr. Zawahiri filed a complaint for divorce on the grounds of incompatibility. Ms. Alwattar subsequently cross-complained for divorce, also citing incompatibility, and, inter alia, seeking enforcement o...f a religiously-mandated dower ("mahr") term found in the couple's marriage contract. After a two-day trial held on August 2 and 6, 2007, the trial court issued a divorce decree filed October 10, 2007. The court granted the couple a divorce but declined to compel the mahr payment. The trial court held Mr. Zawahiri “clearly agreed to undertake the duty to pay the mahr when he signed the Islamic marriage contract.†Still, while acknowledging that the requirement to pay money seems less like a religious act than participation in a religious ceremony, the court below held, without citing any legal authority, the obligation to pay the postponed mahr term is rooted in a religious practice and is therefore a religious act. Accordingly, in the view of the trial court, the mahr violates the Ohio constitution.
The court so held despite case law from several other jurisdictions upholding mahr provisions under very similar factual circumstances, on the apparent rationale that no similar holding could be found in Ohio. Instead, the court simply analogized the postponed mahr term to a Get in the Jewish tradition, finding enforcement of the mahr provision would result in unconstitutional entanglement with religion. In addition, the Decree found the mahr term fails to meet the heightened standards for Ohio antenuptial agreements. Ms. Alwattar now appeals the trial court’s decision regarding the enforceability of the mahr provision.
