WSJ: Demanda por perdidas en fondo de pensiones

High Court Hears 401(k) Case

By MARK H. ANDERSONNovember 27, 2007; Page A6
WASHINGTON -- Supreme Court justices hearing a case of alleged retirement fund mismanagement seemed uncomfortable with barring employees from suing over certain losses to an individual's retirement account.

The high court considered arguments in a case brought by a South Carolina man who alleged his employer, DeWolff, Boberg & Associates Inc., mismanaged his 401(k) plan. He charged that requested investment changes were never made and as a result his retirement account lost $150,000.

At issue in the case is whether federal pension law, which allows lawsuits by a group of employees, prohibits a suit over an individual account loss. Legal experts believe the outcome could be an important development in retirement law because of the shift from defined pension plans to 401(k) contribution plans. The case could also affect lawsuits over individual company stock funds, like those at issue in employee losses from accounting-fraud debacles such as Enron Corp.
MORE

• Law Blog: Erisa on Stage at High Court
• LaRue v. DeWolff: Argument transcript Court filing

Justice Stephen Breyer, summing up concerns expressed by several justices, asked why it mattered if "that one diamond came from a big vault or from one little safe-deposit box with the participant's label on it." He indicated he wasn't sure he saw how federal pension law allows the group lawsuit while barring the individual case. Justices expressing similar concerns included Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter, Antonin Scalia and Samuel Alito.

The federal government, appearing at the arguments in favor of the plaintiff, believes the law allows employees to seek recovery of losses for individual retirement account mismanagement. The plaintiff, James LaRue, seeks to recover losses he alleges occurred because the company's plan didn't act on instructions he made in 2001 and 2002. A federal trial court and the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., ruled the case, in its initial stages, wasn't allowed under federal pension laws. (LaRue v. DeWolff, Boberg & Associates Inc.)
Write to Mark H. Anderson at mark.anderson@dowjones.com

WSJ: Magnate sentenciado por caso irregularidades en el caso "oil for food" de Irak

Tycoon Sent to JailIn Oil-for-Food Case

By CHAD BRAYNovember 29, 2007; Page B10
Texas oil trader Oscar S. Wyatt Jr. was sentenced to more than a year in prison after pleading guilty to a conspiracy charge and admitting he approved the payment of a $200,000 surcharge to the Iraqi government in violation of the United Nations' oil-for-food program.

At a hearing in Manhattan, U.S. District Judge Denny Chin sentenced Mr. Wyatt, the former chairman of Coastal Corp., to 12 months and one day in prison, to be followed by three years of supervised release. He also ordered Mr. Wyatt to forfeit $11 million, which Mr. Wyatt paid yesterday.
MORE

Wyatt
• Wyatt Pleads Guilty to Iraq-Oil Scheme10/02/07
• Politics Figure in Wyatt Trial09/04/07
• Three Charged in Oil-for-Food Probe10/22/05

"My opinions in many ways probably caused me to skirt too close to the law," said Mr. Wyatt, who has been outspoken about both Bush administrations and about U.S. policy in Iraq. "For that, I was wrong, and for that, I am truly sorry."

Mr. Wyatt, 83 years old, pleaded guilty to a single count of conspiracy in October, abruptly ending his trial on conspiracy, wire-fraud and other charges on its 12th day. He had faced 18 months to 24 months under a plea agreement.

Mr. Wyatt admitted that he agreed to cause a surcharge of about $200,000 to be paid to a bank account in Jordan controlled by officials at Iraq's State Oil Marketing Organization in December 2001, a violation of the U.N. program and U.S. law.

Write to Chad Bray at chad.bray@dowjones.com

WSJ Law Blog: Sentencia en caso de "securities class action"

Jury Rules For JDSU In Rare Securities Class Action Trial

Posted by Peter Lattman

As we told you last month, a securities-fraud class-action lawsuit that goes to trial is as rare as a pygmy marmoset. There have been 19 securities class action trials since 1996. One that goes to a jury verdict are even rarer — as rare as, say, a Cambodian Forest Ox (pictured). Only four securities class-action cases have been tried to a verdict since the passage of 1995’s PSLRA.
Make that five. After a five week trial and less than two days of deliberation, a federal jury in Oakland unanimously found yesterday that JDS Uniphase and four of its former executives aren’t liable for shareholders’ losses in the company’s stock.

The gist of the lawsuit, filed in 2002: JDSU and its execs painted a rosy picture of the company’s finances so they could cash out before its stock got slammed. Said the plaintiffs’ lawyer during opening statements: “They knew in the year 2000 what was to come in the year 2001. Instead of telling the public, they cashed out, selling hundreds of millions of dollars of stock, benefiting themselves.”

JDSU was a serious highflyer in the dot-com days, run by Jozef Straus, an eccentric, quirky-hat wearing Canadian. The Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds was the lead plaintiff and Labaton Sucharow lead counsel. Jim Bennett at MoFo represented JDSU and three former executives; Heller Ehrman’s Mike Shepard represented former JDSU CEO Kevin Kalkhoven.
“Most people don’t have the courage to take these cases to trial,” said Shepard in an interview with the Law Blog. “My client had the courage to take this case to trial because he didn’t do anything wrong. The only thing the plaintiffs had on him was that he sold a lot of stock and got really rich. I tip my hat to the jury for realizing that rich guys can do the right thing.”
Believe it or not, there’s another securities class action trial going down right now in Phoenix against education provider Apollo Group. Click here for the details. (And click here for a complete list of securities class action trials from Adam Savett at Risk Metrics; click here for photos of endangered species.)

Update: The Law Blog just received this statement from lead plaintiffs’ lawyer Barbara Hart of Labaton Sucharow: “The fact that the case was prosecuted through a complex and lengthy trial reflects Treasurer Nappier’s commitment to the interest of US securities markets and our belief that these allegations needed to be prosecuted to their fullest. The jury has spoken and there is much to be learned from this experience. We are proud of the commitment and professionalism of which this case has been prosecuted on behalf of JDSU shareholders.”

Permalink Trackback URL: http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/11/28/jury-rules-for-defendants-in-rare-securities-class-action-trial/trackback/

Save & Share:
-->Share on Facebook Del.icio.us As we told you last month, a securities-fraud class-action lawsuit that goes to trial is as rare as a pygmy marmoset. There have been 19 securities class action trials since 1996. One that goes to a jury verdict are even rarer — as rare as, say, a Cambodian Forest Ox (pictured). Only four securities class-action […]
--> Digg this -->Email This Print
Read more: Shareholder Suits, Technology, Securities
More related content