Press Releases Distribution, Article Publishing

High end car scheme involving 52 vehicles nets perpetrator 53 years behind bars and an order of restitution for $584,000.

Creative would be a mild word when applied to this recent court case that involved a local Colorado car dealer. “Seems he was selling total loss vehicles to customers without telling them. His scam was in operation for four years, from 2005 to 2008 and covered 52 vehicles. Evidently, the man made it a habit to buy wrecks, repair them and sell them – but did not tell the customer the true extent of the previous damage,” remarked Miller Leonard, a Denver federal criminal defense lawyer and Denver state criminal defense attorney.

Over the four years the dealer told buyers the vehicles had a full factory warranty. Investigators indicated warranties on total losses were voided. In plain English, the cars this man sold should have had salvage branded titles but instead, the dealer was alleging the titles were clean. At the end of the investigation, the car dealer was charged and indicted with conspiracy to commit bribery, commercial bribery and theft.

“It seems the man paid two insurance adjusters to help him along with his scheme and in the process they also wound up being charged. No one had a good day when the case wrapped up. Adjuster number one was charged with a second-degree misdemeanor and handed one year probation and ordered to pay $3,200 in restitution. Adjuster number two pled to commercial bribery (Class 6 felony) and was handed a four year deferred jail term and must pay $12,300 in restitution,” outlined Leonard.

The two adjusters would refer salvage or total loss vehicles to the car dealer who would in turn hand them money and gifts. They would then send him clean titles, not salvage titles. This means the dealer could raise the prices on the resale of the vehicles. What’s the lesson to be learned here? “A couple of things come to mind,” indicated Leonard, “and the first one would be that he needed a compliance program to avoid the very situation he ultimately found himself in. Now, supposing that he was not interested in or didn’t think he needed a compliance program, then he would be entitled to a well thought out criminal defense on his behalf,” he added.

Just because someone is charged and indicted with an offense, does not always mean they are indeed guilty of that offense. While things may look one way on the surface, we rarely know the complete story until the whole case unfolds. “If you do criminal defense for a living, you rarely jump to conclusions about anything until you have spoken to the accused and found out all of the circumstances. In any event, those charged have a right to a criminal defense just as the plaintiff has a right to file a case against them,” Leonard observed.

To learn more, visit http://www.fedcrimdef.com or call 303.623.2721.

Computer chip makers get their knuckles rapped for hiking the price of chips to rip the public off.

In what could be one of the largest antitrust settlements in the nation at $173 million, Colorado and 32 other states banded together and sued several makers of dynamic random access memory computer chips for scheming to jack up prices of their product – a distinct disadvantage for government agencies, businesses and individual consumers. Artificially raising their prices brought the whole house of cards down on them.

“This case is a good example of how many states can and will cooperate in an unfair business practice case. Here, even though the case was filed in California, Colorado became involved and ultimately, secured a settlement on behalf of the state. It goes to show how small a world we live in,” said Miller Leonard, a Denver, Colorado, federal criminal defense lawyer and Denver state criminal defense attorney.

The chip makers named in the multi-state suit included NEC Electronics America Inc., Micron Technology, Inc., both US companies, as well as one company in Germany (Infineon Technologies A.G), one in South Korea (Hynix Semiconductor, Inc.), one in Japan (Elpida Memory Inc.), and one in Taiwan (Mosel-Vitelic Corp. ).

Evidently what happened here is that the chip manufacturers went out of their way to create a remarkably elaborate scheme to drive the prices of the chips up. Fair competition is one thing; collusion in unfair business schemes to artificially raise prices is another. “Unfair business practices are a priority for the Colorado Attorney General,” commented Leonard.

“These types of cases also highlight the growing need for businesses to implement and follow a comprehensive compliance program. More and more, government is seeking civil and criminal sanctions against companies over a myriad of legal matters. Compliance, for good or bad, is a growing need for any company, and in particular, companies doing business in highly regulated industries,” added Leonard.

Colorado won’t be receiving the whole settlement. It will be apportioned by a special master and then the funds will go directly into the State General Fund.

To learn more, visit http://www.fedcrimdef.com or call 303.623.2721.

Mortgage companies need to note their bottom line does not take precedence over the law.

In the current economic climate, there are unfortunately so many financial scams, schemes and rip-offs that it’s hard to keep track of who is doing an honest day’s business anymore. One of the worst practices relates to negligent and exceedingly deceiving lending practices. In fact, there are a number of companies that have helped the foreclosure crisis along simply by following less than legal avenues to wring money out of unsuspecting homeowners.

A recent settlement, announced by the Colorado Attorney General, illustrates the way abuse can occur. Colorado Springs Independence Planning, doing business under the name Alternative Lending of Colorado, had two top employees called on the carpet for deceptive trade practices that now face an order to repay more than $78,000 in fines and restitution.

The two company officers will also have to surrender their mortgage loan originator licenses and inform the office of the Attorney General if they plan to work in any type of mortgage related business again. One will be paying $16,885 in restitution and $14,000 in civil penalties, while the other will be paying $33,700 in restitution and $14,000 in penalties. If both comply with the terms of the settlement, their totals will be reduced.

For example, all but $10,800 of the grand total for the female company officer will be suspended if she complies with the terms of the settlement and in the other’s case, all but $7,200 of his grand total will be suspended on compliance. This does, of course, raise some questions about the victims of their deceptive trade practices, a point the Attorney General’s office is endeavoring to address by arriving at a settlement with these two individuals that will see them exit the mortgage lending industry.

Two down and a few more to go. There is a warning inherent in this settlement that is intended to impress upon mortgage lenders that their financial bottom line should not be put ahead of the law.

One officer was cited for quoting monthly mortgage payments that didn’t include taxes and insurance, misrepresenting loan interest rates, and dragging out closings to pressure buyers into signing a mortgage. In addition, she worked with appraisers to over-value homes, meaning borrowers would owe more than their home was actually worth. She wasn’t present at closings which denied the borrower the chance to question their loan terms; over inflated applicant’s incomes, and did not offer complete and accurate disclosure to home buyers. It seems that the boss, while he knew what his employee was doing, allowed it to happen in the name of the company – bottom line.

The information concerning the settlement was obtained by reviewing the news releases from the Attorney General of Colorado. The lesson: companies need strict compliance programs to avoid abuses that can lead to potential civil and criminal penalties.

Miller Leonard is a Denver federal criminal defense lawyer and Denver state criminal defense attorney. To learn more, visit Fedcrimdef.com or call 303.623.2721.

When many laws are passed into existence, the wording isn’t always clear. The courts are tuning things up.

When laws are passed in the first place, they are generally drafted, read, molded, mashed, squashed and mauled about until they “sound” like they are what the legislators want. Having said that, you can bet your bottom dollar that in many cases, the legislation isn’t that clear and therein lies the legal dilemma.

The law is mostly about precise wording because if it wasn’t, you could drive a truck through some of the holes that exists in legislation today. And in fact, this is what this article is about – the paring back or down of a section of law that was broadly interpreted to mean something it does not. This whole new development came about thanks to federal prosecutors chasing down corruption cases; cases brought against public officials and others in the public sector.

In a nutshell, here is what happened recently when it came to dealing with white collar crime. The Supreme Court took a paring knife to the “honest services law” and cut it right back to the core – call it the very essence of the original law. Now, as a result of this ruling, this law may “only” be used to prosecute kickbacks or bribery. You may be wondering why the courts would cut a law back; a fair question.

The Supreme Court took exception to the way the honest services law was being interpreted by federal prosecutors in corruption cases, largely because it was so vaguely worded that it was used often, expansively and rather creatively by some in a rush to obtain a conviction. In its most recent ruling, the Court also hinted rather broadly, that Congress might want to take another crack at how far the law actually reaches. They didn’t do that without adding a word of caution though; caution as it would apply to constitutional matters.

The interesting rulings did not stop there. Another one handed down by the Court now makes it much more difficult for criminal defense attorneys handling high profile cases to tank guilty verdicts handed out in a hostile community awash with media reports tainting the jury pool. The Court said it would only find those verdicts questionable in a situation that was found to be “extreme.”

So much for the discretion government prosecutors have been using to apply the honest services fraud law; a law initially brought into being in 1988 to try and overturn a 1987 Supreme Court ruling. You may recall the case – Skilling v. U.S. – which involved a former Enron official convicted in one of the largest corruption cases the nation has ever seen. In any event, the net upshot of these latest rulings is that three very recent high profile cases involving corruption must now return to lower courts for another look. Those cases are Black v. U.S., Weyhrauch v. U.S., and Skilling v. U.S. (yes, it will be revisited as well).

The major problem here is and has been the wording of the honest services law. Congress enacted it saying that fraud may be committed by denying someone the “intangible right to one’s honest services.” For many, this created a “Huh?” moment and courts struggling to define the kind or type of crime or wrongdoing that fits into that notion. Suffice it to say that the attempts have not been successful and that is the reason the Supreme Court finally shot an opening volley across the bow of that sinking ship in order to clear the decks – hopefully. So what we have left is a ruling that says bribes and kickbacks are criminal – period. From this point on, it will be interesting to see what develops.

Miller Leonard is a Denver federal criminal defense lawyer and Denver state criminal defense attorney. To learn more, visit Fedcrimdef.com or call 303.623.2721.

When lawyers make mistakes, this is called legal malpractice. It’s their duty to serve their clients ethically.

Lawyers owe their clients a certain level expertise, a duty, to provide ethical, professional and competent legal services. From time to time, a lawyer may breach these duties and harm a client. Actions that breach the duties owed to clients may fall into a variety of areas that include violations of the professional standard of care or disciplinary rules, or a violation of civil or even criminal statutes. This kind of conduct, if indeed proven, may end up with the attorney paying damages, forfeiting fees and disqualification and/or a loss of their license to practice. Legal malpractice is serious business.

The fact that lawyers have many years of training to become experts in the law and that they have graduated with a degree and have set up a practice, means they are representing themselves to their clients that they have the skills, the know-how, learning and ability to competently practice law. In that representation it is implied that they will apply due care and diligence when using their knowledge to handle client’s legal matters.

“Generally speaking, the most common claim brought against lawyers is negligence. To file a negligence claim against an attorney there needs to be several elements present: that the lawyer owed a duty of care to the plaintiff; that the attorney breached that duty; that the breach of duty caused the plaintiff harm and that damages are owed for the injury,” outlined Brooks Schuelke, an Austin personal injury attorney with Perlmutter & Schuelke LLP. “You should also be aware that lawyers don’t normally owe the duty of care to third parties, though that area of the law is changing rapidly,” he added.

In Texas, the Pattern Jury Charges says that professional negligence is the “failure to use ordinary care, that is, failing to do that which an attorney of ordinary prudence would have done under the same or similar circumstances or doing that which an attorney of ordinary prudence would not have done under the same or similar circumstances.” In order to try a case like this, the proof of the standard of care and the breach of it usually requires the expert testimony of an attorney.

Another common area of legal malpractice is called breach of fiduciary duty. Lawyers are classified as fiduciaries and that means they owe their clients supreme loyalty and must tell them everything that is going on with their case. This isn’t something they do to please their clients; it’s a “must do” duty that involves good faith and dealing fairly with integrity. Put another way, lawyers must place the interests of their clients above all others and if they don’t fully disclose what is going on, this amounts to concealment.

“Some of the fiduciary duties a lawyer has are the duties to avoid conflicts of interest, keep client communications in confidence, reveal all material information to the client, follow all instructions the client issues and not get mixed up in activities that would adversely affect the client. In breach of fiduciary duty cases, the burden of the proof is on the lawyer to prove that the lawyer complied with the duties,” remarked Schuelke.

“If you feel you have been a victim of legal malpractice, seek legal counsel immediately and discuss the case with an attorney who has experience in this area of the law. This is serious business and you deserve unimpeachable representation. If you have any questions, call me,” Schuelke suggested.

Contact Perlmutter & Schuelke LLP at http://www.civtrial.com or (512) 476-4944.

A person filing a personal injury claim really needs the expertise of an attorney. This will ensure a fair settlement.

Those who have been hurt in an accident have a variety of options to seek recompense for their injuries. The most frequently pursued avenue is filing a personal injury lawsuit asking for damages for their pain and suffering and even loss of wages from being off work. Filing claims needs to be done just the right way, or there is a real risk that the settlement offer will not be fair.

“Personal injury accident claims really do need to be filed by an experienced attorney, even if you think hiring one may be too expensive. Those that try handling claims on their own have not been terribly successful in obtaining a fair settlement, simply because the insurance companies will aim to keep the settlement low and/or deny it. Insurance companies are not your friends, and don’t make the mistake of chatting to them like they were. Anything you say to them may come back later in a manner that will surprise you,” explained Brooks Schuelke, an Austin personal injury attorney with Perlmutter & Schuelke LLP.

One thing that people need to remember about personal injury litigation is that attorneys tend to work on a contingency fee basis, which in a nutshell means if they win the case, they take a percentage of the settlement. If they lose the case, the plaintiff usually pays nothing, although some attorneys do bill for paperwork, photocopying, etc.

“The biggest advantage a car wreck victim has in hiring an Austin personal injury lawyer to handle their case, is the fact that the attorneys deal with the insurance company. The attorney knows precisely what to do and what say to get them to do right by you and your claim. That is why their experience is so invaluable when it comes to netting you a fair settlement,” added Schuelke.

“For those who are contemplating doing a claim on their own, if your injuries only seem to be minor and you settle for a low amount because that is all you think you will need, don’t be surprised if that minor neck injury turns out to be serious whiplash and disables you from working for a few months. If you have already settled your claim, you can’t reopen it and do it over. That means having to pay for any further expenses out of your own pocket,” Schuelke advised.

If that kind of scenario does happen, there has been no money saved by not hiring an attorney. In fact, there may be “more” spent on paying for extra medical bills; bills that could have been paid for with a fair and equitable settlement. Most injured people have no idea how to assess an injury’s economic worth. If they underestimate it or ignore it, they have potentially cheated themselves out of a lot of money and opened the door to physical problems down the road.

“You really should know that insurance companies will often send out adjusters who will swoop in and try to get you to settle early and settle low. They do this before you know the true extent of your injuries and know what legal rights you have. Unfortunately, many adjusters don’t explain the nature of the settlement they’re advocating the victim sign, and they are known to make misrepresentations about the victim being able to bring future claims,” clarified Austin personal injury lawyer Schuelke.

Contact Perlmutter & Schuelke LLP at http://www.civtrial.com or (512) 476-4944.

It used to be that we had no phones in our vehicles and there weren’t as many accidents. Now, that’s a whole different story.

Since the advent of the cell phone, life has become incrementally more interesting, lively, exciting and deadly. While it’s nice to have 24/7/365 constant contact with friends and family, there needs to be a line drawn about doing that while driving a car and trying to text or talk at the same time. The results of that combination are often fatal. And what good reason was there for the accident, other than someone wanted to text a buddy about a party? Life is precious and responsibility for our own life is one thing; responsibility for the lives of others is paramount.

Unfortunately, those who take the risks of texting while driving are not taking into consideration what might happen to someone else if they are involved in a car accident. Furthermore, if they stopped to think about it, they aren’t even being responsible for their “own” life. Take the case of 21-year-old Josh Ashuby (names have been changed to protect the family) who was on his way home from a party in the city and texting his friends at the same time about what a blast it had been.

Just as he was about to go into a hairpin curve on the road home, he was texting his buddy about meeting him the next day for breakfast. The sun never rose again for Josh, who met an 18-wheeler head on in the curve that night. The cell phone survived the crash, with the display showing his buddy’s reply about breakfast. Pointless death? Indeed, it was not only tragic, but angered a lot of people in the community. Something had to be done about texting and driving.

Allstate Foundation has released some interesting stats about the texting while driving issue, mainly focused on teens, the largest group of cell phone owners who text and drive at the same time. These figures will shock you. About 82% of teens with cells used them while driving and at least 49% admitted they texted while driving, as well. Why do teens text while driving? Usually it’s to find their buds, flirt or get directions. A set of directions or a chance to flirt aren’t worth getting killed over, are they?

Another set of statistics put out by Virginia Tech’s Transportation Institute shows that texting while driving increases the risk of a wreck by up to twenty-three times. Those are frightening numbers. What needs to be done to stop this carnage? Stop using cells phones in cars while driving. Easier said than done, as even though there are many ideas out there about how to stop this deadly habit, most teens (and others) keep on doing it anyway, because they think nothing will happen to “them.”

To stop texting while driving would be fairly easy if people just practiced safety “first” before succumbing to the temptation of instant communication. Shutting off the cell while driving is the first step, only sending texts while pulled over on the side of the road is another, and asking another passenger with you to return the call or text for you is another. These are simple ideas that would save lives, if only people would follow them.

Brooks Schuelke is an Austin personal injury attorney with Perlmutter & Schuelke LLP. Contact an Austin injury lawyer at Civtrial.com or (512) 476-4944.

You were in a car accident, end of story. Surprisingly, there is a lot more to a car wreck than meets the eye.

Texas law requires drivers to carry minimal auto insurance. At a minimum, drivers must carry $25,000 per person/$50,000 per occurrence limits for personal injury damages. What does this mean? The “per person” limits set out the maximum that the insurance policy will pay to any one person in an accident, and the “per occurrence” limits set out the maximum that the insurance policy will pay to all people involved in an accident.

For example, if three people are injured in a single wreck, the most that a 25/50 policy will pay any of the three people is $25,000, and the most that the insurance company will pay the three injured people combined is $50,000. If the driver is involved in a second wreck, the policy limits start over. On January 1, 2011, the minimum requirements will increase to $30,000 per person/$60,000 per occurrence.

In addition to the personal injury limits, the law requires drivers to carry $25,000 limits for property damage, the damage to other people’s vehicles or other property. These limits won’t be changed in January.

Drivers can satisfy their obligations through one of two ways. Drivers can simply purchase auto insurance. Most drivers choose this route. Alternatively, drivers can self-insure by proving that they have enough assets to satisfy the minimum obligations. Most people don’t have the resources to self-insure so this option is usually limited to company-owned vehicles.

While it’s a good idea to raise the limits, for many people the new 2011 limits still won’t be enough. That’s why Texas also encourages drivers to purchase uninsured (UM) and underinsured (UIM) motorist coverage. UM/UIM insurance protects motorists from drivers who either have very little insurance or none at all.

If you think that’s probably not a big problem and opt to drive without carrying UM/UIM, be aware that just about 25% of all drivers in the state are out there without any coverage. And even when the other drivers do have insurance, $25,000 (or $30,000 starting in January) is often inadequate. We all know that the cost of health care is rising, and even a small wreck can result in costs of medical care and other damages that far exceed $30,000. If the person who caused the accident (the at-fault party) has no car insurance or not enough insurance, what happens? What happens is that the victim will have to fork out money for damages and injuries out of their own pocket. UM/UIM insurance helps minimize this risk.

Been in an accident recently and need an Austin personal injury lawyer? Make sure to find one that knows the latest arguments in the paid and incurred fight, what may be argued for extra-contractual damages in UM/UIM, and what may be done about subrogation liens. It’s a tough world out there when you get into a car wreck. Make sure you have the right Austin personal injury lawyer on your side to help you sort things out.

Brooks Schuelke is an Austin personal injury attorney with Perlmutter & Schuelke LLP. Contact an Austin injury lawyer at Civtrial.com or (512) 476-4944.

Many business owners don’t realize there is a difference between a trademark and a trade name.

Despite the fact that many business entrepreneurs know their stuff inside out, many of them still get hung up on the difference between a trademark and a trade name. “The trademark is considered to be a branding tool and it will identify ‘their’ goods and services as being uniquely theirs – thus distinguishing ‘their’ goods and services from others in the marketplace,” clarified David Alden Erikson, a Los Angeles business litigation attorney.

On the other hand, a trade name is a business name, and it’s normally registered with the Secretary of State where the business is incorporated. The name basically identifies the business for the purpose of incorporation. “The thing to remember here is that just because you may successfully register a trade mark, does not mean you have additional trademark protection. The truth is that there a quite a number of trade names filed that conflict with existing trademarks, which means if they are used as marks they may result in a lawsuit for trademark infringement,” summarized Erikson.

“When a business registers a mark related to a ‘service’ and not a product, it is generally called a service mark. But, just to throw a spanner into the works, a service mark (legally speaking) is the exact same thing as a trademark. Thus, you have the leeway to trademark a company name, slogan, logo, product name or some other symbol that may be associated with what you offer to consumers. By the way, you may want to combine any of these categories (say a slogan with a company name) and call that your trademark,” Erikson advised.

The origins of trademark law are rather interesting. They came about as a companion to the unfair competition law – something that protects businesses against the unscrupulous doings of other companies. “Trademarks are also related to intellectual property rights, copyrights and patents. For a further explanation, I’d recommend you talk to a Los Angeles business litigation attorney,” suggested Erikson. Federal patent and copyright protection is in place to protect a business from other people copying their ideas. Trademark protection is in place to protect consumers from copying a businesses’ ideas.

“If you want a strong mark that will hold up in just about any situation, then give me a call. We’ll talk and I will walk you through what you need to do to accomplish your goals,” added Erikson.

To learn more about David Alden Erikson, Attorney at Law, visit http://www.daviderikson.com.

In a world of acronyms gone mad there is now flogging to wrap one’s head around. Flog is a fake blog.

Who hasn’t landed on a fake blog style website at one time or another? The problem is, not everyone knows they’ve landed on a flog. Typically, a flog deals with false advertising and unproven claims with fake testimonials. “It’s the latest way to scam money from unsuspecting surfers. Why is this important to know? It’s important to know because this practice is just beginning and lawyers need to be in a position to provide advice to advertisers and consumers about these sites,” explained David Alden Erikson, a Los Angeles Internet law attorney.

“When advising an advertiser, I’d tell them that flogs may leave them open to both civil and/or criminal liability according to federal advertising laws and FTC rules. Yes, truth in advertising, honest and legit testimonials, etc., may reduce liability for false ads, but it’s important people ‘know’ their boundaries and save themselves a potentially expensive lawsuit,” commented Erikson.

As for consumers, if they are sucked in and buy goods or services from a flog, they need to know that they may have a remedy available to them. Any harm done to a consumer may mean they can file a lawsuit. “This area of the law is so new, it is literally developing as you are reading this news release,” Erikson observed. One thing is for sure, the FTC is working on ways to protect consumers from these schemes and scams.

The biggest risk with many of these flogs are the claims made on them enticing someone to take a significant financial or legal risk. “It’s hard to not want to spend money on something if you think that the celebrity endorsement you just read is legitimate and the product claims sound reasonable,” he added.

For those companies who want and intend to run an honest business online, they need to talk to an attorney familiar with Internet law to find out how to use testimonials, why they need proper disclosures and what things to avoid if they don’t want to get slapped with a false advertising lawsuit or investigated by the FTC.

“Without over simplifying things here when it comes to flogs,” said Erikson, “it’s important to remember one simple rule to do business by, and that is always remember that truth in advertising is crucial and must come before all else,” he reiterated.

To learn more about David Alden Erikson, Attorney at Law, visit http://www.daviderikson.com.