Author Archive: Brian Sanchez

Mike Copeland: Hurts Donut in Waco; Law firm turns 100; Leadership Waco

Hurts Donut Co., a growing regional chain known for large doughnuts with offbeat toppings, is bringing its act to Waco.

Richard West and his wife, Kathryn, confirmed they have secured franchising rights for this area, “and we plan to open a store in Waco as soon as possible,” he said in an email response to an inquiry.

“The rumor is true,” West said. “Hurts Donut is coming to Waco, and we are thrilled to become a part of the Waco community. We are currently looking for a location.”

He said fans and followers of Hurts Donut Co. can receive updates on a Facebook page titled Hurts Donut-Waco Texas.

Hurts has grown from a single location to a presence in eight states and recently unveiled a location in the Dallas-Fort Worth suburb of Frisco.

Pechacek joins FNB

The First National Bank of Central Texas has announced the hiring of Rachel Pechacek as senior vice president of the Woodway-Hewitt banking center, according to a news release from spokesman Dan Ingham.

Pechacek, who has 13 years of experience in commercial and real estate lending, received a bachelor’s degree in real estate-finance from the University of Texas at Arlington and her MBA from Tarleton State University.

“We are very excited to have a senior lender with Rachel’s experience, education and community mindedness join our First Family,” said Joe Barrow, executive vice president of FNB of Central Texas. “Rachel is a proven leader who knows how to assist her customers in meeting their financial goals. We are fortunate to have her.”

Pechacek has served on the board of the Waco Family Abuse Center, was a member of the Greater Waco Chamber of Commerce’s 25th Leadership Waco class and took part in the chamber’s Total Resource Campaign.

Law firm turns 100

The Waco-based law firm Naman, Howell, Smith & Lee is celebrating its 100th anniversary this year, and the Texas House of Representatives on Thursday passed a resolution honoring the firm founded in 1917.

The firm has 72 lawyers, active and retired, and has expanded to include offices in Austin, Fort Worth and San Antonio in addition to Waco, according to a news release from attorney Roy L. Barrett.

Now the 44th largest law firm in Texas, Naman, Howell, Smith & Lee in 2015 was named one of the top-ranked law offices in the country. It achieved that distinction by having at least one-third of its attorneys achieve an “AV Preeminent Rating” from the Martindale-Hubbell rating agency. In its rating system, “A” stands for legal ability and “V” stands for very high ethical standards. Barrett said in his release that only 2,466 firms were selected nationally to receive this honor out of 254,000 reviewed.

Cases and clients of note for the law firm include:

  • Coryell County landowners, who in the 1970s opposed expansion of Fort Hood. The Army reportedly wanted to acquire an additional 59,500 acres, but owners of farms, ranches and homes said Fort Hood was not fully utilizing the 217,000 acres it already had. After a long legal battle, the General Accounting Office, which is the official investigative arm of Congress, sided with the landowners, Barrett said in a summary.
  • The city of Waco in its legal action against Erath County dairies in an effort to clean up Lake Waco.
  • Baylor University, which in the 1990s changed its charter to guard against a takeover by any special focus group such as the fundamentalist movement in the Baptist General Convention of Texas.
  • Central Texas communities, including Gatesville, Hillsboro, Hewitt, Robinson, Woodway, Bellmead, Temple, Killeen, Clifton, Meridian, Hubbard and Nolanvile, “just to name a few,” Barrett said
  • .

Leadership Waco

The Greater Waco Chamber of Commerce has named its 34th Leadership Waco class. The program is a 10-month leadership development experience in which participants learn about such topics as History Day, Serving Others, We The People, Economic Development, Tools for Leaders, Healthcare, Education, Tourism and Visions for the Future.

Class members include: Tony Acosta, Douglass Nissan; John Calaway, Mission Waco; Lynsey Castillo, La Fiesta Restaurant & Cantina; Jacob Cates, Community Bank & Trust; Sydney Cox, Texas Tech University, Waco; Christopher Dahman, Avila Apartments; Nick Deaver, American Bank; and Clinton Dennard, Tarleton State University, Waco.

Others are Rene Duffy, Lamar Advertising; Eva Gregely, Veterans Affairs; Keith Kusler, Greater Waco Chamber; Christopher Lancaster, Baylor Scott & White Medical Center, Hillcrest; Domingo Lopez, Englander dZignPak; Keith Maynard, Andrews CPA; Nicholas Messerall, The Behringer Group; Becca McCormack, Refine 31; and Clark McCormack, Baylor IMG.

Also, Ashley Norris, Providence Foundation; Timothy Payne, American Amicable Life Insurance Co. of Texas; Angela Ragan, Jaynes, Reitmeier, Boyd & Therrell; Joe Rivera, Naman, Howell, Smith & Lee; Clint Savage, Extraco Banks, Joel Shields, Scanes & Routh LLP; Greg Shropshire, Pattillo Brown & Hill; and Lori Young, TFNB Your Bank for Life.

Go to Source

Former Blue Chip boss Mark Bryers avoids action over failed Australian firms

Blue Chip boss Mark Bryers was banned in 2015 from managing a company in New Zealand for seven years.

Blue Chip boss Mark Bryers was banned in 2015 from managing a company in New Zealand for seven years.

A man who claims he lost nearly $750,000 in the collapse of a group linked to former Blue Chip boss Mark Bryers is astounded regulators are not taking any action.

But he says there is always hope someone will be held responsible as he works to find his way out of the expensive hole he is in.

“We’ve all got problems,” he said.

“I’m just gutted, you know, we have these laws but nobody is prepared to prosecute under them.”

READ MORE:
* Mark Bryers banned for seven years
* Blue Chip’s Mark Bryers makes last trip to try to lift bankruptcy
* Blue Chip founder Mark Bryers pleads guilty

The man, who asked not to be named, was a Queensland accountant who sold his business to the Talos Accounting Group in Australia.

Blue Chip boss Mark Bryers was bankrupted in 2009 owing $230 million.

Blue Chip boss Mark Bryers was bankrupted in 2009 owing $230 million.

Talos surfaced in New Zealand in early 2015 when the Official Assignee here objected to Bryers being discharged from his 2009 bankruptcy for personal debts of $230 million.

The key issue during the hearing in the Auckland High Court was whether Bryers had flouted a ban on being a company manager or director in Australia after he was adjudicated bankrupt.

Bryers claimed during the hearing he worked as a consultant for Talos using the alias Mark Ryan, but the Official Assignee argued he had worked in a managerial role, which breached Australian insolvency law.

Associate Judge Jeremy Doogue ultimately banned Bryers from carrying out business in New Zealand for seven years as a condition of lifting his bankruptcy, despite the Official Assignee raising the possibility of an indefinite ban.

The judge found Bryers had little insight into the harm he had done and was more concerned with blaming the losses caused by his bankruptcy on other people’s’ decisions.

He also found Bryers was not just a consultant and had been actively involved in the management of Talos.

“The purpose of Mr Bryers adopting the alias was to deceive people dealing with him in his role at Talos as to what his antecedents were.

Ad Feedback

“It may well have been material to decisions made by people intending to go into business with Talos to know that ‘Mark Ryan’ was in fact Mark Bryers.”

A few months after the ban was imposed, the Sydney-based Talos went into liquidation.

Early estimates suggested the group, made up of mostly 17 accounting businesses, owed about A$6.8m (NZ$7.3m).

A couple of months later, in October 2015, the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC), that country’s corporate regulator, said it did not believe it needed to take any further steps over “alleged misconduct” relating to Bryers and Talos.

Australian senator John Williams questioned ASIC about Talos before the senate economics legislation committee in Australia, and ASIC senior executive leader Warren Day responded they were “aware of allegations” about Talos and Bryers and were looking into them.

“I get suspicious when someone comes to Australia, leaves a train wreck in New Zealand, changes their name, then goes and buys up companies and then it falls over,” Williams said.

In June this year, Williams questioned Day again during a Parliamentary Joint Committee about whether ASIC had taken any further action.

Day responded there had been matters which they were concerned about but in conjunction with the Director of Public Prosecutions, would not take it further.

“We do not have any other steps we want to take.”

An ASIC spokesperson confirmed it was not pursuing any action against Bryers or related companies.

“We have assessed information provided to us about Mr Bryers and associated companies but on the basis of the evidence provided, decided to take no further action.

“Beyond that, we can make no further comment.”

This decision, however, has left the Queensland accountant who sold his business to Talos “astounded”.

The man said he sold 80 per cent of his accounting practice to Talos in 2013 under the “misguided belief” he would be joining a bigger firm.

He said he got about a fifth of what was owed to him, but was still owed between A$500,000 and A$750,000.

Since early 2015 he had been doing everything he could to get the authorities involved, which included providing ASIC with an affidavit.

“I’m lost, you know.

“It’s all there in black and white for them, but it’s very disappointing that the organisation that is set up to prevent and/or prosecute this sort of thing is seemingly not taking any action.”

The Bryers back story

Blue Chip was founded by Mark Bryers and listed on the New Zealand sharemarket in the mid-2000s offering clients tax-efficient investment in properties.

But by 2008, more than 20 Blue Chip-related companies crashed owing thousands of investors more than $84 million.

The Serious Fraud Office investigated the collapse but did not lay any criminal charges.

In 2010, Bryers was fined $37,500 and sentenced to 75 hours of community service after pleading guilty to book-keeping charges relating to Blue Chip’s collapse.

During his attempt to discharge his bankruptcy in 2015, the court heard he had lived in Australia for the past eight years and had no intention of returning to New Zealand.


 – Stuff

Go to Source

Law society condemns rent-a-chair lawyers

HARARE – The Law Society of Zimbabwe (LSZ) has condemned the rent-a-chair practice — popular in hair salons — which hard-pressed lawyers have turned to, as they struggle to raise money to pay for practicing certificates.

According to LSZ, of the 3 000 lawyers registered with the High Court, only 1 500 acquired practicing certificates — a prerequisite to operate legally — from the organisation this year.

However, not all of the 1 500 lawyers without practicing certificates are rogue lawyers, as some are said to be attached to civil service, corporate and other sectors.

Practicing certificates are acquired annually at a $750 fee, with most law firms committing to pay for their employees.

Lawyers that spoke to the Daily News on condition of anonymity claimed that they were struggling to raise the practicing certificate fees because business had gone down owing to prevailing economic situation.

“Sometimes you actually rejoice when your matter is set before a magistrate you are familiar with because you will not be asked for a practicing certificate.

“The thing is these days we are struggling to raise that money as there are also workshops that must be attended to qualify for the practicing certificate,” one of the lawyers said.

“People no longer afford to hire lawyers and we have even reduced on what we charge to represent a person or else you will not make income.”

LSZ president Misheck Hogwe castigated the mushrooming rent-a-chair lawyers, arguing it was difficult to assess their conduct and performance since they would not have acquired practicing certificates from them.

“A lawyer has to operate from a premises registered with LSZ and for one to set up a law firm, compulsory pupillage is a prerequisite.

“It’s a form of training a lawyer undergoes before writing exams at the end of the programme before you can eligible to set a firm…then identify the premises and satisfy us that there is enough equipment,” he said.

“In terms of the Legal Practice Act, no lawyer without a practicing certificate from LSZ should practice. What it means is that no judge or magistrate should entertain such a lawyer, they are bogus.

“We do not allow the rent-a-chair practice where some lawyers purport to join a law firm and pay some premium to enable their practice.

“It is unethical and a very dishonourable conduct. It means that there are no checks and balances as there is no proper grooming for the lawyers. Normally when there are suspicions of such practice we conduct a spot audit.”

Hogwe said registered law firms ensured that their members attained all the required documentation before commencing practice.

“In the normal process, when a lawyer employs a professional assistant they become responsible for acquiring that practitioner’s practicing certificate and it is $750 per annum.

“If a law firm cannot pay, then they should not employ because it would be like employing a driver without the car.”

He urged members of the public to demand to see practicing certificates whenever they deal with lawyers to avoid being duped by some bogus practitioners.

“We normally publish names of deregistered lawyers and those without practicing certificates so that they are aware of the people they will be dealing with. It is in the public interest. Our profession is about integrity and everyone has to feel safe in the hands of the lawyers,” Hogwe said.

Go to Source

City Outlines Law Firms To Handle City Litigation In Specified Areas

The city has named law firms that will be eligible for handling city litigation that is not handled by the city attorney’s office.

The City Council is to consider a resolution on Tuesday, Aug. 22, that “authorizes the Office of the City Attorney to engage the following law firms for legal services in general litigation matters; corporate, transactional & intellectual property matters; labor & employment matters; and government relation matters for the period of July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018:

General Litigation Matters: Gearhiser, Peters, Elliott & Cannon, PLLC; Frost Brown Todd LLC; Luther Anderson, PLLP; Miller & Martin, LLP; and Tidwell, Izell & Richardson.

Corporate/Transactional/Intellectual Property Matters: Autumn Witt Boyd; Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP; Chambliss, Bahner & Stophel, P.C.; Hagler, Bruce & Turner; Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP; Amanda N. Jelks (Jelks Law); Katie King Law; King & Spalding; Miller & Martin, LLP; and Waller Lansden Dortch & Davis LLP.

Labor & Employment Matters: Chambliss, Bahner & Stophel, P.C.; and Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP.

Government Relations Matters: CivicPoint

Go to Source

What law firms want: job hunting tips for trainees

Applications, placements, interviews… It can be brutal securing a job in law. Whatever stage you’re at, here are the dos and don’ts of applying

Interview advice: avoid coming across as robotic and steer clear of corporate buzzwords.



Interview advice: avoid coming across as robotic and steer clear of corporate buzzwords.
Photograph: Gary Roebuck/Alamy

What law firms want: job hunting tips for trainees

Applications, placements, interviews… It can be brutal securing a job in law. Whatever stage you’re at, here are the dos and don’ts of applying

Securing a job in law is hard. Summer can be a brutal time of application forms, assessment days, interviews and rejections. Some students will be invited to a placement. Others won’t get anything and will continue their search into next year.

Charles Smith, a 28-year-old solicitor from Liverpool, says he found the process soul-destroying. “It made me wonder if I’d ever actually practise. I’d go on Facebook and see 153 likes on a post saying someone had just got something, and I’d think maybe I was just one of the unlucky ones.”

Trainee solicitor George Canter, 26, agrees. “I had to deal with an enormous amount of rejection; most of the places I applied wouldn’t even give me an interview.”

Whatever stage you’re at in the process, don’t despair. We’ve got the dos and don’ts of applying.

Don’t: hide your cool

How much of your personality do firms want to see? Liz Blight, HR manager at Fox Williams, says she wants candidates to be honest. Her advice is to avoid coming across as robotic and steer clear of big words, “especially corporate buzzwords that don’t fit naturally into responses”.

Although everyone gets nervous, Victoria Tavener, HR officer at Kingsley Napley LLP, says recruiters try to see beyond that. To help bring out a candidate’s personality they ask questions such as “how would your friends describe you” and “who would you like at your dream dinner party”. But know when to keep quiet, she says. “Talk about your role and experience but don’t waffle and have the confidence to know when to stop speaking.”

Don’t: think you have to be perfect

Trainee solicitors are recruited to do just that: train. “It’s unreasonable for firms to recruit you and expect the finished product,” says Bryan Scant, chair of the Junior Lawyers Division. “If you are coming straight from your Legal Practice Course with no real legal experience then you clearly won’t be at the same standard as a newly qualified solicitor.”

Others agree. “We want to train people in a specific way,” says Tavener. “We’re looking for potential – someone who’s passionate about the areas we practice in and has an understanding of how a law firm operates and the challenges they are faced with. By no means do we expect a finished product.”

Just bear in mind that if you have worked for three years as a paralegal in one particular area then the bar is going to be set much higher for you.

Do: make sure you meet the criteria

Target your applications. Make sure you are going to be considered seriously. Some firms say they want a 2.1 but when you look closely what they actually want is a 2.1 on every module.

“The advice we give to students is don’t waste your time on an application when you’re not going to meet the criteria,” says James Catchpole, director of the Legal Practice Course at The City Law School. “Be strategic: will that firm genuinely look at you?”

If you have mitigating circumstances, you need to explain them in the best way possible.

Do: look at each firm individually

If you want to do employment law, don’t just apply to every firm that has an employment department. Look at the number of people who work in that team; if it’s one partner and one junior then chances are you’re not going to get a training seat there so don’t apply. “That’s not pitching in a savvy way if it’s their small business area and it’s complementary to everything else they do,” says Catchpole. “Look for firms that have substantial areas of activity in the area you want to practice in.”

Tavener agrees and recommends doing your research. She says it’s very obvious if candidates haven’t thought about their practice areas. “We have a very small commercial team and people who come in wanting to be corporate lawyers have really come to the wrong place,” she says.

Do: remember what matters

You are going to spend your waking day with your work colleagues, so remember that job hunting is a two-way process. “Selecting graduates is as much about us assessing them as [it is] them selecting us,” says Blight. However much you may want to work for a firm in theory, if you don’t like them upon meeting do you really want to spend two years there?

Don’t: lose confidence

Remember how competitive law is and that you are not the only person finding it hard. “Most solicitors have been in that position where their friends are being offered training contracts and you aren’t, but you have to keep trying,” says Scant.

Catchpole agrees and points out that you shouldn’t limit your search to the glossy brochures. There are firms recruiting all year round and you need to hunt them down. His advice is to reflect on why you’ve been rejected: “if there’s the opportunity to get feedback, take it and act on it”.

Above all, don’t lost hope. “Everything happens for a reason,” says Catchpole, “and if they decide they don’t want you then that’s not your firm. Yours is out there – you just haven’t found it yet”.

Follow Guardian Students on Twitter: @GdnStudents. For graduate career opportunities, take a look at Guardian Jobs.

Go to Source

Law School emphasizes public service with new certificate program

News
| University

19110_18999_duke_lawff

Duke Law School recently announced its first certificate for Juris Doctor students. 

The new program—the Public Interest and Public Service Law Certificate—is specifically designed for students who have an interest in public service. 

Stella Boswell, assistant dean of public interest and career development, said public service jobs have become more competitive in recent years. As a result, law students have to clearly demonstrate a strong interest in public work—something they can accomplish with the new certificate.

“What makes you highly qualified in the private sector with private law firms may not be what government and public interest employers are looking for,” Boswell said. “Instead, what they’re looking for is really somebody who has a passion for and a commitment to service, so the certificate would be one way you can demonstrate that.”

Boswell added that there is a demand for more public counsel. In North Carolina, legal aid funds have been cut by more than half since 2008, according to the News and Observer. 

“Always, throughout time, people have had great legal needs that are not going to be met in the private sector,” Boswell said. “Low and middle income people in this country have always had trouble with getting legal representation for things they need, so public interest lawyers are the people who step in to do that.”

Students in the program must perform at least 75 hours of community service and work full-time in the public sector during a summer while pursuing their degree. 

South Moore, second year law student and president of the Government and Public Service Society, praised the law school for making public service more of a priority.

“I think no matter what legal career you go into, public service is going to be a part of it,” Moore said. “Speaking as someone who went to law school specifically to have a public interest career, it’s great for me…I think it makes Duke an even more competitive law school than it already is.”

Coming from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Moore said his undergraduate experience emphasized public service. He feared that wouldn’t be the case at Duke.

“My big concern when I came to Duke—other than that I didn’t want to cheer for your basketball team—is that that same sense of service wouldn’t be there at the Law School,” he said. “I was completely wrong to have worried about that. The certificate program is example of that.”

Brenda Berlin, Trinity ’86, supervising attorney of the Children’s Law Clinic and chair of the certificate’s advisory board, spearheaded the campaign to create the certificate. Berlin and her law school colleagues considered similar programs at peer institutions while designing the certificate, Boswell said.

After it was drawn up, the certificate was presented to the law school faculty for approval. Tia Barnes, assistant dean for academic affairs, said that the certificate had much faculty support.

“There are lots of different practice areas in the field of law and our curriculum is open to students to chart their own path and to develop a curriculum that suits their interests,” Barnes said. “But, I think one of the reasons that it had a lot of support is because we wanted to be able to help students who plan to go into public interest or public service more concretely define and demonstrate their interest.”

Though there is a requirement to show demonstrated interest in public service, Barnes noted that the certificate is also open to law students who have an interest in public service but are unsure if they want to do such work after graduation. 

“It’s not highly competitive to get into the program,” Boswell said. “We want the program to be very open to the students who are interested in pursuing this path.”

Go to Source

Arconic Inc : Pomerantz Law Firm Reminds Shareholders with Losses on their Investment in Arconic, Inc. of Class Action Lawsuit and Upcoming Deadline – ARNC

NEW YORK, NY / ACCESSWIRE / August 11, 2017 / Pomerantz LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Arconic, Inc. (”Arconic” or the ”Company”) (NYSE: ARNC) and certain of its officers. The class action, filed in United States District Court, Southern District of New York, and docketed under 17-cv-05312, is on behalf of a class consisting of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Arconic securities, seeking to recover compensable damages caused by defendants’ violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

If you are a shareholder who purchased Arconic securities between February 28, 2017, and June 26, 2017, both dates inclusive, you have until September 11, 2017, to ask the Court to appoint you as Lead Plaintiff for the class. A copy of the Complaint can be obtained at www.pomerantzlaw.com. To discuss this action, contact Robert S. Willoughby at rswilloughby@pomlaw.com or 888.476.6529 (or 888.4-POMLAW), toll-free, Ext. 9980. Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include their mailing address, telephone number, and the number of shares purchased.

[Click here to join this class action]

Arconic Inc. is a global provider of lightweight multi-material solutions, focused on the aerospace market in addition to serving the automotive, industrial gas turbine, commercial transportation, and building and construction markets. The Company also provides titanium, aluminum, nickel-based super alloy, and specialty alloy solutions.

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operational and compliance policies. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Arconic knowingly supplied its highly flammable Reynobond PE (polyethylene) cladding panels for use in construction; (ii) the foregoing conduct significantly increased the risk of property damage, injury and/or death in buildings constructed with Arconic’s Reynobond PE panels; and (iii) as a result of the foregoing, Arconic’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

On June 14, 2017, a fire broke out at the 24-story Grenfell Tower apartment block in London. The fire burned for roughly 60 hours, destroying the building and causing at least 80 deaths and over 70 injuries.

On June 24, 2017, The New York Times published an article entitled ”Why Grenfell Tower Burned: Regulators Put Cost Before Safety”, describing the causes of the Grenfell Tower fire and attributing the rapid spread of the fire to highly flammable Reynobond PE cladding panels manufactured by Arconic and used in the building’s construction.

On that same day, Reuters published an article entitled ”Arconic knowingly supplied flammable panels for use in tower: emails,” revealing that Arconic sales managers were aware that flammable panels would be distributed for use at Grenfell Tower.

On June 26, 2017, Arconic issued a press release announcing it would discontinue global sales of Reynobond PE for use in high-rise buildings after the material was suspected to have contributed to the spread of the deadly fire at the Grenfell Tower apartment complex in London.

On these disclosures, Arconic’s common share price fell $3.70, or 14.49%, to close at $21.84 on June 27, 2017.

The Pomerantz Firm, with offices in New York, Chicago, Florida, and Los Angeles, is acknowledged as one of the premier firms in the areas of corporate, securities, and antitrust class litigation. Founded by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known as the dean of the class action bar, the Pomerantz Firm pioneered the field of securities class actions. Today, more than 80 years later, the Pomerantz Firm continues in the tradition he established, fighting for the rights of the victims of securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, and corporate misconduct. The Firm has recovered numerous multimillion-dollar damages awards on behalf of class members. See www.pomerantzlaw.com

SOURCE: Pomerantz LLP


Go to Source

Pomerantz Law Firm Investigates Claims On Behalf of Investors of Pingtan Marine Enterprise Ltd. – PME

NEW YORK, NY / ACCESSWIRE / August 11, 2017 / Pomerantz LLP is investigating claims on behalf of investors of Pingtan Marine Enterprise Ltd. (”Pingtan” or the ”Company”) (NASDAQ: PME). Such investors are advised to contact Robert S. Willoughby at rswilloughby@pomlaw.com or 888-476-6529, ext. 9980.

The investigation concerns whether Pingtan and certain of its officers and/or directors have engaged in securities fraud or other unlawful business practices.

[Click here to join
a class action]

On May 10, 2017, an analyst published a report asserting that Pingtan had concealed its involvement in, among other activities, forced labor, illegal fishing, and human trafficking schemes.

On this news, Pingtan’s share price has fallen as much as $1.80, or 43.8%, during intraday trading on May 10, 2017.

The Pomerantz Firm, with offices in New York, Chicago, Florida, and Los Angeles, is acknowledged as one of the premier firms in the areas of corporate, securities, and antitrust class litigation. Founded by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known as the dean of the class action bar, the Pomerantz Firm pioneered the field of securities class actions. Today, more than 80 years later, the Pomerantz Firm continues in the tradition he established, fighting for the rights of the victims of securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, and corporate misconduct. The Firm has recovered numerous multimillion-dollar damages awards on behalf of class members. See www.pomerantzlaw.com.

SOURCE: Pomerantz LLP


Go to Source

DryShips Inc. : Pomerantz Law Firm Reminds Shareholders with Losses on their Investment in DryShips Inc. of Class Action Lawsuit and Upcoming Deadline – DRYS

NEW YORK, NY / ACCESSWIRE / August 11, 2017 / Pomerantz LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against DryShips Inc. (“DryShips” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: DRYS) and certain of its officers. The class action, filed in United States District Court, Southern District of New York, and docketed under 17-cv-05368, is on behalf of a class consisting of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired DryShips securities, seeking to recover compensable damages caused by defendants? violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

If you are a shareholder who purchased DryShips securities between June 8, 2016, and July 12, 2017, both dates inclusive, you have until September 12, 2017, to ask the Court to appoint you as Lead Plaintiff for the class. A copy of the Complaint can be obtained at www.pomerantzlaw.com. To discuss this action, contact Robert S. Willoughby at rswilloughby@pomlaw.com or 888.476.6529 (or 888.4-POMLAW), toll-free, Ext. 9980. Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include their mailing address, telephone number, and the number of shares purchased.

[Click here to join this class action]

DryShips Inc. owns and operates ocean going cargo vessels worldwide. It operates through two segments, Drybulk and Offshore Support. The Drybulk segment offers
drybulk commodities transportation services for the steel, electric utility, construction, and agri-food industries. The Offshore Support segment provides its services to the global offshore energy industry.

In a series of transactions beginning on or around June 8, 2016, DryShips raised hundreds of millions of dollars in capital by selling newly-issued shares directly to Kalani Investments Ltd. (“Kalani”), a British Virgin Islands firm, at a discount to the stock-market price. This influx of capital enabled DryShips to roughly double the size of its fleet to 36 vessels.

The Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business, operational and compliance policies. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Defendants engaged in a systemic stock-manipulation scheme to artificially inflate DryShips’ share price; (ii) DryShips’ transactions with Kalani were an illegal capital-raising scheme, due in part to Kalani’s failure to register as an underwriter with the SEC; and (iii) as a result of the foregoing, DryShips’ public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

On July 13, 2017, The Wall Street Journal published an article entitled “A Shipping Company’s Bizarre Stock Maneuvers Create High Seas Intrigue.” The article described in detail the various transactions between DryShips and Kalani – namely, how DryShips’ influxes of cash stoked investor interest in DryShips, enabling the Company to issue still more shares, which it then continued to sell to Kalani. Kalani ultimately acquired securities convertible to more than $626 million in DryShips common stock, roughly 100 times DryShips’ stock market value as of early November 2016. Meanwhile, to counter share-value dilution and avoid NASDAQ delisting, DryShips executed a series of reverse stock splits.

As The Wall Street Journal reported, however, because Kalani purchased DryShips stock with the intention of reselling, the transactions between DryShips and Kalani essentially constituted “pseudo-underwriting,” with Kalani in the position of the underwriter of a de facto public offering. Kalani, however, never registered as an underwriter with the SEC, in violation of the federal securities laws. Moreover, the issuance of tens of millions of new DryShips shares significantly diluted shareholder value, while the frequent and sharp spikes and drops in DryShip’s common share price, caused by DryShip’s illegal capital-raising, cost the Company’s shareholders hundreds of millions of dollars.

Since November 2016, DryShips’ share price has fallen approximately 99.9%.

The Pomerantz Firm, with offices in New York, Chicago, Florida, and Los Angeles, is acknowledged as one of the premier firms in the areas of corporate, securities, and antitrust class litigation. Founded by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known as the dean of the class action bar, the Pomerantz Firm pioneered the field of securities class actions. Today, more than 80 years later, the Pomerantz Firm continues in the tradition he established, fighting for the rights of the victims of securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, and corporate misconduct. The Firm has recovered numerous multimillion-dollar damages awards on behalf of class members. See www.pomerantzlaw.com.

SOURCE: Pomerantz LLP


Go to Source