Sentences with phrase «business fraud matters»

Not exact matches

The Briscoe Law Firm, PLLC is a full service business litigation and shareholder rights advocacy firm with more than 20 years of experience in complex litigation matters, including claims of investor and stockholder fraud, shareholder derivative suits, and securities class actions.

The firm represents clients in a wide variety of litigation and appellate matters, including matters involving real property, real estate finance, construction, development disputes and transactions, intellectual property disputes, business disputes, personal injury, fraud, shareholder disputes, and adversarial actions in bankruptcy court.

His practice covers a broad array of subject matters, including constitutional law, sovereign immunity, arbitration, enforcement of arbitral awards, business litigation, securities fraud, criminal law, and intellectual property.

He counsels clients on an array of sophisticated business litigation matters, including fraud, securities, civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO), lender liability, accountant liability and trade practices.

Kaylin also has significant experience handling commercial litigation matters in both state and federal court, representing corporate clients and individuals in a wide range of matters, including complex breach of contract cases, writs of garnishment and replevin, business torts, and fraud and securities litigation.

Mr. Carter has successfully tried numerous cases and represented companies and individuals in a wide variety of matters, including complex business disputes involving claims of breach of contract, fraud, unfair and deceptive business practices, and franchise disputes.

His practice includes business agreements and contractual disputes of all kinds, banking and financial services related litigation, civil fraud, company, partnership and insolvency matters, property litigation, energy and minerals, fiduciaries and professional negligence.

This includes mergers and acquisitions, restructuring, joint ventures, financing, network formation, managed care contracting, contract analysis, insurance regulation, managed care negotiations, Medicaid and Medicare reimbursement matters, fraud and abuse issues, confidentiality and privacy issues, and professional and business licensure matters.

Our team forms part of our wider group advising on business crime matters, including our fraud and white collar crime, health and safety and environment specialists.

Through the years, we have represented clients in all types of business disputes, and are ready to assist in matters such as breach of contract, fraud, tortious interference, and unfair business practices, among others.

He represents diverse businesses and industries such as land developers, resort and hotel owners, entrepreneurs and start - up companies, real estate and leasing companies, commercial landlords and tenants in matters involving breach of contract, breach of warranty and business tort claims, as well as claims arising out of fraud allegations.

In addition, Mr. Cloherty represents businesses and individuals in enforcement matters and government investigations stemming from health care, securities, and mail and bank fraud allegations.

Regarding business disputes, the firm has extensive experience defending its clients against a wide variety of claims, as well as initiating meritorious action against bad actors in fraud, breach of contract, and collection matters.

Ms. Field has experience defending financial institutions in complex litigation, consumer class actions and litigation involving fraud claims, federal consumer credit laws, unfair business practices and other commercial matters.

In government investigations and white collar criminal defense matters, Ms. Steinberg represents businesses and individuals related to allegations of healthcare fraud and off - label marketing of drugs and devices.

Better management of fraud risk and compliance exposure is a critical business priority — no matter the industry sector.

At HSNO, Ms. Green specialized in the investigation and measurement of damages involving first party property claims, employee and corporate fraud, third party claims, product liability matters, business interruption and lost profits, contingent business interruption, extra expense, inventory, construction losses, third - party damage claims, bankruptcy, personal injury and malpractice suits.

Representation of Regions Bank in matter involving attempt by plaintiffs to impose securities regulatory obligations on bank account relationship with its business account - holder who allegedly engaged in securities fraud.

Prior to joining Williams Montgomery & John, he practiced for four years at another Chicago - based civil litigation firm where he represented real property developers, motor vehicle dealers, lending companies, food manufacturers and family owned businesses as both plaintiff and defendant in commercial litigation matters involving breach of contract, fraud and disputes under the Uniform Commercial Code, and defended his clients in consumer class action litigation.

Mr. Birney also has a broad range of experience handling commercial litigation matters in state and federal courts, routinely representing businesses involved in contract disputes, fraudulent transfer, fraud, civil theft, and intercompany claims.

When dealing with a Virginia domestic relations matter, credit report fraud, small business issues or vehicle accident injury concern, the first and most important step that a person should take is to contact a qualified attorney.

Stokoe Partnership Solicitors» expertise consistently attracts high profile criminal defence work prosecuted by bodies, such as HM Revenue & Customs, the Serious Fraud Office, the Crown Prosecution Service, National Crime Agency, the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy and various other regulatory bodies in relation to serious crime matters including fraud, bribery, corruption, money laundering, fraudulent trading, HMRC and VAT allegations, cybercrime and hacking, drug trafficking, armed robbery, murder and extradition.

Examples of our substantive experience include fraud - related and financial reporting laws; employment matters in various industries (including matters involving senior executives); insurance regulation; corporate governance issues; financial services issues; health - care regulation; and a wide variety of other business problems.

Her practice entails matters in state and federal court, including business torts, class action defense, products liability, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duties and allegations of unfair business practice and fraud.

His representation of manufacturers, employers, insurance companies, and small businesses has included first chair in District and Superior Court trials; arbitration and settlement negotiations; motion hearings; and a variety of collection matters including worker's compensation insurance premium fraud.

Lindsay Kenney acts on behalf of local and international clients in relation to business disputes, fraud claims, partnership and shareholder disputes, in bankruptcy proceedings, construction claims, employment litigation, intellectual property litigation, defamation claims, professional liability issues, complex litigation matters and other administrative and regulatory issues, including appeals.

We have in - depth experience consulting on and litigating unfair competition and trade secret matters involving a vast array of topics, such as customer lists, product designs, formats, formulas and process, false advertising and confidentiality agreements, as well as fraud, unfair business practices and unfair competition, among others.

Mr. Gatto's practice is national and international, and it encompasses a full range of IP and technology issues, including: patent, trademark, copyright and trade secret litigation; counseling and technology transactions; developing and implementing IP strategies to protect and to monetize IP assets; creating and implementing corporate IP programs; conducting IP audits; conducting complex patent prosecution, including patent appeals, interferences, Inter Partes Review (IPRs), reissues and protests; handling patent enforcement issues, including licensing and litigation; negotiating and drafting technology agreements; conducting IP due diligence in and negotiating IP aspects of mergers, acquisitions and financings; rendering opinions concerning the infringement, validity and enforceability of patents; handling trademark prosecution, domain name, copyright and trade secret matters; handling IP aspects of employment issues; advising clients on legal issues associated with open source software including open source patent issues, licensing, open source compatibility issues, indemnity issues and developing and implementing corporate policies on use of open source software; advising clients on the legality of cutting edge Internet business methods and technology; and advising clients on computer law issues such as computer fraud and abuse and SPAM - related issues.

If your business is facing criminal allegations, such as embezzlement or fraud, it is important to seek outside counsel when handling these matters.

We routinely handle «bet the company» business disputes, catastrophic personal injury and wrongful death matters, fraud, professional liability, complex product liability matters, intellectual property issues, and other serious and complex litigation matters.

Matters have included: securities fraud, derivative actions, breaches of contract, unfair competition and other business torts; False Claims Act violations; discriminatory conduct; violations of professional standards; and breaches of duty.

I represent individuals and small - to - mid-market businesses in litigation matters, including trade secrets, business owner disputes, fraud claims, real estate disputes, and breaches of contract.

Frank's litigation experience includes complex commercial / business disputes, lender liability, fraud, trade secret, real estate / leasing and gaming matters.

Jeremy's practice has been consistently noted for its breadth, but he specialises in heavy financial and contractual disputes, complex international jurisdictional battles and has a wealth of experience in Russian business and fraud matters.

His litigation experience runs the gamut from intellectual property matters to general business conflicts, including breach of contract, fraud, tortious interference, trade secret misappropriation, breach of fiduciary duty, and shareholder derivative matters.

Comprising two founding partners internationally renowned for their international litigation and arbitration practice, three specialized partners in insolvency proceedings, associates specialised in insolvency and litigation, tax advisers and a dedicated criminal law team, Maravela Asociaţii is perfectly equipped in order to cover the entire range of dispute related matters, including commercial and investment arbitration, insolvency proceedings, fiscal litigations, fraud and business crime disputes.

With more than eight years» experience in the fields of serious crime, business crime and fraud, regulatory matters and commercial litigation, Robert has in - depth expertise to assist a wide range of clients.

The subject matter of litigation includes real estate fraud, non-disclosure disputes, professional negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, California Business & Professions Code, easement and boundary line disputes, to name a few.

Brian Spiro specialises in «high loss» business crime litigation, investigations, fraud and regulatory matters including Serious Fraud Office, Crown Prosecution Service and HM Revenue & Customs prosecutions and investigations.

Ladd has extensive experience prosecuting and defending complex business litigation matters, including disputes involving claims for breach of contract, business fraud, violations of fiduciary duties, breach of non-compete covenants, theft of trade secrets and business defamation.

Bill began practicing in 2004 and has represented both plaintiffs and defendants in consumer fraud issues, employment disputes, estate planning, bankruptcy, personal injury matters, business transactions, and contract disputes, just to name a few.

All lawyers are being targeted with bad cheque frauds: We're getting reports of frauds that appear to be personal or business collection matters, spousal support collections, business loans and IP licence disputes.

Our team of fraud and financial crime specialists are experienced in defending both individuals and businesses in matters involving regulatory enforcement and white collar crime.

Often offshore disputes involve investment disputes, banking matters, commercial litigation, business disputes (including shareholder disputes), trusts and estates, fraud claims, cyber security, data breach, insurance and reinsurance.

Before accepting a retainer or during a retainer, if a lawyer has suspicions or doubts about whether he or she might be assisting a client in dishonesty, fraud, crime or illegal conduct, the lawyer should make reasonable inquiries to obtain information about the client and about the subject matter and objectives of the retainer, including verifying who are the legal or beneficial owners of property and business entities, verifying who has the control of business entities, and clarifying the nature and purpose of a complex or unusual transaction where the purpose is not clear.

We represent you in shareholder disputes, partnership and merger and acquisition disputes, fraud and investment scams, breach of contract and business torts, professional and product liability matters, and intellectual property right infringements.

About Blog Analyzing the Global Impact of Cybersecurity, Law, and Business Risk.I have extensive experience advising and guiding clients through state and federal court matters involving highly complex cyber, technology, commercial, and intellectual property legal issues such as computer fraud, hacking, data security and data breach, privacy, social media law and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

107 DOS 98 Matter of DOS v. Sosis - subject matter jurisdiction; due process; failure to appear at hearing; proper business practices; deposits; fraudulent practice; DOS fails its burden of proof; DOS has subject matter jurisdiction if at the time the disciplinary proceeding was commenced by proper service of a notice of hearing and complaint the party was (i) licensed to engage in regulated real estate activities, or (ii) an applicant for either a license or for the renewal of a license to engage in regulated real estate activities, or (iii) eligible to automatically renew the prior license under the two - year limitation provision of RPL § 441 (2); ex parte hearing is permissible upon proof of proper notice of hearing; DOS has subject matter jurisdiction where party was licensed at the time proceeding was commenced and, where at time of hearing, although not licensed was eligible to automatically apply to renew pursuant to RPL § 441 (2); licensee operated a real estate brokerage business under an unlicensed name; licensee unlawfully retains deposit funds after deposit monies were delivered on the condition that same were to be disbursed only on the principal's consent and approval and said consent and approval was not given; licensee's illegal exercise of right of ownership over his principal's funds spawns conversion and constitutes a fraudulent practice; DOS fails its burden of proof to establish licensee failed to deposit trust funds in a segregated escrow account, engaged in fraud and changed business location without notice to DOS; restitution ordered in the amount of $ 1,900 plus interest, fine of $ 1,000 and any further application for licensure shall not be considered until applicant pays said fine and provides proof of payment of restiMatter of DOS v. Sosis - subject matter jurisdiction; due process; failure to appear at hearing; proper business practices; deposits; fraudulent practice; DOS fails its burden of proof; DOS has subject matter jurisdiction if at the time the disciplinary proceeding was commenced by proper service of a notice of hearing and complaint the party was (i) licensed to engage in regulated real estate activities, or (ii) an applicant for either a license or for the renewal of a license to engage in regulated real estate activities, or (iii) eligible to automatically renew the prior license under the two - year limitation provision of RPL § 441 (2); ex parte hearing is permissible upon proof of proper notice of hearing; DOS has subject matter jurisdiction where party was licensed at the time proceeding was commenced and, where at time of hearing, although not licensed was eligible to automatically apply to renew pursuant to RPL § 441 (2); licensee operated a real estate brokerage business under an unlicensed name; licensee unlawfully retains deposit funds after deposit monies were delivered on the condition that same were to be disbursed only on the principal's consent and approval and said consent and approval was not given; licensee's illegal exercise of right of ownership over his principal's funds spawns conversion and constitutes a fraudulent practice; DOS fails its burden of proof to establish licensee failed to deposit trust funds in a segregated escrow account, engaged in fraud and changed business location without notice to DOS; restitution ordered in the amount of $ 1,900 plus interest, fine of $ 1,000 and any further application for licensure shall not be considered until applicant pays said fine and provides proof of payment of restimatter jurisdiction; due process; failure to appear at hearing; proper business practices; deposits; fraudulent practice; DOS fails its burden of proof; DOS has subject matter jurisdiction if at the time the disciplinary proceeding was commenced by proper service of a notice of hearing and complaint the party was (i) licensed to engage in regulated real estate activities, or (ii) an applicant for either a license or for the renewal of a license to engage in regulated real estate activities, or (iii) eligible to automatically renew the prior license under the two - year limitation provision of RPL § 441 (2); ex parte hearing is permissible upon proof of proper notice of hearing; DOS has subject matter jurisdiction where party was licensed at the time proceeding was commenced and, where at time of hearing, although not licensed was eligible to automatically apply to renew pursuant to RPL § 441 (2); licensee operated a real estate brokerage business under an unlicensed name; licensee unlawfully retains deposit funds after deposit monies were delivered on the condition that same were to be disbursed only on the principal's consent and approval and said consent and approval was not given; licensee's illegal exercise of right of ownership over his principal's funds spawns conversion and constitutes a fraudulent practice; DOS fails its burden of proof to establish licensee failed to deposit trust funds in a segregated escrow account, engaged in fraud and changed business location without notice to DOS; restitution ordered in the amount of $ 1,900 plus interest, fine of $ 1,000 and any further application for licensure shall not be considered until applicant pays said fine and provides proof of payment of restimatter jurisdiction if at the time the disciplinary proceeding was commenced by proper service of a notice of hearing and complaint the party was (i) licensed to engage in regulated real estate activities, or (ii) an applicant for either a license or for the renewal of a license to engage in regulated real estate activities, or (iii) eligible to automatically renew the prior license under the two - year limitation provision of RPL § 441 (2); ex parte hearing is permissible upon proof of proper notice of hearing; DOS has subject matter jurisdiction where party was licensed at the time proceeding was commenced and, where at time of hearing, although not licensed was eligible to automatically apply to renew pursuant to RPL § 441 (2); licensee operated a real estate brokerage business under an unlicensed name; licensee unlawfully retains deposit funds after deposit monies were delivered on the condition that same were to be disbursed only on the principal's consent and approval and said consent and approval was not given; licensee's illegal exercise of right of ownership over his principal's funds spawns conversion and constitutes a fraudulent practice; DOS fails its burden of proof to establish licensee failed to deposit trust funds in a segregated escrow account, engaged in fraud and changed business location without notice to DOS; restitution ordered in the amount of $ 1,900 plus interest, fine of $ 1,000 and any further application for licensure shall not be considered until applicant pays said fine and provides proof of payment of restimatter jurisdiction where party was licensed at the time proceeding was commenced and, where at time of hearing, although not licensed was eligible to automatically apply to renew pursuant to RPL § 441 (2); licensee operated a real estate brokerage business under an unlicensed name; licensee unlawfully retains deposit funds after deposit monies were delivered on the condition that same were to be disbursed only on the principal's consent and approval and said consent and approval was not given; licensee's illegal exercise of right of ownership over his principal's funds spawns conversion and constitutes a fraudulent practice; DOS fails its burden of proof to establish licensee failed to deposit trust funds in a segregated escrow account, engaged in fraud and changed business location without notice to DOS; restitution ordered in the amount of $ 1,900 plus interest, fine of $ 1,000 and any further application for licensure shall not be considered until applicant pays said fine and provides proof of payment of restitution