"We are very excited to welcome Tom, Mike and Gregg.  They are tremendously talented and collectively bring a wide range of labor and employment law experience, including a specialization in wage-and-hour law – an area the firm is already known for," said Guy N. Halgren, chairman of Sheppard Mullin.  "We have one of the biggest and best employment practices in California, and this group further strengthens the capabilities of one of our signature practice groups."

"We look forward to joining Sheppard Mullin, a top-notch full service firm with a strong footprint in Los Angeles and throughout California," Kaufman commented.  "I am impressed with the firm's marquee labor and employment practice, including the group's continued growth in recent years and firm management's support in growing it further."  

"I am very excited to continue to practice with Tom and Gregg at Sheppard Mullin.  We are thrilled to be part of a firm with such a distinguished labor and employment group and one with such a strong California platform," said Gallion.  "Sheppard Mullin's labor and employment practice has been well known in California for years and the firm has done an excellent job expanding this brand nationally.  The firm's unwavering commitment to client service, diversity, and its top notch practice groups outside of labor and employment were also big draws."

Kaufman is a wage/hour specialist and has handled more than eighty class actions for a wide variety of industries, including banks and mortgage lenders, hospitals, large newspapers, information technology companies, restaurants, and other retailers.  Kaufman also is experienced in litigating employment discrimination cases, including winning several jury trials.  He received a J.D. from University of California, Los Angeles in 1995.

Gallion is a seasoned employment litigator and counselor.  He has significant experience handling complex employment litigation, including California wage and hour class actions and nationwide discrimination class actions.  Gallion has also developed a significant counseling practice, regularly advising clients on the most challenging aspects of employment law, including workforce reclassifications, mergers and acquisitions, reductions in force, and high-profile investigations. He has been recognized as a Southern California Super Lawyer and was recognized by Chambers in 2009 and 2010 as a leader in his field.  Gallion received a J.D., Order of the Coif, from the University of Tennessee in 1995.

Fisch has extensive experience in all aspects of employment litigation, and has successfully defended management before federal and state courts and administrative agencies in defense of complaints for class action and single-plaintiff matters, involving wage-and-hour violations, wrongful termination, age, race, gender, and national origin discrimination, sexual harassment, retaliation, and other statutory, contract and tort-related claims, as well as in relation to union campaigns and elections.  He received a J.D. from New York University School of Law in 1996.  

Sheppard Mullin has 200 attorneys based in its Los Angeles offices and its Labor and Employment practice group includes 75 attorneys firmwide. 

About Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP

Sheppard Mullin is a full service AmLaw 100 firm with 550 attorneys in 11 offices located in the United States and Asia.  Since 1927, companies have turned to Sheppard Mullin to handle corporate and technology matters, high stakes litigation and complex financial transactions.  In the U.S., the firm's clients include more than half of the Fortune 100.  For more information, please visit www.sheppardmullin.com. 

Robert Perkinson is a professor of American studies at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. His writing has appeared in The Nation, The Progressive, and Boston Review, among other venues. Texas Tough is his first book.

Drawing on convict accounts, official records, and interviews with prisoners, guards, and lawmakers, Robert reveals the Southern roots of our present-day prison colossus. While conventional histories emphasize the North’s rehabilitative approach, he shows how the retributive and profit-driven regime of the South ultimately triumphed. Most provocatively, he argues that just as convict leasing and segregation emerged in response to Reconstruction, so today’s mass incarceration, with its vast racial disparities, must be seen as a backlash against civil rights. Illuminating for the first time the origins of America’s prison juggernaut, Texas Tough points toward a more just and humane future.

Arthur Lefkowitz currently serves on the Board of Governors of the American Revolution Round Table. Arthur lectures extensively for The New Jersey Council for the Humanities on the subject of The American Revolution. His lecture credits also include various National Park Service historical sites and The Fraunces Tavern Museum in Manhattan famous as the site where George Washington bid farewell to his officers.

His latest book, Benedict Arnold’s Army: The 1775 American Invasion of Canada During the Revolutionary War, is a fascinating account of scholarship. In one of the greatest exploits in American military history, Arnold led his famished corps through the early winter snow up and over the Appalachian Mountains to the St. Lawrence River. On the distant riverbank, Quebec beckoned. Arnold crossed his corps and besieged the British. When the second prong of the invasion arrived under General Montgomery, the officers launched a daring assault on the last day of the year upon the walled city. The objective of Arnold and his heroic corps was the fortress city of Quebec, the capital of British-held Canada. Based upon extensive primary sources and a keen understanding of the terrain, Benedict Arnold's Army examines in fascinating detail a largely unknown but important period of both the Revolution and Arnold's fascinating life.

Arthur provides key insights into Arnold's character during the earliest phase of his military career, revealing his aggressive nature, his need for recognition, his experience as a competitive businessman, and his obsession with honor. When readers close this book, they will understand for the first time what started one of Washington's favorite and most capable officers down the fateful path to treason.

Jack Girardi, Partner at Girardi & Keese, one of America’s Finest Law Firms, and lawyers, as always, brings out the most important key elements to the success of today’s guests.  He and his firm have been dedicated to working hard and getting the best possible recovery for its clients.

Girardi & Keese's mission is to provide aggressive representation of individuals and businesses who have been injured in some way, whether by physical harm, property damage, damage to business, or damage to economic interests. Girardi & Keese has two offices in California: Downtown Los Angeles and San Bernardino.

That is because the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) are increasing scrutiny of transactions that could potentially lessen competition or create a monopoly, even when those transactions do not warrant mandatory review under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act’s (Hart-Scott) jurisdictional and filing-fee thresholds for transactions triggering mandatory antitrust review.  

Glenn E. Davis, chair of the Antitrust Practice Group at Gallop, Johnson & Neuman, said, “Identifying potential antitrust issues prior to closing a deal could save companies considerable effort and expense in litigating against a federal antitrust agency over a relatively modest transaction, or permit proactive planning to structure deals to avoid or minimize risk.”

On January 19, 2010, the FTC announced that for the first time it was lowering the Hart-Scott jurisdictional and filing-fee thresholds for transactions that prompt mandatory antitrust review. The 2010 revisions decreased the basic notification threshold for all transactions from $65.2 million to $63.4 million.

Amy K. Mistler, attorney in the Antitrust Practice Group at Gallop, Johnson & Neuman, said, “While Hart-Scott only requires federal notification for transactions exceeding $63.4 million, this year the U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission have significantly increased antitrust review of transactions falling below the Hart-Scott threshold as well.”  

“The FTC and DOJ are keeping an especially close watch on mergers and acquisitions that result in one company gaining a substantial share of its relevant market,” Davis noted. For example, in January of 2010 the DOJ filed suit against Dean Foods Co., the country’s largest processor and distributor of dairy products, for antitrust violations in its $35 million acquisition of two Wisconsin dairy-processing plants from a local dairy cooperative.  The DOJ alleged that the deal was likely to substantially lessen competition in milk sales to schools and convenience stores in Wisconsin, Illinois and Michigan.

In March of 2010, the DOJ challenged a $5 million merger between the country’s two largest providers of voting machine equipment because the deal gave one company control over more than 70 percent of the voting-machine market. After filing suit to challenge the merger, the DOJ reached a settlement agreement with Election Systems & Software, Inc.  

In May 2010, the FTC filed suit against Dun & Bradstreet Corp. because the database company’s $29 million acquisition of competitor Quality Education Data (QED) gave it more than 90 percent of the market for K-12 education data.  When the suit was filed, Richard Feinstein, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition, announced: “Despite its relatively low dollar value, this transaction dramatically decreased competition in the marketplace…When Dun & Bradstreet acquired QED, it bought its closest competitor and created a monopoly. That’s going to get the FTC’s attention every time.”

For more information, contact Glenn E. Davis or Amy K. Mistler at 314.615.6000 with questions or concerns regarding federal antitrust policy or review. A complete list of the 2010 adjusted thresholds can be accessed via the FTC website at http://www.ftc.gov/os/fedreg/2010/january/1001218claytonact7a.pdf. 

Gallop, Johnson & Neuman, L.C., a full service law firm of 80 attorneys, has provided legal services to clients in diverse industries since 1976 and is one of the largest law firms in St. Louis. The firm serves public corporations; privately-held companies; entrepreneurs and start-up enterprises; individuals and families; trustees and trust beneficiaries; charities; and non-profit entities. 

For more information about Gallop, Johnson & Neuman, contact Lois A. LaDriere, Director of Marketing, at 314.615.6000 or see the website http://www.gjn.com.

The June 1 opening in the Atlanta Financial Center in Buckhead, Ga., becomes the firm's 15th location and extends the law firm’s national presence.

Joining the firm in Atlanta are a founding partner and two attorneys from the Atlanta office of another minority-owned law firm, Adorno & Yoss. Two other administrative personnel also left the Miami-based firm for Gonzalez Saggio & Harlan.

Although Gonzalez Saggio & Harlan formed in Milwaukee in 1989. In the late 1990s, the firm expanded when it opened an office in Des Moines, Iowa, and then grew further, opening offices in Cincinnati, Cleveland and Columbus, Ohio; Indianapolis; and Chicago.

More recently, it added offices on the East and West coasts, opening a New York City office in 2007 and a Los Angeles office a year ago.

Other office locations include Las Vegas.; Nashville, Tenn.; Phoenix; Washington, D.C., and Wayne, N.J.

Gonzalez Saggio has minority-owned certification from the National Minority Supplier Development Council, a required designation for companies that use minority-certified vendors and recognizes minority-owned businesses with nationwide proven capability.

Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Allan Tereshko, in ordering the new schedule in the first of 31 related cases, cited “issues attendant to a trial of this magnitude and complexity,” including pending appeals filed by the defendant of pre-trial motions. The plaintiff in the trial is Joanne Branham on behalf of her deceased husband, Franklin Delano Branham, from McCullom Lake, Illinois.

All the plaintiffs (ten have died since the suits were filed) assert that Philadelphia-based Rohm & Haas, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Dow, poisoned the air and groundwater in the McCullom Lake community with vinyl chloride (among other toxic chemicals) discharged from its chemical-manufacturing plant into an unlined waste pit near their homes. They allege that prolonged exposure caused them to contract rare malignant brain cancers and brain tumors.

Mr. Branham was diagnosed with glioblastoma, a lethal form of brain cancer, in 2004, just a few years after he and Joanne relocated to Apache Junction, Arizona, near Phoenix. He died just one month after brain surgery. 

Contacts:
Aaron J. Freiwald, Esq.
ajf@layserfreiwald.com
215.875.8000
Stephan Rosenfeld (for Layser & Freiwald)
215.514.4101
steph@idadvisors.com

Yet again, the U.S. Senate reached a dead-end this week on a possible solution to the expired estate tax. Unless action is taken soon, the federal tax -- temporarily phased completely for this year only -- will jump to a 55 percent rate with a $1 million per spouse exemption in January.

“Hope was in sight,” said Boston area attorney Hank Whittenberg, a tax and estate planning specialist, "but Congressional bickering blocked a reasonable solution. It seems that each party will continue using this as political fodder until after the mid-term elections -- and then it might be too late to take any action before the end of the year."

Members of the Senate appeared to be in general agreement of a proposal to eliminate a retroactive estate tax increase and reduce the tax to 35 percent while raising the exemption to $5 million. However, following a policy luncheon this week, key finance leaders disclosed any such agreement no longer existed.

Meanwhile, the current House proposal resurrects the 2009 estate taxes retroactively to January 1, 2010, allowing for a $3.5 million per person exemption and a flat rate of 45 percent. That proposal is exempt from the Pay-As-You-Go rules, while the lower Senate proposal would not be exempt from the Pay-Go rules.

"Either proposal is better than the limbo our clients are being left in," Whittenberg said. "Without clear indications of whether a retroactive tax will be instituted for 2010, how much of an exemption will be allowed, or what tax rates will be, those pursuing even the most basic planning face a number of uncertainties. We're still able to help families establish effective plans, but the situation could be so much better and more streamlined. Estate attorneys across the nation join me in calling on Congress to simply address this issue once and for all. Action is long overdue." 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Serving clients throughout the Northeast region, attorneys at Whittenberg Knudsen, LLP focus primarily on estate planning, business law, and probate and trust administration and litigation. Attorney Whittenberg is recognized nationally for expertise in estate and tax planning. He is a partner of Whittenberg Knudsen, LLP, a founding member of WealthCounsel (a national attorney organization of approximately 1,500 estate and wealth strategies attorneys), and a former elected board member of the Member Advisory Board of the National Network of Estate Planning Attorneys.

A state court judge is barring from evidence studies by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Illinois Department of Health, and the McHenry County Health Department in what is believed to be the largest brain cancer cluster cases in the U.S. courts. The first trial in the group of 31 cases is to begin here on June 7.

Court of Common Pleas Judge Allan Tereshko last week ruled against Rohm & Haas/Dow Chemical, the defendant, deciding that the public health epidemiological studies are “irrelevant” to the case and “can only serve as a source of confusion and misdirection.”

The brain cancer cluster victims from McCullom Lake, Illinois, are asserting that Philadelphia-based Rohm & Haas, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Dow, poisoned the air and groundwater in the McCullom Lake community with vinyl chloride (among other toxic chemicals) discharged from its chemical-manufacturing plant into an unlined waste pit near their homes. The Plaintiffs allege that prolonged exposure caused them to contract rare malignant brain cancers and brain tumors; 10 of the victims have died.

The first three brain cancer victims – next-door neighbors who were each diagnosed with malignant brain cancer within the same year – filed suit in April 2006.  Less than a month later, the McHenry Health Department, using outdated cancer-rate data (based on zip codes) for the area that includes McCullom Lake, told local residents there was no epidemiological evidence of a brain cancer cluster.  McCullom Lake’s population is only about 1,000 people; the population of its zip-code region is roughly 50,000.   Later, the state Department of Health announced that more recent data showed that there was no epidemiological evidence of a brain cancer cluster in McHenry County – population more than 300,000.  Under public pressure, the county government then asked the CDC to review the analyses of the two health departments. 

The Court’s order comes after attorneys for Rohm and Haas/Dow have claimed in pre-trial proceedings and in the news media that no public agency has found a brain cancer cluster in McCullom Lake.  Their statements rely on the flawed studies that the judge has now ruled inadmissible, according to Aaron J. Freiwald, lead trial attorney for the plaintiffs.

“The studies cited by the defendant were about as valid in this case as if you did a study of brain cancer rates in the entire state of Illinois or in all of the Western Hemisphere,” Freiwald said.  “They, too, wouldn’t tell you anything about brain cancer rates in McCullom Lake. When you do the math, using reliable, objective data, there is no escaping the fact there was and is a cancer cluster in McCullom Lake Village.”

The trial Court, in granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Preclude evidence of the studies, noted that the studies supported by the defendants “do not attempt to discretely address the pattern of brain cancer represented in the significantly smaller subset which is the Village.”

The first brain cancer cluster case to go to trial will be on behalf of Joanne Branham, who lived with her husband Franklin Delano Branham in McCullom Lake for 30 years.  Mr. Branham was diagnosed with glioblastoma, a lethal form of brain cancer, in 2004, just a few years after he and Joanne relocated to Apache Junction, Arizona, near Phoenix. He died just one month after brain surgery. 

Jury selection is scheduled for June 3rd. 

Contacts:
Aaron J. Freiwald, Esq.
ajf@layserfreiwald.com
215.875.8000
Stephan Rosenfeld (for Layser & Freiwald)
215.514.4101
steph@idadvisors.com

Perrigo’s Chairman and CEO Joseph C. Papa stated, “This verdict is an important victory for store brands, US retailers and consumers. The jury verdict confirms that statements on our wholesalers’ and retailers’ packaging, inviting consumers to compare store brand products to the higher priced national brand products are fair and legal. This kind of statement helps consumers to identify store brand products they want and helps them save as they choose the affordable, high-quality store brand option. We are gratified with this victory as another accomplishment in making quality healthcare more affordable to the US consumer.”

Perrigo was represented by Paul W. Garrity, Robert S. Friedman and Mark McGrath of Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP and John E. Villafranco, Michael C. Lynch, August Horvath, Matthew Marcotte and Joel Hankin of Kelley Drye & Warren LLP.

Perrigo Company is a leading global healthcare supplier that develops, manufactures and distributes OTC and generic prescription (Rx) pharmaceuticals, nutritional products, active pharmaceutical ingredients (API) and pharmaceutical and medical diagnostic products. The Company is the world’s largest manufacturer of OTC pharmaceutical products for the store brand market. The Company’s primary markets and locations of manufacturing and logistics operations are the United States, Australia, Israel, Mexico and the United Kingdom. Visit Perrigo on the Internet (http://www.perrigo.com).

Note: Certain statements in this press release are forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and are subject to the safe harbor created thereby. These statements relate to future events or the Company’s future financial performance and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements of the Company or its industry to be materially different from those expressed or implied by any forward-looking statements. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “could,” “would,” “should,” “expect,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential” or other comparable terminology. The Company has based these forward-looking statements on its current expectations, assumptions, estimates and projections. While the Company believes these expectations, assumptions, estimates and projections are reasonable, such forward-looking statements are only predictions and involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond the Company’s control. These and other important factors, including those discussed under “Risk Factors” in the Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended June 27, 2009, as well as the Company’s subsequent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, may cause actual results, performance or achievements to differ materially from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements in this press release are made only as of the date hereof, and unless otherwise required by applicable securities laws, the Company disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

]]> By Breaking Legal News, Breaking Legal News.

In addition, the jury ruled in Perrigo’s favor on its false advertising counterclaim against Rexall Sundown under Section 43 of the Lanham Act based on a statement used by Rexall Sundown on packaging from 2006 to 2008. The jury determined that the Rexall Sundown statement was false and misleading and awarded Perrigo damages.

Perrigo’s Chairman and CEO Joseph C. Papa stated, “This verdict is an important victory for store brands, US retailers and consumers. The jury verdict confirms that statements on our wholesalers’ and retailers’ packaging, inviting consumers to compare store brand products to the higher priced national brand products are fair and legal. This kind of statement helps consumers to identify store brand products they want and helps them save as they choose the affordable, high-quality store brand option. We are gratified with this victory as another accomplishment in making quality healthcare more affordable to the US consumer.”

Perrigo was represented by Paul W. Garrity, Robert S. Friedman and Mark McGrath of Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP and John E. Villafranco, Michael C. Lynch, August Horvath, Matthew Marcotte and Joel Hankin of Kelley Drye & Warren LLP.

Perrigo Company is a leading global healthcare supplier that develops, manufactures and distributes OTC and generic prescription (Rx) pharmaceuticals, nutritional products, active pharmaceutical ingredients (API) and pharmaceutical and medical diagnostic products. The Company is the world’s largest manufacturer of OTC pharmaceutical products for the store brand market. The Company’s primary markets and locations of manufacturing and logistics operations are the United States, Australia, Israel, Mexico and the United Kingdom. Visit Perrigo on the Internet (http://www.perrigo.com).

Note: Certain statements in this press release are forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and are subject to the safe harbor created thereby. These statements relate to future events or the Company’s future financial performance and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements of the Company or its industry to be materially different from those expressed or implied by any forward-looking statements. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “could,” “would,” “should,” “expect,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential” or other comparable terminology. The Company has based these forward-looking statements on its current expectations, assumptions, estimates and projections. While the Company believes these expectations, assumptions, estimates and projections are reasonable, such forward-looking statements are only predictions and involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond the Company’s control. These and other important factors, including those discussed under “Risk Factors” in the Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended June 27, 2009, as well as the Company’s subsequent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, may cause actual results, performance or achievements to differ materially from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements in this press release are made only as of the date hereof, and unless otherwise required by applicable securities laws, the Company disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Originally posted at Breaking Legal News. Please visit http://www.breakinglegalnews.com/.

Many predicted Congress would take action last year, long before changes – which also include a zero percent generation-skipping transfer tax and dramatically reduced gift tax rate – took place. Instead, a lengthy delay, combined with little direction on what the future tax structure might be, left estate plans across the nation in jeopardy of failure and families unsure how to address potential problems.

“The uncertainty affects all our clients,” said Boston area attorney Hank Whittenberg, a tax and estate planning specialist. Whittenberg suggested many families don’t know how to structure estate plans with so many variables in play. Some consider taking advantage of the lowered gift tax rate – the lowest it’s been since it was enacted in the 1930s – but fear a retroactive penalty if they do. Others face troubling tax challenges with investments and division of assets. “The ambiguity is terrible,” Whittenberg said. “We need something, anything to pass. Just give us some clarity,”

The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 phased the estate tax out over a 10-year period, resulting in a zero percent estate tax in 2010. If unaddressed, the tax will jump back to 2001 levels with a maximum individual exemption of $1 million and top tax rate of 55%. In 2009, the exemption was $3.5 million and rate capped at 45 percent – a far better scenario for taxpayers.

The House is thought to favor a return to 2009 levels and subject estate transfers in 2010 to a retroactive tax. But doing so may pose larger issues. “Constitutional litigators aren’t going to let this fly by without a fight. The notion of enacting a new tax is different than adjusting an existing tax,” Whittenberg said. “But whatever Congress decides, it will impact our clients and the sooner we know what to expect, the better we can meet our clients’ objectives.”

Recognized nationally for expertise in tax planning, Attorney Whittenberg began practicing law more than 15 years ago. He is a partner of Whittenberg Knudsen, LLP, a founding member of WealthCounsel (a national attorney organization of approximately 1,500 estate and wealth strategies attorneys), and a former elected board member of the Member Advisory Board of the National Network of Estate Planning Attorneys. Serving clients throughout the Northeast region, attorneys at Whittenberg Knudsen, LLP focus primarily on estate planning, business law, and probate and trust administration and litigation.