Pastore & Dailey attorneys successfully obtained a favorable agreement on behalf of a client in a dispute with a former hedge fund employer in a private EEOC complaint. The complaint alleged employment discrimination and sexual harassment. This favorable settlement prevented litigation in federal court and resulted in considerable compensation to our client.
Category: News
Pastore & Dailey Represented Mortgage Services Company in Financing Transaction
Pastore & Dailey represented a mortgage servicing company in a financing transaction designed to allow the company to service a multinational bank. The transaction required expert and careful drafting and negotiation as it involved affiliates as well. Goodwin Proctor’s San Francisco office represented the lender.
Pastore & Dailey Represented Mortgage Services Company in Financing Transaction
Pastore & Dailey represented a mortgage servicing company in a financing transaction designed to allow the company to service a multinational bank. The transaction required expert and careful drafting and negotiation as it involved affiliates as well. Goodwin Proctor’s San Francisco office represented the lender.
Private-Equity Firm Manaer Prevails in Federal District Court Against the Milstein Family
Private- equity firm manager Dean Barr, along with his attorneys at Carmody Torrance Sandak & Hennessey LLP, successfully defended claims brought against him by the Milstein Family, the founders of Burlington Coat Factory and investors in Mr. Barr’s firm. The Milsteins had invested several millions of dollars in the fund before its ultimate decline, and claimed that the risks associated with the investment were misrepresented to them. The Connecticut District Court disagreed, and ultimately found that the Milsteins were sophisticated investors, were aware of the risks related to their investment and dismissed the claims brought against Dean Barr. Mr. Barr has retained Pastore & Dailey to bring claims of his own in Connecticut State Court against the Milsteins as well as his former partners.
The full article can be read here:
Pastore & Dailey Successfully Represents Broker Dealer Regarding Errors in Filings
Pastore & Dailey successfully obtained a favorable stipulation and agreement with the Connecticut Department of Banking on behalf of a large national registered broker-dealer. The Department of Banking conducted an investigation into the broker dealer and concluded that the broker-dealer has failed to file a timely U5, included misinformation on a U4, and failed to renew its registration for the calendar year. Following our successful representation, the broker dealer was able to amend its filings and receive a favorable stipulation and agreement with the Department of Banking.
Pastore & Dailey Successfully Counters Motion to Set Aside Judgement
In February 2016, Pastore & Dailey successfully secured a permanent injunction against Defendant Felder for infringement of Van De Velde’s “PRIMADONNA” trademark via a default judgment. Van De Velde is a global retailer of luxury clothing with its headquarters in Belgium. The dispute, which occurred in the Southern District of Florida, resulted in the award of attorneys fees and costs to Van De Velde.
However, on September 29, 2017, more than a year after the judgment, Defendant Felder moved to set aside the default judgment. Pastore & Dailey countered Defendant’s motion as untimely. On March 12, 2018, the Southern District of Florida issued its decision on the motions denying Defendant’s motion to set aside the default judgment and reinforcing the award to Van De Velde. This victory was a collaborative effort between the attorneys at Pastore & Dailey.
Pastore & Dailey Client Gains National Recognition for Co-Working Venture
Pastore & Dailey Client, and former WeWork Executive, Frank Bistrian has gained national recognition by the Wall Street Journal for his new Co-Working venture Network Group LLC.
See Cat Zakrzewski, Former WeWork Executive Launches a Co-Working Company of His Own, Wall Street Journal (Feb. 22, 2018).
Pastore & Dailey Wins Suitability Arbitration for Investor
A Pastore & Dailey client recently prevailed in a FINRA Arbitration against a broker dealer firm regarding compliance failures and unsuitable investments solicited by the broker. The arbitration took place in Houston, Texas. Pastore & Dailey was co-counsel with a well known former general counsel of a large securities firm. Our client asserted claims arising from oil and gas master limited partnerships for breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, failure to supervise, unsuitability, misrepresentation, violation of the Florida Securities and Investor Protection Act, Fla. Stat. § 517.301, and breach of contract. Our client was ultimately awarded both damages and attorneys fees.
CBA Tax Section Federal Business Tax Report
There have been reported several incidents of practitioners being surprised by the new third party authentication procedure adopted by the IRS in October of 2017, effective January 3, and published in the IRM today at Section 21.1.3.3.
In response to several security compromises, IRS has revised its authentication process for third parties who contact the IRS on behalf of a taxpayer.
The former process included the requirement at the IRS ask for the taxpayer’s name and TIN and also the representative’s name and CAF number.
The new procedure, in addition to requesting the taxpayer’s name and TIN, calls for the agent to request the representative’s:
- Name
- CAF Number
- Social Security Number
- Date of Birth
Some practitioners are reporting that the new procedure is not being uniformly applied, and authentication requests for information such as the names, Social Security numbers and dates of birth of the representative’s children are being made, presumably to cross check that information with the representatives own tax returns.
The practitioner should have on file a current Form 2848 for the taxpayer that covers the tax periods and tax forms in question. Note that IRS will not accept versions of Form 2848 from before the October 2011 version. While the IRS will still provide assistance to third party representatives who file Forms 2848 from before October of 2011, the older form cannot be loaded into CAF.
Representatives of taxpayers using Form 8821, Tax Information Authorization, will, apparently, be subject to the same authentication requirements. Recall that Form 8821 does not empower the designee to represent the taxpayer before the IRS.
Suspension of Trading for Hong Kong Blockchain Firm
Last week, on January 8, 2018, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) suspended trading of UBI Blockchain Internet, Ltd. (“UBI”) stock until January 22, 2018.[1] UBI, formerly JA Energy, is a Hong Kong-based technology firm focusing on the Blockchain technology underlying cryptocurrency.[2] Coincidently, one of the focuses of this over-the-counter traded company is on the application of the distributed ledger technology to trace food and drug products from the producer to the consumer.[3] According to UBI’s legal counsel, the motivation behind this innovation is to prevent counterfeit products.[4]
The erratic behavior of UBI shares caught the eyes of the SEC in early December as the company’s stock sky-rocketed in price. On December 1, 2017, shares of UBI were trading at $6.12, and just eighteen days later, the value had swiftly rose to $83.00 per share, and even selling as high as $115.00 per share.[5] The subsequent decline in value was just as precipitous. Within a week of its peak, the value of UBI stock had fallen to $29.00 per share and further down to $22.00 per share before the close of the 2017 year. The freeze on trading allows the SEC an opportunity to investigate the causes of the sudden and drastic changes in the firm’s stock activity.
The SEC is tasked with closely monitoring the trading activity of publicly traded companies. Spikes in value and in the volume of trades within the market, like those seen here with UBI, raise red flags for the SEC to act upon. Pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the SEC may temporarily suspend the trading in particular securities pending an investigation.[6] In the case of UBI, the commission cited two distinct justifications for its suspension: concerns with (1) the accuracy of assertions dating back to September 2017 regarding the company’s business operations; and (2) the unusual and unexplained market activity in the company’s Class A common stock since November 2017.[7] It remains to be seen whether the cause of the fluctuation was caused by SEC violations or by a frenzy as the market responded to UBI’s pharmaceutical application of the Blockchain technology.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
[1] U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Securities Exchange Act od 1934: Release No. 82452, https://www.sec.gov/litigation/suspensions/2018/34-82452.pdf (last visited January 14, 2018, 3:05 PM).
[2] Matt Robinson, Crypto Stock That Surged 900% in 2017 is Hit With SEC Halt, Bloomberg (Jan. 8, 2018, 10:39 AM), https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-08/crypto-stock-that-surged-900-percent-in-2017-gets-sec-suspension.
[3] Cory Johnson, How One Mysterious Startup is Riding the Bitcoin Wave, Bloomberg (Dec. 27, 2017, 12:17 PM), https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-27/bedwetting-to-blockchain-how-one-startup-rode-the-bitcoin-craze.
[4] Id.
[5] UBI Blockchain Internet Ltd., Marketwatch, https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/ubia/charts (last visited January 14, 2018, 3:07 PM).
[6] See supra note 1.
[7] See supra note 1.