Bankruptcy & Reorganization
Creditors' Rights
Our firm's expertise includes areas such as:
fraudulent transfer analysis
negotiation and documentation of financing agreements, debt restructurings, loan workouts, cash collateral arrangements, and debtor-in-possession financing arrangements
complex bankruptcy litigation
counseling with respect to transfers of claims against or interests in bankrupt entities
formulation, negotiation and promulgation of plans of reorganization and related documents
The Firm’s creditors' rights experience also includes such areas as foreclosures and deeds-in-lieu of foreclosure; appointment of receivers; replevin, garnishment and attachment proceedings, pre-judgment and post-judgment; suits on guaranties, Uniform Commercial Code issues, and other commercial litigation matters.
Debt Relief
Our attorneys help individuals, consumers, business investors and small businesses file for bankruptcy protection under the United States Bankruptcy Code, whether it be a liquidation under Chapter 7 or a reorganization under Chapters 11 or 13. We strive to provide a high degree of service and personal care to each of our clients. Our philosophy is simple: provide competent and high quality bankruptcy services for a reasonable fee.
Riley Bennett & Egloff Law is an Indianapolis based law firm. Their attorneys have substantial experience collecting monies owed to their business clients in Indiana state courts and in federal bankruptcy courts. The firm continues to focus on maximizing their client's recovery in an fast and cost-effective manner. Their goal is to provide high quality services and they have a lengthy record of success to show for it. Contact an experience bankruptcy and reorganization lawyer today. Visit us at http://www.rbelaw.com/practice-areas/bankruptcy-reorganization
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Monday, August 6, 2012
Appeals court upholds hate crime law in Ark. case
A federal appeals court has upheld the hate crime conviction of a Green Forest man who is serving an 11-year prison term for intentionally crashing into a car carrying five Hispanic men and injuring them.
The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis ruled Monday there was sufficient evidence that Frankie Maybee and two other men deliberately attacked the other vehicle after a confrontation in a convenience store parking lot.
The court upheld the 2009 Shepard-Byrd Hate Crimes Prevention Act, a law that Congress approved under the power of the 13th Amendment, which calls for abolishing vestiges of slavery. The court found that attacking someone because of his or her ethnic background is constitutionally prohibited under the Hate Crimes Prevention Act.
The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis ruled Monday there was sufficient evidence that Frankie Maybee and two other men deliberately attacked the other vehicle after a confrontation in a convenience store parking lot.
The court upheld the 2009 Shepard-Byrd Hate Crimes Prevention Act, a law that Congress approved under the power of the 13th Amendment, which calls for abolishing vestiges of slavery. The court found that attacking someone because of his or her ethnic background is constitutionally prohibited under the Hate Crimes Prevention Act.
Thursday, June 14, 2012
Indianapolis Personal Injury Law Firm - Price Waicukauski & Riley, LLC
Personal injury accidents occur through the negligent action or inaction of another person or group. Personal injury encompasses a broad range of cases, from dangerous prescription drugs to car crashes. Any case in which one person is hurt by another person's or company’s negligent or wrongful action (or inaction) may be considered personal injury. Most personal injuries include physical, emotional, and financial hardships. If you or a family member has been the victim of personal injury, our Indianapolis personal injury lawyers and wrongful death attorneys can help you get the compensation you deserve.
Price Waicukauski & Riley Law is an Indiana based law firm acknowledged as one of the premier personal injury firms. Their attorneys are dedicated to litigating and negotiating complicated personal injury matters. Representing numerous people who have been injured or have dealt with wrong deaths, their experience gives them first rate quality. They believe in fighting for the compensation you deserve. Visit www.price-law.com to see more.
Price Waicukauski & Riley Law is an Indiana based law firm acknowledged as one of the premier personal injury firms. Their attorneys are dedicated to litigating and negotiating complicated personal injury matters. Representing numerous people who have been injured or have dealt with wrong deaths, their experience gives them first rate quality. They believe in fighting for the compensation you deserve. Visit www.price-law.com to see more.
Eugene Family Law Firm - MJM Law Office, P.C.
MJM Law Office, P.C. represents men and women throughout Lane County and surrounding areas in family law cases. Mr. Mizejewski understands the emotional turmoil that can accompany a change in your family dynamics, and he strives to protect your interests. Working in the Eugene, Oregon area, MJM Law Office represents most family law matters including: divorce, child custody, parenting time, child/spousal support, domestic violence, and juvenile dependency and delinquency. Oregon’s divorce laws are codified in Chapter 107 of the Oregon Revised Statutes. Oregon is a no-fault divorce state, which means that the only legal reason required to file a divorce is that you and your spouse cannot get along, and you see no way of settling your problems. The legal term for this is "irreconcilable differences." No evidence of fault or misconduct is required or involved, unless there has been misconduct relating to child custody.
MJM Law Office is an experienced family law firm located in Eugene, Oregon and consistently fight hard for the rights of the victims of family matters and cases. Their attorneys are able to ease one of the most emotionally draining and difficult experiences and ensure that your rights are protected. Let them help you prepare for the future and move on with your life. Visit mjmlawoffice.com for more information.
MJM Law Office is an experienced family law firm located in Eugene, Oregon and consistently fight hard for the rights of the victims of family matters and cases. Their attorneys are able to ease one of the most emotionally draining and difficult experiences and ensure that your rights are protected. Let them help you prepare for the future and move on with your life. Visit mjmlawoffice.com for more information.
Wednesday, June 13, 2012
Ex-DC Council chairman pleads guilty to 2 charges
The former chairman of the District of Columbia Council pleaded guilty Friday to lying about his income on bank loan applications, the latest blow to a city government rocked by scandal.
Kwame Brown also admitted to a misdemeanor campaign finance violation, capping a tumultuous week in which he forfeited his position as one of the city's most influential powerbrokers. His departure creates more turnover on the city's governing body and follows the resignation of another councilmember who admitted to stealing public funds earmarked for youth sports programs.
Their departures this year — coupled with a federal probe of Mayor Vincent Gray's 2010 campaign that has already produced guilty pleas from two campaign aides — have sent the district government into a tailspin. And the scandals likely aren't helping efforts to gain greater budget autonomy, much less win more voting power for the district's delegate to Congress or to secure the long-sought goal of statehood.
Kwame Brown also admitted to a misdemeanor campaign finance violation, capping a tumultuous week in which he forfeited his position as one of the city's most influential powerbrokers. His departure creates more turnover on the city's governing body and follows the resignation of another councilmember who admitted to stealing public funds earmarked for youth sports programs.
Their departures this year — coupled with a federal probe of Mayor Vincent Gray's 2010 campaign that has already produced guilty pleas from two campaign aides — have sent the district government into a tailspin. And the scandals likely aren't helping efforts to gain greater budget autonomy, much less win more voting power for the district's delegate to Congress or to secure the long-sought goal of statehood.
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
German court rules against YouTube in rights case
A German court ruled Friday that YouTube must install filters to prevent users uploading some music videos whose rights are held by a music-royalties collecting body.
Hamburg's state court sided with Germany's GEMA, which had sued Google Inc.'s YouTube unit over 12 temporarily uploaded music videos for which no licensing fees were paid. The organization represents about 60,000 German writers and musicians.
The online video platform has maintained that it bears no legal responsibility for the uploaded content — saying it checks and sometimes blocks content when users alert the firm about alleged violations of laws.
YouTube currently offers copyright holders software that allows them to identify recordings for which they hold copyright, enabling them to flag the content as infringing their rights.
The Hamburg court ruled that once an alleged violation is flagged YouTube must now apply the software to the recording to prevent further copyright infringements.
The court also told YouTube to install a new program that filters uploaded videos for possible copyright infringements according to key words — such as musicians' names and song titles — to catch versions of a song that only sound somewhat different, such as live recordings.
"The platform operator only has the obligation to block the video ... and take appropriate measures to hinder further rights violations after being notified about the copyright violation," the court said. "There is no obligation to control all videos already uploaded to the platform," it added.
Hamburg's state court sided with Germany's GEMA, which had sued Google Inc.'s YouTube unit over 12 temporarily uploaded music videos for which no licensing fees were paid. The organization represents about 60,000 German writers and musicians.
The online video platform has maintained that it bears no legal responsibility for the uploaded content — saying it checks and sometimes blocks content when users alert the firm about alleged violations of laws.
YouTube currently offers copyright holders software that allows them to identify recordings for which they hold copyright, enabling them to flag the content as infringing their rights.
The Hamburg court ruled that once an alleged violation is flagged YouTube must now apply the software to the recording to prevent further copyright infringements.
The court also told YouTube to install a new program that filters uploaded videos for possible copyright infringements according to key words — such as musicians' names and song titles — to catch versions of a song that only sound somewhat different, such as live recordings.
"The platform operator only has the obligation to block the video ... and take appropriate measures to hinder further rights violations after being notified about the copyright violation," the court said. "There is no obligation to control all videos already uploaded to the platform," it added.
Sunday, April 8, 2012
High court upholds jails' strip searches
The Supreme Court ruled Monday that jailers may subject people arrested for minor offenses to invasive strip searches, siding with security needs over privacy rights.
By a 5-4 vote, the court ruled against a New Jersey man who complained that strip searches in two county jails violated his civil rights.
Justice Anthony Kennedy said in his majority opinion for the court's conservative justices that when people are going to be put into the general jail population, "courts must defer to the judgment of correctional officials unless the record contains substantial evidence showing their policies are an unnecessary or unjustified response to problems of jail security."
In a dissenting opinion joined by the court's liberals, Justice Stephen Breyer said strip searches improperly "subject those arrested for minor offenses to serious invasions of their personal privacy." Breyer said jailers ought to have a reasonable suspicion someone may be hiding something before conducting a strip search.
Albert Florence was forced to undress and submit to strip searches following his arrest on a warrant for an unpaid fine, though the fine actually had been paid. Even if the warrant had been valid, failure to pay a fine is not a crime in New Jersey.
By a 5-4 vote, the court ruled against a New Jersey man who complained that strip searches in two county jails violated his civil rights.
Justice Anthony Kennedy said in his majority opinion for the court's conservative justices that when people are going to be put into the general jail population, "courts must defer to the judgment of correctional officials unless the record contains substantial evidence showing their policies are an unnecessary or unjustified response to problems of jail security."
In a dissenting opinion joined by the court's liberals, Justice Stephen Breyer said strip searches improperly "subject those arrested for minor offenses to serious invasions of their personal privacy." Breyer said jailers ought to have a reasonable suspicion someone may be hiding something before conducting a strip search.
Albert Florence was forced to undress and submit to strip searches following his arrest on a warrant for an unpaid fine, though the fine actually had been paid. Even if the warrant had been valid, failure to pay a fine is not a crime in New Jersey.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)