Labaton Sucharow LLP announced a nationwide class action settlement
valued at $10 million with All Market, Inc., the leading manufacturer
and seller of coconut water in the United States.
Coconut water is one of the fastest growing beverages sold in the United
States. Vita Coco markets its coconut water as “super-hydrating,”
“nutrient-packed,” “mega-electrolyte,” and healthy “super-water.”
Labaton Sucharow filed a proposed nationwide class action, styled
Fishbein et al., v. All Market Inc., No. 11-cv-05580, against the
company after an independent study revealed that Vita Coco’s products do
not contain the electrolyte levels indicated on the products’ labels.
The class action complaint alleges that Vita Coco’s coconut water
products are mislabeled and do not hydrate more effectively than less
expensive sports drinks.
Kellie Lerner, one of the attorneys in the action, stated: “For the
millions of consumers who pay for products that claim to improve their
health, this settlement sends a message that companies will be held
accountable when they exaggerate or misstate the health benefits of
their products.”
Labaton Sucharow LLP, with offices in New York City and Wilmington,
Delaware, is one of the country’s premier law firms representing
institutional investors in class actions and complex securities
litigation, as well as consumers and businesses in class actions seeking
to recover damages for anticompetitive or deceptive practices. The Firm
has been a champion of investor and consumer rights for close to 50
years, seeking recovery of losses and the adoption of necessary
corporate governance reforms to protect investors, businesses and
consumers. Labaton Sucharow has been recognized for its excellence by
the courts and peers. More information about Labaton Sucharow is
available at www.labaton.com.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
US Supreme Court won't permit Ohio execution
The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday added another wrinkle to Ohio's
debate over how strictly the state's lethal injection procedures should
be followed.
The court without comment refused to allow the execution of a condemned killer of an elderly couple to proceed, an execution delayed by federal courts over concerns that the state continues to deviate too often from its written rules for lethal injection.
Both the state and the inmate's attorneys were trying Wednesday to determine what comes next, but the decision is likely to further delay executions even though Ohio's procedures have never been ruled unconstitutional.
The court denied the state's appeal of decisions in inmate Charles Lorraine's case that said Ohio had strayed too far from its execution policies to be trusted to carry out the death sentence for now.
Federal courts must monitor every Ohio execution "because the State cannot be trusted to fulfill its otherwise lawful duty to execute inmates sentenced to death," the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last month.
The court upheld an earlier decision by U.S. District Court Judge Gregory Frost that chided Ohio for not following his warnings to adhere strictly to their policies.
The court without comment refused to allow the execution of a condemned killer of an elderly couple to proceed, an execution delayed by federal courts over concerns that the state continues to deviate too often from its written rules for lethal injection.
Both the state and the inmate's attorneys were trying Wednesday to determine what comes next, but the decision is likely to further delay executions even though Ohio's procedures have never been ruled unconstitutional.
The court denied the state's appeal of decisions in inmate Charles Lorraine's case that said Ohio had strayed too far from its execution policies to be trusted to carry out the death sentence for now.
Federal courts must monitor every Ohio execution "because the State cannot be trusted to fulfill its otherwise lawful duty to execute inmates sentenced to death," the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last month.
The court upheld an earlier decision by U.S. District Court Judge Gregory Frost that chided Ohio for not following his warnings to adhere strictly to their policies.
Friday, March 2, 2012
The Law Firm of Levi & Korsinsky, LLP Launches an Investigation
Levi & Korsinsky is investigating potential claims on behalf of
purchasers of Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation securities
concerning possible violations of federal securities laws.
On January 5, 2012, Integra LifeSciences announced that it received a warning letter from the United States Food and Drug Administration related to quality systems and compliance issues found at its collagen manufacturing facility located in Plainsboro, New Jersey in August 2011. The Company also announced it expects total revenues in the fourth quarter to be approximately 3% below the low end of previously issued guidance. Upon this news, Integra LifeSciences stock fell 20% on January 6, 2012 to close at $24.49 per share; the stock continues to fall, closing on January 10, 2012 at $23.22 per share.
If you own Integra LifeSciences stock and wish to obtain additional information about the investigation and your legal rights, please contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. either via email at jlevi@zlk.com or by telephone at (212) 363-7500, toll-free: (877) 363-5972, or visit http://www.zlk.com/integra-lifesciences-holdings-iart.html .
Levi & Korsinsky has expertise in prosecuting investor securities litigation and extensive experience in actions involving financial fraud and represents investors throughout the nation, concentrating its practice in securities and shareholder litigation. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.
www.zlk.com
On January 5, 2012, Integra LifeSciences announced that it received a warning letter from the United States Food and Drug Administration related to quality systems and compliance issues found at its collagen manufacturing facility located in Plainsboro, New Jersey in August 2011. The Company also announced it expects total revenues in the fourth quarter to be approximately 3% below the low end of previously issued guidance. Upon this news, Integra LifeSciences stock fell 20% on January 6, 2012 to close at $24.49 per share; the stock continues to fall, closing on January 10, 2012 at $23.22 per share.
If you own Integra LifeSciences stock and wish to obtain additional information about the investigation and your legal rights, please contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. either via email at jlevi@zlk.com or by telephone at (212) 363-7500, toll-free: (877) 363-5972, or visit http://www.zlk.com/integra-lifesciences-holdings-iart.html .
Levi & Korsinsky has expertise in prosecuting investor securities litigation and extensive experience in actions involving financial fraud and represents investors throughout the nation, concentrating its practice in securities and shareholder litigation. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.
www.zlk.com
14 people arrested during Supreme Court protest
Fourteen people have been arrested at the Supreme Court for protesting
the resumption of the use of the death penalty in the United States.
Court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg announced the arrests soon after the high court began hearing oral arguments on Tuesday. Those who were arrested will likely be charged with illegally demonstrating at the Supreme Court. Such activities are banned on the court's plaza looking out toward the U.S. Capitol.
The protests are timed to mark the year of the 35th anniversary of the execution of Gary Gilmore, who protesters said was the first person executed under the Supreme Court's upholding of the death penalty in 1976.
Protesters say there have been 1,277 more executions since then, with at least three more scheduled for this month.
Court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg announced the arrests soon after the high court began hearing oral arguments on Tuesday. Those who were arrested will likely be charged with illegally demonstrating at the Supreme Court. Such activities are banned on the court's plaza looking out toward the U.S. Capitol.
The protests are timed to mark the year of the 35th anniversary of the execution of Gary Gilmore, who protesters said was the first person executed under the Supreme Court's upholding of the death penalty in 1976.
Protesters say there have been 1,277 more executions since then, with at least three more scheduled for this month.
Court rejects appeals in student speech cases
The U.S. Supreme Court has passed up a pair of cases for the online age —
whether schools may censor students who are at home when they create
online attacks against school officials and other students.
The justices on Tuesday rejected appeals from Pennsylvania and West Virginia involving questions about the limits on criticism from students and where the authority of school officials ends.
The high court decision left standing lower court rulings that two Pennsylvania students cannot be disciplined at school for parodies of their principals that they created on home computers and posted online.
In the West Virginia case, an appeals court upheld the suspension of a student who created a web page that suggested another student had a sexually transmitted disease, and invited classmates to comment.
Lawyers on both sides were disappointed the high court chose not to step into the fray over student speech posted online, as federal court judges have issued a broad range of opinions on the subject.
The justices on Tuesday rejected appeals from Pennsylvania and West Virginia involving questions about the limits on criticism from students and where the authority of school officials ends.
The high court decision left standing lower court rulings that two Pennsylvania students cannot be disciplined at school for parodies of their principals that they created on home computers and posted online.
In the West Virginia case, an appeals court upheld the suspension of a student who created a web page that suggested another student had a sexually transmitted disease, and invited classmates to comment.
Lawyers on both sides were disappointed the high court chose not to step into the fray over student speech posted online, as federal court judges have issued a broad range of opinions on the subject.
Law Firm Website Design Companies: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly
The Good:
All good law firm website design companies should:
- Have specialized and skilled website designers in house. Experience is key in understanding the professional look needed for attorneys and their law firms.
- Have a user-friendly and reliable content management system (CMS) to update the website.
- Be familiar with all the latest Search Engine Optimization techniques in order to gain maximum potential for your website to rank at the top of search results.
- Offer a robust web-hosting and maintenance plan. Law firms are busy as it is and having the website design company not only host, but maintain the website is an absolute plus.
- Not charge for any unnecessary bells and whistles.
- Have reliable testimonials that can prove real client satisfaction.
- Provide good customer support service. Exceptional customer service should be all about the customer satisfaction. They should be able to answer all inquiries in a swift and thorough manner and reduce the technical website design jargon to a level anyone could understand.
- Charge you by project base (a straight forward, one time website design cost instead of monthly payments).
I know the pressing question on every one's mind is, well, how do you know? Spending extra money doesn't necessarily mean better. There were quite a few law firm website design agencies in this category, asking for a pricier sum and delivering decent products, however; there are reasonably priced website design companies who deliver even better websites. Of course, my opinion is mine. But if you want your investment in a website design company to be worthwhile, just heed my advice. Remember, I had to ask for an extension on my task in order to really understand what separates the good from the bad.
The Bad:
Just like there is yin to yang, black to white, and hot to cold, there unfortunately has to be the good law firm website design companies to the bad law firm website design companies. I don't know about you, but doing the research alone to complete my task took a lot of time. You know how that saying goes, "Time is money and money is time"? Well sure, this is one of the big differences from the good website design companies versus the bad website design companies.The bad law firm website design company:- Includes a contract that obligates you to pay an overpriced rate for a law firm website design or a technology license fee on a monthly basis. I personally don't like contracts. I mean, it binds me and limits my flexibility if I'm unhappy with a company's services. This can pose a problem later if you decide your business and law firm needs a change and want to part ways.
- Has many over-priced service fees. They will milk you with all kinds of unnecessary website features that you weren’t even aware of.
- Is able to deliver a decent website design layout but seem to get lost in their cookie cutter design elements. Every client's website may look clean and professional but lacks the uniqueness and branding of why clients should choose THEIR law firm instead of the firm across the street (whose website looks and repeats the exact same information as yours by the way).
- Shows poor SEO track records that give you a slim to none chance to rank at the highest position on top search engines like Google, Yahoo!, AOL and Bing.
Let's get down to the nitty-gritty and do a little math here:For the purposes of this article, we will be purchasing a website for a small firm with 20 attorneys and 2 offices. And if we break down the website design costs from the good and the bad, you can immediately see the major downfalls of the bad.The Good Law Firm Web Design Company: 1-time website design cost averaging $5,000 - from a reputable GOOD law firm website design company. And you get to own it!
The Bad Law Firm Web Design Company: An annual 1-year license cost averaging well over $6,000 that you must continuously keep paying on a year to year basis. If you do the math here, you can say you're wasting an incredible amount of money that can go to other marketing resources to help further your business. Since your website will end up costing you too much, you will have a limited budget for marketing campaigns through organic SEM or PPC.With that said, generally "bad" website design companies are hard to distinguish because they will deliver a decent product but in turn try to take advantage of prices. In this case, everyone should be cautious and careful. This especially may be a slippery slope for new start-up firms who believe that only the best law firm websites will be delivered by paying a huge amount of money. The Bad more than likely will result in a poor return on investment. To prevent getting stuck with the bad law firm website design company there is a golden rule to remember: just because it's out there, doesn't mean it's the best! Don't get sucked into paying for overpriced fees for a law firm website design that may not even be the best.
The Ugly
And (finally!) we get to talk about the law firm website design company that has every aspect of just plain ugly. No matter how much you end up paying for it - or even if it's completely free - don't be a victim of building a law firm website that will make your firm look "unsophisticated", "inexperienced", and "out-dated". Yes, these words usually do a good job of scaring off potential clients who come to visit your website. Many potential clients will walk away and go to other law firms that they see as better competitors. However, it's surprising to see how many law firms still go along with ugly law firm website design companies. Some think having any website would benefit their business, but little do they know... it is doing quite the opposite.Business is all about status and if you have a law firm website that costs your business because it's ugly?...well, that is literally just UGLY.
Most people are always on the go, have minimal time to fit everything in their schedule and are not patient. Web users form first impressions of web pages in a matter of 50 milliseconds, according to researchers. Human beings are very visual creatures, so in a blink of an eye, we will make an instantaneous judgment of a websites "visual appeal". We like things that are aesthetically appealing and through the "halo effect", first impressions can color subsequent judgments of perceived credibility, usability, and professionalism. Ultimately these factors influence a web user's purchasing decisions and whether we want to use your law firm to represent our needs.First impressions count immensely in the legal industry and should be considered in law firm website design. If the website design is difficult to read, intrusive, or poorly signposted, your visitors will go elsewhere. We've all experienced trying to navigate through a less-than-friendly website and reading a screen that strains your eyes versus printed paper. We get impatient quick- it's because we're only human!Remember, law firm websites are all about providing information and services, not for over-the-top advertisement!
Below are what some typical ugly website designs for law firm websites would consist of:
- Excess usage of generic graphics; basically this constitutes anything you can find in clip art like Lady Justice, the gavel or scales of justice.
- Text that is too small to read
- Multiple items that blink or animate - this causes too much distraction!
- Text crowding against the left edge
- Text that is stretched all the way across the page
- Multiple frame scroll bars in the middle of a page
- Unclear and overly complex navigation
- Poor color combination of text and background that make the text hard to read
- Orphan pages - where given links do not link back to where they came from and give no identification
- Any website design look that is extremely out-dated and looks as if it were dug up from a late nineties time capsule
A clean, professional look is a MUST for law firm websites - don't get sucked into the ugly website category that will cost your business (even if it's FREE!), I like to view ugly websites comparable to that of a parasite, where the website design company benefits at the expense of your law firm and business. In this case, your law firm is being harmed. Some elements make a law firm website design good, some make them bad, and some make them ugly.
The great line between these elements can determine whether your website is:
- Interesting or boring
- A good design or bad design
- Has good color or bad color
- Has a good layout or bad layout
- Is imaginative or unimaginative
Though my research was fairly time-consuming, I did my due diligence and have found one particular law firm website design company that stood out from the competitors. “Law Promo" impressed me with their eye-pleasing design skills, SEO capabilities, customer service and overall pricing, and was the agency that I recommended to my firm.
I urge you to do your own research and wish you the best of luck on your law firm website design company search and here I leave you with my two cents on what separates The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly in the world of law firm website design.
All good law firm website design companies should:
- Have specialized and skilled website designers in house. Experience is key in understanding the professional look needed for attorneys and their law firms.
- Have a user-friendly and reliable content management system (CMS) to update the website.
- Be familiar with all the latest Search Engine Optimization techniques in order to gain maximum potential for your website to rank at the top of search results.
- Offer a robust web-hosting and maintenance plan. Law firms are busy as it is and having the website design company not only host, but maintain the website is an absolute plus.
- Not charge for any unnecessary bells and whistles.
- Have reliable testimonials that can prove real client satisfaction.
- Provide good customer support service. Exceptional customer service should be all about the customer satisfaction. They should be able to answer all inquiries in a swift and thorough manner and reduce the technical website design jargon to a level anyone could understand.
- Charge you by project base (a straight forward, one time website design cost instead of monthly payments).
I know the pressing question on every one's mind is, well, how do you know? Spending extra money doesn't necessarily mean better. There were quite a few law firm website design agencies in this category, asking for a pricier sum and delivering decent products, however; there are reasonably priced website design companies who deliver even better websites. Of course, my opinion is mine. But if you want your investment in a website design company to be worthwhile, just heed my advice. Remember, I had to ask for an extension on my task in order to really understand what separates the good from the bad.
The Bad:
Just like there is yin to yang, black to white, and hot to cold, there unfortunately has to be the good law firm website design companies to the bad law firm website design companies. I don't know about you, but doing the research alone to complete my task took a lot of time. You know how that saying goes, "Time is money and money is time"? Well sure, this is one of the big differences from the good website design companies versus the bad website design companies.The bad law firm website design company:- Includes a contract that obligates you to pay an overpriced rate for a law firm website design or a technology license fee on a monthly basis. I personally don't like contracts. I mean, it binds me and limits my flexibility if I'm unhappy with a company's services. This can pose a problem later if you decide your business and law firm needs a change and want to part ways.
- Has many over-priced service fees. They will milk you with all kinds of unnecessary website features that you weren’t even aware of.
- Is able to deliver a decent website design layout but seem to get lost in their cookie cutter design elements. Every client's website may look clean and professional but lacks the uniqueness and branding of why clients should choose THEIR law firm instead of the firm across the street (whose website looks and repeats the exact same information as yours by the way).
- Shows poor SEO track records that give you a slim to none chance to rank at the highest position on top search engines like Google, Yahoo!, AOL and Bing.
Let's get down to the nitty-gritty and do a little math here:For the purposes of this article, we will be purchasing a website for a small firm with 20 attorneys and 2 offices. And if we break down the website design costs from the good and the bad, you can immediately see the major downfalls of the bad.The Good Law Firm Web Design Company: 1-time website design cost averaging $5,000 - from a reputable GOOD law firm website design company. And you get to own it!
The Bad Law Firm Web Design Company: An annual 1-year license cost averaging well over $6,000 that you must continuously keep paying on a year to year basis. If you do the math here, you can say you're wasting an incredible amount of money that can go to other marketing resources to help further your business. Since your website will end up costing you too much, you will have a limited budget for marketing campaigns through organic SEM or PPC.With that said, generally "bad" website design companies are hard to distinguish because they will deliver a decent product but in turn try to take advantage of prices. In this case, everyone should be cautious and careful. This especially may be a slippery slope for new start-up firms who believe that only the best law firm websites will be delivered by paying a huge amount of money. The Bad more than likely will result in a poor return on investment. To prevent getting stuck with the bad law firm website design company there is a golden rule to remember: just because it's out there, doesn't mean it's the best! Don't get sucked into paying for overpriced fees for a law firm website design that may not even be the best.
The Ugly
And (finally!) we get to talk about the law firm website design company that has every aspect of just plain ugly. No matter how much you end up paying for it - or even if it's completely free - don't be a victim of building a law firm website that will make your firm look "unsophisticated", "inexperienced", and "out-dated". Yes, these words usually do a good job of scaring off potential clients who come to visit your website. Many potential clients will walk away and go to other law firms that they see as better competitors. However, it's surprising to see how many law firms still go along with ugly law firm website design companies. Some think having any website would benefit their business, but little do they know... it is doing quite the opposite.Business is all about status and if you have a law firm website that costs your business because it's ugly?...well, that is literally just UGLY.
Most people are always on the go, have minimal time to fit everything in their schedule and are not patient. Web users form first impressions of web pages in a matter of 50 milliseconds, according to researchers. Human beings are very visual creatures, so in a blink of an eye, we will make an instantaneous judgment of a websites "visual appeal". We like things that are aesthetically appealing and through the "halo effect", first impressions can color subsequent judgments of perceived credibility, usability, and professionalism. Ultimately these factors influence a web user's purchasing decisions and whether we want to use your law firm to represent our needs.First impressions count immensely in the legal industry and should be considered in law firm website design. If the website design is difficult to read, intrusive, or poorly signposted, your visitors will go elsewhere. We've all experienced trying to navigate through a less-than-friendly website and reading a screen that strains your eyes versus printed paper. We get impatient quick- it's because we're only human!Remember, law firm websites are all about providing information and services, not for over-the-top advertisement!
Below are what some typical ugly website designs for law firm websites would consist of:
- Excess usage of generic graphics; basically this constitutes anything you can find in clip art like Lady Justice, the gavel or scales of justice.
- Text that is too small to read
- Multiple items that blink or animate - this causes too much distraction!
- Text crowding against the left edge
- Text that is stretched all the way across the page
- Multiple frame scroll bars in the middle of a page
- Unclear and overly complex navigation
- Poor color combination of text and background that make the text hard to read
- Orphan pages - where given links do not link back to where they came from and give no identification
- Any website design look that is extremely out-dated and looks as if it were dug up from a late nineties time capsule
A clean, professional look is a MUST for law firm websites - don't get sucked into the ugly website category that will cost your business (even if it's FREE!), I like to view ugly websites comparable to that of a parasite, where the website design company benefits at the expense of your law firm and business. In this case, your law firm is being harmed. Some elements make a law firm website design good, some make them bad, and some make them ugly.
The great line between these elements can determine whether your website is:
- Interesting or boring
- A good design or bad design
- Has good color or bad color
- Has a good layout or bad layout
- Is imaginative or unimaginative
Though my research was fairly time-consuming, I did my due diligence and have found one particular law firm website design company that stood out from the competitors. “Law Promo" impressed me with their eye-pleasing design skills, SEO capabilities, customer service and overall pricing, and was the agency that I recommended to my firm.
I urge you to do your own research and wish you the best of luck on your law firm website design company search and here I leave you with my two cents on what separates The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly in the world of law firm website design.
Pacman Jones pleads guilty to disorderly conduct
Cincinnati Bengals cornerback Adam "Pacman" Jones pleaded guilty Wednesday to a misdemeanor charge of disorderly conduct.
Jones entered the plea in Hamilton County Municipal Court just as his non-jury trial was scheduled to begin. A second misdemeanor charge of resisting arrest was dismissed in a plea agreement with prosecutors.
Judge Brad Greenberg ordered Jones to serve a year of probation, complete 50 hours of community service and pay a $250 fine plus court costs. Jones could have received a maximum jail sentence of 30 days.
Jones, 28, was accused in court documents of being disorderly, shouting profanities and trying to pull away as officers arrested him at a downtown bar in July.
At the time, Jones was on probation in Las Vegas in connection with a 2007 no contest plea to a strip club melee that left three people wounded. He was ordered in November to perform an additional 75 hours of community service for violating that probation with the Cincinnati arrest.
Jones entered the plea in Hamilton County Municipal Court just as his non-jury trial was scheduled to begin. A second misdemeanor charge of resisting arrest was dismissed in a plea agreement with prosecutors.
Judge Brad Greenberg ordered Jones to serve a year of probation, complete 50 hours of community service and pay a $250 fine plus court costs. Jones could have received a maximum jail sentence of 30 days.
Jones, 28, was accused in court documents of being disorderly, shouting profanities and trying to pull away as officers arrested him at a downtown bar in July.
At the time, Jones was on probation in Las Vegas in connection with a 2007 no contest plea to a strip club melee that left three people wounded. He was ordered in November to perform an additional 75 hours of community service for violating that probation with the Cincinnati arrest.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)