An attorney sees a court's opinion upholding e-mail privacy as potentially groundbreaking and possibly helpful to his client, the founder of a company that sold male enhancement pills.

Lawyer Martin Weinberg said Wednesday that e-mail evidence should have been excluded from the government's case against Steven Warshak, who was convicted of fraud and other crimes related to his Ohio company. It sold products including Enzyte pills, known for their "Smiling Bob" commercials.

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati threw out Warshak's 25-year sentence Tuesday. The court also said Warshak's rights were violated when investigators obtained his e-mails without warrants, but it upheld his convictions.

The Securities Law Firm of Menzer & Hill, P.A., www.suemyadvisor.com, announced today it filed an arbitration claim against NEXT Financial Group (“NEXT”), for its failure to supervise one of its financial advisors who engaged in unauthorized and excessive trading within an investor’s account.

Consistent with the arbitration claim this Firm just filed, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s (“FINRA”) BrokerCheck website, on November 10, 2010, states that NEXT “did not have a reasonable system for reviewing the transactions of its registered representatives for excessive trading.”

Gary Menzer, co-founder and managing partner of Menzer & Hill, P.A., says “the $400K fine and regulatory action FINRA assessed against NEXT is not surprising considering the activity we uncovered in the account of one of our clients and customer of NEXT.”  Investors are encouraged to contact Menzer & Hill, P.A. if they believe their accounts are being excessively traded by their brokers or are subject to other abuses.

The attorneys at the Securities Law Firm of Menzer & Hill, P.A. are dedicated to pursuing claims on behalf of investors who have suffered investment losses. 

For a free case evaluation or to discuss this matter, please contact the Securities Law Firm of Menzer & Hill, P.A., at 888-923-9223, or visit us on the web at www.suemyadvisor.com

Several Union City residents have filed a class action lawsuit against United Water on allegations that the company cheated customers by selling them useless warranties that do not cover repairs.

The warranties, which cost about $150 a year, are supposed to cover the repair of broken water pipes, sewer pipes and other items, the attorneys for three 18th Street plaintiffs, said. Although the application says "Guaranteed Acceptance" in large print, there are actually many exclusions, the attorneys said.

Multi-unit dwellings are actually excluded from the warranty, but that has not stopped United Water from marketing and selling the policies to the owners of multi-unit buildings, the lawsuit says.

The suit was recently filed in Bergen County Superior Court in Hackensack, where United Water is based.

Attorneys Carl Mayer and Bruce Afran held a press conference Tuesday at the courthouse. Afran estimated that if all New Jersey residents in a situation similar to the plaintiffs were to join the suit, and the suit was successful, it could cost United Water as much as $50 million.

More than 100 lawyers are battling for the biggest chunks of what is likely to be a multibillion-dollar settlement for Gulf of Mexico oil spill victims, jockeying for spots on the elite team that will control the plaintiffs' cases.

A judge will pick 12 to 15 lawyers to take the lead in lawsuits against BP PLC and other companies filed by thousands of fishermen, restaurateurs, hotel operators, property owners and many others over the worst offshore oil spill in U.S. history.

Competition is fierce: The candidates include a former Cabinet secretary and the lawyer who represented Al Gore in the 2000 presidential recount case. The team could get up to 15 percent of a multibillion-dollar settlement from more than 300 lawsuits that have been consolidated in New Orleans federal court. And that's on top of the typical 30 percent fee that lawyers charge their individual clients.

"This is a very lucrative position," said Brian Fitzpatrick, a Vanderbilt University law professor who has studied how attorney fees work. "You not only control the case but you get a big percentage off the top. This will attract all the big fish."

Applications from 112 attorneys have been filed with U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier, who will announce his choices in the coming weeks. Top trial lawyers from around the nation are represented, many of them veterans of similar high-profile cases such as Toyota's sudden acceleration problems and the troubled painkiller Vioxx.

If approached by your broker (or financial advisor or insurance agent) to purchase an indexed annuity there are some things an investor should consider.  First, an indexed annuity (also known as, equity-indexed annuity or fixed indexed annuity) is a fixed annuity, either immediate or deferred, that earns interest or provides benefits that are often linked to an equity or stock market index.  In 2008, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC), an association of state insurance regulatory officials, issued a buyers guide to indexed annuities, which provides educational information on indexed annuties.  Did your broker provide you with one?  The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) also published an investor alert on indexed annuities.

Unscrupulous brokers take advantage of naïve, unsuspecting investors, especially seniors, and heavily pitch purchases into indexed annuities.  Often they will tout indexed annuities as being better than bank CDs and will convince investors to liquidate their CDs to buy an indexed annuity.  Investors with variable annuities are often approached by a broker to buy indexed annuities, touting them as being safer than then variable annuity, which has investment choices whose principal can be subject to market volatility.  Did the broker recommend you to consider moving money into the fixed account of the variable annuity?  If not, the broker is probably only motivated to earn a commission which can be as high as 5%.  Another fraudulent tactic is to entice an investor with an “upfront bonus” to buy an indexed annuity but what a devious broker may not tell you is that often you would have to annuitize the annuity in order to take advantage of the bonus benefit – it’s not free money, there’s a cost to every benefit in an annuity.  Other brokers may convince you that the annuity they sold you earlier is now out-of-date and try to sell you another annuity claiming to have “better and more features.”

http://suemyadvisor.com/blog/investor-alerts/fraudulent-practices-indexed-annuities-61