Supreme Court extends whistle-blower protections under anti-fraud law

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Tuesday expanded protections for whistle blowers covered by an anti-fraud law passed following the collapse of energy giant Enron, ruling outside accountants, auditors and lawyers cannot be fired or punished for exposing fraud.

The 6-3 decision will have an effect in the mutual fund and financial services industries, the court said, because they rely heavily on outside contractors and advisers.

The case before the court arose when two employees of a firm that did research for the Fidelity family of mutual funds revealed the funds were overstating expenses. They alleged that in some instances, Fidelity was operating “veiled index funds” while collecting a fee as though they were actively managed.

The two employees say they were reprimanded and ultimately dismissed for having exposed this fraud. When they sued their employer under the Sarbannes-Oxley Act, they lost when an appeals court ruled the law’s protection for whistle blowers covered only employees of public firms, not outside advisers and accountants.

In their appeal to the high court, they said this would reimpose “the very code of silence” that allowed massive frauds such as Enron to occur.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, speaking for the court, said Congress meant to broadly protect whistle blowers who could expose wrongdoing. It made no sense, she said, to think “a Congress, prompted by the Enron debacle, would exclude from whistle-blower protection countless professionals equipped to bring fraud on investors to a halt.”

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Stephen G. Breyer and Elena Kagan agreed.

A dissent was filed by Justice Sonia Sotomayor who said the law covered only “employees” of public companies, not outside advisers. Justices Anthony Kennedy and Samuel Alito agreed with her.

The whistle-blower provisions in the law protect those who reveal frauds from retaliation, and they also allow them to receive a share of money that is recovered if a fraud is exposed.

Source:http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-supreme-court-scotus-whistle-blower-20140304,0,1883091.story#axzz2wMFSSInO

Supreme Court Divided on Limiting Securities Fraud Suits

The Supreme Court appeared divided into three camps on whether to overrule or alter a long-standing legal precedent that provides the foundation for many class-action lawsuits alleging securities fraud.

The court heard an hour-long oral argument in a case involving Halliburton Co. and whether to overturn a 1988 Supreme Court decision which held that investors in securities-fraud lawsuits don’t have to prove they relied upon any misleading statements by a company.

By the end of an hour-long argument session, it appeared some justices were looking for a middle-ground to resolve the case.

The court, in Basic v. Levinson, said it was enough that investors rely on the integrity of stock prices, which are a reflection of publicly available company information. That legal doctrine, known as fraud-on-the-market, has provided a basis for allowing investors to pool their claims into one large class-action lawsuit. Read the full WSJ story here.

If the court abandons its earlier precedent it could make it difficult for investors to bring class-actions alleging they were misled.

The court’s four liberal justices, including Justice Elena Kagan, voiced resistance Wednesday to overturning the 1988 decision.

Justice Kagan said Congress has been active in passing securities-law reforms and has had “every opportunity” to overrule or alter the court’s Basic decision, but hasn’t done so. She and other liberal justices suggested there was no strong justification for the court to overrule its prior precedent, which the court generally is reluctant to do.

Conservatives justices expressed concern about the court’s 1988 ruling, but appeared divided on how to proceed.

Justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel Alito voiced skepticism of the premises behind the court’s earlier decision, suggesting it had made it too easy for investors to have their lawsuits certified to proceed as class-actions. Justice Scalia said once investor cases are allowed to go forward as class-actions, company defendants feel pressure to settle even weak cases.

But Justice Anthony Kennedy, a moderate conservative justice, repeatedly asked questions that sought a compromise in deciding the case. He asked whether companies defending against securities-fraud allegations ought to have a chance, before a class-action is certified, to argue that any alleged company misrepresentations didn’t have an impact on the company’s stock price. The court could embrace that approach without abandoning its earlier case, he suggested.

Other justices later voiced interest in Justice Kennedy’s line of questioning. By the end of the session, it didn’t appear that a majority of the court was prepared to fully abandon the 1988 precedent.

The case is being closely watched in investing circles and by the business community. The underlying dispute focuses on a decade-old lawsuit covering investors who bought HalliburtonHAL +1.02% shares between 1999 and 2001. The plaintiffs allege that Halliburton misled the public about its asbestos liabilities, about revenue on construction contracts, and about the benefits of its 1998 merger with Dresser Industries. Halliburton argued that any misrepresentations alleged by the plaintiffs had no actual impact on the company’s share price.

Halliburton asked the court to overturn the 1988 precedent, but as a fallback position, has also advocated for changes to the legal process that are similar to the ones raised by Justice Kennedy.

A ruling is expected by the end of June.

The Avanti Law Group: Legal Fraud of the Century

There are plenty of candidates for that title, but after Tuesday the prize belongs to attorney Steven Donziger. Federal judge Lewis Kaplan ruled that the environmental activist had engaged in a massive racketeering scheme and declared that a $9.5 billion judgment against Chevron CVX -0.89% in an Ecuadorian court cannot be enforced in the United States.

As our readers know, in 1993 Mr. Donziger sued Texaco (now merged with Chevron) for what he said was the company's failure to clean up oil pits it drilled in Lago Agrio in the 1970s with state oil company PetroEcuador. Chevron had signed proof that it had cleaned its portion of the pits and had been absolved of any liability, but Mr. Donziger sniffed the potential windfall of a media-ready environmental "disaster" and sued the company for $113 billion. He enlisted all manner of celebrity helpers, including actress Daryl Hannah.

He won in Ecuador, but only thanks to what Judge Kaplan found were "dishonest and corrupt" measures including bribery, coercion and engaging an American consulting firm to ghostwrite an independent expert's reports. In a 485-page opinion, the judge called the case "extraordinary," calling the actions of Mr. Donziger and his legal team "offensive to the laws of any nation that aspires to the rule of law, including Ecuador." The corrupt extortion was intended to "instill fear of a catastrophic outcome in order to increase the amount Chevron would pay to avoid the worst," Judge Kaplan wrote.

Chevron refused to give in, and now the case may serve as an example of how companies can fight back if they have the nerve and the cash. Mr. Donziger says he'll appeal, but on the factual record he stands discredited. Another worthy casualty may be financially strapped Washington law firm Patton Boggs, which got involved on behalf of Burford Capital's BUR.LN -0.44% effort to provide litigation financing to the plaintiffs. Tuesday's opinion means the firm won't collect any plunder, which couldn't happen to a nicer crowd.

Mr. Donziger is a pioneer of the foreign environmental tort, trying to exploit Third World juries to bleed U.S. companies regardless of the merits. We're glad to see his dishonesty face American justice. `

The Avanti Law Group: Haste Clouds Long-Term Effort on Mortgage Fraud

A report issued by the Justice Department’s inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, underscores the danger of extolling short-term results when it comes to prosecuting white-collar crimes. The report highlights how generating headlines seemed to take precedence over accurate figures in the government’s fight against mortgage fraud.

In October 2012, less than a month before the presidential election, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. called a news conference to trumpet the Justice Department’s success in combating foreclosure fraud through a program called the Distressed Homeowner Initiative. “The success of the Distressed Homeowner Initiative, and the developments we announce today, underscore our determination to pursue these and other financial fraud criminals around the country,” Mr. Holder said in a statement.

The claims of great success came during a time of persistent criticism that the Justice Department was not taking stronger action to pursue fraud in the run-up to the financial crisis. The numbers offered by Mr. Holder for the first year of the initiative were impressive: charges filed against 530 defendants, including 172 executives, from frauds that resulted in losses of more than $1 billion.

After questions from the news media about those claims, almost a year later the Justice Department revised those figures significantly downward. The total number of defendants charged was 107, with no reference to any executives, and the loss from criminal activity was $95 million. In response to Mr. Horowitz’s report, a Justice Department spokeswoman pointed out: “In the time period in question, the number of mortgage fraud indictments nearly doubled, and the number of convictions rose by more than 100 percent.”

An interesting question is whether accurate reporting of the results, like a 100 percent increase in convictions, would have generated the kind of headlines the government seemed to want. Bringing that many more cases for a complex white-collar crime is a good result, but claiming to pursue several corporate executives gave the original numbers much more punch in light of accusations that the Justice Department was being soft on Wall Street.

The inspector general’s report puts much of the blame for the inflated figures on how the F.B.I. gathered the information for Mr. Holder. Mr. Horowitz noted that “we found significant breakdowns in the process used to develop the results of the Distressed Homeowners Initiative.” That occurred at least in part because the F.B.I. had “too little time and resources available to allow for vetting of the data.”

The report does not give a reason for taking such a slapdash approach, but I think it is clear that there was pressure to announce the success of the initiative to demonstrate how the Justice Department was responding to public outcry over the lack of tangible evidence that prosecutors were taking a hard line. And so we have an example of “act in haste, repent at leisure.”

Intensifying the pressure to report robust results was additional money provided by Congress for positions to be used to combat mortgage fraud after the financial crisis. Both the Justice Department and the F.B.I. received millions of dollars for new employees, and that means showing the money was put to good use. But Mr. Horowitz’s report states that mortgage fraud was not a high priority for the F.B.I., in part because it was declining as lenders toughened their standards. In these days of tight budgets, however, no agency turns down an appropriation.

The government is fond of calling a new initiative an operation, which implies a sense of urgency and resolve. In 2010, before the Distressed Homeowner Initiative, the Justice Department started Operation Stolen Dreams to take on a broad array of mortgage frauds. Less than three months after it started, Mr. Holder announced that prosecutors had brought cases involving “1,215 criminal defendants nationwide, including 485 arrests, who are allegedly responsible for more than $2.3 billion in losses.”

Those are impressive numbers for a white-collar crime, especially in such a short period, but their validity may be open to question. Mr. Horowitz’s report points out that his office did not audit these figures, and in light of the other findings, he recommends that the Justice Department “revisit the results.”

Catching those engaged in mortgage fraud is not like operating a sobriety checkpoint or drug dragnet that quickly yields arrests. Trumpeting initiatives for pursuing complex white-collar crimes whose success will be reported in months rather than years runs the risk of offering results that don’t grab the public’s attention — or worse, makes them look like failures.

As an initial matter, just figuring out what the numbers are can be difficult. Mortgage fraud is not a separate crime but a subset of federal offenses like bank fraud, mail fraud and wire fraud. So prosecutions involving mortgages may not show up easily in government records.

A greater problem in announcing a crackdown is that these types of cases often don’t come to light until months, or even years, after the transactions, and the fraud can take many different forms. During the period when real estate values soared, there were schemes to inflate property values so that lenders were making loans for far more than houses were worth. Once the housing bubble burst around 2007, mortgage frauds morphed into schemes to defraud homeowners trying to avoid foreclosure.

Putting together a mortgage fraud case requires amassing a large volume of documents to track ownership, housing values and the transfer of money. Even figuring out where a fraud involving inflated housing values took place usually requires a bank or real estate company to report suspicious activity, which could come long after the scheme ended when the loan finally defaults.

For scams involving homeowners who face foreclosure, just identifying whether a crime took place is difficult. Those in danger of losing their homes may grasp at straws in seeking help, with companies taking advantage of them by doing just enough to make it appear they tried to help. Victims may not recognize a fraud or have the time and energy to pursue a complaint in the face of losing their homes.

This type of scheme often involves modest sums taken from those who can least afford it. The Justice Department tends not to pursue small cases, leaving them to local law enforcement, so any number of violations could easily fall through the cracks.

Mortgage fraud, like most white-collar crimes, requires painstaking investigation over a long period, so there will never be a flood of cases. And even when the government commits resources to investigations, there will be some that do not pan out.

But that does not make headlines when the government paints itself into a corner by pursuing initiatives that imply a promise of quick results.

The Avanti Law Group: Credit Suisse Waits for $11 Billion Answer in N.Y. Fraud Suit

Feb. 19 (Bloomberg) -- As Credit Suisse Group AG sees it, time has run out on New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman’s pursuit of Wall Street banks for mortgage fraud that helped trigger the financial crisis.

Schneiderman sued Credit Suisse in 2012 as part of a wide- ranging probe into mortgage bonds. He claimed Switzerland’s second-largest bank misrepresented the risks associated with $93.8 billion in mortgage-backed securities issued in 2006 and 2007.

Credit Suisse asked a Manhattan judge in December to dismiss Schneiderman’s case, as well as his demand for as much as $11.2 billion in damages. The bank argued that New York, by waiting so long to file the lawsuit, missed a three-year legal deadline for suing. The state countered that it had six years to file its complaint.

If the bank wins, Schneiderman will face a new roadblock as he considers similar multibillion-dollar claims against a dozen other Wall Street firms. The judge in New York State Supreme Court could rule at any time.

“It would obviously tilt everything in the favor of Credit Suisse and similarly situated financial institutions,” said David Reiss, a professor at Brooklyn Law School, hindering New York’s remaining efforts to hold banks accountable for mistakes that spurred a recession.

Obstacles Posed

The obstacle posed by such statutes of limitation in pursuing mortgage-bond cases may be traced back to Andrew Cuomo, Schneiderman’s predecessor. Although now-Governor Cuomo didn’t file any such cases against the banks, he announced a probe into all aspects of the mortgage business in 2008.

In doing so, he may have started the clock ticking on how long a state suit could be filed, making it impossible for fellow Democrat Schneiderman to argue his office didn’t learn of the bank’s conduct until he took office in 2011.

On Feb. 6, Credit Suisse said it was setting aside 514 million Swiss francs ($568 million) for legal issues, including 339 million francs for mortgage litigation. The bank may be preparing to resolve a related bond insurer lawsuit, Mark Palmer, an analyst with BTIG LLC in New York, said in a Feb. 10 note.

Matt Mittenthal, a spokesman for Schneiderman, and Dani Lever, a spokeswoman for Cuomo, declined to comment on the Credit Suisse case.

Filing Deadline

Schneiderman, 59, avoided a filing deadline dispute by settling a mortgage-bond case with JPMorgan Chase & Co. last year. The state got $613 million in that pact, New York’s share of the landmark $13 billion federal-state accord with the largest U.S. lender.

Armed with the Martin Act, New York’s powerful anti-fraud tool, Schneiderman has said he is seeking settlements with the other, unidentified banks.

In the lawsuit against Zurich-based Credit Suisse, filed in November 2012, he claims the bank ignored warning signs about the quality of loans it was packaging and selling. One example cited was its use of New Century Financial Corp. mortgages after that firm’s 2007 bankruptcy.

The attorney general’s lawsuit involves 64 Credit Suisse bond offerings in 2006 and 2007. Credit Suisse has said the losses on those offerings were only about half of the $11.2 billion claimed by Schneiderman.

One Credit Suisse executive described some of the mortgages the bank sold as “complete and utter garbage,” according to the complaint. The bank relied on mortgage originators that “systematically abandoned underwriting standards in the years leading up to the collapse of the housing market,” Schneiderman said.

Thrown Out

Credit Suisse, which denies any wrongdoing, told Justice Marcy S. Friedman Dec. 11 that the suit should be thrown out because it was filed more than three years after the alleged wrongdoing was discovered.

Consumer fraud and personal injury claims are generally subject to a three-year statute of limitations under New York law, while financial frauds can be granted six years.

The Avanti Law Group: Federal crackdown on Medicare fraud in metro Detroit hits it big

The U.S. Department of Justice could dub 2013 the year its fight against Medicare billing fraud in Southeast Michigan yielded the first real payoff.

Last year, the Detroit Medicare Fraud Strike Force, deployed here from Washington, and a locally organized Health Care Fraud Unit of prosecutors together brought charges in fraud schemes billing more than $380 million to the federal program. That's more than double the bad billing amount charged in any preceding year.

It's been a slow build since the strike force came to Detroit in 2009 as part of the national Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team, referred to as HEAT, to ferret out what data analysis suggested was hundreds of millions worth of fraud here.

The effort is gaining traction, according to both investigators and a Crain's analysis of local casework and Justice Data.

In 2013, federal prosecutors obtained 18 local indictments against 46 defendants in fraud schemes totaling $380.2 million — fueled by $225 million in unnecessary medical treatment attributed to oncologist Farid Fata — but even without that, higher than the previous record of $143.3 million in billings charged in 2011.

But more significantly, that figure approaches for the first time the billing volume that experts believe is likely fraudulent within the $5 billion-plus in annual Medicare expenditures in Southeast Michigan. Since the first indictments from the increased enforcement presence came down in June 2009, nearly 170 people have pleaded guilty and nearly three dozen were convicted by juries. Another 110 await a finding by a jury or judge this year, including three who are on trial this week before U.S. District Judge Arthur Tarnow.

Investigators said the success is due to a mix of cutting-edge surveillance and witness interviews that establish crossover points between one bad billing scheme and another.

Over time, Justice has begun to catch criminals before they close shop and change markets as in years past, and the trickle of closed cases has become a verifiable stream.

Feeling the HEAT

 

Local prosecutions from the national HEAT program, a collaboration between Justice and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and by the local Health Care Fraud Unit, formed by U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade in Detroit in 2010, have together roped in 341 defendants in $745 million of alleged fraudulent Medicare billing schemes to date.

"Based on Medicare spending data, we see per-beneficiary spending is going down in this market. One possible conclusion from that is we are indeed making headway," McQuade said.

"That's consistent with what we see, but a lot of the law enforcement community will tell you about the balloon effect, where squeezing one area (of fraud) makes another expand."

The decline in per-beneficiary spending is tentative — the most recent year available is 2010, but it shows that reimbursements from Medicare fell anywhere from $50 to $400 per enrollee in five Southeast Michigan hospital referral regions from 2009, which was the first year of strike force prosecution. The regions saw nothing but increases the preceding five years.

Even so, the $10,944 average expenditure per Medicare enrollee across the region is more than the average payout in 90 percent of the 306 regions tracked nationwide.

The per-beneficiary data is compiled by the Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care, a program of the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice.

Since January 2011, McQuade said, the amount billed to Medicare for psychotherapy locally has gone down by 70 percent, and home health care has seen reduced billings, although billings are still generally high.

"We do have a recently intercepted conversation on wiretap, where two individuals were recorded saying they need to be more careful now because they're really cracking down in this area. That's encouraging," McQuade said.

"Does that mean criminals stop, or do they go elsewhere? That's hard to know. But when you do bring down some of the actors, you do seem to bring down at least some of the fraud occurring along with them."

Nationwide, more than 1,500 people have been charged since March 2007 in connection with more than $5.1 billion in Medicare billings, by the strike force in nine cities where software operated by HHS found disproportionate Medicare billing volumes believed to be due to fraud.

Read full article here…

The Avanti Law Group: IRS releases Dirty Dozen Tax Scams List for 2014

Washington, D.C. – Every year, people fall prey to tax scams. The IRS wants you to be safe and informed – and not become a victim.

“Some people are victimized by tax scams, while some get involved after being lured in by false promises of big money,” said IRS spokesman Dan Boone.

Taxpayers who get involved in illegal tax scams can lose their money, or face stiff penalties, interest and even criminal prosecution. Remember, if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

Here are some highlights from the 2014 update of IRS’s annual “Dirty Dozen” list of tax scams.

Identity theft. Tax fraud using identity theft tops this year’s Dirty Dozen list. In many cases, an identity thief uses a taxpayer’s identity to illegally file a tax return and claim a refund. For the 2014 filing season, the IRS has expanded efforts to better protect taxpayers and help victims. Find more information on the identity protection page on www.IRS.gov.

Pervasive telephone scams.  The IRS has seen an increase in local phone scams across the country. Callers pretend to be from the IRS in hopes of stealing money or identities from victims. If you get a call from someone claiming to be from the IRS – and you know you owe taxes or think you might owe taxes, call the IRS at 1.800.829.1040. If you get a call from someone claiming to be from the IRS and know you don’t owe taxes or have no reason to think that you owe taxes, then call and report the incident to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration at 1.800.366.4484.

Phishing.  Phishing scams typically use unsolicited emails or fake websites that appear legitimate. Scammers lure in victims and prompt them to provide their personal and financial information. The fact is that the IRS does not initiate contact with taxpayers by email to request personal or financial information. This includes any type of electronic communication, such as text messages and social media channels.

False promises of “free money” from inflated refunds. Scam artists often pose as tax preparers during tax time, luring victims in by promising large tax refunds. The bottom line is that you are legally responsible for what’s on your tax return, even if someone else prepares it. Taxpayers who buy into such schemes can end up penalized for filing false claims or receiving fraudulent refunds. Take care when choosing someone to do your taxes. Only use a qualified tax preparer who will sign your return and enter their IRS Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN). For tips about choosing a preparer, visit www.irs.gov/chooseataxpro .

Impersonation of charitable organizations. Taxpayers need to be sure they donate to recognized charities. Following major disasters, it’s common for scam artists to impersonate charities to get money or personal information from well-intentioned people. They may even directly contact disaster victims and claim to be working with the IRS to help the victims file casualty loss claims and get tax refunds.

Frivolous arguments.  Frivolous schemes encourage taxpayers to make unreasonable and outlandish claims to avoid paying the taxes they owe. The IRS has a list of frivolous tax arguments that taxpayers should avoid. While taxpayers have the right to contest their tax liabilities in court, no one has the right to disobey the law or ignore their responsibility to pay taxes.

Tax scams can take many forms beyond the “Dirty Dozen”. The best defense is to remain vigilant. Get more information on tax scams at IRS.gov.

The Avanti Law Group: Tips for Preventing Health Law Fraud in New York

The Avanti Law Group tips for preventing health law fraud in New York aims to assist the elderly in protecting their rights, so that frauds are not easily perpetuated.

The Avanti Law Group: 3 Tips to Avoid Family Conflicts in Estate Plannin

Whether you are creating an estate plan for the first time or making changes to one, be aware that how you plan to leave your assets may create tension in your family. Although the potential for conflicts can develop without a Will, different treatment of children or other beneficiaries as part of a well thought out and drafted estate plan can cause animosity among family members.

Family conflicts may develop for many reasons, such as when a loved one chooses to unequally divide their estate, leaves money in trust instead of a lump sum, or disinherits a family member.

North Carolina Estate Planning Conflict Resolution

How can one manage family conflicts in estate planning?

1.     Bring family together. Hold a family meeting that discusses the assets left to each child and family member. This will allow an opportunity for explaining important asset protection decisions and other considerations. These meetings also help to reduce tensions that could build later on should resentment develop between siblings. This is also an ideal time to bring up any existing health issues for which your family may need to plan.

2.     Choose and talk with your executor and agents. Many conflicts can be prevented if your executor and agents have a clear understanding of your wishes. You may have updated your beneficiaries and neglected to inform them or your executor of the changes, which can cause confusion later on. When it comes to decisions for your medical care, who have you granted power of attorney and are they aware of their responsibility?

3.     Use succession tools with an attorney. The types of trusts and business entities you choose to establish will offer different degrees of protection and benefits. For those who own family businesses, the interests of business partners and family heirs may conflict. Structure a business succession plan by working with a North Carolina estate planning attorney. Succession plans help preserve a company’s value for the business owners’ heirs. There are other planning techniques a lawyer can review with you that will greatly reduce the potential for family conflicts so that your assets are available for the family members you designate when they need them.

The Avanti Law Group: Diversity

Avanti Law Group is the largest women-owned and minority-owned firm in West Michigan.
Our commitment to diversity goes beyond ownership; we are equally committed to the development, advancement and retention of our minority professionals. Our attorneys more accurately represent the make-up of the communities where our clients operate, the make-up of their employees and of their client base. Our firm emphasizes in teamwork and collegiality; we value the differences in experience, perspective, and outlook that our legal and no legal staff brings to the firm. We draw upon the strengths of knowledgeable and skilled individuals who represent a variety of viewpoints, experiences, and backgrounds to the delivery of the highest quality of legal services to individuals, corporations, and public sector entities.

For most, Diversity is a goal. At Avanti Law Group, diversity is a fact. As of April 2011:
· 60% of our attorneys are women
· 30% of our attorneys are minorities

Diversity Efforts

Avanti Law Group is actively involved in community and bar organizations that represent and promote the interests of minorities. We continuously sponsor business events and trade shows that seek to enhance diversity in the professional community.

The Firm’s Diversity Policy

It is the Firm’s policy to ensure equal employment opportunity without the discrimination or harassment on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, age, sex, disability, citizenship, marital status, sexual orientation or any other characteristic protected by the law. Our commitment to diversity is an integral part of every facet of our firm including our recruitment, hiring and training efforts as well as the organizations we belong to and programs we sponsor. Avanti Law Group values and celebrates its minority status.

Supplier Diversity

As both a women and minority-owned law firm, Avanti Law Group is committed to promoting diversity through our vendors. We actively seek targeted diverse businesses and provide them with the opportunity to partner with us to provide excellent services to our Firm and our clients. Avanti Law Group Supplier Diversity Program ensures cover that minority and women owned businesses are well represented and have an equal opportunity in our supplier selection process. For additional information on the firm’s diversity initiatives, please contact:

Raquel A. Salas

Diversity Coordinator
600 28th St SW
Wyoming, MI 49509
Telephone: (616) 257-6807
Email: rsalas@avantilaw.com

To put our diverse team to work for you, contact us.

Awards & Recognition of the Avanti Law Group

Avanti Law Group, PLLC is a full service law firm providing a full range of interdisciplinary legal services to its clients. Both, the firm and the firm’s attorneys are recognized as leaders not only in the legal profession but also in the communities they serve. The following is a list of some of our awards and recognitions:

2012	Attorney Raquel Salas named as one of the 50 Most Influential Women in West Michigan by the Grand Rapids Business Journal. March 2012, Grand Rapids, MI.
2011	Avanti Law Group named as the #1 Top Women Owned Law Firm in West Michigan by the Grand Rapids Business Journal. March, 2011, Grand Rapids, MI.
2011	Attorney Robert Anthony Alvarez named Hispanic Person of the Year 2010 by the West Michigan Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. March, 2011, Grand Rapids, MI.
2009	Attorney Raquel Salas named as one of West Michigan’s 40 up-and-coming leaders by the Grand Rapids Business Journal, “40 Under 40.” November, 2009, Grand Rapids, MI.
2009	Attorney Raquel Salas received Universidad del Este’s (Puerto Rico) Distinguished Alumni Award for outstanding service in the legal field by. May, 2009, Carolina, Puerto Rico.
2009	Attorney Raquel Salas recognized as one of West Michigan’s “Women in Business” by MiBiz.
2007	Attorney Meghan Moore received Bar and Gavel Award for outstanding service to Chicago-Kent, the community and the law profession.

The Avanti Law Group: Bankruptcy and Debt Settlement Services

Too many consumers feel that their debts are overwhelming and there is nothing they can do other than file a bankruptcy. Due to lack of information, many consumers turn prematurely to bankruptcy. We can help you avoid bankruptcy by settling your unsecured debts on your behalf.

We can help you settle some or all of the following:

· Medical bills
· Credit cards
· Department store cards
· Personal loans
· Student loans
· Bounced checks
· And many others

However, there are situations where filing for bankruptcy might be the best option to get a fresh start. If so, Avanti Law Group, we will explain the bankruptcy process and help you understand your rights. We Are A Debt Relief Agency Representing People Filing For Bankruptcy Relief Under The Bankruptcy Code.

Criminal Defense of the Avanti Law Group

Defending Against Misdemeanors and Felonies

If you have been charged with a crime, you need a qualified and aggressive criminal defense lawyer in West Michigan who will fight for you. Avanti attorneys have successfully defended people who have been charged with both misdemeanors and felonies, including high-profile murder cases. No matter what your charges are, we take your defense seriously. And you should, too.

We believe that every client should be treated with respect, care and honesty. We believe that every client is innocent until the prosecution has done its job and proven otherwise. We won’t judge you, and we will use plain English to explain the law, the possible penalties, defenses and case strategy and how your decisions will affect the outcome of your case. You will always know exactly what the prosecutors are up to, what strategies we will use, and how your case is progressing. We use a hard-nosed approach to fighting for your best interests and rights.

If there is a legal defense available in your case, we will find it for you. Our record speaks for itself. No tricks. No lies. Just rock-solid, tough, and effective criminal defense that fights every step of the way to have your charges dropped or reduced to an acceptable outcome. If that can’t be accomplished, we take your case to trial to fight for your rights. It’s your future and we understand how important it is to protect it.

We defend people facing the following charges:

· DUI/DWI
· Traffic tickets and related offenses
· Domestic ciolence, including PPOs
· Assault and battery
· Sex crimes (rape, child molestation, child pornography, prostitution, etc.)
· Theft and embezzlement
· Robbery, burglary
· Tax fraud
· Juvenile crimes (including, juvenile DUI/underage drinking, theft, vandalism, violence and sex crime cases)
· Drug related offenses
· Homicide, murder

The Avanti Law Group: West Michigan Attorneys

Attorneys Protecting Your Rights in the State of Michigan, Throughout the United States, and Internationally

We are a full service litigation firm offering exceptional legal representation to our clients. Our accomplished attorneys represent a diverse clientele of businesses and individuals in a full range of interdisciplinary legal services throughout the State of Michigan, throughout the United States and internationally, including class action litigation, criminal defense, immigration, business law, family law, labor and employment, wage and hour, civil litigation, personal injury and more. Our attorneys are recognized as leaders not only in the legal profession but also in the communities where they live and serve.

We Are Experienced Negotiators and Trial Lawyers

If you have a legal problem, you want a team of experienced and creative attorneys who know how to protect your rights. We take a hard-nosed approach to fighting for you or your business’ best interests and rights. Our knack for finding creative solutions to complex challenges has been the primary strengths of our firm since its founding. We leverage our negotiation and litigation skills to be powerful advocates for our clients in all our varied areas of practices. We vigorously pursue relief for our clients and leave no stone unturned in our effort to achieve the best possible results for each client we serve. If that cannot be accomplished, we take your case to trial to fight for your rights. As experienced negotiators and trial lawyers, we will help you find solutions to your legal challenges.

We Focus on You and We Stand by Your Side Every Step of the Way

At Avanti Law Group we focus on you and your legal issues, not us. We care deeply about the clients we serve and we take the time to get to know you, your problems and legal concerns.

One piece of advice that is frequently passed from lawyer to lawyer is “Do not take your client’s case personally.” To us, this advice is useless. Why? Because if you have come to us for help, you trust us to do everything we can to get you the best possible results, rest assured that we will absolutely take your case personally. We put our own skin in the game and we will stand up for your rights every step of the way.

Avanti attorneys are passionate, committed, focused, empowered, creative, accountable and aggressive. Contact us today to put our winning approach work for you.

Business and Corporate Services of the Avanti Law Group

Operating a business in today’s world leaves your company exposed to a variety of legal risks. Avanti’s business and corporate law services extend from drafting and negotiating the arrangements listed below to counseling clients on virtually any legal issue facing their business. Contact us today to set up a consultation to discuss your company’s legal needs.

Our attorneys’ experience includes having:

· Assisted in the representation of companies in industries as diverse as publishing, direct marketing, food processing, ready-to-eat food industry, manufacturing, retail, construction, financial services, and real estate, in a variety of business transactions;
· Represented Eastern Floral in the acquisition of Molesta Floral;
· Represented Sustainable Energy Financing in the acquisition of Viability Incentives;
· Represented Sustainable Energy Financing in the acquisition of Viability Africa;
· Represented Tienda Guadalajara in the sale of its assets;
· Represented Lavanderia Jalisco in the sale of its assets;
· Represented Fit Zone for Women Franchise Owner in the closing of its facilities and negotiations with all its creditors;
· Counsel for dozens of Small Businesses, including Women and Minority Owned businesses, in a wide range of corporate and commercial issues including formation, financing, operation, contracts review, collection, expansion and joint ventures.

Our Business and Corporate Services includes:

· Asset Purchase Agreements
· Business Acquisitions
· Business Formation (Corporations, LLC, Non-Profit Organization and more)
· Commercial Leases
· Confidentiality Agreements
· Construction Contracts
· Consultant Contracts
· Employment Agreements
· Formation Documents
· License Agreements
· Joint Venture Agreements
· Nondisclosure Agreements
· Non-compete Agreements
· Office Leases
· Operating Agreements
· Promissory Notes
· Purchase and Sale of Goods Contracts
· Settlement Agreements
· Supplier Agreements

The Avanti Law Group: Class Action Litigation

Avanti Law Group has the capacity and experience to defend and prosecute class actions and other complex litigation on behalf of a wide range of clients, in state and federal courts across the nation.

Avanti Law Group has been extensively involved in class-action litigation in state and federal courts. While most of our experience is in asserting class-action litigation, our expertise in all relevant issues enables us to advise and represent clients effectively from any standpoint.

We pride ourselves in providing the highest quality legal representation to clients who would not be able to obtain effective redress for their injuries but for the availability of the class action device. The cases we litigate prosecuting the class, are generally taken on contingency, at no cost to the client, with our fee tied to the benefit obtained for the class. In defense case, a different fee structure applies.

Attorney Alvarez has been first and second chair trial litigation and negotiation practice in high profile class action cases, including:

· Aguilera, et al., vs. Michigan Turkey Producers Cooperative, W.D. Mich. 2009. Representing proposed class of meat processing workers for alleged violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Collective action certified – Resolved.

· Obando et al., vs. Belfor USA Group, Inc. et al., E.D. La. 2006. Representing potential class of approximately 10,000 workers (Brazilian and Mexican immigrants) in a Nationwide Hybrid collective/Rule 23 class action against subcontractor and general contractor for alleged violation of the FLSA and the wage and hour laws of various states – Resolved.

· Miro Aldoman Saucedo et al., vs. Five Star Contractors, L.L.C., et al., S.D. MS. 2009 – Representing class of approximately 2000+ workers (Brazilian and Mexican immigrants) against subcontractor and general contractor in Hybrid collective/Rule 23 class action for alleged violation of the FLSA, RICO and breach of contract – Currently in litigation.

· Juan Doe et al., vs. Mary Hollinrake, Clerk for the County of Kent, et al., U.S. District Court – Western District of Michigan: Class action lawsuit alleging violation of Constitutional rights including fundamental right to marry due to a policy which effectively denied marriage licenses to U.S. citizens who were to marry undocumented individuals based solely on their lack of a social security number. Filed in cooperation with the law firm of Sommers Schwartz, P.C. – Resolved.

· Juan Doe et al., vs. Daniel C. Krueger, Clerk for the County of Ottawa, et al., U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan: Class action lawsuit alleging violation of Constitutional rights including fundamental right to marry due to a policy which effectively denied marriage licenses to U.S. citizens who were to marry undocumented individuals based solely on their lack of a social security number. Filed in cooperation with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF). Currently in litigation.

· Guerrero et al., vs. Brickman Group, LLC et al., W.D. Mich. 2005. Represented class of approximately 900 foreign guest workers (Mexican Nationals) in Hybrid Collective/Rule 23 class action for alleged violations of the FLSA and various state claims – Resolved.

· Galaviz Zamora et al., vs. Brady Farms, Inc. et al., W.D. Mich. 2004. Represented potential class of approximately 1,000 migrant farmworkers (Mexican immigrants) in hybrid collective/Rule 23 class action against their employer for alleged violations of the FLSA and the MSAWPA – Resolved.

· Bautista et al., vs. Twin Lakes Farms, Inc. et al., W.D. Mich. 2004. Represented class of approximately 1,000 migrant farmworkers (Mexican immigrants) in hybrid collective/Rule 23 class action against their employer for alleged violation of the FLSA and the MSAWPA – Resolved.

Published Decisions

· Lima et al., vs. International Catastrophe Solutions, Inc. et al., 493 F.Supp.2d 793 (E.D. La. June 27, 2007) conditionally certifying class of workers seeking unpaid wages under the FLSA and allowing for distribution of notice to the class.

· Guerrero et al., vs. Brickman Group, L.L.C. et al., 2007 WL 922420 (W.D. Mich. March 26, 2007) Certifying Rule 23 class of foreign guest workers seeking damages for breach of contract under H2B program.

· Bautista, et al., vs. Twin Lakes Farms, Inc. et al., 2007 WL 329162 (W.D. Mich 2007) Certification and approval of Settlement Class and Settlement in which attorney Alvarez was lead litigator and negotiator of settlement.

· Galaviz Zamora et al., v. Brady Farms, Inc. et al., 2005 WL 2372326 (W.D. Mich. September 23, 2005) Plaintiffs’ Immigration status not relevant and not discoverable in class/collective employment litigation action -issue of first impression.

· Garcia-Andrate et al., v. Madra’s Café Corp. et al., 2005 WL 2430195 (E.D.Mich., August 03, 200) Plaintiff’s immigration status was determined not relevant and not discoverable. The court also affirmed the worker’s right to assert their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination with regard to their immigration status and possible unlawful employment – issue of first impression.

Contact us to discuss how we our winning approach can help you.

Contact of the Avanti Law Group

The decisions you make today regarding your case can have material consequences in its final outcome. It is important that you consult with an experienced attorney before making any decisions or issuing any statement in your case. Contact us immediately; we can help.

“Clients choose Avanti Law Group because of our emphasis in client service, fee structure, industry knowledge, and proven track record of success and leadership. No matter what situation you are faced with, we will help you get through it.” Meghan Moore, Esq. Co-founder.

We currently have 2 offices in West Michigan, to better serve you. Contact our office for an appointment or send an e-mail using the form below to schedule a no-obligation consultation with an experienced attorney from Avanti Law Group.

Wyoming, MI
Headquaters
600 28th St. SW
Wyoming, MI 49509
Phone: (616) 257-6807
Fax: (616) 257-8501

Holland, MI
720 Michigan Ave. - Suite A
Holland, MI 49423
Phone: (616) 392-4867
Fax: (616) 257-8501

The Avanti Law Group: Immigration Law

With passion for all aspects of immigration law, Avanti Law Group is dedicated to helping individuals and families navigate the complex and frequently changing immigration laws of the United States. Avanti Law Group strives to provide the highest quality legal services to all of our clients at all times. Small businesses, large corporations, families, students, schools and individuals trust Avanti Law Group to provide cost-effective and innovative immigration law solutions.

Put our experience in and in-depth knowledge of U.S. immigration law to work for you.

For Individuals

We are proud to offer individuals immigration services related to employment and family immigration. We can help you obtain a work visa, marry a foreign national, bring your fiancé (e) to the United States, petition for a family member, attend school in the United States, and understand the immigration consequences of criminal convictions.

For Businesses

We understand your need for mobility and security in today’s global economy. Avanti Law Group can help you employ a foreign worker, offer a permanent job to a foreign employee, transfer an employee from overseas, bring employees to the U.S. for training programs, and ensure compliance with I-9 and E-Verify programs

Services include:

· Family-Based Immigration

· Adjustment of Status (Permanent residency)

· Citizenship/Naturalization

· Deportation Defense

· Detention and Bond Issues

· Employment-Based immigration

· Immigration Consequences of Criminal Convictions

· Waivers of Inadmissibility

· Visas for Victims of Crime

· Permanent Residency for Victims of Domestic Violence

Contact us to schedule a time to speak with an experienced immigration attorney about any of the following visas/services:

· Nonimmigrant visas

   o H visa (H-1B, H-1A, H-4, H-2A, H-2B, H-3)
   o L visa (L-1A, L-1B, L-2)
   o E visa (E-2, E-3)
   o F visa (F-1, F-2)
   o B visa (B-1, B-2)
   o J visa (J-1, J-2)
   o visa
   o P visa (P-1)
   o TN visa (TN-1, TN-2, TD)
   o R visa (R-1, R-3)
   o U visa

· Family-based immigration
   o Family-based petitions
   o Marriage-based petitions
   o K visas (K-1, K-2, K-3, K-4)
   o V visa (V-1, V-2, V-3)

· Employment-based immigration
  o PERM labor certification
  o Employment-based immigrant visa petitions
     o EB-1 (Extraordinary Ability, Outstanding Researchers, Multinational Executive/Manager)
     o EB-2 (National Interest Waiver, Exceptional Ability, Advanced Degree)
     o EB-3 (Skilled or Professional Worker)
     o EB-4 (Special Immigrant)
     o EB-5 (Investor)

· Workforce Compliance
  o I-9 audits (preparation for and response to)
  o E-verify compliance
  o No-Match letter responses
  o Representation during ICE investigations

Additional Services:

· Deportation/Removal
· Waivers of Inadmissibility (I-212, I-601)
· I-360 Self-Petitions under VAWA (Violence Against Women Act)
· We counsel clients on I-9 compliance and citizenship status discrimination issues.

Results

We get results. Following are some examples of the cases that immigration attorneys at Avanti Law Group have won:

· Approvals for waivers required after criminal activity
· Approvals for waivers required after unlawful presence in the U.S.
· Winning in Immigration Court
· Obtaining a low bond for our clients in Immigration detention
· Obtaining permanent residency for undocumented spouses of U.S. citizens/residents
· Approvals for waivers after deportation
· Citizenship for individuals with a criminal record
· Permanent residency for investors

Family Law and Divorce of the Avanti Law Group

All family law related matters are emotionally-charged and highly stressful processes. While the vast majority of all cases settle, it sometimes takes significant work and preparation before either party has enough information to make settlement decisions. Whether a case can be settled by agreement rather than decided by a judge after contested trial depends on the parties and their attorneys. Avanti Law Group follows a cooperative approach. However, we are trial ready if the case needs to be decided by a judge. Each case has a unique dynamic that will dictate the method of achieving the results you need.

Our attorneys’ experience includes:

· Successfully represented mother in a custody battle against father (who was an established business owner), in obtaining custody of their 4-year-old daughter, even though mother was being deported to Mexico, child was U.S. Citizen, mother had no formal education and mother had been unable to secure employment in Mexico
· Successfully represented father in opposition to Friend of the Court Report and Recommendation and obtained a child support reduction of 50%
· Successfully represented mother in opposition to Father’s motion to claim income tax exemption every other year
· Regularly represents wife/husband in divorce proceedings.

Our attorneys represent clients in all areas of family law, including:

· Adoption
· Custody and visitations
· Grandparent visitation
· Relocation
· Paternity
· Guardianships
· Termination of parental rights
· Juvenile criminal matters
· Premarital and post-marital agreements
· Divorce modifications
· Separation agreements
· Annulment
· Divorce
· Spousal and child support
· Property division
· Post-judgment matters
· Business valuation and non-marital property
· Property settlement