Jump to Navigation
Recent Firm News
    Burke, Harvey & Frankowski, LLC is investigating potential claims available to shareholders of BioMimetic Therapeutics, Inc. ("BMTI" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: BMTI) related to charges of fraudulent acts and false financial reporting by the Company.
    Read more

    A regulatory lawsuit filed this week should alert holders of Apple REIT investments to consider their legal options, according to attorneys at The Doss Firm, LLC and Burke Harvey & Frankowski, LLC.
    Read more 

    FINRA Charges David Lerner & Associates With Soliciting Investors to Purchase REITs Without Fully Investigating Suitability; Lerner Marketed REITs on its Website With Misleading Returns
    Read more

    Burke, Harvey & Frankowski Hits Morgan Keegan With $1.1 Million Award: The law firms of Burke, Harvey & Frankowski and Sonn & Erez recently won an arbitration against Morgan Keegan for the sale of the firm's proprietary RMK funds.
    Read More
     
    Morgan Keegan in the news, Read More.
"Guiding you through the maze of Securities Litigation"

Legal News

Firm in the News

[06-07]  Hundreds of cases pending against Morgan Keegan

News

Business

Read More

Top Headlines

Read More

Securities

Read More

Securities Litigation

  • [03/01]

Read More

Case Summaries

Banking Law

[02/01] GECCMC 2005-C1 Plummer Street Office L.P. v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
In a suit alleging breach of lease agreements that the defendant bank assumed after it purchased a failed bank's assets and liabilities from the FDIC pursuant to the terms of a written purchase and assumption agreement, the district court's grant of the bank's motion to dismiss is affirmed, where under federal common law, the plaintiff lacked standing to bring suit under the agreement because it was not an intended third-party beneficiary of the agreement.

[01/24] TIFD III-E, Inc. v. US
In a suit by a taxpayer partner challenging IRS notices of adjustment reallocating a large percentage of the partnership's income for the years 1993 to 1998 to the taxpayer away from two Dutch banks that had purchased an interest in the partnership, and imposing a penalty for underpayment, the district court's judgment in favor of the taxpayer is reversed, where: 1) the banks' interest was not a capital interest for purposes of qualifying them as partners within the meaning of IRC section 704(e)(1); and 2) the taxpayer failed to point to substantial authority supporting its position, so that the government was entitled to impose a penalty on the taxpayer for substantial understatement of income.

[01/20] CRM Collateral II, Inc. v. TriCounty Metropolitan Transportation Dist. of Oregon
In proceedings following default on a standby letter of credit, the district court's disposition of the case on cross-motions for summary judgment is reversed and the case remanded, where: 1) the district court incorrectly concluded that the applicant for the letter of credit was a surety and erroneously permitted it to assert the defense of discharge; and 2) the applicant was not entitled to an award of damages because the beneficiary's draw on the letter of credit did not violate the statutory warranty to the applicant that the drawing did not violate any agreement between the applicant and the beneficiary.

Read More

Associated Press text, photo, graphic, audio and/or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Neither these AP materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computer except for personal and non-commercial use. Users may not download or reproduce a substantial portion of the AP material found on this web site. AP will not be held liable for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions therefrom or in the transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages arising from any of the foregoing.