The mother of an autistic child joined Consumer Watchdog and its attorneys today to announce a lawsuit against the California Department of Managed Health Care ("DMHC"), the Schwarzenegger Administration agency responsible for regulating many of California's health insurers. The suit alleges that the DMHC has wrongfully allowed insurance companies to refuse to pay for autism treatments, resulting in the denial of critically needed, medically necessary treatment for autistic children.

The suit, filed by Consumer Watchdog and Strumwasser & Woocher LLP, alleges that the DMHC, and its Director Cindy Ehnes, recently changed the state agency's policy to permit insurers to deny coverage for Applied Behavioral Analysis ("ABA"), an essential treatment for autism, in plain violation of the California Mental Health Parity Act. That law requires health insurers to cover and pay for all medically necessary treatments for autism, including ABA. If successful, the suit would require the DMHC to bar insurers from refusing to cover medically necessary ABA treatments. The suit also seeks to compel the DMHC to turn over records that would expose the full extent of the DMHC's violations of the California Mental Health Parity Act and the Knox-Keene Act.

"Californians, including those stricken by autism, and their parents and caregivers, expect regulators to enforce the law, not to side with insurance companies seeking to boost their profits by denying patients the care they need," said Harvey Rosenfield, founder of the non-profit advocacy group Consumer Watchdog and author of the landmark insurance reform initiative Proposition 103. "Governor Schwarzenegger, a longtime and vocal supporter of the Special Olympics and developmentally disabled children, will now have to explain in court why his administration is allowing health insurers to evade state mental health laws and shift health care costs to already beleaguered taxpayers."

Governor Schwarzenegger, who appointed the current Director of the DMHC, has received $711,200 in campaign contributions from Blue Cross, Kaiser and Blue Shield -- three health insurers regulated by the DMHC that commonly deny coverage for autism treatments.

The DMHC's actions upholding heath insurance denials for medically necessary autism treatment puts children at risk by forcing parents to seek treatment through over-stretched taxpayer-funded programs, or to forgo treatment altogether.

"HMOs and health insurers are denying autistic children the most effective medical treatment that is available, with severe consequences for them, their families, and the state's taxpayers," said Fredric D. Woocher, lead counsel in the suit. "Insurance companies are blatantly violating California law. Yet the Department of Managed Health Care is not only standing by and doing nothing to prevent these violations; it is actually supporting the insurers as they abandon autistic children and their families."

Insurer's New Tactic in the Battle to Avoid Paying for Autism

ABA is a form of behavioral therapy that has been scientifically proven to improve brain function in autistic children. For years, insurance companies refused to pay for ABA on the grounds that it was "experimental" and that there was insufficient medical evidence to show that it was an effective treatment for autism. But the evidence supporting the efficacy of ABA is now overwhelming. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institute of Mental Health, and the United States Surgeon General all agree that behavioral interventions, such as ABA, are a critical component of any comprehensive autism treatment program.

According to the lawsuit, until March of this year, health care consumers were able to appeal an insurer's denial of ABA through the DMHC's Independent Medical Review ("IMR") system, in which a treatment denial is reviewed by a team of doctors that is unaffiliated with the insurance company that denied the treatment and independent of the DMHC.

The suit alleges that as the IMR doctors increasingly overturned insurer treatment denials, compelling the insurers to pay for ABA, insurers privately urged the DMHC to change its procedures and process the treatment denials through the DMHC's own internal grievance review system. Unlike the IMR system, in which independent doctors evaluate whether a treatment should be provided on the basis of whether it is medically necessary and effective, the grievance system is conducted by DMHC staff, who are not doctors and who simply defer to the insurers' determination of whether the claim is even covered by their health care policies.

"Health insurers want to re-write the law to benefit their bottom line and the regulators are holding the pen," said Pam Pressley, Consumer Watchdog's Litigation Director. "California's mental health laws are clear: doctors get to decide whether care is needed, not insurance company bureaucrats or government lawyers."

Consumer Watchdog has learned that the health insurance industry mounted a lobbying campaign to convince the Schwarzenegger Administration that ABA is an "educational" program not covered by health insurance policies. On March 9, 2009, the DMHC issued a memo indicating that the agency would review ABA and other autism treatment denials through the DMHC's internal grievance system as urged by insurers.

Consumer Watchdog has evidence that the DMHC has in fact upheld the insurers' denials of ABA on coverage grounds in violation of the Mental Health Parity Act. That law requires insurers to pay for any "medically necessary" and effective autism treatment -- a decision that must be made by independent doctors, not by insurance company bureaucrats or government lawyers.

Kristie Sepulveda Burchit, mother of Aidan who suffers from autism, joined the group to announce the lawsuit. Kristie's insurer, Blue Cross, first refused to provide ABA in 2008 on the ground that it was not medically effective as a treatment for autism. Kristie requested an IMR and the independent physicians who reviewed her appeal overturned the Blue Cross denial. Then, in 2009, shortly after the DMHC issued its March 9 memo, Blue Cross again refused to pay for Burchit's continued ABA autism treatment, this time on the basis that it supposedly was "not covered" by Kristie's health insurance policy because ABA is an "educational service." Burchit has now appealed the denial to the DMHC through the grievance system and is awaiting a decision from the regulator. Consumer Watchdog said that if it wins the lawsuit, the DMHC would have to order Blue Cross to provide ABA treatment for Aidan.

The suit also alleges that the DMHC and its Director Cindy Ehnes:

• Illegally instituted a policy of denying ABA treatment on the ground that providers were inadequately licensed, despite the fact that the law clearly requires health insurers to cover all medically necessary treatments for autism, including ABA, whenever such services are either provided or supervised by a licensed or certified professional.
• Illegally withheld public documents properly requested under the California Public Records Act, which would expose how the DMHC conducts its "grievance system" and would reveal the full extent of the DMHC's violations of the mental health parity law.

Nearly 1 out of every 150 children born in the United States is diagnosed with autism. As of December 2007, the California Department of Developmental Services provided care to nearly 37,000 Californians with autism.

SOURCE Consumer Watchdog

Toronto Canada Mina Mar Group Inc (www.minamargroup.com) a privately held Canadian company today filed a lawsuit in Toronto Canada against Belmont Partners. www.belmontpartners.net and Joseph Meuse personally.

Amongst other things, the companies purchased by Mina Mar Group had the following names and trading symbols: Vsheild Software Corp. - VSHE, King Resources Inc. - KING and Aztec Technology Partners, Inc. - AZTC. In summary, Mina Mar Group takes the position that assets were removed from the 3 aforementioned companies which belong to all of the shareholders, however Joseph Meuse admitted to Miro Zecevic President of Mina Mar Group that these assets were distributed to only to some, but not all of the shareholders. Miro Zecevic said "Upon learning this, it just didn't sit well with us. That action exposed us and these Companies to law suits from dissenting shareholders, SEC inquiries, sanctions and other possible liabilities that Mina Mar did not anticipate and did not bargain for.

"We are extremely disappointed that Belmont and Mr. Meuse (The X management) simply refused to address these matters and other matters when brought to their attention. Moreover there are other serious irregularities that were discovered by our internal forensic research analysts that would seriously undermine any minority shareholder of these companies. In addition any company that merged with these issuers would have been in peril. Our team has worked very hard over the past several months by completing filings on Pink Sheets and increasing these issuers ranks from "STOP NO INFORMATION" to "YIELD LIMITED INFORMATION" and including introducing these issuers to substantial companies in Europe USA and China as per various past news releases. All of these pending deals are now off the table. We have a very strong presence in China with approximately 20 Chinese companies looking to enter the public markets with reverse mergers. In good conscience and as a good corporate citizen we can not recommend these companies to our clients nor provide any sort of meaningful investor relations to these issuers shareholders. We recently launched a shareholder advocacy division where we assist minority shareholders in cases where the issuers are abusive or where the issuers simply abandon the assets, and leave minority shareholders in the cold. This Belmont matter goes against the very principles we believe in."

Mina Mar Group acknowledges the efforts of Big Apple Consulting, a USA based company, who is also involved in a similar type of lawsuit with Belmont on a similar and unrelated transaction.

The entire Mina Mar Group law suit against Belmont Partners can be viewed at this link http://www.minamargroup.com/client_interests.php

SOURCE Mina Mar Group

William Cozzi, a Chicago police officer, was sentenced today to 40 months in federal prison for violating the federal civil rights of a man whom the officer struck repeatedly with a dangerous weapon while the man was handcuffed and shackled in a wheelchair, announced Acting Assistant Attorney General Loretta King for the Civil Rights Division, U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald for the Northern District of Illinois and Robert D. Grant, Special Agent-in-Charge of the Chicago Office of the FBI.

Cozzi, 52, of Chicago, pleaded guilty in January and admitted that he used excessive or unreasonable force while acting under color of law. He was ordered to begin serving his sentence on Aug. 6, 2009. The sentence was imposed by U.S. District Judge Blanche Manning, who also imposed a $2,000 fine, two years of supervised release and 200 hours of community service. Cozzi joined the Chicago Police Department in 1992 and was assigned to the 25th District at the time of the alleged incident. He was subsequently suspended from duty.

Cozzi was charged in April 2008 with depriving the victim of his civil rights. In pleading guilty, Cozzi admitted that on Aug. 2, 2005, while performing his duties as a police officer, he used a "sap" -- a dangerous weapon similar to a blackjack -- to repeatedly strike the unnamed victim, identified only as "Victim A," who was handcuffed and shackled in a wheelchair at Norwegian American Hospital in Chicago, resulting in bodily injury. At the time, Victim A was awaiting treatment in the hospital emergency room after being stabbed in the shoulder.

"Police officers are given tremendous authority and responsibility so that they can protect and serve the public trust. Those who abuse that authority face serious consequences," said Loretta King, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. "The Civil Rights Division is committed to the vigorous enforcement of federal laws prohibiting this type of misconduct by law enforcement officials."

"No law enforcement officer may use unreasonable force with impunity and every citizen, regardless of being in police custody, has a Constitutional right to be free from the use of excessive force," U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald said.

Cozzi pleaded guilty while reserving his right to appeal a judge's rulings last year denying his motion to dismiss the indictment on the grounds that the prosecution was based in part on compelled statements he made to the Chicago Police Department's Office of Professional Standards and during a police review board hearing.

According to a plea agreement, Cozzi was dispatched to the hospital to respond to the stabbing and approached Victim A who was being loud and verbally abusive while awaiting treatment for the stabbing. Shortly after approaching Victim A, Cozzi placed him in handcuffs and left the emergency room to retrieve leg shackles, which he then placed upon Victim A. With the victim restrained, Cozzi used a sap to repeatedly strike him in the face and body. At the time, Victim A posed no physical threat to Cozzi or anyone else at the hospital, according to the plea agreement.

Cozzi also admitted that he subsequently prepared a false arrest report and misdemeanor complaints stating that Victim A attempted to punch him and two hospital security guards, as well as a false tactical response report stating that he used an "open hand strike" on Victim A but omitted that he struck the victim with a sap.

SOURCE U.S. Department of Justice

The NAACP and nine class representatives today filed a motion for class certification in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, on behalf of a nationwide group of current and former employees of Eli Lilly Company. At the same time, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint alleging that the pharmaceutical giant discriminates against its African-American employees in pay, promotion and related promotional opportunities and that Lilly's discriminatory policies and practices deny these African Americans an equal opportunity to advance in their careers.

Accompanying the class certification motion and amended complaint were certified declarations by more than 100 members of the class throughout the United States regarding their adverse employment experiences at the company.

The legal actions were announced at 11 a.m. Tuesday on the steps of the U.S. District Courthouse in Indianapolis by Angela Ciccolo, National General Counsel of the NAACP; plaintiffs' spokesperson Cassandra Welch; and the plaintiffs' attorney and new Co-lead Counsel David Sanford, of Sanford Wittels & Heisler LLP.

Sanford Wittels & Heisler, a national civil rights firm with offices in Washington, D.C., New York City and San Francisco, and the Morelli Ratner firm, a New York City-based plaintiff's firm have joined with Rose & Rose, a civil rights firm in Washington, DC, as Co-lead Counsel in the matter. The plaintiff's local counsel in Indiana is Rob Dassow of Hovde, Dassow & Deets, LLC.

The NAACP, Cassandra Welch in her individual capacity, as well as Raynard Tyson, Sheryl A. Davis, Clara Walker, Delores Ryan, Allison Carter, Lawanda Rutledge, Joy Mason, Kelly French and Jackie Colbert are named as class representatives on behalf of themselves and the class of current and past employees of Eli Lilly who experienced pervasive and longstanding racial discrimination as Lilly employees. There are an estimated 2,000 members of the class.

"More than 100 African American employees have filed declarations outlining the toll of Eli Lilly's discrimination on them and their families. Lost earnings and benefits coupled with the humiliation and distress of years of not being recognized for their merit and being held back because of the color of their skin," said Mr. Benjamin Jealous, President of the NAACP. "Companies like Eli Lilly who practice the anachronistic policies of racial discrimination harm not only the victims, but the competitiveness of U.S. business which must conduct business in an increasingly diverse marketplace."

The plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief, back pay, front pay, and attorneys' fees, costs and expenses to redress Lilly's pervasive and discriminatory employment practices.

All of the plaintiffs worked at Lilly locations in the U.S. over the past three decades and many continue to work there today: Mr. Tyson resided in North Carolina and was employed by Lilly from 1999 through 2004; Ms. Davis has been employed as a sales representative by Lilly in Memphis, TN, since March 2000; Ms. Walker resides in Indianapolis and has been employed at Lilly since 1988; Ms. Ryan resides in Indianapolis and has been employed at Lilly since 1977; Ms. Carter resides in Indianapolis and has been employed at Lilly since 2000; Ms. Rutledge resides in Olympia Fields, IL, and has been employed at Lilly since 2003; Ms. Mason resides in Indianapolis and has been employed at Lilly since 1998 and Kelly French resides in Indianapolis and was employed at Lilly from 1999 through 2008.

"Lilly discriminates against its African-American employees by advancing the company's white employees more quickly, and by denying African-American employees equal job assignments, promotional opportunities, training, compensation and other benefits of employment," said Mr. Sanford, Co-Lead Class Counsel. "These actions are part of Lilly's continuing pattern and practice of treating African-American employees differently from white employees. Such callous and unlawful behavior gives a new and warped meaning to the term 'lily white.' It cannot be allowed to continue."

Ms. Welch resided in Indianapolis during her employment by Lilly from 1992 until 2004. She is a long-time member of the NAACP, which is committed to the improvement of the social and economic status of minority groups, the elimination of racial prejudice and discrimination, and the attainment of civil rights and equal opportunities for its members and others. The majority of the members of the NAACP are African American.

"I have been subjected to blatant and persistent pay discrimination throughout my tenure at Lilly," said Ms. Welch. "I had to endure years of racist comments and threats -- including having a dark-colored doll with a noose around its neck left on my desk -- just to remain employed. My complaints to supervisors were never properly investigated, and I was ultimately let go by the company based on an untrue allegation by a co-worker."

Similar employment horror stories of the nine class representatives are described in the filing and in the more than 100 declarations.

"As these individual and collective employment experiences make clear, for several decades Lilly has intentionally engaged in discriminatory practices with indifference to the federally protected rights of its African American employees," said Ms. Ciccolo, General Counsel of the NAACP. "This company's longstanding policies and patterns of discrimination have injured and damaged these nine class representatives and all of the other African-Americans it employs. The legal actions we are taking in Indianapolis federal court are required to bring that injury and damage to a prompt and permanent end."

SOURCE Sanford Wittels & Heisler, LLP

Documents from all five cases of Brown v. Board of Education Presented for the First Time

The struggle for freedom is a recurring theme in the annals of American history, and it is the subject of a new exhibition of milestone documents opening June 16 at the National Archives at Atlanta.

To mark the 75th anniversary of the National Archives and Records Administration, the National Archives at Atlanta opens Documented Rights, a traveling exhibition of original documents from each of the 13 regional branches of the National Archives.

Documented Rights presents records that give voice to the national struggle for human and civil rights. It features more than 80 documents, facsimiles, images and sound recordings, including:

• Selected documents from all five court cases that comprised Brown v. Board of Education Topeka, the landmark Supreme Court ruling that ended school segregation -- exhibited for the first time together;
• Court records of the schooner Amistad, that tell the story of 53 Africans who resisted enslavement, overpowered the ship's captain and were found off the coast of Long Island;
• Court records from San Francisco in the 1890s chronicling the citizenship odyssey of San Francisco-born Wong Kim Ark;
• The official logbook recording the WWII evacuation and relocation of Aleuts in Alaska;
• Court records reflecting the efforts of white residents of Koinonia Farms, Georgia, to overcome various forms of discrimination;
• An early Montgomery Improvement Association booklet by Martin Luther King, Jr.; and
• A court martial order for Second Lt. Jackie Robinson who refused to move to the back of the bus on a military post.

Documented Rights is part of a nationwide series of commemorative events that includes a one-day symposium at the National Archives at Atlanta on June 13 on the legacy of the Civil Rights Movement; registration for the symposium is closed.

The exhibition is free and open to the public at the National Archives at Atlanta, 5780 Jonesboro Road, Morrow, Georgia. The facility hours are Tuesday - Saturday, 8:30 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Call 770-968-2100 for more information or see http://www.archives.gov/southeast/.

Source: National Archives

Loretta King, the Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, announced today that Special Litigation Counsel Kristy Parker, a senior attorney in the Division's Criminal Section, has been selected to receive the 2009 Top Prosecutor Award from the Women in Federal Law Enforcement (WIFLE).

Parker was selected for her role as the lead prosecutor in the successful 2008 case of United States v. Sydnor, et al., which resulted in the federal conviction of three Kentucky jailers who retaliated against an 18-year-old traffic offender by arranging to have him locked in a jail cell with violent inmates, who in turn brutally assaulted and raped the teenaged victim.

"Kristy Parker represents the tenacious spirit and extraordinary commitment of the many fine career attorneys who serve the public interest at the Justice Department. Her tireless and extraordinary litigative ability vindicated the civil rights of the victim," said Acting Assistant Attorney General Loretta King for the Civil Rights Division. "We thank the Women in Federal Law Enforcement for recognizing her for this distinguished honor."

"I congratulate Ms. Parker for receiving this high honor. Her unwavering dedication made certain that the officers who trampled on the dignity and rights of a powerless teenager were brought to justice," said Mark Kappelhoff, Chief of the Division's Criminal Section.

The victim was arrested on Valentine's Day, 2003, and taken to the Grant County, Ky., Detention Center. A sergeant and several officers teased the teenager at the jail and after announcing he needed to be "taught a lesson," visited a jail cell filled with hardened criminals and told them that they would be bringing down a young man who needed to be "messed" with. The officers then escorted him down a hallway lined with cells filled with hardcore criminals, as inmates yelled, "Fresh Meat!"; "Give him to me!" and "Happy Valentine's Day!" The officers pushed the boy into the cell, slammed the door shut and left him without looking back. In the next hours the boy was viciously raped by an inmate and abused by others.

During the investigation and trial, Parker and another lawyer under her supervision won over reluctant law enforcement witnesses and made a powerful presentation of the evidence. Parker delivered arguments that educated and moved a jury initially reluctant to convict law enforcement officers. The jury convicted the defendants on all counts. They received lengthy prison sentences.

This is the third consecutive year in which WIFLE selected an attorney from the Civil Rights Division's Criminal Section as its top prosecutor. Last year, Deputy Chief Paige Fitzgerald received the award for her successful cold case prosecution of James Ford Seale, a former Ku Klux Klansman, for the racially-motivated murders of two young black men killed in Mississippi more than 40 years earlier. Deputy Chief Bobbi Bernstein was named WIFLE's top prosecutor in 2007 for her role in the case of United States v. Saldana, et al., a prosecution marking the first -- and to date, the only -- use of federal criminal civil rights statutes to prosecute violent hate crimes carried out by members of a traditional street gang.

Parker has served the Justice Department for a decade and has been a trial attorney in the Criminal Section for six years. She will be presented the Top Prosecutor Award at a banquet ceremony honoring WIFLE award recipients on June 17, 2009, in Tucson, Ariz.

The mother of a 12-year-old autistic boy who died while in the care of a psychiatrist at a group home has filed a wrongful death and medical malpractice lawsuit claiming overmedication and improper care led to the boy's death.

The lawsuit was filed in Miami-Dade circuit court Tuesday by the boy's mother, Martha Quesada. In it, she alleges Denis Maltez died in 2007 after receiving an overdose of anti-psychotic drugs.

"This is a clear case of a 12-year-child who perished because he was given a lethal combination of off-label, dangerous, anti-psychotic drugs to control his behavior without appropriate consent, administration and supervision," said Howard Talenfeld, Quesada's attorney and partner with Fort Lauderdale law firm, Colodny, Fass, Talenfeld, Karlinsky & Abate, P.A., in Fort Lauderdale. Partner Maria Abate is co-counsel on the case.

"Tragically, this case is one of many cases where foster children and developmentally disabled children are given powerful drug to control their behavior instead of utilizing appropriate behavioral interventions," Talenfeld said. "This is an important first step in seeking remedy for Ms. Quesada's loss, and raising awareness of the cavalier prescription, administration of medications to control behavior with little regard for possible counter-indications or devastating results."

At the time of his death on May 23, 2007, Denis was under the care of psychiatrist, Dr. Steven L. Kaplan, at the former Rainbow Ranch group home, owned and operated by David Glatt. Both are named in the lawsuit.

The Miami-Dade County Medical Examiner found that Denis died of Central Serotonergic Syndrome. This resulted from "the co-administration of multiple psychotropic medications with no monitoring or supervision," the lawsuit claims. The drugs stimulated overproduction of serotonin - a naturally occurring chemical that help regulate a person's mood. This proved lethal, the suit claims. Denis, who had severe autism, died in a van after being restrained by group home staff.

The lawsuit claims Glatt replaced Denis's regular visits to Jackson Memorial Hospital with on-site care by Dr. Kaplan without Quesada's consent. During Denis's time at the facility, Kaplan only visited him twice. Kaplan prescribed a regimen of medications described "as chemical restraints to control Denis's behavior." Those included Depakote, an anti-seizure drug used for mood-stabilization; the tranquilizer Clonazepam; and anti-psychotics, Seroquel and Zyprexa. Several of the drugs lack Food and Drug Administration approval for use on children. They also warn of possible side-effects.

Quesada's lawsuit comes a month after the death of Gabriel Myers. The 7-year-old foster child had been prescribed a variety of mental health drugs, and later hanged himself. The use of psychiatric medications on Florida foster children now is being studied by the state Department of Children and Families.

SOURCE Colodny, Fass, Talenfeld, Karlinsky & Abate

Today, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled in favor of The Procter & Gamble Company (P&G) in the patent infringement lawsuit filed by P&G against Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. The positive ruling protects P&G's rights in the U.S. to exclusively market the osteoporosis therapy Actonel(R) (risedronate sodium) tablets. Actonel is commercialized through a collaboration between Procter & Gamble Pharmaceuticals and sanofi-aventis.

On August 13, 2004, P&G filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Teva to enforce P&G's U.S. composition of matter patent for risedronate, the active ingredient in Actonel. Teva sought to market a generic version of Actonel in the United States under the assertion that the Actonel patent was not valid due to obviousness of the invention. On February 28, 2008, the Court ruled in favor of P&G, expressly rejecting Teva's validity challenge. Shortly afterwards, Teva filed an appeal of the decision. Oral arguments for the appeal were heard in December, 2008.

"We are very pleased and not surprised that the Court recognized and acknowledged the uniqueness of the risedronate molecule," said Tom Finn, P&G President, Global Health Care. "P&G pioneered the use of bisphosphonates in humans almost 30 years ago. We specifically selected Actonel for development versus a stable of many other bisphosphonates because our extensive R&D efforts suggested Actonel had many important, distinguishing characteristics including its potency and favorable safety profile. We will continue to invest in Actonel and continue to pursue development of future Actonel initiatives in the years to come."

The Actonel patent life extends through June 2014, including a pediatric extension, which was granted last month. Actonel was approved in 2000 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Actonel is the only oral monthly postmenopausal osteoporosis therapy approved to reduce the risk of both spine and non-spine fractures (non-spine fractures were measured as a group, not separately).

SOURCE The Procter & Gamble Company

On October 26th, 2007, a three member American Arbitration Association panel unanimously found the Pennsbury School District liable for wrongfully terminating and breaching its contract with Milestone Construction Management, Inc. and wrongfully withholding payments to Milestone in bad faith. The Bucks County, Pennsylvanian school district was ordered to pay over $1,000,000.00 in damages to Milestone and to Milestone's bonding company. In addition, the panel ordered the school district to indemnify Milestone in an amount not to exceed $333,352.39 for payments made by the bonding company to several of Milestone's subcontractors and suppliers. On December 30, 2008, the court granted Milestone Construction Management's Motion to Compel Pennsbury School District to proceed back to arbitration to finalize the claim of indemnity based on the amount Milestone Construction was required to pay Centennial Insurance Company under the indemnity agreement.

The Arbitrators' decision was handed down after more than thirty days of testimony involving dozens of witnesses.

The school district contracted with Milestone in the Spring of 2003 to perform the general construction for additions and alterations to Manor Elementary School, located in Levittown, PA. Despite significant problems with the plans and specifications that had been prepared by the Architect, Daley and Jalboot, and delays in obtaining required permits, the school was open and ready for the start of the 2003-2004 school year.

Milestone is represented by Bruce L. Phillips, esquire, of Venzie, Phillips and Warshawer, in Philadelphia.

Milestone Construction Management, founded in 1999 by Rocco Cavallo, is a full service construction management firm, providing a wide range of preconstruction and construction services throughout the Delaware Valley.

SOURCE Milestone Construction Management

White Plains, New York Law firm Tilem & Campbell announces the filing of a Federal Civil Rights Lawsuit naming the Village of Spring Valley, its Police Department, the Building Department, two building inspectors and several police officers. One of the police officers, Roxanne Lopez, named as a defendant in the suit, is featured prominently on Manhunters, a television program which airs on the A&E network and follows the exploits of a task force of local police officers and federal marshals that apprehends wanted fugitives.

The law suit alleges that on or about July 1, 2008, Police Officer Roxanne Lopez and other police officers tricked an individual named Moshe Katz into going to 20 Franklin Avenue in Spring Valley, New York, the location of an apartment Mr. Katz was attempting to rent out. Once there, Detective Lopez and another Officer named in the Federal Complaint only as Detective "Ted" demanded that Mr. Katz give an individual named "Hector" $1000, which they claimed Mr. Katz owed "Hector". "Hector" is believed to be a friend or acquaintance of Detective Lopez. According to Court papers, when Mr. Katz refused to pay money to "Hector", Detective Lopez contacted co-defendant, Assistant Building Inspector Manny Carmona, who immediately arrived at the scene. Both Detective Lopez and Assistant Building Inspector Carmona then threatened an illegal building inspection unless Mr. Katz paid $1000 to "Hector."

According to the Federal Complaint, Mr. Katz paid "Hector" $600 and was then forced by Detective Lopez to go the bank to get the additional $400, under further threat of an illegal building inspection. Detective Lopez and Detective Ted instructed Assistant Building Inspector Carmona to remain at the location until Mr. Katz returned with the additional $400. The Lawsuit alleges that the police, under color of law, acted as judges and jury in collecting a debt for a friend.

If anyone has any information on this case or other misconduct by any of the individuals involved in this case they should contact the law firm at info@tilemandcampbell.com" target=_new>info@tilemandcampbell.com.

SOURCE Tilem & Campbell