Wed 2010-05-19 13:23 EDT

Conspiracy of Banks Rigging States Came With Crash (Update1)

...a nationwide conspiracy in which financial advisers to municipalities colluded with Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co., Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., Wachovia Corp. and 11 other banks... rigged bids on auctions for so-called guaranteed investment contracts, known as GICs, according to a Justice Department list that was filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan on March 24 and then put under seal. Those contracts hold tens of billions of taxpayer money...The workings of the conspiracy -- which stretched from California to Pennsylvania and included more than 200 deals involving about 160 state agencies, local governments and non- profits -- can be pieced together from the Justice Department's indictment of CDR, civil lawsuits by governments around the country, e-mails obtained by Bloomberg News and interviews with current and former bankers and public officials. "The whole investment process was rigged across the board," said Charlie Anderson, who retired in 2007 as head of field operations for the Internal Revenue Service's tax-exempt bond division. "It was so commonplace that people talked about it on the phones of their employers and ignored the fact that they were being recorded." Anderson said he referred scores of cases to the Justice Department when he was with the IRS. He estimates that bid rigging cost taxpayers billions of dollars...

Banks Rigging States Came; conspiracy; Crash; Update1.

Mon 2010-02-01 17:19 EST

Did Larry Langford bet Birmingham's future on Wall Street scheme? / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com

The Christian Science Monitor

Now on trial in US District Court in Tuscaloosa, Ala., on 60 counts of money laundering and bribery charges, Mr. Langford is at the center of a spectacular scandal where, prosecutors say, a popular mayor whose motto is ``Do something!'' gambled a city's future on a risky Wall Street scheme, all while taking bribes in the form of cash, Rolex watches, and designer clothes.

Christian science Monitor; com; CSMonitor; Larry Langford bet Birmingham's future; Wall Street schemes.

Thu 2009-10-01 17:56 EDT

98489 -- Landmark National Bank v. Kesler -- Leben -- Kansas Court of Appeals

J. J. LEBEN

Landmark National Bank brought a suit to foreclose its mortgage against Boyd Kesler and joined Millennia Mortgage Corp. as a defendant because a second mortgage had been filed of record for a loan between Kesler and Millennia. In a foreclosure suit, it is normal practice to name as defendants all parties who may claim a lien against the property. When neither Kesler nor Millennia responded to the suit, the district court gave Landmark a default judgment, entered a journal entry foreclosing Landmark's mortgage, and ordered the property sold so that sale proceeds could be applied to pay Landmark's mortgage. But Millennia apparently had sold its mortgage to another party and no longer had interest in the property by this time. Sovereign Bank filed a motion to set aside the judgment and asserted that it now held the title to Kesler's obligation to pay the debt to Millennia. And another party, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. ("MERS"), also filed a motion to set aside the judgment and asserted that it held legal title to the mortgage, originally on behalf of Millennia and later on behalf of Sovereign. Both Sovereign and MERS claim that MERS was a necessary party to the foreclosure lawsuit and that the judgment must be set aside because MERS wasn't included on the foreclosure suit as a defendant. The district court refused to set aside its judgment. The court found that MERS was not a necessary party and that Sovereign had not sufficiently demonstrated its interest in the property to justify setting aside the foreclosure. ...The district court properly determined that MERS was not a contingently necessary party in Landmark's foreclosure action. The district court also was well within its discretion in denying motions from MERS and Sovereign to intervene after a foreclosure judgment had been entered and the foreclosed property had been sold. The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

98489; appealing; Kansas court; Kesler; Landmark National Bank; leben.