Cases and Decisions

Federal Court Grants London & Stout’s Motion to Dismiss Securities Fraud Complaint with Prejudice.

by

On December 3, 2021, the Honorable R. Gary Klausner of the U.S. District Court for the Central District California granted the firm’s motion to dismiss a third-party securities fraud complaint against our client with prejudice. After being sued for a scheme to defraud investors, a group of defendants attempted to evade responsibility by shifting blame to our client.

Consistent with our general approach, we immediately looked for the most efficient path to victory for our client. Within days of being retained, we filed a motion to dismiss the third-party complaint as fundamentally flawed in incurable ways. Adopting our reasoning—and agreeing that any effort to amend would be futile—the court dismissed the third-party complaint without leave to amend as procedurally improper and untimely. We are proud to have achieved vindication for our client quickly and efficiently.

Tom Stout Wins Compassionate Release from Federal Prison for Pro Bono Client

by

On March 26, 2021, the Honorable Claria Horn Boom of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky granted Tom Stout’s motion for compassionate release on behalf of an immunocompromised federal inmate in a matter handled by the firm pro bono. Our client was sentenced to 98 months in federal prison in 2018 for a non-violent drug offense. Despite being in the CDC’s highest risk category for complications from COVID due to multiple medical conditions and having no history of violent conduct, the Bureau of Prisons denied our client’s request for compassionate release then failed to either protect him from contracting COVID or properly treat him once he did. In fact, BOP was so overwhelmed by the volume of prisoners with COVID at the facility holding our client that it stopped performing tasks as basic as recording their daily vital signs.

After expressing “grave concerns about the BOP’s ability going forward to prevent reinfection or to address additional health risks stemming from his previous COVID infection,” the court proceeded to adopt our arguments that our client’s sentence warranted reconsideration due to the unusually harsh conditions during the COVID pandemic, the absence of any history of violent conduct, and the rehabilitative steps he took while in custody.