Its far from over, CityTime Scandal has more scandal to come...
CityTime Shareholder lawsuit is set to move forward, Could shareholder win set precedent? Go Robbins Geller Rudman!!!....says SAIC now Leidos
knew about CityTime and broke SEC laws not disclosing the huge CityTime loss and refund to New York City!!? This blog has always said this. Lawsuit lists the step by
step reasoning on why SAIC knew about City Time...They were paying Denaults legal bills according to court records and this blogs exclusive news when Denault
sued SAIC and won, 4 years ago!!!???? http://suzannahbtroy.blogspot.com/2012/02/mayor-bloomberg-citytime-valentines.html
Federal Insurance Company asking for 15 million in restitution on CityTime from the City of
New York? Under-reported, this bit of news is really true according to court records. A back and forth
of letters between lawyers and Preet's office demanding money back on CityTime!!!? Even SAIC agrees!!!??
New York Daily news says the New York City is not paying the Whistle Blower on City Time!!! What's up with that? Is there more news in that news? The street thinks so.
Dr Redacto this blogs legal villain is foiled by Wonder Woman exposing the endless greed of government and SAIC (AKA Leidos) not paying up what's due...squeezing truth from evil men with her lasso.
" On March 29, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit put the shareholder claims back on the docket with what plaintiffs’ attorneys Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd say is a potentially precedent-setting opinion.In 2012 SAIC, after more than four decades of operation as one of Washington biggest consulting firms, split in two. The parent company rebranded itself as Leidos and retains the liability for the CityTime litigation. A spokeswoman from SAIC referred an inquiry from MarketWatch to Leidos. A Leidos spokeswoman declined comment on the Appeals Court decision.The appeals court judges agreed with plaintiffs that SAIC should go to trial on allegations it failed to disclose in march 2011 10K that there was a “reasonable possibility” of a large liability relating to claims it defrauded the city. In March 2012, SAIC agreed to pay New York City $500.4 million to resolve a federal criminal complaint alleging it defrauded the city."
" On March 29, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit put the shareholder claims back on the docket with what plaintiffs’ attorneys Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd say is a potentially precedent-setting opinion.In 2012 SAIC, after more than four decades of operation as one of Washington biggest consulting firms, split in two. The parent company rebranded itself as Leidos and retains the liability for the CityTime litigation. A spokeswoman from SAIC referred an inquiry from MarketWatch to Leidos. A Leidos spokeswoman declined comment on the Appeals Court decision.The appeals court judges agreed with plaintiffs that SAIC should go to trial on allegations it failed to disclose in march 2011 10K that there was a “reasonable possibility” of a large liability relating to claims it defrauded the city. In March 2012, SAIC agreed to pay New York City $500.4 million to resolve a federal criminal complaint alleging it defrauded the city.""The Government respectfully submits this letter to briefly respond to a new argument raised in the latest submission by Federal Insurance Company (“Federal”), dated March 9, 2016, concerning its request for Court-ordered restitution in this matter. (Federal’s letter is attached hereto as Exhibit A.) Specifically, the Government must address Federal’s new, and spurious, accusation that the Government’s opposition to its restitution request is motivated by the Government’s “own pecuniary interest,” in that the Government purportedly “wants to keep the money . . . for itself.”
"The Government respectfully submits this letter to briefly respond to a new argument raised in the latest submission by Federal Insurance Company (“Federal”), dated March 9, 2016, concerning its request for Court-ordered restitution in this matter. (Federal’s letter is attached hereto as Exhibit A.) Specifically, the Government must address Federal’s new, and spurious, accusation that the Government’s opposition to its restitution request is motivated by the Government’s “own pecuniary interest,” in that the Government purportedly “wants to keep the money . . . for itself.”
Suzannah B. Troy artist: CityTime Crime 2011 Suzannah B. Troy NYTimes Before 911 ECTP biggest Tech Titanic and NYPD "GIFTS"
http://suzannahbtroy.blogspot.com/2016/04/citytime-crime-2011-suzannah-b-troy.html?m=1
http://suzannahbtroy.blogspot.com/2016/04/citytime-crime-2011-suzannah-b-troy.html?m=1
