<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Heninger Garrison Davis, LLC</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress site</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 12:51:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Actos:  The Facts</title>
		<link>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/actos-the-facts/</link>
		<comments>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/actos-the-facts/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 12:51:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>hgdlaw</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Actos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taylor Bartlett]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/?p=1224</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By:  Taylor Bartlett Actos is a single ingredient brand name drug composed...&#160;&#160;<a href="http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/actos-the-facts/">Learn More</a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><a href="http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Actos-Package.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-1225" title="Actos-Package" src="http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Actos-Package-300x168.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="168" /></a></span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">By:  <a title="Taylor Bartlett" href="http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/attorneys/taylor-bartlett/" target="_blank">Taylor Bartlett</a></span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Actos is a single ingredient brand name drug composed of Pioglitazone.  Pioglitazone was developed, manufactured, and advertised by Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, the parent company of several US Takeda entities.  Takeda Pharmaceutical Company is a company headquartered in Japan.  Until April 20, 2006 Eli Lilly and Company was in collaboration to market and sell Pioglitazone within the United States.  </span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;">Pioglitazone (Actos) can be found in combination with other drugs under the following brand names: ActoPlusmet, ActoPlusmet XR , and Deutact.  It is within the Thiazolidinediones class (“TZD’s”).  Avandia and Rezulin are two notorious TZD’s.  Its approved use is to treat Type II Diabetes by exerting an antihyperglycemic effect only in the presence of endogenous insulin.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;">The FDA approved Pioglitazone for use on July 15, 1999, for the treatment of Type II Diabetes.  It was fast tracked through the approval process mainly because of its similarity to other TZD class drugs.  Numerous human clinical trials were conducted but no bladder cancer study was published prior to approval.  Studies conducted on lab rats, however, indicated that bladder tumors in male rats developed after exposure to Pioglitazone. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;">In 2005, the results of the PROactive (PROspective Pioglitazone Clinical Trial In Macro Vascular Events) three-year study were published.  The study, funded in part by Takeda and / or its partners, was intended to investigate the impact in total mortality and macrovascular morbidity on humans ingesting Actos.  During the course of the study, the researchers became aware that there was a statistically significant increase in bladder cancer occurrence in Actos users.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;">In 2010, a planned five year interim study on the association between Actos ingestion and bladder cancer was concluded.  It was a longitudinal cohort study funded by Takeda that evaluated 193,099 Kaiser Permanente Northern California patients who were older than 40.  Of those patients, 30,173 were treated with pioglitazone.  The results indicated that Actos use for longer than 48 months results in a 1.7 increased risk – fully adjusted.  It also showed that Actos use for more than 24 months resulted in a 1.4 increased risk – fully adjusted.  There was no noticeable difference in bladder cancer risk based on the sex of the Actos user.  Also, no clear pattern arose between increasing time since initiation of Actos use and bladder cancer risks.  On September 17, 2010, the FDA issued a safety announcement indicating that it was undertaking review of the data.  The report on this study was published in April 2011.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;">In response to Avandia’s bad press, a study looking at the association between Pioglitazone use and bladder cancer was conducted that reviewed adverse events submitted to the FDA from 2004-2009.  The study found that there was a “definite signal” between Pioglitazone use and bladder cancer.  This study noted a significant relationship even prior to the publication of other bladder cancer studies.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;">The French medical authorities reported in June 2011 that a greater than one year use of Actos increases risk of bladder cancer by 40%.  During that month, France and Germany banned Actos and the FDA finally announced that greater than one year use of Actos may be associated with increased risk of bladder cancer.  In August 2011, the FDA required new warnings for Actos which define the bladder cancer risks.  On the same day, the FDA recommended to healthcare professionals that they be especially careful when prescribing Actos to patients with a history of bladder cancer.  Takeda, in July 2011, recognizing the dangers of Actos recalled the drug in France.  Actos is one of Takeda’s top selling drugs and has had global sales of approximately 4.8 billion and accounted for approximately 27% of Takeda’s revenue.  As of today, Takeda has failed to recall this dangerous drug and is facing surmounting criticism and scrutiny for its manufacturing of this dangerous drug.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;">If you are anyone you know has taken Actos (or any of its combination drugs) and developed any type of bladder problem after ingesting it, call the law firm of Heninger Garrison Davis, LLC at 1-800-241-9779.</span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/actos-the-facts/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>LUCKY PALACE UPDATE:  Lucky Palace investor says work was done both with and against Sheriff Warren</title>
		<link>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/lucky-palace-update-lucky-palace-investor-says-work-was-done-both-with-and-against-sheriff-warren/</link>
		<comments>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/lucky-palace-update-lucky-palace-investor-says-work-was-done-both-with-and-against-sheriff-warren/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 12:05:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>hgdlaw</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gayle douglas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lucky Palace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[steve heninger]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/?p=1221</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By JoBeth Davis - bio &#124; email MONTGOMERY, AL (WSFA) - The seventh day of...&#160;&#160;<a href="http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/lucky-palace-update-lucky-palace-investor-says-work-was-done-both-with-and-against-sheriff-warren/">Learn More</a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div id="WNStoryHeader">
<div id="WNStoryByline">
<div>By JoBeth Davis - <a title="" href="http://www.wsfa.com/Global/story.asp?S=14043131" target="_blank">bio</a> | <a title="" href="mailto:jbdavis@wsfa.com?body=http://www.wsfa.com/story/18440564/lucky-palace-investor-says-work-was-done-both-with-and-against-sheriff-warren" target="_self">email</a></div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="WNStoryRelatedBox">
<div>
<div>
<h6>MONTGOMERY, AL (WSFA) -</h6>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="WNStoryBody">
<p>The seventh day of testimony in the Macon County Casino Civil Suit stretched on with Lucky Palace Investor Jess Ravich on the stand.</p>
<div id="raycomSidebar1">
<div>
<div id="sidebarHeader">
<p>Ravich explained to the court how his company, Libra Securities, would have structured the investment to Lucky Palace should things have gotten to the point of being ready to build.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p>&#8220;But for the sheriff granting assurances, we had everything ready to go, [everyone] was on board,&#8221; explained Ravich.</p>
<p>Studies had been completed on the viability of the project by researching Macon County and the surrounding areas, Ravich had spoken with Bracy, visited the site and its nearest competition, and he figured that the venture would be successful. Ravich started working on finding investors and brought Paul Alanis in on the project to work as a developer and casino manager. Ravich said all that was needed was for the Sheriff to say that should the facility be built according to the regulations at the time of the assurance, that it could open as a casino and as intended.</p>
<p>&#8220;It&#8217;s naive to think that anyone would spend a significant amount of money only to hope that something would get done,&#8221; said Ravich.</p>
<p>Ravich also agreed with testimony given on Tuesday by Alanis that said VictoryLand might even be able to benefit from the opening of Lucky Palace due to the &#8220;cluster effect.&#8221;</p>
<p>Ravich explained that he only visited Alabama a few times; his primary source of information regarding progress with the Sheriff was Paul Bracy Jr., President of Lucky Palace LLC. &#8211; Bracy&#8217;s testimony was heavily called into question earlier in the trial.</p>
<p>He then went on to explain to the court in detail the work that was done to persuade Sheriff Warren to grant the charity licenses for Lucky Palace. Ravich recruited a local Alabama investor, a man by the name of Ed Rogers. Rogers did a number of things beyond loaning money which included visiting with the Attorney General at that time, Troy King, about the Sheriff. Rogers told Ravich that AG King supported Lucky Palace coming to Macon County under a Planet Hollywood umbrella. King also told Rogers that Sheriff Warren should have been able to issue a &#8220;build-out letter&#8221; as requested under the broad rules he was given.</p>
<p>Ravich explained that once Rogers got involved, work started to determine what specifically the Sheriff didn&#8217;t like about Lucky Palace and why he hadn&#8217;t been willing to give any assurances. Ravich said they considered using an all-Alabama management team instead of Silver Slipper like originally planned.</p>
<p>&#8220;We were just trying to find out what his hot button was and why he wasn&#8217;t responding to us,&#8221; said Ravich.</p>
<p>A large effort was put in to showing an Alabama involvement rather than using groups from other states.</p>
<p>Rogers said negotiations with Sheriff Warren had been going well in e-mail correspondence with Ravich. Rogers thought they would see some kind of approval by mid-December and if that didn&#8217;t work they would &#8220;explore other strategies.&#8221;</p>
<p>Those strategies broke down to two things &#8211; 1) opposing the Sheriff with a different candidate in the upcoming election and 2) bringing a lawsuit.</p>
<p>Rogers brought a third man in to help &#8211; former Alabama Lt. Governor Steve Windom. Windom was hired to work as a lobbyist and consultant for their &#8220;other strategies.&#8221;</p>
<p>E-mail correspondence was sent that stated, &#8220;nothing short of fear of losing, or actually losing an election will persuade [Sheriff Warren] to write the letter.&#8221;</p>
<p>Windom sought the help of Steve Raby to work on the campaign of their candidate &#8211; current Shorter Police Chief Sandor Maloy. Windom wrote in correspondence that it would be an &#8220;all out war on the Sheriff for the months of the campaign.&#8221;</p>
<p>Windom and Raby sought payment for their involvement &#8211; $20,000 a month in advance starting in January 2006. They also sought a &#8216;success bonus&#8217; for either a successful election or for getting the sheriff to sign an agreement. Under this agreement, Windom would have gotten a $1 Million bonus. Windom&#8217;s suggested strategy of &#8220;creating fear&#8221; for Sheriff didn&#8217;t work. That&#8217;s when the charities banded together for the second strategy and a lawsuit was filed.</p>
<p>Read a case timeline <a href="http://www.wsfa.com/story/18309692/mcgregor-defends-character-attacks-in-casino-civil-trial">HERE</a>.</p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/lucky-palace-update-lucky-palace-investor-says-work-was-done-both-with-and-against-sheriff-warren/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>LUCKY PALACE UPDATE:  Developers hoped to make Macon County a major gaming destination</title>
		<link>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/lucky-palace-update-developers-hoped-to-make-macon-county-a-major-gaming-destination/</link>
		<comments>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/lucky-palace-update-developers-hoped-to-make-macon-county-a-major-gaming-destination/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 16:43:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>hgdlaw</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gayle douglas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lucky Palace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[steve heninger]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/?p=1218</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By JoBeth Davis - bio &#124; email MONTGOMERY, AL (WSFA) -On the sixth day of...&#160;&#160;<a href="http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/lucky-palace-update-developers-hoped-to-make-macon-county-a-major-gaming-destination/">Learn More</a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div id="WNStoryHeader">
<div id="WNStoryByline">
<div>By JoBeth Davis - <a title="" href="http://www.wsfa.com/Global/story.asp?S=14043131" target="_blank">bio</a> | <a title="" href="mailto:jbdavis@wsfa.com?body=http://www.wsfa.com/story/18429121/developers-hoped-to-make-macon-county-a-major-gaming-destination" target="_self">email</a></div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="WNStoryRelatedBox">
<div id="DisplaySizeId27">
<div></div>
<div></div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="WNStoryBody">MONTGOMERY, AL (WSFA) -On the sixth day of testimony in the Macon County Casino civil trial, potential Lucky Palace Developers explained that they hoped to turn Macon County into a destination for gaming similar to Tunica, Mississippi.</p>
<div id="raycomSidebar1">
<div>
<div id="sidebarHeader">
<h3>The Case</h3>
</div>
<div id="sidebarContent1">
<p>The civil suit between 15 Macon County Charities and Lucky Palace LLC. against Macon County Sheriff David Warren, Milton McGregor and VictoryLand started litigation in federal court on Monday, May 7, 2012.</p>
<p>The suit (originally filed by 17 charities) alleges that Macon County Sheriff David Warren worked with VictoryLand attorneys and Milton McGregor to draft rules and regulations for the conduct of electronic bingo in Macon County to give VictoryLand a monopoly.</p>
<p>&#8216;The Charities&#8217; all attempted to apply for Class B bingo licenses to operate at Lucky Palace. These applications were denied by Sheriff Warren due to the lack of a &#8216;qualified location&#8217; as stated in the rules. These plaintiffs are suing for lost profits associated with the denial of the licenses to the charities to operate at Lucky Palace.</p>
<p>The plaintiffs allege conspiracy, violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, better known as &#8216;RICO&#8217; as well as violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.</p>
<p>Read the full lawsuit <a href="http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wsfa/linkedwebdocs/https___ecf.almd.uscourts.gov_cgi-bin_show_temp.pl_file=file0.863406783008156.pdf">HERE</a>.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p>Lucky Palace President Paul Bracy Jr. wrapped up his third day on the stand early Tuesday morning. Following Bracy on the stand was Silver Slipper CEO Paul Alanis. Silver Slipper was a company Lucky Palace had been interested in contracting with to assist in developing and managing the casino.</p>
<p>Alanis was intended to testify as to his experience in developing and building other casinos as well as his work with Bracy and investor Jess Ravich on the Lucky Palace project.</p>
<p>Alanis explained his past work with the development of some of his casino projects. Those projects include casinos in Tunica as well as various parts of the U.S. Alanis even did some work with Southern Star Casino in Lowndes County in his capacity as the CEO of Silver Slipper.</p>
<p>He testified that Jess Ravich, a Lucky Palace investor and a friend of his approached him about working with Paul Bracy Jr. on the Lucky Palace project. A contract was drafted for Silver Slipper to assist in the development and management of Lucky Palace. Alanis had experience with working with larger corporations and helped Bracy develop Lucky Palace as a Planet Hollywood Casino.</p>
<p>&#8220;I tried to move [the project] forward,&#8221; explained Alanis. &#8220;I thought I could help keep the budget reasonable and get it done quickly.&#8221;</p>
<p>Alanis said he viewed Macon County as a great opportunity and location to open a venture like Lucky Palace.</p>
<p>&#8220;I wasn&#8217;t interested in getting into a project that would be an uphill battle. Looking at how well other Alabama facilities were doing, I thought we could get involved,&#8221; testified Alanis.</p>
<p>He told the court he toured the nearby facilities including the Native American facilities and even VictoryLand itself. Alanis discussed with Ravich that the Macon County area, especially with its proximity to Atlanta, had a &#8220;high propensity&#8221; towards gaming. Alanis told the court he thought Lucky Palace, along with VictoryLand, could be part of a &#8220;cluster effect&#8221; that would draw large groups of people to a number of facilities. In this way there would be competition, but the facilities would also play off of each other. This would essentially turn Macon County into the electronic bingo &#8220;Tunica of Alabama.&#8221;</p>
<p>Alanis told the court that in his experience, a casino the size of Lucky Palace would take 15 months to build &#8211; three months to complete the site work and a year to &#8216;go vertical&#8217; and construct the facility.</p>
<p>Alanis explained that this plan never happened. He testified that because of issues with cooperation from Macon County Sheriff David Warren, investors, including Ravich, were wary of releasing money to start work on the facility site without the guarantee of Class B bingo licenses for charities associated with Lucky Palace.</p>
<p>&#8220;You can&#8217;t get the financing [without the approval] and it would be foolhardy to give money without the approval,&#8221; explained Alanis. &#8220;You need to have the approvals to move forward and build and certainly to get the financing.&#8221;</p>
<p>Alanis understood that the lenders wanted to be certain that should they lend the money, the building would open as a casino and not as a bowling alley.</p>
<p>Alanis cited the process used in Mississippi to obtain a casino license.</p>
<p>&#8220;In most states you have a hearing,&#8221; he explained. &#8220;At the hearing you&#8217;re granted a permit. When you begin the process of construction, if you follow the conditions it&#8217;s understood that the actual license would be forthcoming after inspection.&#8221;</p>
<p>Alanis explained that he only read the first rules briefly &#8211; he was never made aware of any changes in those rules while he was working on the project.</p>
<p>Following Alanis on the stand was attorney Stan Gregory. Gregory works for the Bradley, Arant law firm out of Birmingham. Gregory was contacted on behalf of attorney Bobby Segall and his client Frank Thomas who was also looking at constructing an electronic bingo facility in Macon County.</p>
<p>Gregory testified that he drafted what was meant to be an additional amendment to the rules that Thomas and Bracy would have wanted to submit to Sheriff Warren. The language added included the ability to get a &#8220;build-out letter&#8221; as a pre-qualification to approving Class B bingo licenses. Gregory added that it was perfectly common for other parties to draft rules and regulations for consideration. His testimony was brought in to demonstrate that Lucky Palace was working to alter the rules for its own specific venture. Bracy told the court last week that he had no knowledge of the involvement of Thomas or Segall.</p>
<p>Lucky Palace investor Jess Ravich finished the day on the witness stand detailing his involvement in the project. During opening statements, McGregor&#8217;s attorneys described Ravich as &#8220;the guy behind this litigation.&#8221; Ravich&#8217;s testimony will stretch into Wednesday.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.wsfa.com/story/18429121/developers-hoped-to-make-macon-county-a-major-gaming-destination">http://www.wsfa.com/story/18429121/developers-hoped-to-make-macon-county-a-major-gaming-destination</a></p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/lucky-palace-update-developers-hoped-to-make-macon-county-a-major-gaming-destination/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>LUCKY PALACE UPDATE:  Lucky Palace President says Sheriff wasn&#8217;t &#8216;reasonable&#8217;</title>
		<link>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/lucky-palace-update-lucky-palace-president-says-sheriff-wasnt-reasonable/</link>
		<comments>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/lucky-palace-update-lucky-palace-president-says-sheriff-wasnt-reasonable/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 13:12:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>hgdlaw</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gayle douglas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lucky Palace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prominent cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[steve heninger]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/?p=1215</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By JoBeth Davis - bio &#124; email MONTGOMERY, AL (WSFA) -The fifth day of testimony...&#160;&#160;<a href="http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/lucky-palace-update-lucky-palace-president-says-sheriff-wasnt-reasonable/">Learn More</a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div id="WNStoryHeader">
<div id="WNStoryByline">
<div>By JoBeth Davis - <a title="" href="http://www.wsfa.com/Global/story.asp?S=14043131" target="_blank">bio</a> | <a title="" href="mailto:jbdavis@wsfa.com?body=http://www.wsfa.com/story/18374653/day-5-in-macon-co" target="_self">email</a></div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="WNStoryRelatedBox">
<div id="DisplaySizeId27">
<div></div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="WNStoryBody">MONTGOMERY, AL (WSFA) -The fifth day of testimony in the Macon County casino civil trial ended with Lucky Palace President Paul Bracy Jr. still on the stand.</p>
<div id="raycomSidebar1">
<div>
<div id="sidebarHeader">
<h3>The Case</h3>
</div>
<div id="sidebarContent1">
<p>The civil suit between 15 Macon County Charities and Lucky Palace LLC. against Macon County Sheriff David Warren, Milton McGregor and VictoryLand started litigation in federal court on Monday, May 7, 2012.</p>
<p>The suit (originally filed by 17 charities) alleges that Macon County Sheriff David Warren worked with VictoryLand attorneys and Milton McGregor to draft rules and regulations for the conduct of electronic bingo in Macon County to give VictoryLand a monopoly.</p>
<p>&#8216;The Charities&#8217; all attempted to apply for Class B bingo licenses to operate at Lucky Palace. These applications were denied by Sheriff Warren due to the lack of a &#8216;qualified location&#8217; as stated in the rules. These plaintiffs are suing for lost profits associated with the denial of the licenses to the charities to operate at Lucky Palace.</p>
<p>The plaintiffs allege conspiracy, violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, better known as &#8216;RICO&#8217; as well as violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.</p>
<p>Read the full lawsuit <a href="http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wsfa/linkedwebdocs/https___ecf.almd.uscourts.gov_cgi-bin_show_temp.pl_file=file0.863406783008156.pdf">HERE</a>.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p>Attorneys took Bracy through an exhaustive analysis of his tax troubles &#8211; Bracy says he&#8217;s working to pay off his back taxes to both the federal and state governments and says his former accountants share a large amount of the blame for misevaluating the worth of past projects. In all, Bracy owes approximately $4.5 Million in back taxes. Bracy was even unaware of a tax lien against Lucky Palace itself. On the stand last week, Macon County Sheriff David Warren told the court that had he known of Bracy&#8217;s tax issues, he wouldn&#8217;t have granted licenses to charities wishing to operate bingo through Lucky Palace.</p>
<p>Bracy detailed what he called a complicated relationship with Sheriff Warren. Bracy attached a heavy part of the blame to Sheriff Warren as to why Lucky Palace charities were never granted Class B bingo licenses.</p>
<p>&#8220;The sheriff and others manipulated things preventing us from getting a build-out letter which prevented us from starting construction on the building,&#8221; testified Bracy.</p>
<p>&#8216;The charities,&#8217; 17 Macon County Charities that applied for bingo licenses for Lucky Palace along with the casino itself allege Sheriff Warren, Milton McGregor and VictoryLand attorneys worked to construct rules to govern electronic bingo that would give VictoryLand a monopoly in the county. The lawsuit also states that the group continued to manipulate those rules through future amendments whenever it looked like Lucky Palace was close to qualifying.</p>
<p>The original rules, drafted by Fred Gray Jr., son of a VictoryLand attorney, along with John Bolton, another VictoryLand attorney, stated that charity bingo licenses would only be granted to charities that wanted to operate at a &#8216;qualified location.&#8217; That qualified location had to have a building that Sheriff Warren could inspect and have a value, including capital improvements, of at least $5 Million. Under that expectation, VictoryLand was the only group at the time who could qualify.</p>
<p>Bracy told the court that soon after the first rules were promulgated in December 2003, he went to talk to Sheriff Warren to declare his intentions to seek bingo licenses to operate Lucky Palace. Lucky Palace was officially formed, in a business sense, in February 2004. Four months later the first amendment to the rules was passed stating that any facility wishing to operate charity bingo must have at least 15 charity applications and it upped the required value of the facility to $15 Million.</p>
<p>Bracy said that&#8217;s when he started working to get a written assurance from Sheriff Warren that should he construct a facility, the licenses would be granted. Under the rules, Lucky Palace would have been required to have a facility already built so Sheriff Warren could inspect it before issuing the 15 minimum charities bingo licenses. Bracy testified that his lenders wanted a written guarantee from Sheriff Warren or the licenses before they would provide the money to purchase additional land and front construction costs.</p>
<p>When Bracy started lobbying Warren for the charity licenses, Lucky Palace had no facility, it owned about 3.5 acres of land &#8211; not enough for the facility &#8211; but it had options to purchase more land. Bracy himself even purchased a chunk of land intended to be signed over to the use of Lucky Palace. Warren still wouldn&#8217;t grant Bracy&#8217;s charities licenses, nor would he sign what Bracy refers to as a &#8220;build-out letter.&#8221; That letter would have been the written guarantee Bracy&#8217;s lenders wanted before forking over the funds to actually build the facility.</p>
<p>Attorneys pointed out that ultimately, Bracy&#8217;s land was never signed over, the land options were never explored and the land that had already been purchased through a financing plan went into foreclosure. Bracy says that&#8217;s because of his difficulty with Sheriff Warren that led the stall on the project.</p>
<p>&#8220;I thought it was reasonable for us to go to the sheriff to explain why we should get the licenses before the structure was built,&#8221; explained Bracy.</p>
<p>Bracy then explained that when he couldn&#8217;t get what he &#8216;needed&#8217; from Warren, Lucky Palace threw support behind a different candidate to oppose Sheriff Warren in the 2006 elections. Lucky Palace and its lenders hoped that &#8216;their candidate,&#8217; current Shorter Police Chief Sandor Maloy, would be more &#8216;reasonable&#8217; and help re-write the rules to help Lucky Palace. Bracy testified that he put money in a PAC, somewhere in the ballpark of $150,000, to help Maloy&#8217;s campaign.</p>
<p>&#8220;I tried to replace Sheriff Warren because of the struggle I had with getting a build-out letter,&#8221; said Bracy. &#8220;I thought it was the reasonable thing to do.&#8221;</p>
<p>Ultimately, Maloy was defeated by Warren. Bracy added they never technically had an agreement with Maloy to re-write the rules. They just hoped Maloy would have been more &#8216;reasonable.&#8217;</p>
<p>Bracy told the court that after repeated attempts to get Sheriff Warren&#8217;s cooperation, Warren allegedly told him that to get what he wanted, Bracy would have to sue him.</p>
<p>Bracy did just that.</p>
<p>The lawsuit was filed on December 18, 2006. Lucky Palace and the charities are suing for lost profits due to alleged conspiracy, violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, better known as &#8216;RICO&#8217; as well as violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.</p>
<p>&#8220;The lawsuit was to see that justice was done in hopes that we would prevail in getting a license to compete,&#8221; said Bracy before adding that he hopes Lucky Palace will eventually come to fruition.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.wsfa.com/story/18374653/day-5-in-macon-co">http://www.wsfa.com/story/18374653/day-5-in-macon-co</a></p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/lucky-palace-update-lucky-palace-president-says-sheriff-wasnt-reasonable/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>LUCKY PALACE UPDATE:  McGregor on stand for 5 hours</title>
		<link>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/mcgregor-on-stand-for-5-hours/</link>
		<comments>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/mcgregor-on-stand-for-5-hours/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 14:26:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>hgdlaw</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gayle douglas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lucky Palace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stephen heninger]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/?p=1210</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By JoBeth Davis - bio &#124; email MONTGOMERY, AL (WSFA) - Testimony for the third...&#160;&#160;<a href="http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/mcgregor-on-stand-for-5-hours/">Learn More</a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div id="WNStoryHeader">
<div id="WNStoryByline">
<div>By JoBeth Davis - <a title="" href="http://www.wsfa.com/Global/story.asp?S=14043131" target="_blank">bio</a> | <a title="" href="mailto:jbdavis@wsfa.com?body=http://www.wsfa.com/story/18253286/day-3-of-lucky-palace-victoryland-civil-trial" target="_self">email</a></div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="WNStoryRelatedBox">
<div>
<div>
<h6>MONTGOMERY, AL (WSFA) -</h6>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="WNStoryBody">
<p>Testimony for the third day of the civil case between 17 Macon County charities and Lucky Palace, LLC., against Macon County Sheriff David Warren, Macon County Greyhound Park (known as VictoryLand) and Milton McGregor started off with the continuance of testimony from Fred Gray Jr., the attorney Sheriff Warren asked to assist in writing regulations and eventual amendments for the issuance of licenses to operate electronic bingo in Macon County.</p>
<p>The plaintiffs allege conspiracy, violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, better known as &#8216;RICO&#8217; as well as violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution on behalf of the defendants. They&#8217;re suing for profits lost due to the fact that Lucky Palace was never able to obtain a license to operate because of amendments to the original rule.</p>
<p>Fred Gray Jr. continued the testimony he started for the court on Wednesday. Gray was the attorney Sheriff Warren tasked with drafting the rules and regulations to govern electronic bingo in Macon County following the passage of the referendum allowing charity e-bingo in the county.</p>
<p>Part of the contention with Gray Jr.&#8217;s involvement was not his experience, it was his family. Fred Gray Jr.&#8217;s father, Fred Gray Sr., is, and has been an attorney on retainer for VictoryLand for a long time. Gray Sr. testified as to his involvement on Tuesday and explained he did not morally agree with gambling. Gray Sr. told the court he knew of his son&#8217;s involvement with Sheriff Warren in writing the rules, but he had no input and received nothing of value from McGregor or VictoryLand as a result of his son&#8217;s involvement.</p>
<p>Stephen Heninger, attorney for Lucky Palace LLC., produced a memo and series of communications between Gray Jr. and Gray Sr. involving Gary Huckaby, another attorney for Lucky Palace. Huckaby notified Gray Sr. that he was seeking to collect all documents containing information on Lucky Palace from the Sheriff. The memo from Gray Sr. to Gray Jr. said &#8220;let&#8217;s go over it and see what we&#8217;re compelled to send.&#8221;</p>
<p>Gray Jr. explained that his father&#8217;s involvement was not as a representative of VictoryLand but as a friend of Huckaby. Gray Sr. and Huckaby are both past presidents of the Alabama Bar Association &#8211; Gray Jr. says his father &#8220;simply responded&#8221; at his behest.</p>
<p>Gray Jr. was also questioned about his relationship with John Bolton, another VictoryLand attorney. Bolton allegedly wrote the rules and regulations Gray handed over to Sheriff Warren to sign. Gray told the court that Bolton did write some of the regulations and said he did correspond with Bolton, however he couldn&#8217;t remember to what extent Bolton was responsible for the rules that were ultimately adopted.</p>
<p>&#8220;I can&#8217;t really go back in my mind and re-create that now,&#8221; explained Gray. The events described in this case took place back in 2003 and 2004. Since then, the Gray Law Firm where some of these documents were stored caught fire and those documents were lost. Servers at a different law firm crashed in 2005 meaning another large chunk of documents were forever lost. Most of this case must come from the memory of the witnesses &#8211; and these events took place almost 10 years ago.</p>
<p>Gray told the court shortly before finishing testimony, &#8220;It was never my intent, nor was it the Sheriff&#8217;s intent to draft rules that would favor VictoryLand.&#8221;</p>
<p>Milton McGregor also testified as a witness for the case on Thursday. Despite past legal proceedings, this was McGregor&#8217;s first time testifying in court in front of a jury.</p>
<p>McGregor explained that he had no hand in the creation of the Local Constitutional Amendment that allowed for the operation of charity electronic bingo in Macon County.</p>
<p>&#8220;The effort to pass the bingo referendum wasn&#8217;t made at my request. I didn&#8217;t oppose it. I definitely had an interest in it after it passed because I was definitely interested in being an operator for charities.</p>
<p>McGregor said that after the referendum passed, he began to get calls from charities wanting him to offer electronic bingo at VictoryLand. McGregor met with Sheriff Warren and Fred Gray Jr. to express his interest in operating an e-bingo facility.</p>
<p>&#8220;I thought, after visiting the Native American facilities, that if I built something nice, I thought people would come and be entertained…I was excited to get started for these charities,&#8221; said McGregor.</p>
<p>At that meeting McGregor told Sheriff Warren and Gray Jr. that he wanted to get started &#8220;soon.&#8221; He also offered the assistance of two VictoryLand attorneys &#8211; John Bolton and David Johnston. Bolton and Johnston both had experience with gaming regulations and McGregor thought they could serve as a &#8220;resource of information&#8221; in writing the regulations Warren needed, should they decide to use them.</p>
<p>McGregor told the court that he meant Bolton and Johnston&#8217;s involvement to merely be a resource and says they weren&#8217;t acting in the interests of VictoryLand, he thought they were acting on the best interests of Macon County.</p>
<p>&#8220;I was trying to be helpful,&#8221; explained McGregor.</p>
<p>Ultimately, McGregor said, he just wanted rules that were &#8220;fair and equally applied.&#8221; He said he would have accepted any rules and that he did not personally give input as to what he thought those rules should look like. McGregor testified that he didn&#8217;t even read the rules until after they were finalized, signed by Sheriff Warren and published in the local paper.</p>
<p>&#8220;Bolton would never propose anything from the point of view of VictoryLand,&#8221; said McGregor. &#8220;I gave him no instructions other than to be helpful if his help would be needed.&#8221;</p>
<p>McGregor did admit that he wanted ruled that were best for Macon County and also for VictoryLand. And that since Bolton was a Victoryland attorney, McGregor probably did pay for the work he put in when assisting Gray Jr. in drafting the rules.</p>
</div>
<p><a href="http://www.wsfa.com/story/18253286/day-3-of-lucky-palace-victoryland-civil-trial">http://www.wsfa.com/story/18253286/day-3-of-lucky-palace-victoryland-civil-trial</a></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/mcgregor-on-stand-for-5-hours/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Five HGD attorneys named as Super Lawyers® and Rising Stars</title>
		<link>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/five-hgd-attorneys-named-as-super-lawyers-and-rising-stars/</link>
		<comments>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/five-hgd-attorneys-named-as-super-lawyers-and-rising-stars/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 16:26:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>hgdlaw</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Announcements]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/?p=1200</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Stephen D. Heninger, W. Lewis Garrison, Jr. and Timothy C. Davis have...&#160;&#160;<a href="http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/five-hgd-attorneys-named-as-super-lawyers-and-rising-stars/">Learn More</a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Super-Lawyers-2012-ad.png"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-1201" title="Super Lawyers 2012 ad" src="http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Super-Lawyers-2012-ad-187x300.png" alt="" width="187" height="300" /></a></p>
<p>Stephen D. Heninger, W. Lewis Garrison, Jr. and Timothy C. Davis have been named to the Alabama <em>Super Lawyers </em>list as one of the top attorneys in Alabama for 2012.  No more than 5 percent of the lawyers in the state are selected by <em>Super Lawyers</em>.</p>
<p>Additionally, Stephen D. Heninger was chosen as one of the top 10 lawyers in the state of Alabama.</p>
<p>Gayle Douglas and Erik S. Heninger have been named to the Alabama <em>Rising Stars </em>list as one of the top up-and‐coming attorneys in Alabama for 2012.  Each year, no more than 2.5 percent of the lawyers in the state receive this honor. The selection for this respected list is made by the research team at <em>Super Lawyers.</em></p>
<p>Heninger Garrison Davis is headquartered in Birmingham with offices in Atlanta, New Jersey and New York and focuses on Business Litigation, Class Actions and Mass Torts, Intellectual Property and Personal Injury.  Please visit <a href="http://hgdlawfirm.com">http://hgdlawfirm.com</a> to learn more about the firm.</p>
<p><em>Super Lawyers</em>, a Thomson Reuters business, is a rating service of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. The annual selections are made using a rigorous multi-phased process that includes a statewide survey of lawyers, an independent research evaluation of candidates, and peer reviews by practice area.</p>
<p>The <em>Super Lawyers </em>and<em> Rising Stars </em>lists are published nationwide in <em>Super Lawyers </em>magazines and in leading city and regional magazines across the country.  For more information about <em>Super Lawyers, </em>go to superlawyers.com.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/five-hgd-attorneys-named-as-super-lawyers-and-rising-stars/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>HGD welcomes Kathryn Harrington</title>
		<link>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/hgd-welcomes-kathryn-harrington/</link>
		<comments>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/hgd-welcomes-kathryn-harrington/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2012 14:22:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>hgdlaw</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Announcements]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/?p=1198</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The law firm of Heninger Garrison Davis is pleased to announce that...&#160;&#160;<a href="http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/hgd-welcomes-kathryn-harrington/">Learn More</a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The law firm of Heninger Garrison Davis is pleased to announce that Kathryn Harrington has joined the firm. Kathryn’s practice focuses on representing individuals in the areas of pharmaceutical and medical device litigation where she is currently a member of a team of lawyers working on litigation involving Depakote, a drug which can cause major birth defects when taken by women during pregnancy.</p>
<p>To learn more about Kathryn, please visit the Heninger Garrison Davis website: http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/attorneys/kathryn-harrington/.</p>
<p>“We think Kathryn has the experience needed to provide valuable assets to our clients, especially in our pharmaceutical litigation practice,” said Lew Garrison, partner of Heninger Garrison Davis, of Robertson’s move to the firm.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/hgd-welcomes-kathryn-harrington/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>HGD Welcomes Dara T. Jeffries</title>
		<link>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/hgd-welcomes-dara-t-jeffries/</link>
		<comments>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/hgd-welcomes-dara-t-jeffries/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Apr 2012 14:05:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>hgdlaw</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Announcements]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/?p=1180</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Heninger Garrison Davis is pleased to announce that Dara T. Jeffries has...&#160;&#160;<a href="http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/hgd-welcomes-dara-t-jeffries/">Learn More</a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Heninger Garrison Davis is pleased to announce that Dara T. Jeffries has joined the firm. Dara is an attorney in the Atlanta office of Heninger Garrison Davis, LLC, focusing on intellectual property litigation. Her favorite quotation is “I took the one less traveled by, and that has made all the difference,” by Robert Frost. Dara’s background shows that, indeed, this has become her motto in life. She came to HGD with a chemical engineering degree from MIT, and a biomedical engineering degree from Columbia University.</p>
<p>Although she is a scientist at heart, focusing her Master’s degree research on reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament through medical device technology, Dara found that hard science and a laboratory bench were not her calling. Rather, protecting the inventions resulting from years of hard research by her scientific colleagues became her true passion. While in law school, she realized that protection of intellectual property was not enough, and Dara discovered a flair and affinity for litigation practice through her participation in Student Trial Lawyers Association. Following her desire to become a patent litigator, Dara’s path took her to Heninger Garrison Davis, LLC. She fully intends to continue following the road less traveled in providing innovative litigation tailored to each client’s need, rather than simply following a previously laid pattern.</p>
<p>When not advocating for clients, Dara indulges in her hobbies of weekly soccer games, catching up on the latest novels or historical research, or simply spending time with her family members and friends.</p>
<p>To learn more about Dara, please visit the Heninger Garrison Davis website: http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/attorneys/dara-t-jeffries/</p>
<p>“We think, with her unique background, Dara will be an excellent fit in our patent litigation practice,” said Timothy Davis, Managing Partner of Heninger Garrison Davis, of Jeffries’s move to the firm.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/hgd-welcomes-dara-t-jeffries/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>HGD Welcomes Brett Bartel</title>
		<link>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/hgd-welcomes-brett-bartel/</link>
		<comments>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/hgd-welcomes-brett-bartel/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2012 13:57:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>hgdlaw</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Announcements]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/?p=1175</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The law firm of Heninger Garrison Davis is pleased to announce that...&#160;&#160;<a href="http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/hgd-welcomes-brett-bartel/">Learn More</a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The law firm of Heninger Garrison Davis is pleased to announce that Brett Bartel has joined the firm. Brett is an attorney in the Atlanta office of Heninger Garrison Davis, LLC.</p>
<p>His practice specialty is in the area of intellectual property litigation, especially patent litigation. Brett has worked with many different technologies including pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, mechanical devices, motion imagery, computer technology, and medical devices. He is admitted in Georgia and is a registered patent attorney with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Brett was formerly with Gardner Groff, PC.</p>
<p>He attended Brigham Young University and graduated in 2003 with a B.S. in Microbiology. Brett also received his M.S. degree in Biology from the Georgia Institute of Technology. Prior to attending law school, he became a patent agent and worked in Georgia State University’s Office of Technology Commercialization.</p>
<p>In 2009, Brett earned his J.D. from the Georgia State University College of Law. While in law school and as a member of the 2008 and 2009 AIPLA Moot Court team, he competed in the Giles Sutherland Rich Moot Court Competition for patent law. Brett and his partner were regional semi-finalists and were awarded best appellee brief.</p>
<p>To learn more about Brett, please visit the Heninger Garrison Davis website: <a href="http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/attorneys/brett-bartel/">http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/attorneys/brett-bartel/</a></p>
<p>“We think Brett has the experience needed to provide valuable assets to our clients, especially in our patent litigation practice,” said Timothy Davis, Managing Partner of Heninger Garrison Davis, of Bartel’s move to the firm.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/hgd-welcomes-brett-bartel/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>WSJ:  Who owns Crimson and White?</title>
		<link>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/wsj-who-owns-crimson-and-white/</link>
		<comments>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/wsj-who-owns-crimson-and-white/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2012 13:31:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>hgdlaw</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/?p=1125</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By:  Allen Barra On the football field, the University of Alabama had...&#160;&#160;<a href="http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/wsj-who-owns-crimson-and-white/">Learn More</a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By:  Allen Barra</p>
<p>On the football field, the University of Alabama had a great season, winning the BCS national championship for the second time in three years. In the courtroom, however, there&#8217;s been less cause for celebration.</p>
<p>For seven years now the university has been locked in a bitter legal struggle with Alabama artist Daniel Moore over his right to depict scenes from Alabama games in his paintings. The university argues that it has exclusive rights to its trademark, which includes the Tide&#8217;s famous crimson-and-white colors. Mr. Moore maintains that his paintings are covered under his right to free speech. Appealing to a higher court, he says the freedom to paint what he chooses is a &#8220;God-given right.&#8221;</p>
<div>
<div>
<div id="articleThumbnail_1">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p><img src="http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/PJ-BG098_ALABAM_G_20120321191855.jpg" alt="ALABAMA" width="553" height="369" border="0" hspace="0" vspace="0" /></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p><cite>New Life Art, Inc.</cite>&#8216;Never Again&#8217; (2012) by Daniel Moore</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p>Simply put, the University of Alabama is telling Mr. Moore that he can&#8217;t portray its football players unless he purchases a license from them.</p>
<p>In a recent account of the case, the Birmingham News called the lawsuit &#8220;embarrassing.&#8221; News reporter Jon Solomon said in a phone interview last week that &#8220;Alabama couldn&#8217;t have picked a worse PR fiasco than the one they&#8217;ve created.&#8221;</p>
<p>To put it in football terms: Picture Alabama&#8217;s 2012 national champs playing a junior highschool squad—and going into the fourth quarter with the junior high leading. At least that&#8217;s what it looks like as the university, using the lawyers and other &#8220;material and financial support&#8221; provided by Collegiate Licensing Co., Alabama&#8217;s licensing agent, lines up against Mr. Moore and his Birmingham-based lawyer, Steve Heninger. (In addition to Alabama, CLC represents the NCAA and 100 other universities.)</p>
<p>So far, according to the Birmingham News, the university has spent nearly $1.4 million in legal expenses battling Mr. Moore. The irony is almost dizzying: Mr. Moore&#8217;s works have boosted Alabama football&#8217;s prestige, bolstering fan support for the same self-sustaining athletic department that is now seeking to restrict the artist&#8217;s right to portray the team in paint.</p>
<p>The late, great Bear Bryant must be spinning in his grave. As his career neared its end, Bryant himself selected Mr. Moore to commemorate his assault on Amos Alonzo Stagg&#8217;s record for coaching victories. In fact, several of Mr. Moore&#8217;s works are on display in the Paul W. Bryant Museum on the university&#8217;s campus in Tuscaloosa.</p>
<p>The legal wrangling began back in 2005 when the university filed suit against Mr. Moore to prevent him from using Alabama&#8217;s trademarks, including colors and logos, in his popular paintings. Many legal observers believe that Mr. Moore won a major victory in 2009 when a U.S. District Court in Birmingham ruled that the First Amendment gave him the right to paint, but that this right did not extend to merchandise such as coffee mugs, calendars and other items that the court considered commercial products rather than art.</p>
<p>The ruling satisfied neither party. The university appealed in an attempt to claim its trademark interests on any and all depictions, while Mr. Moore appealed on behalf of his right to use his artwork in all mediums.</p>
<p>Oral arguments were heard by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta on Feb. 2 of this year, and the court&#8217;s decision, which will reverberate through all of college sports, is expected soon. There have been few relevant cases regarding art and trademark infringement, the most important being a 2003 decision by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati. In 2000 Tiger Woods&#8217;s licensing company, ETW Corp., filed suit against artist Rick Rush to prevent him from selling prints made from his painting of Mr. Woods winning the 1997 Masters. The court decided that Mr. Rush&#8217;s painting, like Andy Warhol&#8217;s depictions of celebrities such as Marilyn Monroe and Mick Jagger, was sufficiently &#8220;transformative&#8221; to fall under First Amendment protection because the work—with Mr. Woods in three different poses with several past winners of the Masters—contained the artist&#8217;s own creative component and was not simply a likeness of Mr. Woods. Messrs. Heninger and Moore are hoping for similar logic from the Atlanta court.</p>
<p>Mark McKenna, a Notre Dame professor specializing in trademark law, is an amicus attorney for the case. In a phone interview last week, he said: &#8220;CLC and the university are using Daniel Moore as a test case. The bottom line is that Alabama and other schools want to control all the merchandise carrying an image associated with their schools. If they win, it isn&#8217;t clear how far they could take this. If Daniel Moore isn&#8217;t free to use an image from an Alabama game, how do we know that, say, Sports Illustrated wouldn&#8217;t be able to use a photo from an Alabama football game without the university&#8217;s approval? How do we know it would be OK for a newspaper to print a game photo? For that matter, could they even say &#8216;University of Alabama&#8217; or &#8216;Crimson Tide&#8217; in print?&#8221;</p>
<p>Does Mr. McKenna think that magazines and newspapers are concerned as they await the court&#8217;s decision? &#8220;They ought to be,&#8221; he says.</p>
<p>The University of Alabama responded by email: &#8220;While we regret the necessity of having to involve the courts in this matter, the lawsuit was necessary since UA must protect the value and reputation of our trademarks, name, colors, indicia, and logos by determining who uses them, as well as when and how they are used.&#8221;</p>
<p>Mr. Moore&#8217;s attorney, Mr. Heninger, says that &#8220;Alabama and CLC have made it clear from the start that they&#8217;ll go straight to the Supreme Court on this issue if necessary.&#8221;</p>
<p>It&#8217;s fourth-and-goal, and the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has the ball.</p>
<p><em>Mr. Barra writes about sports for the Journal. His next book, &#8220;Mickey &amp; Willie: The Parallel Lives of Baseball&#8217;s Golden Age,&#8221; will be published this fall by Crown.</em></p>
<p>A version of this article appeared Mar. 22, 2012, on page D4 in some U.S. editions of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Who Owns Crimson and White?.</p>
<p><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304692804577285434191164136.html?mod=googlenews_wsj">http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304692804577285434191164136.html?mod=googlenews_wsj</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.hgdlawfirm.com/wsj-who-owns-crimson-and-white/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

