NoneThreat to dollar's role amid distrust

Giants WR Malik Nabers (toe) active vs. Colts

LOS ANGELES, Dec. 03, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP ("GPM") reminds investors of the upcoming December 16, 2024 deadline to file a lead plaintiff motion in the class action filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Acadia Healthcare Company Inc. ("Acadia" or the "Company") ACHC securities between February 28, 2020 and October 18, 2024 , inclusive (the "Class Period"). If you suffered a loss on your Acadia investments or would like to inquire about potentially pursuing claims to recover your loss under the federal securities laws, you can submit your contact information at www.glancylaw.com/cases/acadia-healthcare-company-inc-1/ . You can also contact Charles H. Linehan, of GPM at 310-201-9150, Toll-Free at 888-773-9224, or via email at shareholders@glancylaw.com to learn more about your rights. On September 1, 2024, The New York Times reported that Acadia has "lured patients into its facilities and held them against their will, even when detaining them was not medically necessary," and that "in at least 12 of the 19 states where Acadia operates psychiatric hospitals, dozens of patients, employees, and police officers have alerted the authorities that the company was detaining people in ways that violated the law." On this news, Acadia's stock price fell $3.72, or 4.5%, to close at $78.21 per share on September 3, 2024, thereby injuring investors. Then, on September 27, 2024, the Company revealed it had "received a voluntary request for information from the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York as well as a grand jury subpoena from the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri . . . related to its admissions, length of stay and billing practices." On this news, Acadia Healthcare's stock price fell $12.38, or 16.36%, to close at $63.28 per share on September 27, 2024, thereby injuring investors. The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) Acadia's business model centered on holding vulnerable people against their will in its facilities, including in cases where it was not medically necessary to do so; (2) while in Acadia facilities, many patients were subjected to abuse; (3) Acadia deceived insurance providers into paying for patients to stay in its facilities when it was not medically necessary; and (4) as a result, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. Follow us for updates on LinkedIn , Twitter , or Facebook . If you purchased or otherwise acquired Acadia securities during the Class Period, you may move the Court no later than December 16, 2024 to request appointment as lead plaintiff in this putative class action lawsuit. To be a member of the class action you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the class action. If you wish to learn more about this class action, or if you have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to the pending class action lawsuit, please contact Charles Linehan, Esquire, of GPM, 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100, Los Angeles, California 90067 at 310-201-9150, Toll-Free at 888-773-9224, by email to shareholders@glancylaw.com , or visit our website at www.glancylaw.com . If you inquire by email please include your mailing address, telephone number and number of shares purchased. This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. Contacts Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP, Los Angeles Charles Linehan, 310-201-9150 or 888-773-9224 shareholders@glancylaw.com www.glancylaw.com © 2024 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

(The Center Square) – Billionaire and advisor to President-elect Donald Trump Elon Musk was denied by a judge this week a $56 billion compensation package for his work as CEO of Tesla, the successful electric automaker that pioneered EV technology in the U.S. The package had been approved by more than 70% of Tesla's board of directors. A Tesla shareholder who owned just nine shares of stock in the company sued to block the 2018 compensation agreement. In addition to blocking the package this week, the judge in the case, Delaware Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick, awarded the plaintiff's attorneys $345 million, which Reuters reported is “one of the largest fee awards ever in securities litigation.” The Associated Press reported that “the fee award amounts to almost exactly half the current record $688 million in legal fees awarded in 2008 in litigation stemming from the collapse of Enron.” The ruling was widely criticized as government overreach into the private sector. Cathie Wood, founder and CEO of ARKinvest, called the ruling a "mockery." "Adding judicial insult to injury, Delaware Judge McCormick has ordered #Tesla shareholders to pay the plaintiff’s lawyers $345 million! The plaintiff owned 9 shares of $TSLA," Wood wrote on X. "McCormick is making a mockery of the sense of fairness essential to our American judicial system." Pershing Square CEO Bill Ackman wrote: "This decision and the payola for lawyers is absurd. We are going to see a migration of Corporate America from Delaware." The unique compensation package was high risk, high reward. If Musk hit all of his target goals to make the company hugely successful, as he did, then he would be awarded the compensation package. If he did not hit those marks, he would receive zero dollars. Musk and Tesla vowed to appeal. McCormick first voided the pay agreement in January, saying it was unfair and that the Tesla board did not negotiate well enough with Musk. In response, a supermajority of more than 70% of Tesla shareholders voted to approve the payment package for Musk earlier this year, but again McCormick sided this week against Musk and Tesla shareholders. Musk called the ruling a form of “lawfare.” “Shareholders should control company votes, not judges,” Musk wrote on X. Many other Tesla shareholders blasted the decision and the attorney fee decision. "The lawyers, judges, and attorneys did not create net-positive shareholder value from this clownery," Alex Guichet, who said he is a Tesla employee, wrote on X. "They do not deserve a single dollar. We employees did. We supported the shareholder vote with our own yes votes too. This is wrong on so many levels." Shareholder Jeremy Goldman wrote: "The majority of the owners of the company have made their desires known and it's just crazy that a single judge can basically say haha, no. I don't really care what you want. Also pay a few hundred million for the privilege of being ignored." The plaintiff's attorneys praised the ruling. “We are pleased with Chancellor McCormick’s ruling, which declined Tesla’s invitation to inject continued uncertainty into Court proceedings and thank the Chancellor and her staff for their extraordinary hard work in overseeing this complex case,” attorneys from Bernstein, Litowitz, Berger & Grossmann, the firm representing Musk’s opponents, said in a statement. A November 2024 study published by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform found tort costs amounted to $529 billion in 2022, or 2.1 percent of U.S. GDP. The study found that excessive tort costs hurt the economy. "In addition to having a substantial aggregate cost on the economy, a large portion of the total tort-related expenditures go toward litigating and defending claims and lawsuits rather than compensating claimants,” authors of the study wrote.

None

NEW YORK – President-elect Donald Trump’s lawyers formally asked a judge Monday to throw out his hush money criminal conviction , arguing that continuing the case would present unconstitutional “disruptions to the institution of the Presidency.“ In a filing made public Tuesday, Trump’s lawyers told Manhattan Judge Juan M. Merchan that anything short of immediate dismissal would undermine the transition of power, as well as the “overwhelming national mandate" granted to Trump by voters last month. Recommended Videos They also cited President Joe Biden’s recent pardon of his son, Hunter Biden, who had been convicted of tax and gun charges . “President Biden asserted that his son was ‘selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted,’ and ‘treated differently,’" Trump’s legal team wrote. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, they claimed, had engaged in the type of political theater "that President Biden condemned.” Prosecutors will have until Dec. 9 to respond. They have said they will fight any efforts to dismiss the case but have indicated a willingness to delay the sentencing until after Trump’s second term ends in 2029. In their filing Monday, Trump's attorneys dismissed the idea of holding off sentencing until Trump is out of office as a “ridiculous suggestion.” Following Trump’s election victory last month, Merchan halted proceedings and indefinitely postponed his sentencing, previously scheduled for late November, to allow the defense and prosecution to weigh in on the future of the case. He also delayed a decision on Trump’s prior bid to dismiss the case on immunity grounds. Trump has been fighting for months to reverse his conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records to conceal a $130,000 payment to porn actor Stormy Daniels to suppress her claim that they had sex a decade earlier. He says they did not and denies any wrongdoing. The defense filing was signed by Trump lawyers Todd Blanche and Emil Bove, who represented Trump during the trial and have since been selected by the president-elect to fill senior roles at the Justice Department. Taking a swipe at Bragg and New York City, as Trump often did throughout the trial, the filing argues that dismissal would also benefit the public by giving him and “the numerous prosecutors assigned to this case a renewed opportunity to put an end to deteriorating conditions in the City and to protect its residents from violent crime.” Clearing Trump, the lawyers added, would also allow him to “to devote all of his energy to protecting the Nation.” Merchan hasn’t yet set a timetable for a decision. He could decide to uphold the verdict and proceed to sentencing, delay the case until Trump leaves office, wait until a federal appeals court rules on Trump’s parallel effort to get the case moved out of state court or choose some other option. An outright dismissal of the New York case would further lift a legal cloud that at one point carried the prospect of derailing Trump’s political future. Last week, special counsel Jack Smith told courts that he was withdrawing both federal cases against Trump — one charging him with hoarding classified documents at his Florida estate, the other with scheming to overturn the 2020 presidential election he lost — citing longstanding Justice Department policy that shields a president from indictment while in office. The hush money case was the only one of Trump’s four criminal indictments to go to trial, resulting in a historic verdict that made him the first former president to be convicted of a crime. Prosecutors had cast the payout as part of a Trump-driven effort to keep voters from hearing salacious stories about him. Trump’s then-lawyer Michael Cohen paid Daniels. Trump later reimbursed him, and Trump’s company logged the reimbursements as legal expenses — concealing what they really were, prosecutors alleged. Trump has said the payments to Cohen were properly categorized as legal expenses for legal work. A month after the verdict, the Supreme Court ruled that ex-presidents can’t be prosecuted for official acts — things they did in the course of running the country — and that prosecutors can’t cite those actions to bolster a case centered on purely personal, unofficial conduct. Trump’s lawyers cited the ruling to argue that the hush money jury got some improper evidence, such as Trump’s presidential financial disclosure form, testimony from some White House aides and social media posts made during his first term. Prosecutors disagreed and said the evidence in question was only “a sliver” of their case. If the verdict stands and the case proceeds to sentencing, Trump’s punishments would range from a fine to probation to up to four years in prison — but it’s unlikely he’d spend any time behind bars for a first-time conviction involving charges in the lowest tier of felonies. Because it is a state case, Trump would not be able to pardon himself once he returns to office. ___

New disability ministers will ‘champion’ inclusion and accessibility – ministerWilliam Blair Has Negative Outlook of Medtronic Q3 EarningsNew conflict in northeast Syria could bring 'dramatic consequences' --UN envoy

Mutual of America Capital Management LLC Purchases 8,852 Shares of Bio-Techne Co. (NASDAQ:TECH)Bill Maher Threatens to ‘Quit’ His Show Over Trump Win

Manchester City boss Pep Guardiola has rubbished suggestions of a rift with Kevin De Bruyne, insisting he is “desperate” to have the playmaker back at his best. A number of prominent pundits, including former City defender and club ambassador Micah Richards, have questioned why the Belgium international has not been starting games amid the champions’ dramatic slump. City have not won in seven outings in all competitions – their worst run since 2008 – with De Bruyne featuring only as a substitute in the last five of those matches after recovering from a pelvic injury. The latest came with a 12-minute run-out in Sunday’s demoralising 2-0 defeat at Premier League leaders Liverpool, a result which left City 11 points off the pace and fifth in the table. Richards said on The Rest is Football podcast it appeared “there’s some sort of rift going on” between De Bruyne and Guardiola while former England striker Gary Lineker added: “It seems like all’s not well.” Former Liverpool defender Jamie Carragher said he felt “something isn’t right” and fellow Sky Sports analyst Gary Neville, the ex-Manchester United right-back, described the situation as “unusual, bizarre, strange”. Guardiola, speaking at a press conference to preview his side’s clash with Nottingham Forest, responded on Tuesday. The Spaniard said: “People say I’ve got a problem with Kevin. Do you think I like to not play with Kevin? No, I don’t want Kevin to play? “The guy who has the most talent in the final third, I don’t want it? I have a personal problem with him after nine years together? “He’s delivered to me the biggest success to this club, but he’s been five months injured (last season) and two months injured (this year). “He’s 33 years old. He needs time to find his best, like last season, step by step. He’ll try to do it and feel better. I’m desperate to have his best.” De Bruyne has not started since being forced off at half-time of City’s Champions League clash with Inter Milan on September 18, having picked up an injury in the previous game. Both the player and manager have spoken since of the pain he was in and the need to ease back into action, but his spell on the bench has been unexpectedly long. The resulting speculation has then been exacerbated because De Bruyne is in the final year of his contract but Guardiola maintains nothing untoward has occurred. He said: “I’d love to have the Kevin in his prime, 26 or 27. He would love it to – but he is not 26 or 27 any more. “He had injuries in the past, important and long ones. He is a guy who needs to be physically fit for his space and energy. You think I’m complaining? It’s normal, it’s nature. “He’s played in 10 or 11 seasons a lot of games and I know he is desperate to help us. He gives glimpses of brilliance that only he can have. “But, always I said, he himself will not solve our problems, like Erling (Haaland) won’t solve it himself. We attack and defend together. “We want the best players back. Hopefully step by step the confidence will come back and we’ll get the best of all of us.”

Judge denies Musk $56 billion Tesla compensation package

Shohei Ohtani wins 3rd AP Male Athlete of the Year award, tying Michael Jordan for 1 shy of record LOS ANGELES (AP) — Shohei Ohtani has been named The Associated Press Male Athlete of the Year for the third time. That ties the two-way superstar with Michael Jordan, an athlete Ohtani followed while growing up in Japan. He trails only Lance Armstrong, Tiger Woods and LeBron James, who each won the award four times. Ohtani received 48 votes in balloting by 74 sports journalists from the AP and its members. He earned his third National League Most Valuable Player award after helping the Dodgers win their eighth World Series title. Ohtani hit 54 home runs and stole 59 bases as the first player with a 50-50 season. His dog, Decoy, became a celebrity, too, helping Ohtani deliver a ceremonial first pitch at a game.

Dylan Gendron scored 30 points, including six 3-pointers and Sanford beat Oxford Hills, 74-50, in a boys basketball game on Monday in Sanford. Luke Gendron added 15 points and Ryan Alexander had nine for Sanford (3-2). Brayden Murch had 15 point and Cam Pulkkinen 11 for Oxford Hills (3-3). Oxford Hills’ Ella Pelletier drives to the basket between Sanford’s Ella Tederous, left, and Ava Hudson during their game Monday at Oxford Hills Comprehensive High School. Brewster Burns GIRLS BASKETBALL OXFORD HILLS 48, SANFORD 34: Ella Pelletier scored 23 points and the Vikings (4-1) beat the Spartans (2-3) in Paris. Gabbie Tibbetts added 13 points and Maddy Herrick had 10 for Oxford Hills. Mollie Puffer had 17 points for Sanford. GIRLS HOCKEY EDWARD LITTLE/LEAVITT/POLAND/MONMOUTH 10, YORK/TRAIP/MARSHWOOD/NOBLE 2: Reegan Saunders had three goals and the visiting Red Hornets (3-1-2) beat York (0-6). Leksi Langevin added two goals, while Adalyn Martin, Reagan Mulliner, Adeline Langer, Ella Labelle and Lauren Bolduc also scored. Phebe Schroeck and Kiera Alessi scored for York. We invite you to add your comments. We encourage a thoughtful exchange of ideas and information on this website. By joining the conversation, you are agreeing to our commenting policy and terms of use . More information is found on our FAQs . You can modify your screen name here . Comments are managed by our staff during regular business hours Monday through Friday as well as limited hours on Saturday and Sunday. Comments held for moderation outside of those hours may take longer to approve. Please sign into your Press Herald account to participate in conversations below. If you do not have an account, you can register or subscribe . Questions? Please see our FAQs . Your commenting screen name has been updated. Send questions/comments to the editors. « PreviousMoney Research Collective’s editorial team solely created this content. Opinions are their own, but compensation and in-depth research determine where and how companies may appear. Many featured companies advertise with us. . Gold has been a highly prized commodity for thousands of years, and yet much of it still remains within the Earth’s surface. A considerable amount of the precious metal can be found as deposits in gold mines around the world, most of which are owned and operated by gold mining companies. Operating a single gold...