DOCSLIB.ORG

Filing # 29423303 E-Filed 07/08/2015 05:45:05 PM

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Filing # 29423303 E-Filed 07/08/2015 05:45:05 PM Filing # 29423303 E-Filed 07/08/2015 05:45:05 PM IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA THE FLORIDA BAR Supreme Court Case No.: SC15-1011 Complainant, The Florida Bar File No.: 2012- vs. 50,591(150) RICHARD SAM LEHMAN Respondent. RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT Respondent, RICHARD SAM LEHMAN, by and through his undersigned counsel, for his Answer with Affirmative Defenses and Mitigating Circumstances, states and alleges as follows: 1. Admit 2. Admit 3. Admit 4. Admit 5. Admit 6. Admit 7. Admit, but affirmatively asserts that the audit also determined that all funds were used solely for the benefit of the Estate of Wilson Lucom. 8. Admits, that funds were transferred from the estate account into Mr. Lehman's Operating Account, but affirmatively states that no funds were retained by Mr. Lehman or by his law firm and that all funds were used for the benefit of the Estate of Wilson Lucom. 9. Admit, that for a brief period of time, that Respondent comingled funds by placing the funds in his Operating Account, but states that all funds were used for the benefit of the Estate of Wilson Lucom and that, as more particularly hereinafter set forth, that Mr. Lehman co-mingled the funds negligently and in an effort to protect those funds from dissipation by third parties from the Country of Panama. 145552.0060 I/I 00667802v. I 10. Admit that Mr. Lehman paid expenses of the Estate of Wilson Lucom from his operating account, rather than leaving the funds in the Estate Account, but affirmatively states that although Mr. Lehman's actions in so doing were wrong, that there were mitigating circumstances surrounding his misguided decision to do so, as hereinafter explained in detail. 11. Admit that through his negligence and in a genuine effort to protect the estate funds from unscrupulous parties in Panama, that Mr. Lehman violated Rule 5-1.l(a)(l) of the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar. Affirmative Defens es and Mitigating Circumstances 1. Richard S. Lehman has been a member of the Florida Bar for over 45 years. Lehman was born in Florida and is a long time resident of South Florida. Until the complaint in this case was filed, he never had a single Bar complaint filed against him and has scrupulously followed the law and his ethical obligations without a mark on him. 2. Before starting his private practice in Florida, Lehman graduated from Georgetown Law School in Washington D.C., obtained an LLM, master's degree in tax law at New York University Law School and served for years as a Senior Attorney with the Internal Revenue Service of the United States and as a law clerk to Judge William Fay on the United States Tax Court in Washington D.C. 3. Lehman has held an "AV" rating as an attorney since early in his career. Mr. Lehman also served in the Judge Advocate General's Corps of the United States Army Reserves. Prior to commencing work as the Executor of the Estate of Wilson C. Lucom, he had never been accused of any wrongdoing whatsoever and was held in the highest regard in his community by individuals from the political, religious, legal, financial and other sectors. During Mr. Lehman's 45-year history with the Florida Bar, he has taken his -2- 145552.00601/100667802v. l obligations to the public seriously. As early as 1978, Mr. Lehman edited, published and provided to the Florida Department of Commerce a book titled "A Guide to Florida International Business and Investment Opportunities," one of the first books in Florida promoting international commerce. He presently offers to the Florida legal community, free of charge, twelve (12) credit hours of continuing education credits in the field of tax law via video webinars. 4. Mr. Lehman has admitted to commingling assets of the Lucom Estate over a period of a few months from the Fall of 2006 until January 2007, and acknowledges that doing so was a result of his negligence and his efforts to protect those funds from unscrupulous individuals and judges in Panama, as more particularly hereinafter explained in detail. He is sincerely remorseful as to his error in judgment, but was under tremendous pressure, as hereinafter explained. 5. None of the commingled funds were used to benefit Mr. Lehman or his law firm and all funds were used for the Estate of Wilson Lucom, and paid out within a four month period together with nearly one million dollars of Mr. Lehman's own funds that he paid on behalf of the Lucom Estate in an effort to uphold the expressed intention of the will of Wilson Lucom. Moreover, Mr. Lehman received no compensation or fees for the hundreds of hours of time that he expended on behalf of this estate. 6. Richard Lehman and Wilson Lucom were friends and enjoyed an attorney client relationship in Palm Beach Florida for over thirty years before Wilson Lucom moved to Panama with his third wife, Hilda, a Panamanian and U.S. citizen. On June 2, 2006, Lucom passed away in Panama, and shortly thereafter the Fourth Civil Circuit Court in Panama, (the "Panamanian Probate Court"), on July 5, 2006, appointed Lehman as the -3- 145552.0060 I/I 00667802v.1 sole Executor of the Lucom Estate (hereinafter "Order 1025"). See Exhibit A hereto. Lehman's appointment was later confirmed by the Panama Appellate Court. Exhibit A-1 hereto. 7. Mr. Lucom's Will separately identified all his property, with particular emphasis on his real estate holdings (the "Real Estate"). Mr. Lucom left all of his identified Real Estate directly to a Panamanian Foundation whose sole purpose was to feed the poor and starving children in Panama. See, Exhibit B hereto. The main piece of Real Estate, a seven thousand (7,000) acre parcel of land in Panama on the Pacific Ocean (Hacienda Santa Monica), belonged to a Panamanian corporation known as Hacienda Santa Monica, S.A., which was 100% owned by Lucom at the time of his death. Since Lucom's death in 2006, the value of the property held by Hacienda Santa Monica S.A. has skyrocketed to more than One Hundred and Forty Million Dollars ($140,000,000). This property was clearly and unambiguously earmarked in Lucom's will to go to the poor children of Panama. 8. At the time of his death, Mr. Lucom was married to his third wife, Hilda Lucom ("Hilda"), a Panamanian and US citizen, who was then 83 years old and in poor health. Mr. Lucom had no children of his own. Hilda had five (5) children with her first husband, Gilberto Arias, a Panamanian citizen and lineal descendant of one of the most powerful families in Panama. The Arias family is a Panamanian family with two presidents in their lineage and who, among others, controlled Panama's most powerful political party at the time of Mr. Lucom's death. They were also the owners of Panama's second largest newspaper, the Panama American. Mr. Lucom was alienated from Hilda's children in Panama. -4- 145552.0060 I/I 00667802v.1 9. The dispositive provisions of Mr. Lucom's Will leave no doubt as to his wishes. Mr. Lucom expressed that Hilda, who was independently wealthy from her first marriage into the Arias family, was to receive the couple's multimillion-dollar home in Panama and a fixed annuity during her lifetime. The remainder of Mr. Lucom's assets, after the payment of several specific bequests, in unambiguous terms, was to pass to the Wilson C. Lucom Trust Fund Foundation with the single goal to benefit the poor children of Panama. In furtherance of maximizing the amount that ultimately was to pass to the Foundation, Mr. Lucom's Will provided that the annuity sum that Hilda was to receive under his will "shall be solely for her use while she lives, and after her death all bequests end, and what was given to her must be returned to the WILSON C. LU COM TRUST FUND foundation, as of her death. No principal or interest account shall go to the estate of HILDA PIZA LUCOM". 10. Mr. Lucom again reiterated his intent in other sections of his Will. "My wife's grandchildren and other relatives must look to their inheritance from their parents, who are wealthy." Relative to his charitable foundation, Mr. Lucom stated: I am the sole owner of Hacienda Santa Monica, which has no liens or mortgages. I instruct my Executors to place my Hacienda Santa Monica on the market. ... The product of the sale of Hacienda Santa Monica must go to the WILSON C. LU COM TRUST FUND Foundation. The main objective of the FUND A CI ON WILSON C. LU COM TRUST FUND is to feed needy children in Panama. I instruct my trustees to find an area where there are children's schools that don't have any meals for lunch, and lack the usual needs and those provided by schools where lunch is provided. -5- 145552.0060 Ill 00667802v. l 11. Mr. Lehman, as Executor of Wilson Lucom's Estate was charged with the responsibility of being legally and morally obligated to protect the Estate for its rightful beneficiaries, the starving children of Panama. It was a responsibility that Mr. Lehman took very seriously and which he endeavored to fulfill despite incredible obstacles placed in his path by Hilda and her children who were aided and abetted by their Panamanian attorneys, willing Panamanian prosecutors and Panamanian judges. 12. Although, Mr. Lehman had for decades successfully practiced law in the United States, neither he nor any lawyer who has grown up in the American legal system with its respect and reverence for the law could be prepared for the power of corruption in the Panamanian legal system or the greed of the powerful Arias clan, who were intent on stealing Lucom's fortune from the poor children of Panama.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Panama: Political and Economic Conditions and U.S. Relations
    Panama: Political and Economic Conditions and U.S. Relations Mark P. Sullivan Specialist in Latin American Affairs November 27, 2012 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL30981 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Panama: Political and Economic Conditions and U.S. Relations Summary With five successive elected civilian governments, the Central American nation of Panama has made notable political and economic progress since the 1989 U.S. military intervention that ousted the regime of General Manuel Antonio Noriega from power. Current President Ricardo Martinelli of the center-right Democratic Change (CD) party was elected in May 2009, defeating the ruling center-left Democratic Revolutionary Party (PRD) in a landslide. Martinelli was inaugurated to a five-year term on July 1, 2009. Martinelli’s Alliance for Change coalition with the Panameñista Party (PP) also captured a majority of seats in Panama’s National Assembly. Panama’s service-based economy has been booming in recent years – with a growth rate of 7.6% in 2010 and 10.6% in 2011 – largely because of the ongoing Panama Canal expansion project, now slated for completion in early 2015. The CD’s coalition with the PP fell apart at the end of August 2011when President Martinelli sacked PP leader Juan Carlos Varela as Foreign Minister. Varela, however, retains his position as Vice President. Tensions between the CD and the PP had been growing throughout 2011, largely related to which party would head the coalition’s ticket for the 2014 presidential election. Despite the breakup of the coalition, the strength of the CD has grown significantly since 2009 because of defections from the PP and the PRD and it now has a majority on its own in the legislature.
    [Show full text]
  • Incumbent's Party Loses Presidency in Panama
    AMERICAS By RANDAL C. ARCHIBOLD MAY 4, 2014 MEXICO CITY — Panamanians, enjoying one of the fastest-growing economies in the hemisphere but wary of corruption and growing executive power, rejected the governing party’s choice for president on Sunday — on a ticket with the president’s wife for vice president — and instead hewed to tradition by electing an opposition candidate. Panama’s election commission declared the president-elect to be Juan Carlos Varela, who is vice president but broke with the governing party in a rancorous falling-out and was stripped of many of his duties. He captured 39 percent of the vote, with more than three- Voters lined up at a polling station outside quarters of the ballots counted. Panama City for the presidential election on Sunday. The election commission declared Juan Mr. Varela, 50, an engineer and well-known politician whose family Carlos Varela, an opposition candidate, the owns the country’s biggest liquor producer, was seven points ahead of winner. Edgard Garrido/Reuters the 32 percent won by the governing party candidate, José Domingo Arias, a former housing minister and a political newcomer. A third major candidate, Juan Carlos Navarro, a former two-time mayor of Panama City, had 28 percent. converted by Web2PDFConvert.com Juan Carlos Varela at a polling place in Panama City. Mr. Varela said he would promote transparency and fight corruption. Edgard Garrido/Reuters Mr. Varela, who takes office on July 1 for a five-year term, campaigned against growing fears of corruption and the president’s iron fist-style of leadership. He promised a more transparent government that would maintain growth and popular social programs and fight inequality.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Reservations of Panama
    APPENDIX 2 TO ANNEX XVIII REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 5.4 RESERVATIONS BY PANAMA PANAMA 1. Sector: Retail Sales Sub-Sector: - Legal Source or Authority Article 293 of the Political Constitution of the of the measure: Republic of Panama of 1972, as amended. Articles 5 and 10 of Law No. 5 of January 11, 2007. Article 12 of Executive Decree No. 26 of July 12, 2007. Succinct description of the 1. Only the following persons may own a retail measure: business in Panama: (a) Panamanians national by birth; (b) natural persons who, on the date of entry into force of the 1972 Constitution were a naturalised person and married to a Panamanian national or have children with a Panamanian national; (c) Panamanians by naturalization, who are not covered by the description under (b), after three years of the date on which they have obtained their naturalisation letter; (d) Panamanian juridical persons or juridical persons organized under the law of a foreign country and foreign natural persons who on the date of entry into force of the 1972 Constitution, owned a retail business in Panama according to the domestic law; and (e) a juridical person, whether organized under the laws of Panama or any other Country, if ownership of that person is held by natural persons described in subparagraph (a), (b), (c), or (d), as set out in paragraph 5 of Article 293 of the Constitution. 2. Notwithstanding paragraph 1(e), a foreign national may own a juridical person engaged in retail business if: (a) the products sold by the juridical person in retail business are exclusively products that are - 2 – produced at its direction and bear its label; or (b) the juridical person is engaged primarily in the sale of a service, and the products that it sells are necessarily associated with the sale of that service.
    [Show full text]
  • Panama Country Report BTI 2012
    BTI 2012 | Panama Country Report Status Index 1-10 7.39 # 22 of 128 Political Transformation 1-10 7.70 # 25 of 128 Economic Transformation 1-10 7.07 # 29 of 128 Management Index 1-10 5.65 # 43 of 128 scale: 1 (lowest) to 10 (highest) score rank trend This report is part of the Bertelsmann Stiftung’s Transformation Index (BTI) 2012. The BTI is a global assessment of transition processes in which the state of democracy and market economy as well as the quality of political management in 128 transformation and developing countries are evaluated. More on the BTI at http://www.bti-project.org Please cite as follows: Bertelsmann Stiftung, BTI 2012 — Panama Country Report. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Stiftung, 2012. © 2012 Bertelsmann Stiftung, Gütersloh BTI 2012 | Panama 2 Key Indicators Population mn. 3.5 HDI 0.768 GDP p.c. $ 13609 Pop. growth1 % p.a. 1.6 HDI rank of 187 58 Gini Index 52.3 Life expectancy years 76 UN Education Index 0.743 Poverty3 % 17.9 Urban population % 74.8 Gender inequality2 0.492 Aid per capita $ 19.0 Sources: The World Bank, World Development Indicators 2011 | UNDP, Human Development Report 2011. Footnotes: (1) Average annual growth rate. (2) Gender Inequality Index (GII). (3) Percentage of population living on less than $2 a day. Executive Summary Since 2004, Panama has experienced a period of political stability and strong macroeconomic performance. The country’s growth rates in 2007 and 2008 were higher than in any other country in Latin America. The economic and financial crisis of 2008 caused only a temporary slowdown, and Panama was one of the very few countries in the region that did not suffer recession in 2009.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 2 to Annex Xv Panama
    APPENDIX 2 TO ANNEX XV PANAMA - SCHEDULE OF SPECIFIC COMMITMENTS REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 4.18 Modes of supply: (1) Cross-border supply (2) Consumption abroad (3) Commercial presence (4) Presence of natural persons Sector or subsector Limitations on Market Access Limitations on National Treatment Additional Commitments EXPLANATORY NOTES: - For the purposes of this Schedule, the term “None” indicates a services sector or sub-sector where there are no terms, limitations and conditions on market access or conditions and qualifications on national treatment. The term “Unbound” indicates that no national treatment or market access commitments have been made. The term “Unbound*” means unbound due to lack of technical feasibility. - The absence of specific reservations in a given services sector or sub-sector is without prejudice to the horizontal reservations that apply. - The level of commitments in a particular services sector shall not supersede the level of commitments undertaken with respect to any other services sector to which such service is an input for the particular service or to which it is otherwise related. - CPC numbers indicated in parenthesis are references to the United Nations Provisional Central Product Classification (Statistical Papers, Series M, N° 77, Provisional Central Product Classification, Department of International Economics and Social Affairs, Statistical Office of the United Nations, New York, 1991). - Attachments I and II to this Schedule form an integral part thereof. PART I. HORIZONTAL COMMITMENTS This Part sets out those commitments that apply to trade in services in all scheduled services sectors unless otherwise specified. Those commitments that apply to trade in specific services sectors are listed in Part II.
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 Annual Report As Per Article 59(10) of Its Rules of Procedure and Asked That the State to Submit Its Observations Within One Month
    CHAPTER IV.B VENEZUELA I. INTRODUCTION 1. The Commission has closely followed the human rights situation in Venezuela and, through its various monitoring mechanisms, has observed a series of structural situations that affect the enjoyment and exercise of human rights in that country. Accordingly, the Commission has observed and has repeatedly made statements in its previous reports on Venezuela on structural situations such as the provisional nature of judges and prosecutors, which weakens the judicial branch and leads to its lack of independence and impartiality. The Commission has considered that this structural flaw has a negative impact on the right of access to justice and due process, and thus is one of the weakest points of Venezuelan democracy. Along these same lines, as the lack of independence and autonomy of the judicial branch vis-à-vis the political branches of government is one of the most fragile points that has been identified, the IACHR is concerned about the use of the punitive power of the State to harass and stigmatize human rights defenders and journalists, and to criminally prosecute political dissidents and disqualify several of its leaders from holding office. 2. In addition, the IACHR has identified as matters of concern the regulatory amendments that imply legal and regulatory restrictions—in particular, through passage of Special Powers Acts (Leyes Habilitantes), which in recent years have been used to effect the reform of criminal statutes, as well as to assign public safety and domestic law enforcement responsibilities to the military. The Inter-American Commission has also stated that the high degree of impunity in Venezuela, the serious public safety situation, and the violence in penal institutions are factors that impose particular constraints on the inhabitants’ exercise of the human rights to life, humane treatment, and access to justice, among other rights.
    [Show full text]
  • Panama 2018 Human Rights Report
    PANAMA 2018 HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Panama is a multiparty constitutional democracy. In 2014 voters chose Juan Carlos Varela Rodriguez as president in national elections that international and domestic observers considered generally free and fair. Civilian authorities maintained effective control over the security forces. Human rights issues included undue restrictions on free expression, the press, and the internet, including censorship, site blocking, and criminal libel; and widespread corruption. The Varela administration and the Public Ministry continued investigations into allegations of corruption against public officials. Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person, Including Freedom from: a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings There were no reports the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings. b. Disappearance There were no reports of disappearances by or on behalf of government authorities. c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment The constitution prohibits such practices, and there were no reports that government officials employed them. In 2017 civilian correctional officers used batons and tear gas to control inmates who refused to be transported. Penitentiary System authorities investigated the incident and dismissed the case, citing evidence that showed standard procedures were enforced due to serious misconduct by the inmates. In May the PANAMA 2 Ombudsman’s Office decried the possible use of excessive force and the conclusion of the penitentiary authorities. Prison and Detention Center Conditions Prison conditions remained harsh, due primarily to overcrowding, a shortage of prison guards, and inadequate medical services and sanitary conditions. Physical Conditions: As of August the prison system, with an intended capacity of 14,842 inmates, held 16,069 prisoners.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 2 to Annex Xv Panama
    APPENDIX 2 TO ANNEX XV PANAMA - SCHEDULE OF SPECIFIC COMMITMENTS REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 4.18 Modes of supply: (1) Cross-border supply (2) Consumption abroad (3) Commercial presence (4) Presence of natural persons Sector or subsector Limitations on Market Access Limitations on National Treatment Additional Commitments EXPLANATORY NOTES: - For the purposes of this Schedule, the term “None” indicates a services sector or sub-sector where there are no terms, limitations and conditions on market access or conditions and qualifications on national treatment. The term “Unbound” indicates that no national treatment or market access commitments have been made. The term “Unbound*” means unbound due to lack of technical feasibility. - The absence of specific reservations in a given services sector or sub-sector is without prejudice to the horizontal reservations that apply. - The level of commitments in a particular services sector shall not supersede the level of commitments undertaken with respect to any other services sector to which such service is an input for the particular service or to which it is otherwise related. - CPC numbers indicated in parenthesis are references to the United Nations Provisional Central Product Classification (Statistical Papers, Series M, N° 77, Provisional Central Product Classification, Department of International Economics and Social Affairs, Statistical Office of the United Nations, New York, 1991). - Attachments I and II to this Schedule form an integral part thereof. PART I. HORIZONTAL COMMITMENTS This Part sets out those commitments that apply to trade in services in all scheduled services sectors unless otherwise specified. Those commitments that apply to trade in specific services sectors are listed in Part II.
    [Show full text]
  • 1540 Matrix for Panama
    OP 1 and related matters from OP 5, OP 6, OP 8 (a), (b), (c) and OP 10 State: Panama Date of Report: 12 July 2005 Date of Addendum 1: 24 February 2006 Date of Addendum 2: 30 April 2008 Did you make one of the following Remarks statements or is your country a State (information refers to the if YES, indicate relevant information (i.e. signing, accession, ratification, Party to or Member State of one of the YES page of the English version entering into force, etc) following Conventions, Treaties and of the report or an official Arrangements ? web site) General statement on non- 1 possession of WMD General statement on commitment to 2 disarmament and non-proliferation General statement on non-provision 3 of WMD and related materials to non- Biological Weapons Convention 4 X Deposit 20 March 1974 (BWC) Chemical Weapons Convention 5 X Deposit 07 October 1998 (CWC) Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty 6 X Ratified 13 January 1977 (NPT) Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban 7 X Deposit 23 March 1999 Treaty (CTBT) The information in the matrices originates primarily from national reports and is complemented by official government information, including that made available to inter-governmental organizations. The matrices are prepared under the direction of the 1540 Committee. The 1540 Committee intends to use the matrices as a reference tool for facilitating technical assistance and to enable the Committee to continue to enhance its dialogue with States on their implementation of Security Council Resolution 1540. The matrices are not a tool for measuring compliance of States in their non-proliferation obligations but for facilitating the implementation of Security Council Resolutions 1540 and 1673.
    [Show full text]
  • CARLOS GUEVARA MANN Florida State University, Panama City of Knowledge | Building #227 | Clayton P.O
    CARLOS GUEVARA MANN Florida State University, Panama City of Knowledge | Building #227 | Clayton P.O. Box 0819-05390 |Panama | Republic of Panama Tel: +507 317 0367 ext. 239 | +507 6671 7649 (mobile) E-mail: [email protected] EDUCATION Ph.D., 2001, University of Notre Dame. Dissertation directed by Michael Coppedge. M.A., 1993, Ohio University. Thesis directed by Michael Grow. Licenciado en Finanzas, 1990, Universidad Católica Santa María La Antigua, Panamá (cum laude) RESEARCH INTERESTS Politics and democracy in Latin America and Western Europe International relations of Latin America Political history of Latin America FULL-TIME APPOINTMENTS Florida State University, Panama: Associate Professor of Political Science, 2016- Director, Master of Science in International Affairs Program, 2016- Assistant Professor of Political Science, 2004-2005 Associate Professor of Political Science, Universidad del Norte, Barranquilla, Colombia, 2014-2015 United Nations World Food Programme (WFP), Regional Bureau for Latin America and the Caribbean Policy Advisor with the rank of National Programme Officer (NO-D), 2011-2013 University of Nevada, Reno: Assistant Professor of Political Science, 2005-2011 Director, International Affairs Program, 2005-2006 Lloyds TSB Bank Plc, Panama: Senior Manager-Credit (discretionary limit: US$500,000), 2001-2003 Executive Officer, Credit Appraisal, 1993-1995 Credit Analyst, 1990-1991 Government of the Republic of Panama: Director-General of Foreign Policy (with the rank of Ambassador Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary),
    [Show full text]
  • James Perry (United States) V. Panama
    REPORTS OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRAL AWARDS RECUEIL DES SENTENCES ARBITRALES James Perry (United States) v. Panama 27 May 1933 VOLUME VI pp. 315-321 NATIONS UNIES - UNITED NATIONS Copyright (c) 2006 DECISIONS 315 Cross-references: Annual Digest, 1933-1934, pp. 481-482; Comision General de Reclamaciones entre Panama y Estados Unidos de America, Reclamaciôn de la Repûblicâ de Panama en su propio nombre y representaciôn de Juan Manzo, Registre No. 21. (Publication Oficial, Panama, 1934.) Bibliography: Hunt, Report, pp. 695-696, and "The United States-Panama General Claims Commission", Am. J. Int. Law, vol. 28 (1934), p. 71 ; Borchard, "The United States-Panama Claims Arbitration", Am. J. Int. Law, vol. 29 (1935), p. 101; Friede, "Die Entscheidungen . .", Z.a.ô.R.u.V., BandV (1935), pp. 462-463; Annual Digest, 1933-1934, pp. 482-483. In 1905 Juan Manzo, then a boy between 10 and 13 years of age, was working as a water carrier for the Municipal Engineering Division of the Isthmian Canal Commission. The testimony for both parties is in agreement that Manzo was regularly allowed by his superiors to oil the sheaves, through which ran a cable used for hoisting material to a reservoir at Ancon, Canal Zone. It is the opinion of the Commission that the practice of allowing Manzo to oil the sheaves was equivalent to direcling or employing him to do so, and that it was negligence per se to employ so young a child as an oiler of heavy machinery in motion. On September 4, 1905, Manzo, while oiling, caught his right hand in one of the sheaves and lost his fingers and half of his palm.
    [Show full text]
  • Mcdermott INTERNATIONAL, INC. (Exact Name of Registrant As Specified in Its Charter)
    UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 8-K CURRENT REPORT Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Date of Report (date of earliest event reported): October 30, 2018 McDERMOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) Republic of Panama 001-08430 72-0593134 (State or other jurisdiction of (Commission file number) (I.R.S. employer identification number) incorporation) 757 N. Eldridge Parkway Houston, Texas 77079 (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip code) Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (281) 870-5000 (Former name or former address, if changed since last report) Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions: ☐ Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425) ☐ Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12) ☐ Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b)) ☐ Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c)) Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an emerging growth company as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act of 1933 (§230.405 of this chapter) or Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (§240.12b-2 of this chapter). Emerging growth company ☐ If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.
    [Show full text]