10-pound bag of Chronic Supernova, consider yourself bought. Thousands of former Bear Stearns Cos. (BSC) employees will share a $10 million settlement of lawsuits claiming they lost money on the bank’s stock in their retirement accounts. Two ex-Bear Stearns employees yesterday asked a federal court judge in Manhattan to approve the settlement on behalf of an estimated 8,400 former colleagues. The settlement will resolve class-action suits filed beginning in 2008 against Bear Stearns and other defendants by former employees of the bank. The employees, participants and beneficiaries of Bear Stearns’s employee stock ownership plan who held shares of the bank’s common stock, claimed risky investments in subprime mortgages caused them to lose money. Ex-Bear Stearns Employees to Get $10 Million in Settlement [Bloomberg] Related: Jimmy Cayne Takes “It’s A Bag Of Oregano” Route In Face Of Drug Use Allegations

Over the course of the Rajat Gupta insider trading trial, attorneys for the former Goldman Sachs director have attempted to show that while their client was privy to material non-public information about, among others, Goldman and Procter & Gamble, and had an established relationship with Raj Rajaratnam, the hedge fund manager currently doing eleven years for trading on material non-public information, their client had no role in helping Raj-Raj score his ill-gotten gains. Last Monday the defense put a witness on the stand who told the jury that while once close, Gupta wasn't even invited to Rajaratnam's "lavish 50th birthday party that took place in Kenya," ergo there is no way Rajat would've shared inside info with the guy. This week, the team was hoping to play wiretaps of conversations that took place between Rajaratnam and Goldman executive David Loeb, who they claim is the guy who actually tipped off the Galleon manager. Unfortunately: Rajat Gupta, the former Goldman Sachs Group director accused of insider trading, lost a bid to have a jury hear wiretaps of Goldman Sachs executive David Loeb tipping Galleon Group LLC co-founder Raj Rajaratnam...Rajaratnam got some of his illegal tips from Loeb, Goldman Sachs’s head of Asia equity sales in New York, defense attorney Gary Naftalis has said in court. The lawyer has argued to the jury that the “wrong man” is on trial...“This is an attempt to prove an alternative view of the underlying facts and blatant hearsay,” Judge Rakoff told Gupta’s lawyers. Gupta Loses Bid on Wiretaps of Goldman’s Loeb, Rajaratnam [Bloomberg] Related: Maybe Rajat Gupta Just Wanted Raj Rajaratnam To Console Him Over Goldman’s 3Q2008 Loss, Not Go And Trade On It

From time to time around these parts, when things get particularly rough, we like to take a few moments to get a little perspective. Yes, you could be facing a significantly reduced bonus. Yes, you could be facing layoffs. Yes, you could be facing a class-action lawsuit by your investors, not to mention first-degree murder charges. But you're not this guy and for that you should be thankful. Patrick Gallagher, of Lansdale, Penn., has filed a $50,000 lawsuit against the Philadelphia-area Penthouse Club claiming a stripper injured him so severely during an on-stage dance that he was left with internal bleeding from a ruptured bladder. Gallagher’s friends had gone all-out for his bachelor party back in 2010, getting him the “bachelor’s package” which included a special performance from a stripper. During the dance, Gallagher was laying flat on the stage when a stripper slid down a pole “with such force” that she ruptured his bladder upon landing, the lawsuit said. His lawyer, Neil T. Murray, said the woman came from a “great height.” After the hard stripper landing, the injured soon-to-be groom called it a night. The next morning he went to the hospital where he was advised of his injuries and underwent surgery, the lawsuit said. Gallagher also says he suffered nerve damage to his back and hip. Pennsylvania man sues strip club, claims he was severely injured by dancer

In 2008, Fursa Strategic Alternatives, an asset management firm run by Massapequa resident William F. Harley III, informed investors that it would be closing its doors and returning everyone's money. As some money managers can likely attest though, making the decision to close up shop (and writing people to say as much), doesn't mean you're emotionally ready to do so. Harley, for example, couldn't shake the feeling that he was put on this earth to be an investor and, god damn it, he was going to invest until the day he died. So he did what any rational human being in his position would, and decided to just, you know, hang on to his clients' money for a while. Of course, the pesky little varmints kept calling, so he had to disconnect the phones and to avoid an awkward confrontation wherein they appeared at the firm's building demanding their cash in person, he moved HQ into the basement of one of his other businesses, a Hooters restaurant. That got people off his tail for a while but, unfortunately, they popped up again and this time are taking legal action. The Claude Worthington Benedum Foundation filed the lawsuit last month in the Court of Common Pleas in Allegheny County, Pa. It has since been moved to federal court in the western district of Pennsylvania. The charity said in its lawsuit that William F. Harley III continued operating Fursa Strategic Alternatives from the basement of a Hooters restaurant on Long Island after saying in 2008 the fund would close and the charity's money would be returned. Federal filings show Fursa in January was the largest investor in lingerie company Frederick's of Hollywood Group. A spokesman for Harley said lawyers for the fund sought unsuccessfully to contact the charity last year. Harley could not be reached for comment at his home Wednesday...The lawsuit points to Fursa's investment in Frederick's of Hollywood as evidence the company continued operating instead of returning its money. Fursa Alternative Strategies owns 46 percent of Frederick's, according to the company's proxy statement. While a spokesman for Harley has not denied most of the allegations, he does take issue with claim that Fursa has any sort of legitimate set-up at any of his four Hooters, telling Newsday that he "occasionally has business meetings at them, but doesn't run an office there." Charity lawsuit accuses Massapequa man of mishandling $2M investment [Newsday]

Back in June, hedge fund manager Daniel Shak sued his ex-wife, Beth, over assets he claimed she'd hid during the couple's divorce. Said assets were Beth's shoes, which Daniel alleged were kept in a "secret room" and were worth approximately $1 million, 35 percent of which he wanted. It was a bit unclear as to why he was going after the footwear collection three years after the two split (though using the proceeds to relaunch his fund was a possibility) but the heart wants what the heart wants. Anyway, today brings just a couple follow-ups on the Shaks, both of which are slightly more exciting for Beth than Dan. 1. He won't see a single pair of Loubs. A civil suit brought by poker professional Dan Shak against his ex-wife, fellow poker pro Beth Shak, regarding her extensive shoe collection was dismissed in a court in New York after Mr. Shak advised his attorneys that he didn’t want to pursue the issue any further...the opening arguments apparently doomed the case in the eyes of the male Shak. Ms. Shak testified to Judge Daniele that her shoe fetish grew as a response to repeated denials of emotional attention from Mr. Shak. “I would not call these shoes a collection, I would call them a sickness at a particular point in my life,” Beth Shak testified to Judge Daniele as she recounted how Dan Shak would refuse her attempts at romantic encounters, according to the Post. “I tried to get him to go to therapy with me, but it just didn’t work,” the Post quotes Ms. Shak as testifying. “I was so unhappy with my marriage that all I did was shop. There was nothing to our relationship…he and I had nothing.” Further into her testimony to the court, Ms. Shak stated that not only did Mr. Shak know about the shoes but even signed off on all the bills as they came before him. After a break following Ms. Shak’s testimony, Mr. Shak apparently had a change of heart regarding the lawsuit. His attorneys informed Judge Daniele that their client wanted to withdraw the case, which Judge Daniele quickly granted. Looking square at Mr. Shak as she dismissed the case, Judge Daniele is quoted by the Post as stating, “Well, thanks for wasting everybody’s time.” 2. She's going into the shoe business! Now that that the suit is over, Shak, who has an image of a pair of Louboutons tattooed just below her waist, is concentrating one what's next — the launch her own line of shoes. Dan Shak Drops Lawsuit Against Beth Shak Following Opening Arguments [PND] Sexy Singles 2012: Beth Shak [Philly]

"The only way to finance a big European-style state is to have it paid for by massive taxation of everyone, mostly the middle class. Right now, we are avoiding honest debate on this fact...The first truth is that the current tax rates cannot support the promises made to middle-class Americans. The most unaffordable items in fiscal projections are Social Security for everyone and government-sponsored health care for the middle class. You cannot preserve these even with Draconian slashing of military, infrastructure, welfare, education, and other expenditures. The second truth is that you cannot pay for the Life of Julia, or any vision of a cradle-to-grave welfare state, without massive and increasingly regressive middle-class taxes. The poor don't have the money to pay for a European-style welfare state, and the rich, rich as they are, don't have anywhere near enough. Not only that, it's easy to tax middle-class assets and transactions — things like payrolls, sales, and real estate — but soaking the rich means taxing investments. Investments are complicated and can be restructured to minimize taxes. Also, investments are the lifeblood of economic growth. Raising significantly more taxes from the rich also requires higher marginal tax rates — and their rates are already quite high. High marginal rates distort the economy and yield less revenue than anticipated because they increase the rewards for legal and illegal tax avoidance...to achieve anything like the European-style entitlement state they advocate, we need to tax everyone a lot more, not just the 1 percent. Despite all the drum circles protesting the inequitable distribution of resources, the wealthy just don’t have enough. The middle class and even the poor must step up to carry more of the burden if this is our desired endgame. [The American, related]