Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Lawyers may be tempted to gloss over yet another article about litigation holds and data preservation because they believe they already have the basics down. But the “basics” are a moving target and several developments from the past year merit reconsideration of company hold processes in 2015. Those developments focus on the importance of recognizing and addressing the new and dynamic forms of evidence that must be kept for litigation. As the recent cases of Brown v. Tellermate Holdings, No. 2:11-cv-1122 (S.D. Ohio July 1, 2014) and Small v. University Medical Center of Southern Nevada, 2:13-cv-00298-APG-PAL (D. Nev. Aug. 18, 2014) demonstrate, a company's litigation hold process might not be defensible unless appropriate steps are taken to preserve relevant information stored with cloud computing providers and maintained on mobile devices.
Preserving Data In The Cloud
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
A federal district court in Miami, FL, has ruled that former National Basketball Association star Shaquille O'Neal will have to face a lawsuit over his promotion of unregistered securities in the form of cryptocurrency tokens and that he was a "seller" of these unregistered securities.
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
Blockchain domain names offer decentralized alternatives to traditional DNS-based domain names, promising enhanced security, privacy and censorship resistance. However, these benefits come with significant challenges, particularly for brand owners seeking to protect their trademarks in these new digital spaces.
Mission Product Holdings, Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC The question is whether a debtor's rejection of its agreement granting a license "terminates rights of the licensee that would survive the licensor's breach under applicable nonbankruptcy law."