Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Imagine that it’s Spring 2020 and you run a warehousing company and you discover that your warehouse contains containers of goods that could help combat the spread of the COVID-19 virus — masks, medical gowns, gloves or other personal protective equipment (PPE). Or imagine you own a trucking company and learn that your drivers are delivering pallets of hand sanitizer and disinfectants to a residential address. What, if any, liability might you have if it turns out a customer is hoarding PPE?
Imagine that it’s Spring 2020 and you run a warehousing company, in which it is common for your customers to store container-loads of goods in both the short-term (while awaiting a move to the container’s next destination) and long-term (perhaps while the entity holding title to the goods in the container finds a buyer). Now imagine you discover that your warehouse contains containers of goods that could help combat the spread of the COVID-19 virus — masks, medical gowns, gloves or other personal protective equipment (PPE).
*May exclude premium content
By Patricia Kim and Maren Messing
The Court held that only those who obtain information from particular areas of the computer which they are not authorized to access can be said to “exceed authorization.”
By David L. Axelrod and Hannah L. Welsh
For decades the SEC and the Department of Justice, with the endorsement of federal judges, have used the general securities fraud statutes to patch together a complex and problematic insider trading common law. After years of criticism, however, that could now be changing.
By Robert J. Anello and Richard F. Albert
When law enforcement seeks to compel a subject to provide a passcode to allow them to rummage through a cellphone, courts have not spoken with a unified voice. Some, including New Jersey’s highest court, have arrived at the dubious conclusion that requiring an individual to communicate cellphone passcodes to the government does not warrant Fifth Amendment protection. Commentators had hoped that the U.S. Supreme Court would reject that expansive view, however, the Supreme Court declined to wade in, seemingly guaranteeing that continued uncertainty on this critical issue will continue to bedevil criminal practitioners.
By Tom McParland
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit signaled last month that it may fully address, for the first time, the question of whether a decades-old change to federal law rendered a commonly used tool for extending U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission investigations unenforceable in federal court.