Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Home Topics

Law Firm Management

Features

Backdating Issues

Jonathan M. Cohen & John P. Sheahan

The recent wave of investigations and lawsuits involving the alleged backdating of stock options promises to become one of the most widespread corporate crises in recent years. As these allegations mount, targets of the investigations will look to their insurance companies to help pay their potentially substantial defense costs and any resulting liabilities. <br>At the same time, insurance companies will be looking for ways to minimize, or even evade entirely, their coverage obligations. As a result, targets of backdating investigations must move quickly to protect their insurance coverage.

Features

ADA Mental Illness Claims Increase in the Workplace

Jonathan O. Hafen

As defined by the ADA, a qualifying disability is 'a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of such individual.' 42 U.S.C. 12102(2)(B), (C). The ADA regulations define disabilities broadly, including a specific reference to 'neurological systems, mental or psychological disorders.' (29 C.F.R ' 1630.2 (h).) Because the ADA only provides such general guidance, litigation continues to arise as parties try to refine the concepts presented in the Act, such as whether a mental disorder is a qualifying impairment, whether an employee with a qualifying mental illness can perform essential job functions, and how the limitation of a major life activity caused by a qualifying mental illness can be reasonably accommodated in the workplace.

Features

<b>Online Exclusive:</b> Dewey Ballantine and Orrick Set to Merge

Andrew Longstreth

New York's Dewey Ballantine and San Francisco's Orrick, Herrington &amp; Sutcliffe have taken another step toward completing a merger. According to a statement released Wednesday morning, the management and executive committees at both firms announced to their respective partners that they intend to recommend approving the combination. A full partnership vote at both firms is expected before the end of the year.

Need Help?

  1. Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
  2. Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
    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.
    Read More ›
  • Supreme Court Asked to Assess Per Se Rule Tension in Criminal Antitrust
    In recent years, practitioners have observed a tension between criminal enforcement of the broadly written terms of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 and the modern Supreme Court's notions of statutory interpretation and due process in the criminal law context. A certiorari petition filed in late August in Sanchez et al. v. United States, asks the Supreme Court to address this tension, as embodied in the judge-made per se rule.
    Read More ›
  • Restrictive Covenants Meet the Telecommunications Act of 1996
    Congress enacted the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to encourage development of telecommunications technologies, and in particular, to facilitate growth of the wireless telephone industry. The statute's provisions on pre-emption of state and local regulation have been frequently litigated. Last month, however, the Court of Appeals, in <i>Chambers v. Old Stone Hill Road Associates (see infra<i>, p. 7) faced an issue of first impression: Can neighboring landowners invoke private restrictive covenants to prevent construction of a cellular telephone tower? The court upheld the restrictive covenants, recognizing that the federal statute was designed to reduce state and local regulation of cell phone facilities, not to alter rights created by private agreement.
    Read More ›