Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In today's challenging economic environment it is a familiar story: After a protracted period of slow pay and then no pay, your customer (or borrower, joint venturer, counter-party, etc.) files a bankruptcy petition, leaving you holding the bag. And that's only the beginning.
This edition of the Quarterly State Compliance Review looks at some legislation of interest to corporate lawyers that went into effect recently, including amendments to the corporation laws of Delaware, California, and New York. This edition also includes two recent decisions of interest from the Delaware Chancery Court.
In-depth analysis of recent rulings.
Everything contained in this issue, in an easy-to-read format.
Features
What obligations does a buyer's broker have to different clients interested in purchasing the same property? When faced with that question in <i>Rivkin v. Century 21 Teran Realty LLC</i>, the Second Circuit certified the question to the New York Court of Appeals. <i>Rivkin</i> answered at least one significant question surrounding the obligations of a buyer's broker, but the Court of Appeals opinion raised new questions whose resolution will await future litigation (or legislation).
The Second Circuit recently issued an important decision in <i>Teamsters Local 445 Freight Div. Pension Fund v. Dynex Capital Inc.,</i> which has significant implications for securities class action litigation and the continuing fallout from the crisis in the credit markets. The decision addressed the issue of collective scienter, or whether a corporation can commit securities fraud when none of its individual agents acted with fraudulent intent.
Features
Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.