Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Equitable Subordination Still Requires Proof of Harm Image

Equitable Subordination Still Requires Proof of Harm

Michael L. Cook

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed a bankruptcy court's equitable subordination order on June 20, 2008. ccording to the court, subordination of the insiders' secured claims was "inappropriate" because the bankruptcy trustee had failed to show that the defendant insiders' "loans to the debtor harmed either the debtor or the general creditors." This article discusses the repercussions of that ruling.

Tradex: Requirements and Limitations of Chapter 15's Nonmain Recognition Image

Tradex: Requirements and Limitations of Chapter 15's Nonmain Recognition

Michael J. Sage & Joshua Weisser

A series of high-profile decisions issued within the past year addressed Chapter 15's strict recognition procedures and denied recognition to proceedings involving hedge funds registered in the Cayman Islands.

Features

New York Strengthens Wage Laws Image

New York Strengthens Wage Laws

Elise M. Bloom, Fredric C. Leffler & Thomas A. McKinney

In light of recent aggressive enforcement efforts of New York's Labor Laws by both the New York State Attorney General's Office and the New York State Department of Labor ("NYSDOL"), prudent employers should consider the effect of these new enactments on their pay and leave practices and take action to ensure compliance.

Features

Competing Definitions of 'Mass Layoffs' Under the WARN Act Image

Competing Definitions of 'Mass Layoffs' Under the WARN Act

Neil V. McKittrick & Elizabeth L. Schnairsohn

The Retraining and Notification Act ("WARN" or The Act) creates some uncertainty for employers because it contains two potentially conflicting definitions of the term "mass layoff" ' one that looks to a 30-day period and another that aggregates layoffs over a 90-day period. This article analyzes a recent ruling that addresses the problem.

Retaliation Claims Image

Retaliation Claims

Victoria Woodin Chavey

Part One of this article, which appeared in the June issue of Employment Law Strategist, discussed proof of retaliation claims. The conclusion herein addresses what conduct is protected.

Panel Affirms Award Against Wal-Mart in Disability Bias Case Image

Panel Affirms Award Against Wal-Mart in Disability Bias Case

Mark Hamblett

Staking out an exception to the general rule that the requirement to accommodate is normally triggered by a disabled employee's request, the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said an employer must take action "if the employer knew or reasonably should have known that the employee was disabled." <i>Brady v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc.</i>, 06-5486-cv.

August issue in PDF format Image

August issue in PDF format

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

&#133;

Case Notes Image

Case Notes

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Highlights of the latest product liability cases from around the country.

Features

Does the FDAAA's Data Dump Compute? The Potential Impact of the FDAAA on Product Liability Image

Does the FDAAA's Data Dump Compute? The Potential Impact of the FDAAA on Product Liability

Alan G. Minsk & David Hoffman

This article describes some of the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007 provisions related to the expansion of information disclosure and discusses the potential effect of the provisions on product liability exposure.

Features

The Impact of New Vehicle Technology: Reaffirming Parental Responsibility in Automotive Safety Cases Image

The Impact of New Vehicle Technology: Reaffirming Parental Responsibility in Automotive Safety Cases

Norma Gant & Nicole Dinardo

Product liability litigation sometimes arises when children are injured in and around motor vehicles ' whether it involves a moving or non-moving vehicle. When evaluating responsibility, the acts, omissions, and fault of the caregiver, parent, or person responsible for the child must be considered. In defending this type of litigation, evaluating such responsibility is part of the overall analysis of the design and performance of the motor vehicle and whether having different or additional safety technology would have made a difference or resulted in a different outcome.

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