Features
Poppy Seed or Onion?
Unusual case: Is a bagel a weapon?
Disparate Impact and Disparate Treatment Analysis
The United States Supreme Court rebuked a Ninth Circuit panel for misapplying disparate impact analysis in the context of a disparate treatment case when the lower court ruled that a recovered drug addict could not be denied reemployment under the terms of the employer's no-rehire rule. In doing so, the Supreme Court determined that, in fact, a no-rehire rule is a "quintessential legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for refusing an employee who was terminated because of misconduct."
Extensive Amendments to Federal Rules Governing Class Actions
Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure was recently amended extensively to add two new sections governing the appointment of class counsel and the payment of attorney fee awards.
Features
What Were They Thinking ... ?
Editor-in-Chief Alfred G. Feliu shakes his head in disbelief.
Forfeiture Provision of Voluntary Stock Not Illegal
New York's highest court has issued an important decision interpreting Section 193 of the New York Labor Law, which prohibits employers from making deductions from an employee's wages except in limited circumstances.
Features
John Gaal's Ethics Corner
Your ethics questions answered by the expert.
Features
Decisions of Interest
Recent rulings of importance to your practice.
Alleged Employee Wrongdoing
On Dec. 4, 2003, President Bush signed into the law the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003 (FACT), Pub. L. No. 108-159, 117 Stat. 1952 (2003), amending 15 U.S.C. § 1681a, <i>et. seq.</i>, and reauthorizing and amending the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).
Developments of Note
Recent developments in e-commerce law and in the e-commerce industry.
e-Commerce Docket Sheet
Recent court rulings in e-commerce.
Need Help?
- Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
- Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.
MOST POPULAR STORIES
- The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance ProgramsThe parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.Read More ›
- Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar InvestigationsThis article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.Read More ›
- Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the RoughThere 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 ›
- The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year LaterThe DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.Read More ›
- Restrictive Covenants Meet the Telecommunications Act of 1996Congress 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 ›
