Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Features
The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued its first decision interpreting the Federal Trademark Dilution Act of 1995 (FTDA) in Moseley v. V Secret Catalogue, Inc. In an opinion that corporate counsel were eagerly awaiting, the unanimous Court held that proof of actual dilution was required to succeed on a claim of trademark dilution under the FTDA. This decision effectively raises the bar for trademark owners and their counsel to prove a claim of actual dilution.
Features
The SEC recently issued new rules regulating the conduct of attorneys practicing before it. The SEC has also proposed a new rule ' open for a 60-day comment period ' that would create an 8-K public reporting requirement by the board of directors, to be triggered by a lawyer's mandatory withdrawal from the representation in the event of uncorrected client actions.
Most sophisticated employers are aware that the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) requires that employees be paid overtime when they have worked more than 40 hours per week. Most employers also know that the FLSA contains certain exemptions from that rule. Those exemptions include what are commonly known as the 'white collar' exemptions. The white collar exemptions apply to those employees 'employed in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity.' When those exemptions apply, they may save significant overtime costs and ' often more importantly ' provide employers with useful flexibility for scheduling employees. Unfortunately, many employers in various industries are classifying employees as exempt who do not qualify for the exemption.
Features
Recent developments of interest to corporate counsel.
The concept of value-based fees for legal services is generating a steady buzz in the legal marketplace. Debate, discussion, reports and articles abound as attorneys and their law firms try to figure out if there is a better compensation model than the billable hour.
Features
This is part three of a three-part series on technology-related issues of importance to General Counsel. The increasing pressure to produce electronic data and documents in native formats puts in-house counsel on the front lines during, and even prior to, the electronic discovery phase of litigation. The basic obligations in-house counsel have prior to potential litigation include developing a corporate strategy for electronic data preservation and retrieval, implementing the plan, documenting policies and procedures in writing, and disseminating the policies and procedures to appropriate internal parties. Missteps in any of these areas can and has led to various sanctions ranging from fines to default judgments.
Features
Since it became the law on July 30, 2002, The Sarbanes-Oxley Act has been the subject of an endless stream of panel discussions, seminars, speeches, articles and media interpretations. It may or may not be a tsunami in the financial markets comparable to the changes brought by the regulatory scheme developed in the 1930s. But the statute and the corollary changes by stock exchanges to their listing requirements will alter the relationships between the participants in the financial markets in significant and long-term ways. This article highlights and places in context the changes wrought thus far, and concludes by noting areas in which further change is yet possible.
Features
The Second Circuit has held that denying insurance coverage for infertility treatments that can only be performed on women does not violate the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA). Saks v. Franklin Covey Co., 00-9598 (Jan. 15, 2003).
This is part two of a three part series on electronic issues related to litigation. Just as general counsel and their outside litigation attorneys are getting familiar with the challenges of electronic discovery, the definition of what is discoverable has begun to broaden. In most of the literature on electronic discovery, the list of places where discoverable information resides is fairly standard and includes computer hard drives, servers, CD-ROMs, floppy disks, zip disks, backup media, e-mail servers, laptops, home computers, and hand-held devices.
This is part two of a two part article. Clients subpoenaed by the government or private litigants rarely want to disclose their documents. They reflexively assert that it is all personal, confidential or proprietary. However, they are often surprised to learn that most documents are not protected from disclosure by the Fifth Amendment privilege. There is an entire body of case law that narrowly restricts the protection of the Fifth Amendment privilege in document production, which can be a trap for the unwary.