<b><i>ASFA Can Be Retroactive, Says Judge</i></b> In a decision issued July 2 in a case of first impression, Chief Judge Judith S. Kaye of the Court of Appeals interpreted the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA), enacted in February 1999, to find that it can be applied retroactively to expedite the placement of severely abused children and their siblings.
<b><i>Part One of a Two-Part Article.</i></b> Forensic psychological assessments are often pivotal documents that can have a dramatic effect on the trajectory of a contested custody dispute and, ultimately, on the path a particular child's life will take post disposition. Forensic reports arrive in court as documents that represent the application of a behavioral "science" and there is therefore a common expectation that the recommendations will be weighted heavily because they will go beyond common public knowledge or subjective value choices.
<b><i>Part Two of a Two-Part Article</i></b> Part One of this article reported on how the Court of Appeals, in 40 <i>W. 67th St. Corp. v. Pullman</i> (5/13/03), ruled that RPAPL '711(1) should be interpreted when the evicting landlord is a housing cooperative. Part Two discusses the ramifications of <i>Pullman</i> in the courts.
By a slim 17-vote margin, the American Bar Association's House of Delegates during the association's annual meeting changed model rules governing the attorney-client privilege in the hopes of combating corporate fraud.
“Baseball arbitration” refers to the process used in Major League Baseball in which if an eligible player's representative and the club ownership cannot reach a compensation agreement through negotiation, each party enters a final submission and during a formal hearing each side — player and management — presents its case and then the designated panel of arbitrators chooses one of the salary bids with no other result being allowed. This method has become increasingly popular even beyond the sport of baseball.
Insiders (and others) in the private equity business are accustomed to seeing a good deal of discussion ' academic and trade ' on the question of the appropriate methods of valuing private equity positions and securities which are otherwise illiquid. An interesting recent decision in the Southern District has been brought to our attention. The case is <i>In Re Allied Capital Corp.</i>, CCH Fed. SEC L. Rep. 92411 (US DC, S.D.N.Y., Apr. 25, 2003). Judge Lynch's decision is well written, the Judge reviewing a motion to dismiss by a business development company, Allied Capital, against a strike suit claiming that Allied's method of valuing its portfolio failed adequately to account for i) conditions at the companies themselves and ii) market conditions. The complaint appears to be, as is often the case, slap dash, content to point out that Allied revalued some of its positions, marking them down for a variety of reasons, and the stock price went down - all this, in the view of plaintiff's counsel, amounting to violations of Rule 10b-5.
The 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.
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.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.
