No one can deny that cyberattacks are the new norm. Such risks will increasingly challenge our ability to operate our businesses. In the world of cybercrime, everyone — from individuals to nation-states — is a target. However, some targets are more alluring than others.
On Nov. 17, 2016, JPMorgan APAC, a Hong Kong subsidiary of JP Mor¬gan Chase & Co., agreed to pay $72 million for violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).
Three Chinese nationals face federal charges for allegedly hacking into two major U.S. law firms in a scheme to trade on information about imminent mergers and acquisitions.
<b><i>A Doctrine In Flux</b></i><p>The big product-liability news at the Connecticut Supreme Court in 2016 was undoubtedly <i>Izzarelli v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco</i>, a decision that refined Connecticut's standards for design-defect product-liability claims. But the decision may turn out to be even more notable for what it portends.
Non-compete clauses in employment contracts typically seek to preclude employees from working for a competitor for a specific period of time and within a specific geographic area. Most states allow non-competition agreements, provided they are reasonable in scope and justified by the employer's legitimate business interests. California, however, generally prohibits covenants not to compete, subject to limited exceptions.
New York's Appellate Division, Second Department, has reversed a family court decision denying a father's objection to a magistrate's upward modification of his child support obligation.
“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.
