Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Search


First Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Decision
June 29, 2004
In the first ruling applying the whistleblower protections of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. ' 1514A, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ordered a bank holding company to rehire its former Chief Financial Officer (CFO), after finding that the company fired the CFO in retaliation for reporting alleged accounting misconduct to the company's Chief Executive Officer (CEO), outside auditors, and others.
Sarbanes-Oxley 'Creep'
June 29, 2004
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) responded to well-publicized allegations of securities fraud. Its commandments about financial and internal control certifications, audit committees, auditor independence and the like expressly target publicly traded corporations. Yet much has been written about the "inevitable" spillover of SOX-type obligations onto not-for-profit organizations, especially in the health care sector. As a result, not-for-profit CEOs, compliance officers and counsel have practical questions.
The New SEC-FDA Alliance
June 29, 2004
On Feb. 5, 2004, the FDA and the SEC announced a new alliance between the two agencies. In a press release describing the changes, the FDA explained that "[u]nder the new referral procedure, any FDA employee who believes a publicly held, FDA-regulated firm has made a false or misleading statement to the investment public concerning a matter within the FDA's authority can initiate a process for referring the matter to the SEC Division of Enforcement."
Disability Dilemmas for Supervisors
June 29, 2004
As we all know, the ADA prohibits discrimination on account of past, present and perceived physical and emotional disabilities. Generally, the key to avoiding liability is focusing on abilities and not disabilities. That's an easy mantra to articulate, but it can be deceptively complicated for a supervisor to implement.
NLRB Again Limits <i>'Weingarten' </i>Rights
June 29, 2004
Continuing a seesaw battle that has been ongoing since the early 1980s, the NLRB recently held in a 3-2 decision that non-union employees do not have a right under the National Labor Relations Act to be accompanied by a fellow employee during a meeting that might lead to discipline.
Coordinating Complex Employment Litigation
June 29, 2004
In the past several years, employment class and collective action lawsuits have caught the attention of employees across the country. Many of these cases have resulted in multi-million dollar settlements or verdicts. Equally troubling, once an industry or corporation is viewed as potentially vulnerable on an issue, copycat cases may be brought in multiple jurisdictions against the same defendant or against others in the same industry.
National Litigation Hotline
June 29, 2004
Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.
Recent Developments from Around the States
June 29, 2004
National cases of importance to your practice.
9th Circuit Snaps At Gator's Argument
June 29, 2004
An Internet company asked a skeptical 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in late June for the right to sue an East Coast business rival in Northern California, even though the rival has no physical presence in the California.
Spam Costs Double in Last Year
June 29, 2004
According to a new report from Nucleus Research, "Spam: The ROI Killer," the cost of spam per employee has skyrocketed to $1934 per year.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Private Equity Valuation: A Significant Decision
    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.
    Read More ›