• What’s new in Bankruptcy Law

    Date: 2014.10.02 | Category: Law Libraries, PLI Discover PLUS (our upgraded eBook library), PLI Publications, Treatise | Response: 0

    The Bankruptcy Deskbook was recently supplemented. That means print subscribers as well as PLI Discover PLUS subscribers have access to updated materials. This update includes:

    Patient Care Ombudsman

    When the debtor in Chapter 7, 9, or 11 is a “health care business,” the court is required to order the appointment of a patient care ombudsman unless it makes a specific finding that it is unnecessary. Two recent cases help clarify the extensive definition of “health care business” and spell out a four-part test for determining whether a debtor qualifies as such. To learn more, see § 1:3.7 and Discover PLUS subscribers can click here to automatically be taken to Chapter 1.

    Adjudication of “Stern Claims”

    In Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that when a bankruptcy court is not permitted by Article III of the Constitution to enter a final judgment on a core bankruptcy claim, the bankruptcy court should follow the procedures of the statute and submit to the district court for de novo review proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. To learn more, see § 2:1.2[C][1] and Discover PLUS subscribers can click here to automatically be taken to Chapter 2.

    Exemptions from Property of the Estate

    Retirement funds may be exempted under both state and federal law. In Clark v. Rameker, the Supreme Court resolved a split between the Seventh Circuit and the Fifth Circuit and ruled that inherited IRAs are not retirement funds for purposes of section 522(b)(3)(C), thus affirming the Seventh Circuit’s decision that affirmed the bankruptcy court’s order sustaining a trustee’s objection to the debtor’s claimed exemption in such funds. To learn more, see § 7:4 and Discover PLUS subscribers can click here to automatically be taken to Chapter 7.

    Gavel

  • Free One Hour Briefing on Defining “Waters of the United States”: What is at Stake?

    Date: 2014.10.01 | Category: PLI, Programs (free) | Response: 0

    American FlagOctober 2, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

    On April 21, 2014, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Defense (DOD) published a rule-making proposal to revise the definition of “waters of the United States,” a key statutory term used to prescribe the extent of federal jurisdiction to regulate a variety of activities under the Clean Water Act (CWA). 79 Fed. Reg. 22188. The current comment period for the proposal expires on October 20, 2014.

    This closely watched and highly controversial proposal follows on more than forty years of CWA implementation, three landmark Supreme Court decisions and the issuance of shifting guidance documents by EPA and DOD over the course of the past several presidential administrations. Much of the current debate centers on how the agencies should interpret and apply the Court’s 4-1-4 decision in Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S. 715 (2006), which generated considerable confusion as to the reach of federal jurisdiction under the CWA. The EPA/DOD proposal aims to clarify matters, and stakeholders have expressed serious doubts as to whether the proposal makes matters better or worse.

    A good deal is at stake. Once finalized, the proposal will influence every regulatory program under the statute, from wastewater permitting under Section 402, to discharges of dredged or fill material under Section 404, to oil spill liability and prevention under Section 311, to State obligations to establish water quality standards under Section 303. Each of these programs applies only to “waters of the United States.” Many stakeholders believe the agencies’ proposal would greatly expand the universe of waters to be protected by these programs.

    While only a page or so in length, the proposed definition is intricate, and it differs from the existing definition in several key respects. The agencies have defined “tributaries” quite broadly, to include ponds and even ditches in certain circumstances. They have proposed to exert jurisdiction over adjacent waters of all kinds, not merely wetlands as before, and have defined “adjacent” broadly. They have proposed to exert jurisdiction on a case-by-case basis over “other” waters, and have defined this category of waters using a “significant nexus” test put forth by a single Justice in a concurring opinion in Rapanos. And the agencies have proposed specific exclusions from the definition for certain ditches and water features that are used in particular ways.

    Please join attorney James T. Banks, leader of the Environmental Practice at Hogan Lovells US LLP as he addresses:

    • What regulated parties will need to understand this proposal
    • What States and local governments will need to understand this proposal
    • The potential need for regulated parties, States and local governments to provide their input to the agencies during the comment period

    Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

  • Free One Hour Briefing on Telling the Story of Your Complex Case

    Date: 2014.09.30 | Category: PLI, Programs (free) | Response: 0

    October 1, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

    Storytelling is the most effective form of persuasion. Neither law schools nor the practice of law provide much, if any, training on how to develop likely the most important skill an advocate must possess: the ability to tell and present a persuasive story that resonates and convinces the audience on an intellectual and emotional level. Good storytelling is good advocacy.

    In this briefing, David Henry Dolkas, a partner with McDermott Will & Emery LLP, and the author of Managing Complex IP Litigation will cover:

    • The five reasons that most presentations are ineffective and fail to resonate and convince.
    • How to address and answer the “Key Questions” presented by your complex case.
    • How to take the answers to the Key Questions and apply principles of screen writing and narrative to build the story of your complex case.
    • How to tell a story that will appeal to the emotional intelligence of your audience.
    • How to emphasize the benefits, rather than the features, of the facts that make up the story of your complex case.

    Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

  • Free One-Hour Briefing on Litigating Under Patent Local Rules: Avoiding the Pitfalls

    Date: 2014.09.29 | Category: PLI, Programs (free) | Response: 0

    September 30, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

    Fourteen years ago, the Northern District of California started an experiment: a special set of local rules to govern pretrial proceedings in patent cases. If imitation is a sign of success, then the experiment was a great success: Thirty one districts around the country have now adopted variants of the Northern District’s Patent Local Rules, and judges in other jurisdictions, such as the Central District of California, have adopted standing orders adopting the scheduling and disclosure requirements of the Patent Local Rules for their courtroom or regularly incorporate those requirements into Rule 16 scheduling orders.

    Litigating under the rules can be challenging, with most courts adopting a strict approach to pre-trial disclosures that is very different from the way other civil disputes are handled under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Failure to recognize these differences and to plan ahead for complying with the rules can result in a litigant being precluded from making important substantive arguments.

    Please join the chair of Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis LLP’s IP litigation group, Michael M. Carlson as he discusses:

    • The potential pitfalls of practicing under Patent Local Rules
    • The steps that must be taken to prepare for and comply with Patent Local Rules
    • The major variations in the terms of the Patent Local Rules as adopted among the districts

    The discussion will be applicable to those litigating patent cases in any district that has adopted the rules or in front of any judge who has implemented them through standing or scheduling orders.

    Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

  • Free One-Hour Briefing on Financial Due Diligence and the Specter of Fraud in the Private M&A Context

    Date: 2014.09.23 | Category: PLI, Programs (free) | Response: 0

    September 23, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

    In the context of private M&A transactions, where do the boundaries exist between proper negotiation and fraudulent conduct? A buyer may believe that the seller has a duty to disclose negative facts about the company, while the seller may believe that the buyer has the responsibility to ask the right questions and conduct proper due diligence to satisfy itself as to the condition of the company. Where contractual disclaimers are at play, buyers and sellers can often be at odds on who bears the ultimate risk of reliance on inaccurate information. In such cases, common law fraud may be the final arbiter of which party is ultimately deemed at fault for dashed expectations following a private company acquisition. This One-Hour Briefing will examine how common law fraud principles can govern the proper scope of seller and buyer responsibilities when due diligence and contractual protections fall short.

    Michael M. Farhang of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP will address the following topics:

    • What are the common law fraud standards in two representative jurisdictions, New York and California, as applied to buyer and seller conduct in private M&A transactions?
    • What are the effects of choice-of-law provisions in private M&A agreements?
    • What impact does a contractual disclaimer have on a buyer’s reliance on alleged representations or omissions by the seller regarding the target company?
    • How do courts view the quality of a buyer’s due diligence when evaluating claims of fraud in the M&A context?
    • What are some of the policy considerations relevant to the boundaries of responsibility between sellers and buyers in the M&A context?

    Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

  • The Library Ledger September 2014, Volume 2, Issue 3

    Date: 2014.09.22 | Category: PLI | Response: 0

    libraryledgerheaderOur latest edition of the Library Ledger is now available on the blog!  Read this most current edition which provides you with news on our Search Widget; PLI Discover PLUS usage reports; and search tips on how to locate the Treatise you need.  Read all of our newsletters on the Library Ledger page.

  • Free One-Hour Briefing on Ralls Corporation v. Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States: Is This Landmark Ruling the Dawn of Due Process for CFIUS?

    Date: 2014.09.17 | Category: PLI, Programs (free) | Response: 0

    September 18, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

    In 2012, President Obama vetoed the acquisition of windfarms in Oregon by Ralls Corporation, an American company owned and controlled by two senior officials of the Sany Group, a Chinese corporation, based on their proximity to a sensitive military installation. Ralls subsequently challenged the action and the District Court dismissed the complaint. On July 15, 2014, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a landmark decision in Ralls Corporation v. Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States No. 1:12cv-01513) (July 15, 2014), reversing the District Court’s decision. The Circuit Court held that constitutional due process had been denied because Ralls was not given notice of the factual basis for the veto or given an opportunity to rebut the evidence.

    This one-hour briefing will be hosted by Christopher R. Brewster and Anne W. Salladin, Special Counsel at Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP’s Washington-based National Security/CFIUS/Compliance practice. These panelists regularly represent foreign companies before CFIUS. Mr. Brewster has advised clients on CFIUS filings since passage of the Exon-Florio Amendment in 1988, including some of the largest matters considered by the Committee; Ms. Salladin is a nearly twenty year veteran of the US Department of the Treasury, the chair of CFIUS, where she provided legal advice to CFIUS and participated in the review and investigation of over 500 CFIUS cases.

    The panelists will discuss the following:

    • A review of the decision
    • If upheld, implications of the decision for foreign investment in the USA
    • If upheld, implications for CFIUS procedures and
    • If upheld, implications for course and structure of deals that may affect national security

    Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

  • Free One-Hour Briefing on State Enforcement in the Financial Services Sector: The Emergence of a Federal Law Enforcement Tool Empowering State Authorities Under Dodd-Frank

    Date: 2014.09.16 | Category: Programs (free) | Response: 0

    September 17, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

    Not only did The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 revamp the federal consumer protection regime by establishing the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau into which the Act moved enforcement authority over a number of federal consumer protection statutes but, concurrently, Dodd-Frank expanded the law enforcement authority of the states, opened up a whole new enforcement arena for state banking and financial services regulators and attorneys general who are now authorized, acting under the new federal law, to protect consumers from unfair, deceptive and abusive practices by lenders, sales finance companies, check cashers, credit, debit and prepaid card providers, debt collectors, and other participants in the financial services sector – including many banks that hold federal charters, as well as their subsidiaries.

    This session will feature a first-hand look at the approach taken by state regulatory and enforcement officials and the consequences for their regulated institutions and other entities as state regulatory examinations and enforcement investigations have resulted in litigation under Dodd-Frank in both state and federal court.

    Please join Joy Feigenbaum, Executive Deputy Superintendent in charge of the Financial Frauds & Consumer Protection Division of the New York State Department of Financial Services, and Thomas P. James, Senior Assistant Attorney General in the Consumer Fraud Bureau at the Office of the Illinois Attorney General, as they address the following topics, among others:

    • What new power and authority was granted to state regulators and attorneys general by Dodd-Frank?
    • How does the federally-created enforcement authority granted to the states under Dodd-Frank correspond to and augment existing enforcement powers the states have typically exercised, including what additional remedies are available to state officials and what new claims may be asserted by them?
    • How have these new powers played out in litigation filed by state regulators and attorneys general to date?
    • How to understand and respond effectively to a state government enforcement investigation

    Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

  • Free One-Hour Briefing on Mindful Lawyering: An Introduction to Mindfulness and How it Can Boost Your Life and Legal Practice

    Date: 2014.09.15 | Category: Programs (free) | Response: 0

    September 16, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

    One of the greatest challenges in today’s fast-paced, technology-driven world is staying present in life’s most sacred moments. The overwhelming pace of communication, keeping up with inboxes and texts, the sea of information at our fingertips, and efficiency expectations at work has led to widespread attention and engagement issues and increased stress. It is very easy to get caught up in a sort of auto pilot, constantly thinking about the past and future, mindlessly going through life. When we fall into mindlessness we struggle to stay focused in our work with clients and find it difficult to manage ourselves, relationships and key, high impact moments.

    One of the best ways to overcome these challenges and effectively manage the stress inherent in the pace of life today is to develop a mindfulness practice. “Mindfulness” is defined as being present with our experience, non-judgmentally. Put simply, it’s about being aware of the story lines, bodily sensations, and emotions that are present throughout life. With practice, mindfulness exercises can help lawyers decrease stress, manage emotions, enhance team dynamics, and increase both self-awareness and focus.

    Though we can all benefit from a mindfulness practice, it can be particularly useful if you:

    • Find it difficult to stay present with clients
    • Struggle to stay focused at work
    • Slip into mindlessness and rely on old, outdated habits rather than choosing adaptive and best courses of action
    • Experience persistent stress and find it difficult to disengage from work

    In this briefing on Mindfulness for Lawyers, participants will learn:

    • What mindfulness is
    • How it can enhance focus and concentration
    • How to develop a basic mindfulness meditation practice
    • How developing a mindfulness practice can lead to increased self-awareness and emotional intelligence, and therefore greater leadership
    • The core components of mindfulness

    Please join Dan DeFoe, J.D., M.S. of Adlitem Solutions and Rob Durr, Ph.D., Licensed Clinical Psychologist at Northwestern University for this interactive workshop to learn about mindfulness meditation, an empirically-supported practice that can decrease stress, boost concentration, and aid in emotion regulation through the cultivation of present-moment awareness.

    Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

  • Free One-Hour Briefing on Regulation AB II Overview

    Date: 2014.09.12 | Category: Programs (free) | Response: 0

    September 19, 2014, 1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. (E.D.T.)

    On August 27, 2014, the Securities and Exchange Commission adopted long-anticipated final amendments to Regulation AB that were first proposed in 2010. The new rules make sweeping changes to the offering process and disclosure and periodic reporting requirements for asset-backed securities. In this program, Jerry R. Marlatt and Kenneth E. Kohler of Morrison & Foerster LLP will provide an overview of the new rules and their impact on ABS and MBS issuers and investors in the U.S., including:

    • History of Regulation AB II proposals
    • Changes to the ABS offering process
    • New Forms SF-1 and SF-3
    • Asset-level disclosure and privacy concerns
    • CEO certification
    • Asset review/credit risk management
    • Dispute resolution requirements
    • Investor communication
    • Prospectus disclosure requirements
    • Periodic reporting changes
    • Proposals not adopted by SEC

    Register now and don’t miss this important free briefing!

Categories

Archives

Blogroll

Links

  • PLI
  • PLI Discover PLUS

Tags