Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
National Litigation Hotline
Sarbanes-Oxley Claims Not Exempt from Mandatory Arbitration
A federal district court in the Southern District of New York has recently held that claims brought under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act were not exempt from mandatory arbitration. Boss v. Salomon Smith Barney Inc., 2002 WL 21146653 (S.D.N.Y. May 16, 2003).
Plaintiff Kenneth Boss was employed by Salomon Smith Barney as a research analyst. Boss claimed that contrary to established rules, policies, and procedures, he was directed to share a draft research report with Salomon's investment bankers, and that he was pressured by Salomon to change his recommendations. Boss further alleged that when he failed to do so, Salomon retaliated by terminating his employment. Boss commenced a lawsuit seeking damages and reinstatement, to which Salomon responded by bringing a motion to stay the litigation and compel arbitration. In support of its motion, Salomon cited several internal documents (including its employee handbook), which stated that arbitration was the 'required and exclusive forum' for resolution of all employment disputes (including those brought under any federal, state or local statute, regulation, or common law doctrine regarding termination of employment). Salomon also referred to a U-4 application for registration with the NASD that Boss had executed, which called for arbitration of all disputes between Boss and Salomon.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?