Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
ABC Company was overconfident about the effectiveness of its hotline, which was producing only about 25% of the industry average call volume. XYZ Inc.'s hotline had a similar issue, generating only 15%. In both instances, using a breakthrough benchmarking study, we identified the low usage and recommended potential remediation steps.
Features
The misappropriation theory of insider trading, which was first recognized by the Supreme Court in <i>United States v. O'Hagan</i>, 521 U.S. 642 (1997), establishes liability for individuals who are not typical 'insiders' of companies and also appears to offer such defendants a specific defense to insider trading charges. The O'Hagan Court based the misappropriation theory on a duty owed by the defendant to the source of non-public material information, rather than to the shareholders of the company whose stock was being traded. Because a defendant prosecuted under the misappropriation theory had a duty only to his source, the Court explained that a defendant's disclosure to the source of information prior to trading or tipping could neutralize the acts of deception necessary for a securities fraud claim.
Indictments and resignations following an internal investigation are not necessarily surprising. In the case of the Hewlett-Packard ('HP') investigation, however, it's the investigators who are in dire straits. In the months since HP publicly announced that it had conducted an internal investigation into news leaks by corporate directors, its Chairman and General Counsel have resigned, criminal charges have been filed against those involved in the investigation, and one person has pled guilty. HP exemplifies the pitfalls and problems that can result from an internal investigation itself, for both the company and its counsel. As one Congressman asked: 'Where were the lawyers? There were red flags waving all over the place,' but 'none of the lawyers stepped up to their responsibilities.'
Features
Litigation involving asbestos, which was used for decades as a fire retardant in many products, has littered the legal landscape for years. Several major companies have over the course of the last several years filed for bankruptcy as a result of the onslaught of this litigation. Since the 1980s, many asbestos manufacturers, including Johns Manville, declared bankruptcy under the weight of liability payouts. To date, an estimated 85 companies have filed for bankruptcy claiming asbestos liabilities as the cause. A Rand Institute for Civil Justice report indicates that more than 730,000 asbestos claims have been filed since the early 1970s. Roughly 200,000 claims are still pending in state and federal courts nationwide. Estimates predict that up to 2.4 million claims still may be filed before asbestos litigation finally runs its course.
The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania recently issued one of the first decisions in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to interpret ' 503(b)(9), an important new Bankruptcy Code provision passed under the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (BAPCPA): <i>In re Bookbinders' Restaurant Inc.</i> ' 503(b)(9) is certain to impact the relationship between a debtor seeking to reorganize and the trade vendors that deal with it.
Features
In the last ten years, the credit derivatives market has grown from its infancy to approximately $26 trillion of notional value according to the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. ('ISDA'). The most highly utilized type of credit derivative, the credit default swap, is used by investors to bet on a company's creditworthiness or hedge a position in a fashion that protects against the company's failure to make a payment or satisfy other terms.
Features
It has often been said that the most frequently violated federal employment-related statute is the Fair Labor Standards Act ('FLSA'), 29 U.S.C. '' 201-19 (Supp. 2006). This law, enacted in 1938, regulates, among other things, the payment of overtime to employees who work for employers. Our experience indicates that most, if not all, employers do not intend to violate the provisions contained in the FLSA but, instead, do so out of ignorance of its requirements. This article highlights some of the key provisions of the FLSA, makes reference to recent pronouncements by the United States Department of Labor (the federal agency principally responsible for interpretation of the statute) and presents advice on how to avoid the pitfalls inherent in the FLSA.
Features
An end-of-year (Nov. 29) Delaware Chancery Court decision, <i>Esopus Creek Value LP v. Hauf</i>, No. 2487-N (Del. Ch. Nov. 29, 2006), is receiving a great deal of attention from corporate transactional and corporate restructuring attorneys alike. In <i>Esopus</i>, the Delaware Chancery Court prevented a financially sound company that was prohibited by federal securities law from holding a shareholder vote, because it failed to meet its reporting requirements, from executing an agreement outside of bankruptcy to sell substantially all of its assets under Section 363 of the Bankruptcy Code without first obtaining common stockholder approval as required under Section 271(a) of the Delaware General Company Law ('DGCL').