The Stoneridge Decision
On Jan. 15, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision in <i>Stoneridge Investment Partners v. Scientific Atlanta</i>, the case that has been called 'the most important securities law case to reach the Court this decade' and 'the securities lawyer's <i>Roe v. Wade</i>.' While the case had both domestic and international corporations concerned about its potential to dramatically expand the scope of 10b-5 claims in order to target third parties doing business with public companies that concern can now be laid to rest.
Special Committees and Protecting Privilege
How can a board discharge its fiduciary duties without waiving otherwise applicable privileges to the investigation and opening the door to discovery of investigation related materials by the government or by third party litigation adversaries? An analysis of recent rulings.
Supreme Court Won't Hear Wiretapping Case
The Supreme Court on Feb. 19 declined to take up the first legal challenge to the Bush administration's once-secret National Security Agency program of warrantless wiretapping.
Special Report on e-Discovery: Defensible Legal Hold Process
If the road to hell is paved with good intentions, then the road to legal sanctions can be paved with intentions to show good faith. That's particularly true when it comes to implementing a legal hold process. Companies with lawsuits on the horizon must be extremely careful with the technology they use and the processes they follow regarding e-discovery in order to avoid sanctions and maintain defensibility.
Special Report on e-Discovery: The Revised Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
The 2006 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ('FRCP') were anticipated by some corporate counsel with Y2K-like gloom and doom predictions. In particular, many wondered aloud whether the rules would have the effect of placing reasonable limits on electronic discovery, or whether instead they would open the floodgates and drown us all in a sea of electronic document production. However, the past year has shown that, like the Y2K hysteria that went out with a whimper, the fretting over the negative impact of the amendments may have been overblown.
Bell Atlantic v. Twombly and Its Aftermath
One of the most important decisions that corporate counsel must make in any case is whether to file a motion to dismiss. While a motion can put an early end to the case, it can also prompt a judge to make damaging pronouncements about the law, without the benefit of a fully developed factual record.
'You're Fired!'
For Donald Trump, 'You're fired!' has become a money-maker. But for Human Resources managers and in-house counsel, 'You're fired' is a dreaded phrase that will bring not an increase in ratings, but an increase in lawsuits. A poorly executed termination exposes the employer to significant liability; even a simple discrimination claim can cost the employer $100,000 in defense costs.
Majority Voting in Director Elections
Majority voting for the election of directors has been transformed from a fringe concept to the prevailing election standard among large public companies in the brief span of three years, as demonstrated by the November 2007 edition of the <i>Study of Majority Voting in Director Elections</i>. Statistics and examples drawn from the Study underscore that majority voting has become a relatively mature, as well as widespread, movement.
