Blogs & Social Media Sites
On Friday, the Supreme Court came out with its long awaited decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins. In a nutshell, the Court really decided little: it vacated the previous 9th Circuit decision and remanded the case back to that court for further consideration. In some quarters, that would be called a “punt.”
Nevertheless, perhaps the result can be summarized at best as a tie for defendants – the Court was clear that the mere allegation of the violation of a statute that contains a monetary penalty would not support standing. But at worst for defendants the decision clearly leaves the door open for claims that involve only a statutory violation and penalty can proceed where there is some sort of undefined link between the penalty and some tangible or intangible harm. Read More ›
In March, the Supreme Court decided Tyson Foods v. Bouaphakeo,a much watched case involving the propriety of class certification.
Since the landmark decision in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, lower courts have found ways of restricting the applicability of Dukes and Comcast v. Behrend in ways to find certification despite the apparent suggestion in Dukes that certification was limited and the notion of trial by formula was discredited. (See our October 2014 post.) Many commentators, including me, thought that Tyson would provide the opportunity for the Court to restrain these lower court interpretations. (See our blog posts of June 2015 and November 2015.) Read More ›
Supreme Court Issues Final Word on Whether Unaccepted Rule 68 Offers of Judgment Moot Putative Class Actions… Or Does It?
Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued a decision in which it held that an unaccepted Rule 68 offer of judgment made to the named plaintiff in a putative class action does not moot the case. In doing so, the Court seemingly put an end to what was a contentious class action issue—an issue that this blog has followed closely. Interestingly, however, the Court chose not to decide whether a Rule 68 offer could moot a case if accompanied by a payment in the amount of that offer. Read More ›
The Financial Services Blog offers the latest information on banking development and litigation trends. Topics range from commercial and consumer lending through bankruptcy, lender liability defense, and the Dodd-Frank Act through Regulations JJ.
New Cybersecurity Regs Will Not be Limited to New York: Extra-Territorial Application for the Insurer and its 3rd Parties
August 28, 2017 marks the first of several rapidly approaching implementation deadlines for “covered entities” subject to the new cybersecurity regulations promulgated in March by the New York Department of Financial Services (“NYDFS”). With a few limited scope exemptions based on size, revenue, assets, and structure, 23 NYCRR Part 500 establishes minimum cybersecurity requirements for approximately 4,500 DFS regulated licensees, and the sweeping new rules will de facto extend to third-party service providers and authorized users beyond the Empire State’s borders. Read More ›
The first states to officially begin regulating blockchain technology and business did so in 2014, when a guidance document from the Texas Department of Banking excluding blockchain activity from the state’s money transmitter laws kicked off a chain of similar opinions in other jurisdictions. Since then, at least 26 states—ranging from Alaska to West Virginia—have either introduced or enacted legislation regulating blockchain in some manner. The past seven months have seen the marked growth of legislative activity in the blockchain space, and at least sixteen bills have been enacted or proposed so far this year.
 Texas Department of Banking, Supervisory Memorandum 1037, Regulatory Treatment of Virtual Currencies Under the Texas Money Services Act (April 3, 2014), available at http://www.dob.texas.gov/public/uploads/files/consumer-information/sm1037.pdf.
Lost in the headlines over the SEC’s recent pronouncements on cryptocurrency was important practical advice for both promoters of and participants in initial coin offerings (ICOs). Read More ›
A blog about relevant legal perspectives for the health care industry.
Ohio’s medical marijuana program is set to begin just a little over a year from now. The proposed rules governing Ohio physicians and their role in marijuana-related treatments must be finalized by September 8, 2017. Read More ›
The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services maintains a list of healthcare providers who are excluded from participating in Medicare, Medicaid and all other federal health care programs. Read More ›
West Virginia is the 29th state to authorize medical marijuana use. Read More ›
The International Services Group Blog is a resource for business leaders within the international commerce industry. Frost Brown Todd's international lawyers discuss the latest challenges for international trade and regulation, as well as solutions for those challenges.
On July 17, 2017, the Trump Administration released its most detailed and comprehensive list of objectives to date for renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). While this publication provides additional insight into the renegotiation goals of the Trump Administration, it does trigger a 30-day period before formal talks of NAFTA renegotiation among the United States, Mexico and Canada can officially begin. Such 30-day period will end on August 16, 2017, on which the first round of talks on the three-nation pact are scheduled to take place. Read More ›
On May 18, 2017, the Trump Administration took its first formal step in delivering on President Trump’s much anticipated campaign promise to renegotiate the North America Free Trade Agreement (“NAFTA”). By formally notifying Congress of its plan to renegotiate NAFTA, the Administration has started the clock on a 90-day period, after which the United States can officially begin its NAFTA renegotiation talks with Canada and Mexico. Such 90-day period will end on August 16, 2017. Read More ›
During his campaign for presidency, President-elect Donald Trump frequently called the North American Free Trade Agreement “the worst trade deal in history.” He promised the American people that he would renegotiate or withdraw from NAFTA and raise tariffs on imports from Mexico and Canada. NAFTA is a free trade agreement signed by Canada, Mexico and the United States, creating a trilateral trade bloc in North America. In the aftermath of the election, Americans with international business interests may be wondering whether President-elect Trump has the legal authority to unilaterally withdraw the U.S. from NAFTA and how to prepare for that scenario.
Mr. Trump’s transition team has sketched out his plan for the first 200 days of his presidency. According to post-election memorandum and video, the president-elect intends to push for substantial changes to NAFTA and trade relations between the United States, Canada and Mexico. Read More ›
Social Media Sites