|
|
 |
|
|
February 2008 - Posts
-
|
Allen v. Admin. Review Board constitutes a dramatic departure from the purpose of the whistleblower law under Sarbanes-Oxley. The court offered a cramped view of the law that undermines the ability of employees to complain about suspected corporate malfeasance. The decision basically requires employees to become experts in securities law before making complaints. It is the first circuit court opinion to place such a large burden on retaliated-against employees.
|
-
|
The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued its opinion in Stoneridge. The court concluded that certain nonspeaking defendants were not liable under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 because the investors at issue did not rely on anything these defendants said or did. The inability to plead reliance as to these defendants a critical element of a cause of action under Section 10(b) required dismissal. The court's conclusions are legally sound and squarely grounded in its prior precedent.
|
-
|
On Oct. 29, the commissioner of the Social Security Administration proposed drastically changing the procedural rules for adjudicating claims for Social Security benefits. The SSA does not state that the current rules result in nondisabled people being wrongfully awarded benefits. Rather, by making the hearings and appeals process more difficult, it apparently means to deny benefits to many disabled people. This is not sound policy for operating a safety net for the most vulnerable members of our society.
|
-
|
The practice of law can leave lawyers longing for something other than helping one company make more money at the expense of another. They want to do something more meaningful. For many, the answer is in a new field, compliance and ethics, which involves an entire practice devoted to getting companies and other large organizations to obey the rules and act ethically. There is stress in this field, but it comes from being the champion of doing the right thing at times when others still need to be persuaded.
|
-
|
In 2007, six federal judges in Wilmington, Del., won a competition most Americans didn't know about: one for the billion-dollar-a-year business of reorganizing the largest bankrupt companies. Of the 13 large public companies that filed in the United States in 2007, 10 chose the Delaware bankruptcy court, which now has six judges. These judges will likely do whatever it takes to keep out-of-state cases coming. Parties other than filers should wonder whether these judges can provide them with fair hearings.
|
|
|
|