Recent Posts
Follow Us
twittergoogle_pluslinkedinrssyoutube
The Legal Stuff
Government Enforcement Exposed - "The GEE"
0 0

02 Aug 2017 Corporate Law Alert – SEC Issues Guidance on Initial Coin Offerings and Cryptocurrencies

  On July 25, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued its most comprehensive public guidance to date on digital assets such as cryptocurrencies and tokens. Key points from the guidance are:   Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs) are required to be registered with the SEC if the digital assets are securities offered or sold in the U.S. Digital assets can be evaluated for securities status using traditional securities law criteria Automated functions through smart contracts or other code remain subject to securities laws Companies dealing in digital assets should consider seeking counsel as to whether the digital assets are securities Companies dealing in digital currencies may need to register as broker-dealers, securities exchanges, or alternative trading systems Companies investing in digital assets and advising on investment…

READ MORE
0 0

09 Apr 2014 Alert: SEC creates team to examine private equity and hedge funds

  The SEC has created a dedicated team to examine and scrutinize private equity and hedge funds. According to Reuters, the SEC’s private fund team is led by Igor Rozenblit and Marc Wyatt, veterans of private equity and hedge funds respectively. The SEC’s private fund team will examine several areas in the private fund realm including asset valuation, fee structures and disclosures, and other communications with investors. Creation of this team follows the increased scrutiny on private funds that has occurred since passage of the 2010 Dodd-Frank law, which required many advisors to private funds to register with the SEC.   BT GEEMore Posts – Website

READ MORE
0 0

01 Apr 2014 ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT FINDS EAVESDROPPING LAW UNCONSTITUTIONAL, BUT DON’T TELL ROSE MARY WOODS JUST YET

  The Illinois Supreme Court has concluded in two recent cases that Illinois’s long-standing prohibition against recording conversations unless all parties consent to the conversation is unconstitutionally overbroad. The Court determined that the statute prohibited recording conversations that could not possibly be deemed private and potentially applied to numerous situations, like recording public interactions with law enforcement or government officials, which arguably impinged on the public’s First Amendment rights. For a more detailed account of the Court’s rulings and its potential impact in the employment arena, see the recent client alert published by the Firm’s Labor & Employment law group.   Whether these decisions have any lasting impact, though, remains to be seen. The Court did not conclude that the notion of a two-party consent…

READ MORE
Alert Exclamation Point
0 0

07 Mar 2014 Barnes & Thornburg Legal Alert – Supreme Court Opens a Pandora’s Box of Whistleblower Litigation

By Brian E. Casey |   On Tuesday, the Supreme Court opened the door to a potential wave of whistleblower litigation under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act’s anti-retaliation provision, with its surprising 6-3 decision in Lawson v. FMR LLC.  The Supreme Court’s dissent predicts that even housekeepers, gardeners, and nannies might be able to assert retaliation claims under the Act.  How broadly future courts will interpret Lawson may depend on the imagination of plaintiffs’ lawyers, but one thing is certain – Lawson has created more questions, and more litigation, than it resolved.   For a more detailed analysis, please see the Client Alert published today jointly by the Firm’s Finance, Corporate Governance, and Mergers & Acquisition Litigation practice group and the Labor & Employment Department. You can…

READ MORE
Alert Exclamation Point
0 0

16 Jan 2014 Barnes & Thornburg Legal Alert – Government Regulators Continue to Make Insider Trading a Trial Priority

By Trace Schmeltz |   From a recent client Alert that we issued yesterday:   Government regulators have started 2014 as they did throughout 2013 by continuing to go after insider trading both civilly and criminally. However, the U.S. Attorney’s office has had substantially more success in trying its criminal cases than the SEC has had recently in its civil trials. Why the government’s criminal prosecutors are having greater success proving criminal fraud than the SEC is having proving civil fraud might be because the SEC is pursuing cases that push the envelope on insider trading liability, either factually or legally. Whatever the reason, a trend might be developing…   You can download a PDF of the Alert in its entirety by visiting our website…

READ MORE