-
Jul 22, 2024 | 
law.com | Anthony Sabino
Not long ago in this space, we distilled the then-newest decisions explicating the boundaries of the statutory exemption from arbitration enjoyed by so-called “transportation workers.” See 9 U.S.C. §1. The first was Southwest Airlines Co. v. Saxon, 596 U.S. 450 (2022) (“Saxon”), wherein a unified Supreme Court decreed that the exception is defined, not by the employer’s business, but rather by “the actual work…typically carr[ied] out” by the employees seeking to avoid the arbitral forum.
-
Jun 11, 2024 | 
feeds.feedblitz.com | Jane Wester |Anthony Sabino |Andrew Denney |Brian Lee
Counsel for U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez, D-New Jersey, on Tuesday, began cross-examining cooperating witness Jose Uribe, a New Jersey businessman who pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit bribery, honest services wire fraud, tax evasion and other offenses in March. Menendez’s attorney Adam Fee of Paul Hastings worked to demonstrate to the jurors that while Uribe was close to Menendez’s wife, Nadine Menendez, he did not have extensive interactions with the senator. Want to continue reading?
-
Jun 7, 2024 | 
law.com | Anthony Sabino
In National Small Business United v. Yellen, ___ F.Supp.3d ____ (No. 22-cv-01448) (N.D. Ala. March 1, 2024) (NSBU), a federal district court found the Corporate Transparency Act (the CTA) unconstitutional on multiple grounds. Part I of this writing posited the trial bench’s determination that the statute could not be sustained pursuant to Congress’s powers to conduct foreign affairs and levy taxes, respectively. This installment will analyze District Judge Liles C.
-
May 31, 2024 | 
law.com | Anthony Sabino
The Corporate Transparency Act (the CTA) requires business entities newly created pursuant to state law to fully and publicly identify their beneficial owners.
-
Feb 16, 2024 | 
law.com | Anthony Sabino
Facts versus opinions. A material misstatement of the former is the first and foremost requirement in claiming federal securities fraud; the latter, even if subsequently debunked, can never be the basis for such a serious charge. Yet while the nation’s highest court concisely articulated the differences between the two in, among other milestones, Omnicare, Inc. v.
-
Jun 1, 2023 | 
law.com | Anthony Sabino
In Axon Enterprise, Inc. v. F.T.C., 598 U.S. ___ (No. 21-86) (April 14, 2023), the U.S. Supreme Court very recently decreed that constitutional challenges to regulatory power need not be relegated to agency administrative law judges, but rather are cognizable in the district courts. In the first installment of this two-part series, we exposited the foundation for this newest edict. Now we turn to Axon itself.
-
Jun 1, 2023 | 
lawjournalnewsletters.com | Anthony Sabino
Business Crimes BulletinRegulationSecurities LitigationWhite Collar CrimePart Three of a Three-Part ArticleThe first two installments exposited Janus Capital Group, Inc. v. First Derivative Traders and Lorenzo v. S.E.C., both essential to understanding S.E.C. v. Rio Tinto, the Second Circuit’s most recent holding regarding Rule 10b-5 “scheme” liability.
-
May 25, 2023 | 
law.com | Anthony Sabino
When a respondent to a regulatory enforcement action counterattacks with a “fundamental, even existential” challenge to the very constitutionality of the prosecuting agency, may that claim be decided in the first instance by a district judge? Or must it await appellate review by a circuit court of appeals after the regulators have taken final action? In the very recent case of Axon Enterprise, Inc. v.
-
May 1, 2023 | 
lawjournalnewsletters.com | Anthony Sabino
Business Crimes BulletinRegulationSecurities LitigationUnited States Supreme CourtWhite Collar CrimePart Two of a Three-Part ArticleThis three-part series discusses the Second Circuit’s recent Securities law landmark case, S.E.C. v. Rio Tinto. However, in order to discuss Rio Tinto, it is important to first understand the Supreme Court landmark cases upon which Rio Tinto is based: Janus Capital Group, Inc. v. First Derivative Trader, discussed in the first installment, and S.E.C v.
-
Apr 1, 2023 | 
lawjournalnewsletters.com | Anthony Sabino
Business Crimes BulletinRegulationUnited States Supreme CourtWhite Collar CrimePart One of a Three-Part ArticleThis three-part series discusses the Second Circuit’s recent Securities law landmark case, S.E.C. v. Rio Tinto. However, in order to discuss Rio Tinto, it is important to first understand the Supreme Court landmark cases upon which Rio Tinto is based: Janus Capital Group, Inc. v. First Derivative Trader and S.E.C v. Lorenzo. Janus is discussed here in the first installment.
