-
Jul 15, 2024 | 
lexology.com | John G. Ferreira |Claire Rowland |Naina Kamath
In connection with a merger, acquisition, or other corporate (M&A) transaction, buyers often face the dilemma of how to handle the seller’s existing retirement plans covering the continuing employees.
-
Jun 27, 2024 | 
morganlewis.com | Petrina A. Mironis |Connor Lynch |Sarah Nelson |Ester Lee |Julie K. Stapel |Michael B. Richman | +7 more
BOSTON and WASHINGTON, DC, JUNE 27, 2024: Morgan Lewis represented Hometap Equity Partners LLC, Hometap Investment Partners III L.P., and Hometap Transaction Asset Purchaser I LLC in the Hometap platform’s debut securitization transaction, a rated offering of approximately $217 million of asset-backed notes that were collateralized by a loan that in turn was secured primarily by a pool of option purchase agreements originated by the company or its affiliates.
-
May 1, 2024 | 
jdsupra.com | Naina Kamath |Erin Martin |Emily Renshaw
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is continuing its focus on disclosure of executive perquisites—and aircraft usage in particular—in registration statements, periodic reports, and proxy statements. Pursuant to Item 402 of Regulation S-K in registration statements, public companies are required to disclose detailed information regarding their executive compensation practices, periodic reports, and proxy statements.
-
Apr 30, 2024 | 
morganlewis.com | Erin Martin |Mims Maynard Zabriskie |Naina Kamath |Emily Renshaw
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is continuing its focus on disclosure of executive perquisites—and aircraft usage in particular—in registration statements, periodic reports, and proxy statements. Pursuant to Item 402 of Regulation S-K in registration statements, public companies are required to disclose detailed information regarding their executive compensation practices, periodic reports, and proxy statements.
-
Apr 30, 2024 | 
lexology.com | Erin Martin |Mims Maynard Zabriskie |Naina Kamath |Emily Renshaw
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is continuing its focus on disclosure of executive perquisites—and aircraft usage in particular—in registration statements, periodic reports, and proxy statements. Pursuant to Item 402 of Regulation S-K in registration statements, public companies are required to disclose detailed information regarding their executive compensation practices, periodic reports, and proxy statements.
-
Mar 15, 2024 | 
law360.com | Naina Kamath |Julie K. Stapel
ADVERTISEMENT Don't want ads? Subscribe or login now. By Naina Kamath and Julie Stapel (March 15, 2024, 6:59 PM EDT) -- The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on Jan. 17 in Relentless v. U.S. Department of Commerce and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo....
-
Mar 15, 2024 | 
law360.co.uk | Naina Kamath |Julie K. Stapel
ADVERTISEMENT Don't want ads? Subscribe or login now. By Naina Kamath and Julie Stapel (March 15, 2024, 6:59 PM EDT) -- The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on Jan. 17 in Relentless v. U.S. Department of Commerce and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo....
-
Feb 15, 2024 | 
jdsupra.com | Naina Kamath |Julie K. Stapel
The US Supreme Court heard arguments on January 17 in Relentless v. Department of Commerce and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. In both cases, a commercial herring fishing company challenged a regulatory requirement that the company cover the costs of an observer required to ride along on the fishing boat to confirm compliance with various regulatory requirements. The statute imposing the requirement did not specify who should pay—the government or the fishing company.
-
Feb 14, 2024 | 
morganlewis.com | Naina Kamath |Julie K. Stapel
The US Supreme Court heard arguments on January 17 in Relentless v. Department of Commerce and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. In both cases, a commercial herring fishing company challenged a regulatory requirement that the company cover the costs of an observer required to ride along on the fishing boat to confirm compliance with various regulatory requirements. The statute imposing the requirement did not specify who should pay—the government or the fishing company.
-
Feb 14, 2024 | 
lexology.com | Naina Kamath |Julie K. Stapel
The US Supreme Court heard arguments on January 17 in Relentless v. Department of Commerce and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. In both cases, a commercial herring fishing company challenged a regulatory requirement that the company cover the costs of an observer required to ride along on the fishing boat to confirm compliance with various regulatory requirements. The statute imposing the requirement did not specify who should pay—the government or the fishing company.
