Home > Sullivan & Cromwell LLP > Legal Library

Legal Articles: Sullivan & Cromwell LLP

 







Document(s) published by this organization: 110


View Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next  >>
Show: results per page
Sort by:

Adobe PDFSection 4371 Excise Tax on Insurance and Reinsurance Contracts: D.C. Circuit Holds that Federal Excise Tax Does Not Apply to Wholly Foreign Retrocession Agreements
Eric M. Lopata, David C. Spitzer, S. Eric Wang; Sullivan & Cromwell LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
June 8, 2015, previously published on June 3, 2015
On May 26, 2015, in Validus Reinsurance, Ltd. v. United States,1 the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the “D.C. Circuit,” or the “court”) held that the excise tax imposed on insurance and reinsurance contracts under Section 4371 of the...

 

Adobe PDFRecent Developments in BSA/AML: Federal Reserve Enters Into Written Agreements with Discover Financial Services and State Street Corporation
Nicolas Bourtin, H. Rodgin Cohen, Elizabeth T. Davy, Mitchell S. Eitel, Jared M. Fishman; Sullivan & Cromwell LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
June 8, 2015, previously published on June 3, 2015
Over the past week, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve (the “Federal Reserve”) announced two enforcement actions addressing Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”)/anti-money laundering (“AML”) compliance program deficiencies. Contemporaneous with those...

 

Adobe PDFEqual Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc.—Religious Accommodation in the Workplace: Supreme Court Clarifies that an Employer Can Be Liable for Failing To Accommodate a Religious Practice that the Employer Suspects, But Does Not Know, To Be Religiously Based
David H. Braff, Robin D. Fessel, Robert J. Giuffra, Tracy Richelle High, Sharon L. Nelles; Sullivan & Cromwell LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
June 8, 2015, previously published on June 2, 2015
Yesterday in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., No. 14-86, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the prohibition in Title VII of the Civil Rights of 1964 on adverse employment actions “against any individual . . . because of such individual’s . ....

 

Adobe PDFSupreme Court Clarifies Statute of Limitations Applicable to False Claims Act Whistleblower Suits Against Government Contractors
Robin D. Fessel, Tracy Richelle High, Julia M. Jordan, Theodore O. Rogers, Jeffrey B. Wall; Sullivan & Cromwell LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
June 4, 2015, previously published on May 28, 2015
On May 26, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision concerning the scope of civil fraud claims brought by whistleblowers under the False Claims Act (“FCA”) against government contractors. In Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc. et al. v. United States ex rel. Carter, slip op....

 

Adobe PDFBank Liquidity Requirements: Federal Reserve Proposes Inclusion of Certain U.S. Municipal Securities as High-Quality Liquid Assets for Purposes of the Liquidity Coverage Ratio
Whitney A. Chatterjee, H. Rodgin Cohen, Elizabeth T. Davy, Mitchell S. Eitel, Michael T. Escue; Sullivan & Cromwell LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
June 4, 2015, previously published on May 26, 2015
On Thursday, May 21, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve”) issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (the “Proposal”) that would amend the final rule implementing a liquidity coverage ratio (“LCR”) requirement (the “Final...

 

Adobe PDFPatent Law—Inducing Infringement: Defendant’s Good-Faith Belief That a Patent Is Invalid Is Not a Defense to a Claim for Inducing Infringement
Garrard R. Beeney, Adam R. Brebner, Marc De Leeuw, Stephen J. Elliott, John Evangelakos; Sullivan & Cromwell LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
June 4, 2015, previously published on May 27, 2015
Yesterday in Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc.,1 the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit and held that a defendant’s good-faith belief that an asserted patent is invalid is not a defense to a claim that the defendant induced infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). The...

 

Adobe PDFSEC Proposes Rules to Modify Reporting Regime for Registered Investment Companies and Investment Advisers
John E. Baumgardner, Whitney A. Chatterjee, Donald R. Crawshaw, William G. Farrar, David J. Gilberg; Sullivan & Cromwell LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
June 1, 2015, previously published on May 26, 2015
On May 20, 2015, the Securities and Exchange Commission proposed new rules and amendments that would significantly modify the disclosure and reporting requirements applicable to most investment companies registered under the Investment Company Act of 19401 and all investment advisers registered...

 

Adobe PDFCFPB and FCC Bring “Cramming” Actions Against Sprint and Verizon: Actions Represent First CFPB Settlements To Address Unauthorized Charges on Telephone Bills and First Concurrent Enforcement Proceedings by the CFPB and FCC
Darrell S. Cafasso, H. Rodgin Cohen, Mitchell S. Eitel, Robert J. Giuffra, Sharon L. Nelles; Sullivan & Cromwell LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
May 28, 2015, previously published on May 19, 2015
On May 12, 2015, the CFPB and the FCC (together, the “Agencies”) concurrently announced that Verizon Wireless (“Verizon”) and Sprint Corporation (“Sprint” and, together with Verizon, the “Companies”) have agreed to pay a combined $158 million to...

 

Adobe PDFSupreme Court Rules on Statute of Limitations for Claims Against Plan Fiduciaries: Statute of Limitations for ERISA Fiduciary Claims Can Run From the Date of a Failure to Monitor Investments, Not Merely From the Date of the Initial Investment Decision
Sullivan Cromwell LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
May 28, 2015, previously published on May 19, 2015
Yesterday in Tibble et al., Petitioners v. Edison International et al., the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the six-year statute of limitations for claims against ERISA fiduciaries runs from the date of a failure to monitor investments, and not simply from the date of the initial investment decision....

 

Adobe PDFIn re Cornerstone Therapeutics Inc. Stockholder Litigation: Delaware Supreme Court Holds That Plaintiffs Seeking Monetary Damages Must Plead Non-Exculpated Claims Against Disinterested Directors to Survive Motion to Dismiss by Those Directors
Francis J. Aquila, Audra D. Cohen, H. Rodgin Cohen, Mitchell S. Eitel, Brian T. Frawley; Sullivan & Cromwell LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
May 28, 2015, previously published on May 18, 2015
In a decision1 issued on May 14, 2015, the Delaware Supreme Court held that a plaintiff seeking only monetary damages against a director who is protected by an exculpatory charter provision must plead duty of loyalty/bad faith claims to survive a motion to dismiss, regardless of the underlying...

 


View Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next  >>