ILN Today Post
June 26, 2010
A new wave of whistleblower monetary awards and protections will come to the financial services industry once the Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010 (RAFSA) is enacted. With final resolution of differences between House and Senate versions accomplished, both houses of Congress now will consider the conference committee bill.
Bloomberg legal analyst Spencer Mazyck has been following whistleblowing changes we are likely to see with the anticipated enactment of RAFSA. Spencer explored with me some contours and ramifications of the pending legislation during 20-minute Bloomberg podcast.
ILN Today Post
June 23, 2010
The article 154 of the law defines the Joint-Stock Society as the one existing between two or more people under a social denomination and is composed exclusively of partners whose responsibilities for the losses are limited by their contributions. Its capital will be represented by essentially negotiable titles denominated Stocks, which will have to be completely subscribed and paid before the issuance.
In accordance with the Law, the Joint-Stock Societies could be:
– of Public Subscription: the ones that resort to the public savings for the formation and increase of the authorized social capital, or quote their stocks in the stock market, or contract loans by the public emission of negotiable obligations, or use mass media or advertising to position and negotiate any type of instrument in the stock market; or
– Private Subscription: those Joint-Stock Societies not included in the enunciations of the article 156.
June 22, 2010
Employees can use FMLA protected leave for the placement of a child or to care for a child for whom they have no legal and/or biological relationship and for whom they provide no financial support. Think stepparents, grandparents, aunts and uncles, or any adult who has assumed the responsibilities of a parent for a child.
June 19, 2010
The Court’s opinion, written by Justice Kennedy, decided not to decide “the whole concept of privacy expectations in communications made on electronic equipment owwned by a government employer.” Instead the Court decided the case applying basic Fourth Amendment principles, and decided that regardless of the employee’s privacy expectations, the search here was reasonable on settled Fourth Amendment grounds.
June 19, 2010
The U.S. Department of Labor recently issued a new interpretation of donning and doffing requirements under the Fair Labor Standards Act, bringing the Department’s interpretation in line with recent court decisions. The issue is whether employees should be paid for putting on and taking off clothing before and after work.
ILN Today Post
June 16, 2010
The new Commercial Societies and Individual Enterprises of Limited Responsibilities General Law (Law No. 479-08), substitutes and derogates the Third Title in the Commercial Code that is in effect, that includes the articles 18 to the 64 regarding the Commercial Societies.
This new Law recognizes and maintains in effect the different types of societies known from the Commercial Code. Nevertheless, institutes two new classes of societies: the Societies of Limited Responsibilities (SRL by the initials in Spanish) and the Individual Enterprises of Limited Responsibilities (EIRL by the initials in Spanish).
This way the law recognizes and regulates the following types of societies:
– Joint-Stock Societies of Public and Private Subscription
– Collective Name Societies
– Simple Silent Partnership Societies
– Stocks Partnership Societies
– Societies of Limited Responsibilities
– Individual Enterprises of Limited Responsibilities
June 14, 2010
by Shawn Gilman and Frank C. Morris, Jr.
A little-noticed provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) will significantly impact both health care manufacturers and providers. The provision amends the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 to require regulations by March 23, 2012, mandating that all medical diagnostic equipment and health care provider locations be able to accommodate the needs of individuals with disabilities. This requirement would mean a redesign of both diagnostic equipment and locations for patient interactions to assure that individuals with disabilities who could not utilize currently available diagnostic equipment or provider locations will, in the future, have access to the care and services available to individuals without disabilities. They must be able to have access to—and independently be able to enter, use, and exit—the equipment to the maximum extent possible. This is significant because of the often high cost of diagnostic equipment and space requirements at provider locations.