The roll out of the Office of the National Coordinator’s (ONC) 21st Century Cures Act Interoperability and Information Blocking Rules is reminiscent of the way HIPAA has rolled out over the course of the past 25 years. As of May 1, 2021, Actors have been required to comply with the Information Blocking rules. However, it will take some time before all Actors know who they are and for complaints of Information Blocking to be determined to be actual instances of Information Blocking, by which time the penalties that have not yet been finalized may also need to be adjusted.
The Illinois Legislature recently passed a bipartisan bill, available here, that seeks to significantly amend the Illinois Freedom to Work Act (820 ILCS § 90) and impose restrictions on the use of non-competition and non-solicitation (employee and customer) restrictive covenants for Illinois employees. The bill is expected to be signed by Governor Pritzker, and would take effect on January 1, 2022. The bill is not retroactive and only applies to restrictive covenants entered into after January 1, 2022.
The regime of Law no. 83/2017, of 18 August has strengthened the rules and obligations aimed at preventing the use of the financial system and of specially designated activities and professions for the purposes of money laundering and terrorist financing, imposing on the obliged entities several obligations, namely of reporting and identification.
Nowadays, one of the most complex legal issues arising from the above-mentioned obligations is related to the identification of the Ultimate Beneficial Owners of legal persons. In fact, in order to mitigate the difficulties inherent to this identification, it is extremely important to analyse and know the criteria established by law, essential for a correct interpretation and application of the regime. Read more…
A significant opinion concerning computer security was one of those the United States Supreme Court (“SCOTUS”) issued during its end-of-term flurry this year. Employers and others who permit computer access to sensitive information for business or other defined purposes may want to take note. Spoiler alert: the opinion undercuts use of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 (“CFAA”), 18 U.S.C. §1030 et seq., to obtain federal jurisdiction in employer-employee disputes. (As a practical matter, the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 had already filled the gap for many circumstances).
By Stéphanie Beauchamp, from our Insurance Law Practice Group
June 17, 2021 — The Superior Court recently rendered an interesting decision in Dang c. Industrielle-Alliance, assurance auto et habitation inc., 2021 QCCS 1408, emphasizing the importance for the insured to give a thorough declaration of the risk to the insurer. In this case, the plaintiff was asking her insurer for an indemnity following a fire that had damaged her house. The Superior Court rendered a judgment in favor of the insurer, who argued that the homeowner insurance policy compelled the insured to remain in the house to benefit from the coverage.
As pressure mounts on the US to pass data privacy legislation in 2021, businesses should prepare for compliance
Global data privacy legislation has steadily advanced over the past several years.
One of the most comprehensive and well-known laws is the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), governing personal data originating in the European Union, which went into effect in 2018. Many countries, including Brazil, Japan, and Australia, have followed suit and enacted similar legislation to regulate industries and protect certain rights of consumers, businesses, and other parties that are affected in their respective territories. Late in 2020, China, on a similar path, released draft legislation, the Personal Data Protection Law (PDPL), that is moving toward passage. The United States, however, still lacks a comprehensive law at the federal level, relying instead on a patchwork of state laws to protect data privacy rights, resulting in confusion across the country and costly compliance for U.S. businesses. Read more…
Ninth Circuit Delivers Complete Victory to Walmart on Wage Statement Claims and Rejects Article III Standing to PAGA-Plaintiffs Without Personal Injury
On May 28, 2021, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals delivered a win to Walmart in a lawsuit brought by Roderick Magadia (“Magadia”) alleging violations of California’s wage statement and meal break laws.
The Ninth Circuit overturned a $102 million dollar judgment issued by United States District Judge Lucy H. Koh – comprised of $48 million in statutory damages and $54 million in civil penalties under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”). It did so because it found that Magadia lacked Article III standing because he could not establish that he suffered any alleged meal break violations, and because Wal-Mart had provided compliant wage statements – contrary to the finding of the district court.
In Illinois, health care facilities and practitioners shall be reimbursed for all reasonable expenses by the person requesting copies of records, including the costs of independent copy service companies, handling charges for processing the request, and the actual postage or shipping charge, if any, plus copy charges. The Illinois Code of Civil Procedure (735 ILCS 5/8-2001(d)) initially set the maximum fees that can be charged and the actual dollar amount is adjusted annually by the Comptroller for the State of Illinois. Read more…
Governor Steve Sisolak recently signed Assembly Bill 47, which amends Nevada’s statute governing noncompetition agreements (Nevada Revised Statutes 613.195). Employers should be aware of the following changes to the law, which will go into effect on October 1, 2021.
Our colleagues David S. Poppick and Carol J. Faherty have co-authored the 2021 update to “Trade Secret Laws: Connecticut,” a Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Connecticut, published by Thomson Reuters Practical Law.
Following is an excerpt (see below to download the full version in PDF format):