Tag Archives: Colorado

New York Joins the Wave of States Requiring Businesses to Adopt Reasonable Cybersecurity Safeguards to Protect Private Information

New York is the latest state to adopt a law that requires businesses that collect private information on its residents to implement reasonable cybersecurity safeguards to protect that information. New York now joins California, Massachusetts and Colorado in setting these standards. New York’s law mandates the implementation of a data security program, including measures such as risk assessments, workforce training and incident response planning and testing. Businesses should immediately begin the process to comply with the Act’s requirements effective March 21, 2020. Notably, New York’s law covers all employers, individuals or organizations, regardless of size or location, which collect private information on New York State residents.

Read more

Read full article

Colorado Joins Wave of States to Offer Heightened Employee Protections

Colorado has joined a growing movement of states in passing laws that provide greater protections to employees and job applicants. Among these are the Equal Pay for Equal Work Act and a ban the box law, which limits criminal history inquiries for job applicants. The following is a breakdown of Colorado’s newest employment laws and how their implementation may impact employers and employees alike.

Read more

Read full article

Privacy Concerns Loom as Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing Industry Grows

The market for direct-to-consumer (“DTC”) genetic testing has increased dramatically over recent years as more people are using at-home DNA tests.  The global market for this industry is projected to hit $2.5 billion by 2024.  Many consumers subscribe to DTC genetic testing because they can provide insights into genetic backgrounds and ancestry.  However, as more consumers’ genetic data becomes available and is shared, legal experts are growing concerned that safeguards implemented by U.S. companies are not enough to protect consumers from privacy risks.

Read more

Read full article

Non-Compete Laws Affecting Health Care Professionals in Various U.S. Jurisdictions

Many physicians and other health care workers are familiar with restrictive covenants like non-competition and/or non-solicitation agreements, either as employees who have been asked to sign such covenants as a condition of their employment or as business owners seeking to enforce such covenants to protect their medical practices from competition. These covenants are usually designed to prohibit physicians or other practitioners from leaving and setting up a competing practice nearby using patient contacts, information, and/or training that they received during their employment or association with the former employer.

Read more

Read full article

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Baker in LGBT Discrimination Case

On June 4, the Supreme Court voted 7-2 in favor of a Christian Colorado baker and owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, who had refused to create a custom wedding cake for a gay couple due to his religious objections to gay marriage.

Read more

Read full article

Colorado Places New Limitation on Physician Restrictive Covenants

Earlier this month, Colorado amended its law governing physician non-compete agreements (C.R.S. § 8-2-113(3)).  Since its enactment in 1982, that statute generally has prohibited agreements restricting the rights of physicians to practice medicine, but has allowed contractual provisions requiring a physician to pay damages arising from his or her competition if the damages are reasonably related to the injury suffered by the employer or other contracting party.  Under the amended statute, “a physician may disclose his or her continuing practice of medicine and new professional contact information to any patient with a rare disorder…to whom the physician was providing treatment.”   The goal of the amendment is to avoid interruptions to the continued care of individuals with rare disorders.  The statute looks to the National Organization for Rare Disorders, Inc. to maintain a database of diseases considered “rare disorders.”

Read more

Read full article

Mile High Non-Compete Law: Colorado Court of Appeals Determines Enforceability of Liquidated Damages Clause in Physician Non-Compete Agreement

The Colorado Court of Appeals, in Crocker v. Greater Colorado Anesthesia, P.C., recently examined several unique enforceability considerations with respect to a physician non-compete agreement.  Of particular interest was the Court’s treatment of a liquidated damages provision in the agreement.  Pursuant to a Colorado statute (8-2-113(3), C.R.S. 2017), the Court held that the provision was unenforceable because the liquidated damages were not reasonably related to the injury actually suffered.

Read more

Read full article
ILN Today Post

Colorado: Lawsuit over sales tax notification and reporting requirements settles

In the closely watched case Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl, the Direct Marketing Association, now known as the Data & Marketing Association (DMA), sued Colorado for its allegedly unconstitutional 2010 law subjecting internet retailers to notification and reporting requirements when the retailers cannot be required to actually collect the taxes. The law was the state’s attempt to capture some of the tax revenue lost to purchases over the internet when the seller has insufficient nexus with Colorado to be subject to tax collection laws.

Read More

Read full article

Multistate Tax Update — March 24, 2016

Three joint resolutions addressing ad valorem tax exemptions, put forward by three different committees, have made their way through Florida’s legislature and were filed with the secretary of state this month.

The bill analyses for all three resolutions explain Florida’s annual ad valorem tax as one levied by counties, cities, school districts, and some special districts based on the value of real and tangible personal property as of January 1 of each year. The Florida Constitution reserves ad valorem taxation to local governments, and prohibits the state from levying ad valorem taxes on real and tangible personal property.

Read full article