JONES DAY TALKS®: Women in IP: 2020 in Review and a Look Toward 2021
Jones Day Talks: Women in IP: The Supreme Court's "Copyright Day"
Bill on Bankruptcy: Lawyers Easily Make Simple Words Complicated
Bill on Bankruptcy: ResCap Report, a Bargain at $83 Million
As Expected, Noel Canning v. NLRB Headed to the Supreme Court
Bill on Bankruptcy: How Purchasers of AMR Stock Made a Killing
Fifth Circuit precedent recognizes the “general consensus among courts” that regular, in-person work is an essential function of most jobs. Yet the continued viability of this premise has been in question, given the ability...more
The Bankruptcy Code grants the power to avoid certain transactions to a bankruptcy trustee or debtor-in-possession. See, e.g., 11 U.S.C. §§ 544, 547–48. Is there a general requirement that these avoidance powers only be...more
Since its adoption the Employee Retirement Income Securities Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”), has required employee benefit plan sponsors to make disclosures regarding plan terms and plan expenses. The most well-known of...more
This week, we highlight Ninth Circuit decisions denying copyright protection to assertions of fact (even if those facts were made up), and deepening a slight Circuit split on the Americans with Disabilites Act's...more
On February 26, 2020, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Intel Corp. Inv. Policy Comm. v. Sulyma, __. U.S. __, 140 S. Ct. 768 (2020). The Court unanimously held that Christopher Sulyma ("Sulyma") did not necessarily...more
Under Section 413(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), ERISA’s three-year statute of limitations for fiduciary breaches and certain other violations starts to run when “the plaintiff had actual...more
As discussed in an earlier post on this blog, in Intel Corporation Investment Policy Committee et al. v. Sulyma, No. 18-1116 (Feb. 26, 2020), the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the statute of limitations for breach of fiduciary...more
In its February 26, 2020, unanimous decision in Intel Corporation Investment Policy Committee v. Sulyma, the United States Supreme Court resolved a circuit split regarding what constitutes “actual knowledge” for purposes of...more
The US Supreme Court recently decided a closely watched ERISA case against employers and fiduciaries. Under Section 413 of ERISA, the statute of limitations for a fiduciary breach claim is shortened from six years to three...more
The Supreme Court in Intel Corporation Investment Policy Committee et al. v. Sulyma, case No. 18–1116, significantly narrowed the circumstances in which a three-year statute of limitations would apply to a claim for breach of...more
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on February 26, 2020 that ERISA plaintiffs do not gain “actual knowledge” of fiduciary misconduct merely by receiving financial disclosures from the plan. The unanimous opinion in Intel Corp....more
Seyfarth Synopsis: On February 26, 2020, the Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the Ninth Circuit’s ruling in Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee, et al. v. Sulyma. 589 U.S. ___ (2020), holding that plan participants must...more
On February 26, 2020, the United States Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision by Justice Samuel Alito, held that for purposes of assessing the appropriate statute of limitations for a breach of fiduciary duty claim under the...more
Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee et al. v. Sulyma (case number 18-1116). The decision requires a participant to have “actual knowledge” in order to apply ERISA’s...more
Employers and plan fiduciaries should take careful note of a recent ruling issued by the United States Supreme Court which may prompt increased Employee Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA") litigation and otherwise alter...more
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court just declined to limit the timeframe in which disgruntled employees could bring suit challenging the investment decisions made by plan fiduciaries. While the Employee Retirement...more
In a closely watched decision, Intel Corporation Investment Policy Committee v. Sulyma, Slip Op. No. 18-1116 (U.S. S. Ct., Feb. 26, 2020), construing ERISA’s three-year statute of limitations, see ERISA § 413(2), 29 U.S.C. §...more
On February 26, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Intel Corporation Investment Policy Committee v. Sulyma, holding that, for purposes of ERISA’s three-year statute of limitations, a plan beneficiary does not have “actual...more
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court has found that disclosing information regarding benefit plans to participants does not necessarily shorten the statute of limitations for filing a fiduciary breach claim under ERISA....more
In a decision released on February 19 that relied principally on rules of grammar, the Seventh Circuit held that to be an ATDS under the TCPA, a device must be capable of storing or producing telephone numbers using a random...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in disagreeing with the Courts of Appeals for the Third and Ninth Circuits, ruled on August 5, 2019 in Oxford University Bank v. Lansuppe Feeder, Inc. that a private right of...more
In the first decision by a California appellate court addressing the application of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) to websites, the court in Thurston v. Midvale Corp. (Sept. 3, 2019) 2019 WL 4166620,...more
On November 13, 2018, the District of Minnesota rejected the Ninth Circuit’s expansive interpretation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act’s (TCPA’s) automatic telephone dialing system (ATDS) provision in Marks v. Crunch...more
Even under Marks, a manually-dialed call remains excluded from the TCPA, at least according to a new decision out yesterday. The District Court in Hatuey v. Ic Sys., No. 1:16-cv-12542-DPW, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 193713 (D....more