Losing Momentive: A Roadmap to Higher Cramdown Interest Rates
Download PDF Evan D. Flaschen, David L. Lawton & Mark E. Dendinger* I. Introduction There has been a lot of […]
Download PDF Evan D. Flaschen, David L. Lawton & Mark E. Dendinger* I. Introduction There has been a lot of […]
Download PDF Harvey L. Reiter* I. Introduction Over the past fifteen years, many states—twenty-nine at last count—have adopted renewable portfolio
Recently it has become relatively common for shareholder activists to advocate for changes in senior management, not just changes in board composition. In the face of this pressure, some companies have announced changes to their leadership teams. These changes can create strife in the boardroom and tension among employees. Leadership transitions also raise a number of disclosure and other legal issues that companies should take into account if a board decides to respond to activism in this manner. This article provides a checklist of issues that regularly arise in these situations.
Extraterritorial application of the Bankruptcy Code and international comity require courts to examine congressional intent while balancing the competing interests of different jurisdictions. Absent contrary intent within the statute, debtors and trustees in cases under both SIPA and the Bankruptcy Code likely face an uphill battle in overcoming the presumption against extraterritoriality. The recent gravitation toward universalism and respect for foreign laws reinforces that presumption and seeks to establish international deference as the governing baseline.
This article examines the role of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) in regulating transactions in environmental commodities, such as renewable energy certificates (“RECs”), emissions allowances, carbon offsets and carbon credits.
Balancing the protection of private business interests against governmental regulation is one of the most significant legal frictions of the modern era. Over the course of the past twenty-eight months, this conflict has manifested itself through a federal sports gambling lawsuit involving New Jersey. However, the ongoing lawsuit between a plaintiff quintet of the most powerful sports entities in the United States—the National Collegiate Athletic Association (“NCAA”), the National Basketball Association (“NBA”), the National Football League (“NFL”), the National Hockey League (“NHL”), and the Office of the Commissioner of Major League Baseball (“MLB”) (collectively “sports leagues”)—and the Governor of New Jersey over the possibility of regulated sports wagering in the state is not about gambling. It is about control: control of events, control of data, control of marketing opportunities, and control of current and future revenue streams.