Spencer Fane LLP Logo

Publications

Your publication search results are below.  Please click the title link to read the full content of the item.

SEC Adopts Rulemaking Package – “Solely Incidental” Broker-Dealer Exclusion

On June 5, 2019, the Securities and Exchange Commission adopted a rulemaking package that applies to investment advisers and broker-dealers.

This is the fourth in a series of articles describing the SEC’s rulemaking package.  This article addresses the SEC’s Interpretation of the “Solely Incidental” Broker-Dealer Exclusion.  That exclusion allows broker-dealers to provide certain advisory services without becoming subject to regulation as investment advisers under the Advisers Act, as long as those services are “solely incidental” to the broker-dealers’ core business.  The SEC’s new interpretation of this exclusion provides some helpful guidance for broker-dealers and dually-registered firms.

SEC Adopts Rulemaking Package – Form CRS

On June 5, 2019, the Securities and Exchange Commission adopted a rulemaking package that applies to investment advisers and broker-dealers.  These rules include a new set of disclosure requirements to address retail investor confusion over brokerage and investment advisory services.

This is the third in a series of articles describing the SEC’s rulemaking package.  This article provides an overview of the Form CRS – Relationship Summary portion of the package.

Missouri Proposes to Reduce Reporting Timeframe for Start-Up, Shutdown, and Malfunction Conditions

Facilities that own and operate air emissions sources in the State of Missouri, such as manufacturing plants, chemical plants, and similar industrial air sources, will want to take note of recent proposed changes to the notification obligations involving certain excess emission events.

SEC Adopts Rulemaking Package – Investment Adviser Standard of Conduct

On June 5, 2019, the Securities and Exchange Commission adopted a rulemaking package that applies to investment advisers and broker-dealers.  In a series of four articles, Spencer Fane LLP outlines the SEC’s rulemaking package.  Our first article summarized “Regulation Best Interest” a new standard of conduct governing broker-dealers.  In this second article, we describe the SEC’s interpretation of the standard of conduct that applies to investment advisers when they engage with their clients.

SEC Adopts Rulemaking Package – Regulation Best Interest

On June 5, 2019, the Securities and Exchange Commission adopted a rulemaking package that is applicable to investment advisers and broker-dealers.  The package includes two final rules and two interpretations – Regulation Best Interest, Investment Adviser Standard of Conduct Interpretation, Form CRS – Relationship Summary, and Solely Incidental Broker-Dealer Exclusion Interpretation.  The Regulation Best Interest and Form CRS requirements are effective 60 days after they are published in the Federal Register, with a transition period for compliance that ends on June 30, 2020.  The SEC’s interpretations are effective immediately upon publication in the Federal Register.  In a series of four articles, Spencer Fane LLP outlines the SEC’s rulemaking package.  This first article describes the Regulation Best Interest portion of the SEC’s package.

SCOTUS Holds that Title VII’s Charge-Filing Procedures Are Subject to Waiver

On June 3, 2019, the Supreme Court held that filing a charge of discrimination is not a “jurisdictional” prerequisite to filing suit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. See Fort Bend County v. Davis, Slip Op. No. 18-525 (June 3, 2019).  Although this case deals with what sounds like an obscure legal issue, it is of great practical importance to employers. In short, it means that employers defending against claims of discrimination under Title VII must diligently assert all procedural defenses they may have as early as possible. Otherwise, a failure to assert a defense may allow the plaintiff-employee’s claim to go forward, even if the employee has not technically complied with Title VII’s mandatory charge-filing procedures.

One Key Takeaway from $3 Million Penalty by HHS for Exposing 300,000 Patient Records

The United States Department of Health and Human Services reached an agreement with Touchstone Medical Imaging in which Touchstone agreed to pay $3 million and adopt a corrective action plan in the wake of its data breach that exposed over 300,000 patients’ protected health information.

Supreme Court Sheds Light on Class Arbitrations

The Supreme Court has further closed the window for employees to pursue class-wide claims against their employers in arbitration.  In 2010 the Supreme Court ruled a court may not compel arbitration on a class-wide basis when the arbitration agreement is “silent” on the issue.  Stolt-Nielsen S.A. v. AnimalFeeds Int’l Corp., 559 U.S. 662 (2010).  Nine years later, presented with an arbitration agreement that, instead of silent, was “ambiguous” regarding the availability of class arbitration, the high court has again demonstrated its preference for individual arbitration.  In Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela, Case No. 17-988 (slip opinion April 24, 2019), the Court held that ambiguity cannot provide the basis for finding consent to participate in class arbitration.

Fish and Wildlife Proposes Downgrading American Burying Beetle Status From “Endangered” to “Threatened”

After years of studies, Congressional pressure, and on-the-ground experience with the American Burying Beetle, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposed downgrading the beetle’s status from “Endangered” to “Threatened.” In addition to this move, Fish and Wildlife has proposed a rule that would tailor protections that are necessary for the beetle to recover under section 4(d) of the Endangered Species Act.

DOL Publishes Proposal Interpreting Joint Employer Status

On April 1, 2019, the Department of Labor (“DOL”) published its third proposal in 30 days to revise regulations interpreting the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). The April 1 proposed rule would revise and clarify the test for when multiple employers (known as “joint employment”) can be held responsible for wages under the FLSA. The notice and full text of the rule can be found here.

1 2 3 46 Showing 1-10 of 452 results View All