A cyber breach can have serious legal, financial, and reputational consequences for a company, as described in our previous post. As such, cybersecurity threats must be treated as business risks, not just a potential IT problem. Senior management at a company should take the lead to ensure that the company is taking appropriate actions to protect itself against cyber risks. There are several steps that senior management can guide the company to take to prevent breaches from occurring and to mitigate the impact when they do occur.
Q&A Follow-Up from “The Price is Right…or Is It? What Supply Chain Businesses Should Know” Webinar
On June 3, 2020, Proskauer’s Antitrust Group hosted a webinar on what supply chain businesses should know about price gouging laws and regulations, and, during and after the webinar, we fielded some thoughtful follow-up questions from clients and friends who attended. We have collected and provided answers to the questions we received below in an effort to further inform and share insights on price gouging concerns raised by attendees. Thank you to all who joined us for the webinar.
Arizona Sheriff’s Criminal Contempt Charge Reinforces Importance of Compliance with Civil Orders
President Andrew Jackson is reported (likely inaccurately) to have flaunted a Supreme Court decision by retorting, “John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!” Any litigant who has been on the receiving end of an unwanted court order may find this sentiment a familiar one. As a federal judge in Arizona recently reminded Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, however, refusal to comply with a court order in a civil lawsuit can be criminal. Neither Presidents nor Sheriffs are above the law when it comes to complying with a civil order, and other civil litigants would do well to remember the consequences of such disobedience.
New York’s Appellate Division Reinstates Attorney General’s Statutory Fraud Claim Against “Trump University”
In State of New York v. Trump Entrepreneur Initiative LLC, New York’s Appellate Division recently denied a motion by Donald Trump’ organization to dismiss a fraud claim brought by the New York Attorney General (“AG”) under Executive Law § 63(12). Aside from the fame, or perhaps notoriety, of the respondents, Trump is noteworthy in two other respects. First, the Court’s interpretation of Executive Law § 63(12) suggests that it is easier for the AG to establish a violation of that law than a common law fraud claim (although the Court concluded that the two claims should be treated alike for statute of limitations purposes). Second, in reaching its conclusion, the Appellate Division flatly overruled one of its own decisions – an extreme rarity.