We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 1,909

Federal Court in Mississippi Holds That Although Projects Were Constructed With Federal Funds, They Were Not “A Public Work of the Federal Government” and Therefore the Court Had No Jurisdiction Over a Subcontractor’s Claim Under the Miller Act, Where the United States Was Not a Contracting Party and the Projects Were Not Constructed on Federal Property
  • Pepper Hamilton LLP
  • USA
  • February 15 2018

Triangle Construction Company, Inc. (“Triangle”) contracted with Mississippi Portfolio Partners III, LP (“Mississippi Partners”) to serve as the prime contractor on four apartment complex construction projects (the “Projects”) in Mississippi


CLO Managers No Longer Need to Abide by Dodd-Frank Risk Retention Requirements
  • Pepper Hamilton LLP
  • USA
  • February 14 2018

In a case of first impression, the D.C. Circuit Court struck down the Dodd-Frank-mandated risk retention requirements for managers of open market


Regulation A: For Smaller Companies (and ICOs) a Better Way to Go Public?
  • Pepper Hamilton LLP
  • USA
  • February 12 2018

With the proliferation of smaller companies seeking to grow their businesses, gain credibility and access capital, Regulation A is now increasingly


Confidential Harassment Settlements No Longer Subject to Tax Deduction
  • Pepper Hamilton LLP
  • USA
  • February 12 2018

Has the MeToo Movement led to any changes on how companies settle harassment complaints?


'Rancosky' Decision: Does It Lower the Bar for Punitive Damages?
  • Pepper Hamilton LLP
  • USA
  • February 8 2018

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision in Rancosky v. Washington National Insurance, 170 A.3d 364 (Pa. 2017), was one of the court's most eagerly


Claim of Fraudulent Inducement of a Construction Contract Does Not Invalidate Arbitration Clause in That Same Contract
  • Pepper Hamilton LLP
  • USA
  • February 8 2018

In this case, Nicolas and Monica Koudela (the "Koudelas") entered into a construction contract with "Johnson & Johnson Builders" (the "Agreement"


Claim of Fraudulent Inducement of a Construction Contract Does Not Invalidate Arbitration Clause in That Same Contract
  • Pepper Hamilton LLP
  • USA
  • February 8 2018

In this case, Nicolas and Monica Koudela (the


First Circuit Further Limits Remedies Following Trademark License Rejection
  • Pepper Hamilton LLP
  • USA
  • February 8 2018

Section 365(a) of the Bankruptcy Code is a powerful tool which enables a debtor to reject certain contracts it finds unnecessary or burdensome to its


D.C. Circuit Court Affirms the Legality of Captive Reinsurance Arrangements
  • Pepper Hamilton LLP
  • USA
  • February 7 2018

The January 31 en banc ruling of the D.C. Court of Appeals gave a huge win to the mortgage industry by reinstating the October 2016 three-judge


POTENTIAL CHANGES ON THE HORIZON FOR PENNSYLVANIA WAGE AND HOUR LAW
  • Pepper Hamilton LLP
  • USA
  • February 5 2018

Have there been any recent changes to the overtime pay rules that we have to be concerned about? A. Currently, under both federal and Pennsylvania