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

Clear all

Refine your search

8 results found

Article

LeClairRyan | USA | 21 Sep 2017

Accountant and Attorney Liability Newsbrief

In a unanimous decision handed down on June 5, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court has imposed what in many cases may be a substantial limitation on the

Article

Greenberg Traurig LLP | USA | 11 Aug 2016

Massachusetts Offers Policy Guidance on Investment Advisers’ Use of Robo-Advisers

As robo-advisers continue to grow in popularity with investors, especially millennial investors, at least one regulator is taking a closer look. On

Article

Wiley Rein LLP | USA | 4 Mar 2014

Claim based on accountants’ investment advice barred by securities practices exclusion

Applying Massachusetts law, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts has held that an exclusion for claims made in connection with

Article

Foley Hoag LLP | USA | 21 Apr 2011

Secretary Galvin proposes expert network regulations for Massachusetts advisers

Secretary of the Commonwealth William Francis Galvin has proposed regulations to add conditions to the use of "matching or expert network services" by investment advisers which are registered in Massachusetts or operating in Massachusetts within an exemption from registration.

Article

Day Pitney LLP | USA | 24 Nov 2010

T&E litigation update: Coyne v. Nascimento

In Coyne v. Nascimento, Case No. 10-P-12, 2010 Mass. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1251 (Nov. 19, 2010), a decision issued pursuant to Rule 1:28, the Appeals Court affirmed summary judgment against the plaintiff on statute of limitations grounds.

Article

Day Pitney LLP | USA | 24 Nov 2010

Trust & estate litigation - 24 November 2010

Case law relating to trusts and estates is constantly evolving.

Article

Choate Hall & Stewart LLP | USA | 18 Oct 2010

Recent decision supports recovery under D&O policy for securities liabilities arising from a corporation’s exchange of different classes of its own stock

The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit has ruled in Genzyme Corp. v. Federal Ins. Co. that Massachusetts public policy does not prevent a corporation from recovering under a directors and officers liability policy for securities liabilities arising from the corporation’s exchange of different classes of its own stock.

Article

Day Pitney LLP | USA | 5 Nov 2009

D'ambrosio v Milgroom

Three decisions issued last week by the Appeals Court pursuant to Rule 1:28 are worth mentioning.

Previous page 1 Next page