Government Gone Overboard With Sarbanes-Oxley

by Root Austin Carl November 23 2014, 22:27
For most, it would be a stretch to compare the acts of a corporate executive who shredded company documents in order to cover up financial fraud with those of a fisherman who threw a few undersized red grouper fish back into the sea. For the Department of Justice, it is not stretch at all as both are guilty of the same crime. Should the Supreme Court agree with this comparison, there will surely be vast waves that disturb the business landscape... [More]

Tags:

Corporate

The Contraceptive Mandate: Birth Control or Business Control?

by Jennifer Brown June 12 2014, 11:28
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on March 25th, 2014, on the Tenth Circuit Case Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. v. Sebelius and the Third Circuit Case Conestoga Wood Specialties v. Sebelius; a ruling is expected in late June. Hobby Lobby and Conestoga are two prominent examples from over 71 cases involving for-profit businesses challenging the contraceptive mandate in the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act (ACA) on the grounds that this provision violates their religious beliefs under the First Amendment Free Exercise Clause, Establishment Clause, and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). [More]

National Security Space Launch: No Contest

by Mathew Rayman April 13 2014, 16:13
Competition and innovation are key ideals in American society, and they were the main focus on March 5, 2014 when the CEOs of SpaceX and United Launch Alliance (“ULA”) testified before the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense. The ULA, a joint venture between aerospace giants Boeing and Lockheed Martin, currently provides launch services for the U.S. National Security Space Launch programs. SpaceX, a relative newcomer to the space launch business, is seeking to break ULA’s current monopoly on national security launches and open the procurement process to other launch providers. [More]

Lessons from Hartney: How to Reduce Tax Forum Shopping by Illinois Retailers

by Jennifer Brown April 12 2014, 21:26
The Illinois’ Local Retailers’ Occupation Tax Acts (ROT Acts) allows “municipal governments and the Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) to impose a retail occupation tax ‘upon all persons engaged in the business of selling tangible personal property at retail within the county, municipality, or metropolitan region.” Leading up to the recent Illinois Supreme Court decision in Hartney Fuel Oil Co. v. Hamer, a number of Illinois retailers with selling activities in multiple jurisdictions sought to pay Illinois Local Retailer Occupation Taxes only in the lowest tax rate jurisdictions where they accepted purchase orders, even when their predominant selling activities occurred in other places. This narrow interpretation of the “business of selling” in the ROT Acts complies with the Department of Revenue (DOR) regulations regarding the Acts, which establish a bright-line rule for purchase order acceptances. [More]

Tags:

Corporate | Tax

Family Leave in the United States: Time for a Change?

by Mathew Rayman March 22 2014, 13:43
On February 5, 1993, the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (“FMLA”) was signed into law by Bill Clinton, mandating 12 weeks of unpaid family leave for companies with over 50 employees, if the employee has worked at least 1,250 hours during the last 12 months with the company.[1] In its findings, Congress specifically recognized the importance of parent participation in early childhood and the lack of job security available to working parents, and sought to give new parents more flexibility with work-life balance.[2] Since the FMLA was passed, the United States has fallen far behind other developed countries in providing leave for new parents. After more than 21 years, U.S. lawmakers should reexamine the national family leave policy and increase the benefits guaranteed for family leave. A more generous family leave policy is not only good for individuals and families, but also good for business. [More]

The Necessity of Corporate/NGO Partnerships

by Roshn Vazhel January 28 2014, 03:11
While corporations have historically committed human rights and environmental conservation violations, it is undisputed that they have taken several steps in recent years to reduce their negative impact on the world. Perhaps the most important fundamental change in the framework of corporate responsibility is the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The principles lay out three “pillars”: (1)the state’s duty to protect human rights, (2)the corporate responsibility to respect human rights and (3)the need for available remedies for victims of corporate abuses. But can companies live up to these standards? NGO(Non-government Organizations)/Corporate partnerships may be the answer, but they are in dire straits. [More]

Tags:

Corporate

The Macy’s, JC Penney, and Martha Stewart Love Triangle: Is Freedom of Contract Threatened?

by Maddie Davis November 16 2013, 20:36
In 2011, Martha Stewart called Macy’s CEO Terry Lundgren and announced she wanted to have her cake and eat it too – she was breaking her contract with the company. [1]

The contract granted Macy’s exclusive rights to sell Stewart’s bed, bath and kitchen merchandise. [2] In exchange for these rights, Macy’s spent millions to bring Stewart (then fresh out of prison) back to the forefront as America’s homemaker extraordinaire. [3]
[More]

Tags:

Corporate

Crimes Against Humanity, I’m Lovin’ It: Issues in Sponsorship of the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics

by Inessa Goodman November 12 2013, 21:23
While business leaders and CEOs have never shied away from promoting their political agendas and views, the line is sometimes blurred between what is appropriate, and what is not. The recent controversies involving Chik-fila, Barilla, and their public statements against the LGBT community highlight this issue. Recently, a similar issue has surfaced, not involving public statements, but mere funding of an entity that supports questionable social policies. [More]

Fiduciary Duties: Legal Obligations or Investors’ Imaginary Friends?

by Marvis Barnes November 19 2012, 19:59
Founded in 1983, Ancestory.com is the world’s largest family history website that provides access to more than ten billion records and thirty eight million family trees.[i] Recently, the London based private equity firm Permira Advisers LLP agreed to purchase the company at a valuation of $32 a share.[ii] The $32 amount represents a premium of 10% based on the company’s price at the time the deal was announced. [iii] However, many shareholders are unsatisfied and upset.[iv] In fact, many shareholders have filed suit against the company.[v] Principally, these suits allege that the Board of Directors of Ancestry.com breached their fiduciary duties to stockholders by failing to obtain a higher price by adequately shopping the company and that the decision to consummate the sale was not in the best interest of shareholders, rather that of the Board of Directors.[vi]
[More]

Bluebird: Walmart Wants To Be Your “Every Day Low Price” Bank.

by Matt Diamond October 29 2012, 17:36
Frustrated with your bank’s surprise fees and minute interest rates? Shop at Walmart? You may find a solution to your woes in an unusual but convenient location: on the “Every Day Low Price” stores’ shelves. [More]

Theme by Mads Kristensen

Invitation


We invite law professors, practitioners, and students to submit short articles for publication on this website. Simply email articles to the editors of the journal using the "Contact" form link above.   We also strongly encourage readers to post comments relating to a specific article or a topic covered by an article on the website. Just click on the "Comments" link located in the post footer below each article.

Recent Comments

Comment RSS

Disclaimer

This Journal is published by members of the Business Law Society at the University of Illinois College of Law. It is not a publication of the University of Illinois, and, therefore, the University of Illinois bears no responsibility for its content. Moreover, this Internet publication is prepared as an informational service only and should not be relied upon as legal advice. Although every attempt is made to ensure the information is accurate and timely, the information is presented "as is" and without warranties, either express or implied.