Federal Courts. Choice of Law. Plaintiff's Failure to Make Demand on Stockholders as Required by State Law Does Not Bar Derivative Action Brought under Investment Company Act. Levitt v. Johnson (1st Cir. 1964)

1965 ◽  
Vol 78 (7) ◽  
pp. 1476
Keyword(s):  
Federal Courts ◽  
State Law ◽  
Investment Company ◽  
Choice Of Law

Unresolved Business: Federal Corporate Governance Enhancements

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc I. Steinberg
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Governance ◽  
Insider Trading ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Professional Conduct ◽  
State Law ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Tender Offers ◽  
Federal Level ◽  
Federal Statute

This chapter analyzes and recommends federal corporate governance enhancements that should be implemented. These enhancements, which should be adopted in a measured and directed manner, are necessary to remediate certain deficiencies that currently exist. Consistent therewith, this chapter focuses on several important matters that merit attention, including the undue deference by federal courts to state law, the appropriate application of federal law to tactics undertaken in tender offers, the need for a federal statute encompassing insider trading, and the propriety of more vigorous oversight by the Securities and Exchange Commission (such as with respect to the “current” disclosure regime, the SEC’s Standards of Professional Conduct for Attorneys, and the Commission’s neglecting at times to invoke its statutory resources). Thus, the analysis set forth in this chapter identifies significant deficiencies that currently exist and recommends measures that should be implemented on the federal level to enhance corporate governance standards.

1 The Law Applicable to International Arbitration in New York

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lindsey David M ◽  
Lahlou Yasmine
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
New York State ◽  
State Law ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Choice Of Law ◽  
York State ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Foreign Law ◽  
New York Convention ◽  
The U.S

This chapter focuses on applicable arbitration law in the context of arbitration agreements and awards that fall under the New York Convention or the Panama Convention, and how those two treaties interact with the U.S. Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), New York state law, and possibly foreign law in the context of international arbitration in New York. It first summarizes the FAA and explains FAA preemption of state law that is inconsistent with the FAA. The chapter then discusses the application of the Conventions and difficult issues that can arise when determining the applicable law. In particular, it focuses on choice of law issues that arise when enforcing the agreement to arbitrate under Article II of the New York Convention. U.S. courts have struggled to employ a consistent choice of law analysis when interpreting the “null and void” provisions in Article II(3) of the Convention.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document