Focus on internal audit – the path to excellence – from a Norman Marks post

Posted on by

If you’re an executive officer, or a director, or involved in internal audit, governance, risk/uncertainty management or audit committee activities, click on the following link for another interesting and worthwhile post by Norman Marks about the path to excellence in internal audit, and please also read the informed comments below the article, Click Here For Article.

In some respects internal audit continues to search for respect and appreciation.  It is internal audit that must sell itself and its value to executive management, the board, audit and risk committees and professionals, shareholders, governance professionals, and other stakeholders.

Thanks for listening, Dave Tate, Esq. (San Francisco).

GCs using social media to select law firms, video from Bloomberg Law . . . .

Posted on by

The following video from Bloomberg Law discusses general counsel using social media to select law firms.  My thoughts on the topic.  Social/business media are here to stay.  Each firm needs to determine its approach based on its practice mix and resources that it will commit to the effort.  As with any marketing, there are no guarantees of success.  Some efforts will be viewed successful.  Others won’t.  Strategy should be reviewed and changed as prudent.  Consider the efforts from a ROI viewpoint – but you still need to determine how you will calculate ROI.  New social/business media opportunities are developing regularly.  Overall, any firm that does not evaluate and implement a program that works for that firm is missing an opportunity, and eventually sooner or later will fall behind the competition.  And, lawyers also must be involved in both the design/strategy and the effort – this isn’t something that you can simply assign.

Dave Tate, Esq., (San Francisco)

Click Here To View Video.

Predictive coding – a worthwhile overview article from JD Supra

Posted on by

The following is a worthwhile article from JD Supra, On Predictive Coding – A JD Supra e-Discovery Reader, Click Here For Article.

Dave Tate, Esq. (San Francisco)

Board and Committee Self-Evaluations, Video

Posted on by

New video, board and board committee self-evaluations, .

Rental history sharing could trigger Fair Credit Reporting Act – More difficult for plaintiffs to obtain class certification – The new mortgage foreclosure formalism . . .

Posted on by

From my real estate law blog, http://taterealestatelaw.com:

The following is a potpourri of timely relevant real property legal news.

FTC warns data brokers that provide tenant rental histories they may be subject to Fair Credit Reporting Act –

From the FTC website, Click Here For Link:

“The Federal Trade Commission has warned the operators of six websites that share information about consumers’ rental histories with landlords that they may be subject to the requirements of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).
The letters inform the recipients that if they meet certain criteria, namely collecting information on tenants and their rental history and providing that information to landlords so they can make judgments about renting to those tenants, they are considered credit reporting agencies and are subject to certain legal requirements.
Among the requirements cited in the letter are the companies’ obligation to protect the privacy of tenants whose information they collect, including ensuring that those requesting information about tenants have a legitimate reason to acquire it. The letter reminds the companies of their obligation to ensure that the information they provide is accurate, to give consumers a copy of the information about them on request, and to allow consumers to dispute information they believe is inaccurate. The letters also note that the companies must notify landlords of their requirements if they use the data to deny housing to a tenant, and to notify the sources of their information of the requirement that they provide accurate information.”

More difficult for plaintiffs to obtain class certification –

Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 569 U.S. __ (2013)

In an important case for defense counsels’ toolbox, the U.S. Supreme Court has recently held in Comcast Corp. v. Behrend that before a class can be certified in a class action suit the trial court must undertake a rigorous analysis to determine that the requirements for class certification have been met which might also require the court to address the underlying merits of the case. More particularly, the Court held that the trial court did not address the fact that the plaintiffs’ damages model and related expert witness testimony could not distinguish damages between the various liability theories.

New [Mortgage Foreclosure] Formalism in the Aftermath of the Housing Crisis –

Click on the following link if you are interested in a discussion about the “new” (or return to) formal mortgage foreclosure procedures in the aftermath of the housing crisis, Click Here For Paper.

Enjoy,

Dave Tate, Esq. (San Francisco)

Quentin gets hit by pitch, Quentin charges Greinke on the mound, Greinke breaks collarbone in brawl – any liability, damages, defenses . . . you decide

Posted on by

Just pondering – not a full or legal evaluation of course – sort of like a bar exam question – in MLB Padre hitter Quentin and Dodger pitcher Greinke have a history and Quentin has been hit by Greinke pitches before – in the current game Quentin is batting and Greinke is pitching – Greinke hits Quentin with a pitch – Quentin believes that Greinke is throwing at him or at least intentionally pitching close – Quentin reacts to the hit and charges the Greinke on the mound – Quentin hits or slams into Greinke – benches empty and players scuffle at the mound – Greinke suffers a broken collarbone.  Click Here For Story And Video.

Here are some thoughts and questions.  Not exhaustive.

Is there liability against Greinke and possibly against his employer the Dodgers for hitting Quentin with a pitch, what are Quentin’s injuries or damages if any, and are there defenses to any possible liability?  Negligent hit, risky intentional close pitch, or possible intentional hit?  Being hit by a pitch – whether simply a badly thrown pitch, possibly risky brush back, or intentional – simply part of the game – assumption of the risk?  If it is believed that the pitch was risky or intentional, is there any employer liability for possible risky or intentional act of employee?

Is there liability for Greinke’s broken collarbone?  What is the evidence indicating who or what caused the break (a lot of players from both teams charged or gathered around the mound)?  What does the video show?  Fights or charging the mound or the pitcher – just part of the game, especially when a batter gets hit by a pitch – assumption of the risk?  If Quentin’s slam on Greinke caused the break – does it matter that no evidence will indicate that Quentin intended to break Greinke’s collarbone.  Does it matter if Quentin was provoked into his action by Greinke’s pitch?  If Quentin caused the break, or if any Padre player caused the break, are the Padres possibly liable as the employer?  Do the Dodgers also have a claim for damages that result to them from not having the use of their pitcher for 4-6 weeks as the broken collarbone heals?

Are some or all of these issues already separately addressed by the baseball owners’/players’ collective bargaining agreement, or some other agreement, rule or regulation?

Enjoy, Dave Tate, Esq. (San Francisco)

Accounting securities suits less likely to be dismissed, costlier to settle – from D & O Diary

Posted on by

Forwarding this link from the D&O Diary blog – this should be a topic of interest to some of my blog visitors – securities litigation accounting related suits are less likely to be dismissed, take longer to resolve and take a greater proportion of total securities suit settlement dollars,  Click Here For Article.

One of my opinions about securities suits and liability: as plaintiffs are required to prove scienter in many of these cases, with the design, implementation, oversight, monitoring and improvement of proper risk and uncertainty management, processes and procedures, companies should be able to substantially reduce their exposure to liability and damages.

Dave Tate, Esq. (San Francisco)

New California eminent domain jury verdict – county owes $1.24 million to landowner – from California real estate law blog

Posted on by

We found this in the Daily Republic (Jess Sullivan reporting), Click Here For Article, a Solano County California court has found that the portion of the privately owned land that the county took for a new road was worth more than twice the county’s $575,000 deposit, and in excess of two times the $474,408 value testified to by the county’s second appraiser. And it is likely that the landowner will be entitled to recover attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. sec. 1250.410. See also Gideon’s Trumpet blog for additional discussion, Click Here For Blog.

This information was also posted at http://taterealestatelaw.com.

Dave Tate, Esq. (San Francisco)

Daydreaming while driving causes considerably more accidents than texting . . .

Posted on by

Daydreaming is the cause of possibly considerably more distracted driving accidents than texting, Click Here For Article.

Dave Tate, Esq. (San Francisco)

Persuasive Litigator article, bullet point text v. graphics, a good read to consider . . .

Posted on by

Click on the link below for a good analysis from the Persuasive Litigator, arguing that you should not use or that you should use very little bullet point text in your presentation slides – instead more effectively use graphics with no or minimal text because of the way that people process information. Click Here For Article Link.

Dave Tate, Esq. (San Francisco)