Showing 46 posts in Legislation & Regulation.
New Cybersecurity Regs Will Not be Limited to New York: Extra-Territorial Application for the Insurer and its 3rd Parties
August 28, 2017 marks the first of several rapidly approaching implementation deadlines for “covered entities” subject to the new cybersecurity regulations promulgated in March by the New York Department of Financial Services (“NYDFS”). With a few limited scope exemptions based on size, revenue, assets, and structure, 23 NYCRR Part 500 establishes minimum cybersecurity requirements for approximately 4,500 DFS regulated licensees, and the sweeping new rules will de facto extend to third-party service providers and authorized users beyond the Empire State’s borders. Read More ›
It seems like everyone is discussing “blockchain,” but few have taken the time to really define what blockchain is (and is not). In particular, the federal government has not reached a consensus on what the term should mean. Recently a group of blockchain experts from academia, private practice, and government relations sat down together to do just that—define “blockchain” – at the Blockchain Definition on Capitol Hill event, hosted by MIT Media Lab, Congressman David Schweikert, the Chamber of Digital Commerce, and the DC Blockchain Center. This article shares one definition which was submitted for consideration at the event. Read More ›
Defendants in putative class actions suits filed in federal court attempting recovery for data breaches have generally been successful at obtaining dismissal of the claims before their merits can be considered. This is due to the significant hurdle imposed by the standing requirement under Article III of the U.S. Constitution. Many federal courts have dismissed these claims as lacking Article III standing where the plaintiffs have not alleged a present and ascertainable injury, or an “injury-in-fact”. But several of the federal appellate courts have indicated a willingness to find standing in these cases, and the recent decision in Galaria et al. v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. has further strengthened the hand of plaintiffs’ counsel. Read More ›
On January 1, 2016, the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (UVTA) was enacted in Kentucky and can be found at KRS 378A.005 e seq. The UVTA replaces KRS 378, which contained KRS 378.010, the Kentucky fraudulent conveyance statute, and KRS 378.060, the Kentucky preference statute. Nationally, the UVTA will replace the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (“UFTA”). According to the Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, California, Georgia, Idaho, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Carolina, and North Dakota have joined Kentucky in enacting the UVTA. Adoption of the UVTA is anticipated by the remaining states in the coming years. Read More ›
Does your company lease point-of-sale (POS) credit card terminals to customers in Tennessee? Or, are you a Tennessee merchant who accepts credit or debit card sales? If so, your company will want to be aware of a new Tennessee law that regulates POS terminal contracts. Read More ›
On January 13, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously decided that a borrower may simply provide written notice to a lender to exercise its right to rescind under the Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”). It need not have actually filed suit within the statutory three year period. The Court’s decision in Jesinoski v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. clarified borrowers’ rescission right under TILA and resolved a split between Circuits. Read More ›
On April 7, 2014, Governor Beshear signed into law HB 78, which caused Kentucky to join twenty-seven other states and the District of Columbia in the adoption of the Uniform Trust Code (the "UTC"). Kentucky's adoption of the UTC makes the rules related to trust administration more similar to those in surrounding states (e.g., Ohio, Tennessee, West Virginia and Indiana, which have adopted various portions of the UTC in recent years), and it represents a substantial change to the trust law in Kentucky. In general, the UTC, among other things, (i) contains specific in-court and out-of-court procedures for terminating/modifying outdated or inflexible irrevocable trusts, (ii) more specifically defines the respective rights and duties of trustees and beneficiaries, (iii) provides statutory authority for the principles of virtual representation, and (iv) provides an extensive list of definitions applicable to the new Chapter 386B of the Kentucky Revised Statutes. Read More ›
Many lenders may agree that one of the thornier consumer protection regulations is the Equal Credit Opportunity Act’s rule that limits the ability of a lender to require a spousal guarantee. Regulation B lays out the rule in 12 CFR §1002.7(d)(1), and makes some effort to clarify the rule in its Official Interpretations. In a nutshell, the rule bars a creditor from requiring the signature of a spouse or other person that is not a joint applicant, on any debt instrument if the applicant qualifies individually for the amount and terms of credit requested under the lender’s standards of creditworthiness.
The Changing Face of Criminal Background Checks a/k/a There Are Limits to the “Get Out Of Jail Free Card” For Financial Institutions
Human Resource officers with banks and credit unions face unique professional challenges. While complying with the many general rules governing employment practices, they also must focus on the industry’s unique safety and soundness concerns. One area where this tension exists is in performance of pre-employment criminal background checks. Read More ›
Kentucky’s Lien Release Statute ~ To err is human, and may be “good cause” excusing a delinquent release’s filing.
Kentucky’s Lien Release Statute, KRS 382.365, remains one of the most serious operational risks for real estate lenders. But the Kentucky Supreme Court has brought new clarity to the Act’s “good cause” defense, in Hall v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (June 21, 2012), when the Court ruled that in certain circumstances simple human error may excuse a lender from the statute’s draconian penalty scheme that typically attaches to an untimely filed release of a recorded mortgage. Read More ›
Ask the Blogger
Do you have a topic that you would like discussed in a future blog article? Please let us know. If you have a confidential question regarding a blog article, please feel free to contact the article's author directly, or let us know if you would like for someone to contact you directly.
William T. Repasky practices with the Litigation Department at Frost Brown Todd. He focuses on lending and commercial services; banking litigation and financial institutions.