<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Legal Book &#187; appeals</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.the-legal-book.com/tag/appeals/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com</link>
	<description>Legal product guide</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 21:51:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Courthouse Supervisor Faces Individual Liability Under FMLA</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/courthouse-supervisor-faces-individual-liability-under-fmla/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/courthouse-supervisor-faces-individual-liability-under-fmla/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 21:51:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[allows-employees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court-system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[first-impression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[individual-under]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[split-the-circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[under-the-federal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/courthouse-supervisor-faces-individual-liability-under-fmla/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a case of first impression, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that a court system supervisor may be liable as an individual under the federal law that allows employees to take 12 weeks of job-protected leave for medical reasons. The issue has split the circuit courts.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a case of first impression, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that a court system supervisor may be liable as an individual under the federal law that allows employees to take 12 weeks of job-protected leave for medical reasons. The issue has split the circuit courts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/courthouse-supervisor-faces-individual-liability-under-fmla/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Prop 8 Merits Ruling Will Be Issued Tuesday</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/prop-8-merits-ruling-will-be-issued-tuesday/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/prop-8-merits-ruling-will-be-issued-tuesday/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 06:16:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals-on-tuesday]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[constitutionality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gay-rights-corners]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[its-much-anticipated]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[proposition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-constitutionality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-mood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tuesday]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[undeniably-optimistic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[will-release]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/prop-8-merits-ruling-will-be-issued-tuesday/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The 9th U.S. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The 9th U.S. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/prop-8-merits-ruling-will-be-issued-tuesday/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No SOX protection for whistleblowers working for contractors of public companies</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/no-sox-protection-for-whistleblowers-working-for-contractors-of-public-companies/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/no-sox-protection-for-whistleblowers-working-for-contractors-of-public-companies/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 06:16:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[majority]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rogeriee-thompson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[split-panel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-1st]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[under-the-sarbanes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/no-sox-protection-for-whistleblowers-working-for-contractors-of-public-companies/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Employees of privately held contractors or subcontractors of public companies are not eligible for whistleblower protection under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, a split panel of the 1st U.S. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Employees of privately held contractors or subcontractors of public companies are not eligible for whistleblower protection under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, a split panel of the 1st U.S. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/no-sox-protection-for-whistleblowers-working-for-contractors-of-public-companies/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Divided Circuit Upholds Sentencing Enhancements in Sex Conviction</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/divided-circuit-upholds-sentencing-enhancements-in-sex-conviction/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/divided-circuit-upholds-sentencing-enhancements-in-sex-conviction/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 07:15:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appropriately-assessed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[assessed-three]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[connecticut]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divided-panel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[girl-online]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[his-age]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexual-rendezvous]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-2nd]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[two-level-sentencing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/divided-circuit-upholds-sentencing-enhancements-in-sex-conviction/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A man who enticed a 15-year-old girl online, lied to her about his age, went to Connecticut for a sexual rendezvous and then brought her to New York for more sex was appropriately assessed three two-level sentencing enhancements, a divided panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has held.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A man who enticed a 15-year-old girl online, lied to her about his age, went to Connecticut for a sexual rendezvous and then brought her to New York for more sex was appropriately assessed three two-level sentencing enhancements, a divided panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has held.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/divided-circuit-upholds-sentencing-enhancements-in-sex-conviction/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Switch in Arbitrator Permissible Where NAF No Longer Competent, Circuit Says</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/switch-in-arbitrator-permissible-where-naf-no-longer-competent-circuit-says/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/switch-in-arbitrator-permissible-where-naf-no-longer-competent-circuit-says/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 07:22:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[case]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contract-clause]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[forum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hear-the-case]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[may-appoint]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national-arbitration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[not-able]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[one-designated]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[substitute-arbitrator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-3rd]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/switch-in-arbitrator-permissible-where-naf-no-longer-competent-circuit-says/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Courts may appoint a substitute arbitrator where the one designated in a contract clause -- the National Arbitration Forum -- is not able to hear the case, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has held in a case of first impression.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Courts may appoint a substitute arbitrator where the one designated in a contract clause &#8212; the National Arbitration Forum &#8212; is not able to hear the case, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has held in a case of first impression.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/switch-in-arbitrator-permissible-where-naf-no-longer-competent-circuit-says/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Full Federal Circuit to reconsider broadened doctrine of intervening rights</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/full-federal-circuit-to-reconsider-broadened-doctrine-of-intervening-rights/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/full-federal-circuit-to-reconsider-broadened-doctrine-of-intervening-rights/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 20:52:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alleged-infringer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal-circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[last-year]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[owners-may]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent-claim]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent-office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[product-based]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[relief-because]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/full-federal-circuit-to-reconsider-broadened-doctrine-of-intervening-rights/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Patent owners may breathe a sigh of relief because the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has agreed to review a ruling from last year in a case about an alleged infringer's right to sell a product based on a patent claim subsequently changed in a patent office action.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Patent owners may breathe a sigh of relief because the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has agreed to review a ruling from last year in a case about an alleged infringer&#8217;s right to sell a product based on a patent claim subsequently changed in a patent office action.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/full-federal-circuit-to-reconsider-broadened-doctrine-of-intervening-rights/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>1st Circuit affirms awards against U.S. over Bulger gang murders</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/1st-circuit-affirms-awards-against-u-s-over-bulger-gang-murders/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/1st-circuit-affirms-awards-against-u-s-over-bulger-gang-murders/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 07:59:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[steve]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[steve-flemmi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-families]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[victims-killed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[whitey-bulger]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/1st-circuit-affirms-awards-against-u-s-over-bulger-gang-murders/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a pair of rulings, the 1st U.S. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a pair of rulings, the 1st U.S. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/1st-circuit-affirms-awards-against-u-s-over-bulger-gang-murders/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>D.C. Appeals Court Rules Trade Group Can Keep Informant Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/d-c-appeals-court-rules-trade-group-can-keep-informant-anonymous/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/d-c-appeals-court-rules-trade-group-can-keep-informant-anonymous/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 07:07:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anonymous-informant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[claimed-the-john]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[columbia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[columbia-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[denying-enforcement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[district]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[identity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[keep-the-identity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[software-industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-identity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trade-group]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/d-c-appeals-court-rules-trade-group-can-keep-informant-anonymous/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The District of Columbia Court of Appeals has ruled that a Washington-based software industry trade group can keep the identity of an anonymous informant secret, denying enforcement of a subpoena by a company that claimed the John Doe defamed them.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The District of Columbia Court of Appeals has ruled that a Washington-based software industry trade group can keep the identity of an anonymous informant secret, denying enforcement of a subpoena by a company that claimed the John Doe defamed them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/d-c-appeals-court-rules-trade-group-can-keep-informant-anonymous/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New Requirements for Bar Exam Stress Clinical Education</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/new-requirements-for-bar-exam-stress-clinical-education/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/new-requirements-for-bar-exam-stress-clinical-education/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 08:39:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals-on-thursday]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bar-exam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[count-more]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[field-placement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[school-graduates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[their-eligibility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[under-new]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/new-requirements-for-bar-exam-stress-clinical-education/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Law school graduates will be allowed to count more credit hours from clinics, field placement courses and externships toward establishing their eligibility to take the New York bar exam under new curriculum requirements issued by the state Court of Appeals on Thursday.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Law school graduates will be allowed to count more credit hours from clinics, field placement courses and externships toward establishing their eligibility to take the New York bar exam under new curriculum requirements issued by the state Court of Appeals on Thursday.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/new-requirements-for-bar-exam-stress-clinical-education/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>D.C. Appeals Court: Assault Victims Don&#8217;t Need to Know Attackers to be Entitled to Protection Orders</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/d-c-appeals-court-assault-victims-dont-need-to-know-attackers-to-be-entitled-to-protection-orders/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/d-c-appeals-court-assault-victims-dont-need-to-know-attackers-to-be-entitled-to-protection-orders/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Dec 2011 10:03:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[been-stalked]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[columbia-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[district]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intrafamily-relationship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[orders-must]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[parties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[parties-had]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexually-assaulted]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/d-c-appeals-court-assault-victims-dont-need-to-know-attackers-to-be-entitled-to-protection-orders/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The District of Columbia Court of Appeals has found that under D.C. law, civil protection orders must be available to those who claim they've been stalked or sexually assaulted by a stranger, not just when the parties had been "intimate" partners or had been in an interpersonal or intrafamily relationship.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The District of Columbia Court of Appeals has found that under D.C. law, civil protection orders must be available to those who claim they&#8217;ve been stalked or sexually assaulted by a stranger, not just when the parties had been &#8220;intimate&#8221; partners or had been in an interpersonal or intrafamily relationship.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/d-c-appeals-court-assault-victims-dont-need-to-know-attackers-to-be-entitled-to-protection-orders/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Federal, State Claims May Be Split  In Takings Case, 3rd Circuit Rules</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/federal-state-claims-may-be-split-in-takings-case-3rd-circuit-rules/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/federal-state-claims-may-be-split-in-takings-case-3rd-circuit-rules/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Dec 2011 10:03:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[being-split]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defendants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plaintiff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state-action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-defense]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-plaintiff]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/federal-state-claims-may-be-split-in-takings-case-3rd-circuit-rules/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has decided a plaintiff's federal claims are not precluded when the plaintiff puts the defendants in a state action on notice that the federal claims are being split off and the defense never objects.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has decided a plaintiff&#8217;s federal claims are not precluded when the plaintiff puts the defendants in a state action on notice that the federal claims are being split off and the defense never objects.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/federal-state-claims-may-be-split-in-takings-case-3rd-circuit-rules/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Court Finds Private Actions Not Precluded Under Martin Act</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/court-finds-private-actions-not-precluded-under-martin-act-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/court-finds-private-actions-not-precluded-under-martin-act-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2011 23:44:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[attorney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[common-law-tort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eliot-spitzer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[martin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[not-pre-empted]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[street]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-first]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/court-finds-private-actions-not-precluded-under-martin-act-2/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A decade after then-New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer dusted off the long-dormant Martin Act and deployed it to become the "sheriff of Wall Street," the Court of Appeals has essentially deputized private citizens in holding for the first time that common-law tort claims are not pre-empted by the law.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A decade after then-New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer dusted off the long-dormant Martin Act and deployed it to become the &#8220;sheriff of Wall Street,&#8221; the Court of Appeals has essentially deputized private citizens in holding for the first time that common-law tort claims are not pre-empted by the law.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/court-finds-private-actions-not-precluded-under-martin-act-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Court Finds Private Actions Not Precluded Under Martin Act</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/court-finds-private-actions-not-precluded-under-martin-act/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/court-finds-private-actions-not-precluded-under-martin-act/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2011 23:44:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[attorney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[common-law-tort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eliot-spitzer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[martin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[not-pre-empted]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[street]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-first]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/court-finds-private-actions-not-precluded-under-martin-act/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A decade after then-New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer dusted off the long-dormant Martin Act and deployed it to become the "sheriff of Wall Street," the Court of Appeals has essentially deputized private citizens in holding for the first time that common-law tort claims are not pre-empted by the law.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A decade after then-New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer dusted off the long-dormant Martin Act and deployed it to become the &#8220;sheriff of Wall Street,&#8221; the Court of Appeals has essentially deputized private citizens in holding for the first time that common-law tort claims are not pre-empted by the law.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/court-finds-private-actions-not-precluded-under-martin-act/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Circuit Revives Overtime Claims Against Oracle</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/circuit-revives-overtime-claims-against-oracle/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/circuit-revives-overtime-claims-against-oracle/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2011 05:57:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[action-seeking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[district]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[granted-summary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[oracle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[proposed-class]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reversed-the-district]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[second-time]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-district]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/circuit-revives-overtime-claims-against-oracle/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For a second time, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that out-of-state Oracle workers can move forward with a proposed class action seeking overtime pay. The three-judge panel reversed the district court, which had granted summary judgment in favor of Oracle.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For a second time, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that out-of-state Oracle workers can move forward with a proposed class action seeking overtime pay. The three-judge panel reversed the district court, which had granted summary judgment in favor of Oracle.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/circuit-revives-overtime-claims-against-oracle/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Equitable Limits Apply to ERISA Subrogation</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/equitable-limits-apply-to-erisa-subrogation/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/equitable-limits-apply-to-erisa-subrogation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2011 04:06:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employee-retirement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[equitable-defenses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[income]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[income-security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[limited-at-courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-3rd]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unanimous-panel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[under-the-employee]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/equitable-limits-apply-to-erisa-subrogation/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A unanimous panel of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that subrogation claims in cases under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 can be limited at courts' discretion by equitable defenses and principles such as unjust enrichment.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A unanimous panel of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that subrogation claims in cases under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 can be limited at courts&#8217; discretion by equitable defenses and principles such as unjust enrichment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/equitable-limits-apply-to-erisa-subrogation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Disclosures of Intervention to Support ARS Market Defeat Claim That Merrill Sent False Pricing Signal</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/disclosures-of-intervention-to-support-ars-market-defeat-claim-that-merrill-sent-false-pricing-signal/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/disclosures-of-intervention-to-support-ars-market-defeat-claim-that-merrill-sent-false-pricing-signal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Nov 2011 07:10:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[avoid-liability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[merrill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[place-support]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rate-securities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[routinely-intervened]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-2nd]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[under-the-securities]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/disclosures-of-intervention-to-support-ars-market-defeat-claim-that-merrill-sent-false-pricing-signal/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Disclosures by Merrill Lynch that it routinely intervened to place support bids in the market for auction rate securities are sufficient to avoid liability under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Monday.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Disclosures by Merrill Lynch that it routinely intervened to place support bids in the market for auction rate securities are sufficient to avoid liability under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Monday.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/disclosures-of-intervention-to-support-ars-market-defeat-claim-that-merrill-sent-false-pricing-signal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Immigration Lawyer Disbarred for 100-Plus Conduct Violations</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/immigration-lawyer-disbarred-for-100-plus-conduct-violations/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/immigration-lawyer-disbarred-for-100-plus-conduct-violations/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2011 20:55:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[100-violations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[attorney-facing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conduct-shariati]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[file-paperwork]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[keep-clients]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ordered-the-disbarment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[paperwork-or-keep]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[professional]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vahid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vahid-shariati]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/immigration-lawyer-disbarred-for-100-plus-conduct-violations/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The D.C. Court of Appeals has ordered the disbarment of Vahid Shariati, an immigration attorney facing allegations of more than 100 violations of the D.C. Rules of Professional Conduct. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The D.C. Court of Appeals has ordered the disbarment of Vahid Shariati, an immigration attorney facing allegations of more than 100 violations of the D.C. Rules of Professional Conduct. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/immigration-lawyer-disbarred-for-100-plus-conduct-violations/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>McAfee Defeats Ex-GC&#8217;s Malicious Prosecution Claim</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/mcafee-defeats-ex-gcs-malicious-prosecution-claim-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/mcafee-defeats-ex-gcs-malicious-prosecution-claim-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2011 04:17:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[attempt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[attempt-at-further]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[general-counsel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[several-years]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stock-option]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-9th]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vindication]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/mcafee-defeats-ex-gcs-malicious-prosecution-claim-2/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Former McAfee general counsel Kent Roberts was able to beat all stock option backdating charges against him several years ago, but his attempt at further vindication ran aground at the 9th U.S. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Former McAfee general counsel Kent Roberts was able to beat all stock option backdating charges against him several years ago, but his attempt at further vindication ran aground at the 9th U.S. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/mcafee-defeats-ex-gcs-malicious-prosecution-claim-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>McAfee Defeats Ex-GC&#8217;s Malicious Prosecution Claim</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/mcafee-defeats-ex-gcs-malicious-prosecution-claim/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/mcafee-defeats-ex-gcs-malicious-prosecution-claim/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2011 04:17:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[against-him]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[attempt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[attempt-at-further]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[further-vindication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[general-counsel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ran-aground]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vindication]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/mcafee-defeats-ex-gcs-malicious-prosecution-claim/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Former McAfee general counsel Kent Roberts was able to beat all stock option backdating charges against him several years ago, but his attempt at further vindication ran aground at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Former McAfee general counsel Kent Roberts was able to beat all stock option backdating charges against him several years ago, but his attempt at further vindication ran aground at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/mcafee-defeats-ex-gcs-malicious-prosecution-claim/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama Nominates Arizona Justice for 9th Circuit Slot</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/obama-nominates-arizona-justice-for-9th-circuit-slot/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/obama-nominates-arizona-justice-for-9th-circuit-slot/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2011 05:04:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[arizona]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plugged-in-pick]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president-obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[senate-hurwitz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-president]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/obama-nominates-arizona-justice-for-9th-circuit-slot/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[President Obama on Wednesday moved to fill his fifth vacancy on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, nominating Arizona Justice Andrew Hurwitz, who joins three other 9th Circuit picks awaiting action by the Senate]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>President Obama on Wednesday moved to fill his fifth vacancy on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, nominating Arizona Justice Andrew Hurwitz, who joins three other 9th Circuit picks awaiting action by the Senate</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/obama-nominates-arizona-justice-for-9th-circuit-slot/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ex-Purdue Pharma GC Argues Against Oxycontin Debarment</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/ex-purdue-pharma-gc-argues-against-oxycontin-debarment/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/ex-purdue-pharma-gc-argues-against-oxycontin-debarment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Oct 2011 06:21:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[after-having]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals-briefs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[been-convicted]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[general-counsel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[howard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[howard-udell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[purdue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[purdue-pharma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-right]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/ex-purdue-pharma-gc-argues-against-oxycontin-debarment/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Both sides have filed their appeals briefs in a much-watched case in which former general counsel Howard Udell and two other Purdue Pharma executives are fighting for the right to work in health care again, after having been convicted in 2007 of a criminal misdemeanor.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Both sides have filed their appeals briefs in a much-watched case in which former general counsel Howard Udell and two other Purdue Pharma executives are fighting for the right to work in health care again, after having been convicted in 2007 of a criminal misdemeanor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/ex-purdue-pharma-gc-argues-against-oxycontin-debarment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>D.C. Court Approves Censure for Ex-Am Law 100 Partner</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/d-c-court-approves-censure-for-ex-am-law-100-partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/d-c-court-approves-censure-for-ex-am-law-100-partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Oct 2011 03:18:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[city]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[columbia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[columbia-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[detroit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[detroit-mayor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intimate-contact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kwame]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kwame-kilpatrick]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public-censure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sheryl]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-city]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[venable]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/d-c-court-approves-censure-for-ex-am-law-100-partner/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The District of Columbia Court of Appeals has approved a public censure for former Saul Ewing and Venable partner Sheryl Robinson Wood after she admitted to "intimate contact" with former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick while serving as a court-appointed monitor of the city's police department.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The District of Columbia Court of Appeals has approved a public censure for former Saul Ewing and Venable partner Sheryl Robinson Wood after she admitted to &#8220;intimate contact&#8221; with former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick while serving as a court-appointed monitor of the city&#8217;s police department.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/d-c-court-approves-censure-for-ex-am-law-100-partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>3rd Circuit Revives Legal Mal Suit Despite Lack of Expert Witness</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/3rd-circuit-revives-legal-mal-suit-despite-lack-of-expert-witness-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/3rd-circuit-revives-legal-mal-suit-despite-lack-of-expert-witness-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Oct 2011 05:04:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Master</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[her-claim]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lower]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plaintiff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-lower]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-plaintiff]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/3rd-circuit-revives-legal-mal-suit-despite-lack-of-expert-witness-2/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The 3rd U.S. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The 3rd U.S. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/3rd-circuit-revives-legal-mal-suit-despite-lack-of-expert-witness-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>3rd Circuit Revives Legal Mal Suit Despite Lack of Expert Witness</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/3rd-circuit-revives-legal-mal-suit-despite-lack-of-expert-witness/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/3rd-circuit-revives-legal-mal-suit-despite-lack-of-expert-witness/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Oct 2011 05:04:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[claim]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[expert-witness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[her-claim]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[improperly-dismissed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lower]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plaintiff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[support-despite]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-lower]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-plaintiff]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/3rd-circuit-revives-legal-mal-suit-despite-lack-of-expert-witness/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has revived a legal malpractice suit after finding that the lower court improperly dismissed it for lack of expert witness support despite the plaintiff's insistence that her claim could be proved without any experts.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has revived a legal malpractice suit after finding that the lower court improperly dismissed it for lack of expert witness support despite the plaintiff&#8217;s insistence that her claim could be proved without any experts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/3rd-circuit-revives-legal-mal-suit-despite-lack-of-expert-witness/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>7th Circuit: State common law claims against BoA pre-empted by Fair Credit Reporting Act</title>
		<link>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/7th-circuit-state-common-law-claims-against-boa-pre-empted-by-fair-credit-reporting-act/</link>
		<comments>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/7th-circuit-state-common-law-claims-against-boa-pre-empted-by-fair-credit-reporting-act/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Oct 2011 04:59:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[america]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[broader-view]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[circuit-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal-credit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[indiana]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[northern-district]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reporting-law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/7th-circuit-state-common-law-claims-against-boa-pre-empted-by-fair-credit-reporting-act/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has handed Bank of America a win, taking a broader view of a federal credit reporting law's pre-emption provisions than a Northern District of Indiana judge.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has handed Bank of America a win, taking a broader view of a federal credit reporting law&#8217;s pre-emption provisions than a Northern District of Indiana judge.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.the-legal-book.com/uncategorized/7th-circuit-state-common-law-claims-against-boa-pre-empted-by-fair-credit-reporting-act/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

