This article was originally published on September 18, 2024 on Bloomberg Law and is republished here with permission.
The Northern District of Texas’s nationwide ban on the Federal Trade Commission’s noncompete rule isn’t a complete bar to government enforcement. The rule sought to curb unfair methods of competition and would have voided employees’ noncompete provisions. It required employers to send notice that noncompete agreements are no longer enforceable.
Published in Law360 on May 23, 2024. © Copyright 2024, Portfolio Media, Inc., publisher of Law360. Reprinted here with permission.
On April 23, the FTC promulgated its final rule[1] banning noncompetes nationwide.[2]
While most commentary has focused on the scrutiny noncompetes would now garner at the federal level, few discussed the waterfall enforcement effect at the state level that would follow as state attorneys general could deploy their broad authority under state unfair or deceptive acts or practices, or UDAP, laws to treat noncompetes as separate and independent violations.[3]
The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) recently announced an Airline Passenger Protection Partnership with state attorneys general (AGs), marking a significant expansion of AGs’ regulatory reach. This partnership, formed in response to growing frustration among AGs over their limited ability to investigate passenger complaints and enforce state consumer protection laws against airlines, empowers AGs to investigate complaints against airlines and grants them access to complaints filed directly by consumers with the DOT.
On October 17, following Washington Attorney General (AG) Bob Ferguson’s unsuccessful consumer protection action against thrift store chain, Savers Value Village Inc. (Savers), the Washington Superior Court of King County granted Savers’ motion for attorney’s fees and costs in the amount of $4.3 million. This substantial award — which is allowable under the Washington Consumer Protection Act (WA CPA) — represents a substantial recoupment of Savers’ attorneys’ fees spent to defend the almost decade-long litigation.
Ashley Taylor, Ryan Strasser and Amy Pritchard Williams of Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP discuss the involvement of outside counsel in representing state Attorney Generals and how that involvement can affect the dynamics of the litigation.
Before being elected to the U.S. Senate, now former Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt filed a lawsuit against Power Home Solar LLC — a North Carolina entity now doing business as Pink Energy — alleging that the solar company misrepresented the effectiveness and safety of its energy-generating systems for residential homes in violation of the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act. The lawsuit seeks injunctive relief and restitution in addition to civil penalties to remedy the alleged violations of Missouri consumers’ rights.
In this episode of Regulatory Oversight, Stephen Piepgrass welcomes Regulatory Investigations, Strategy + Enforcement Partner Ryan Strasser and Williams & Jensen Partner Matt Hoekstra to discuss how law firms can work with firms like Matt’s on behalf of clients during congressional inquiries with parallel AG investigations or consumer litigation.
On December 8, the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) issued a statement regarding its intent to investigate certain participants in the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) created by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act.[1] This announcement, just a few months after the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced its first-ever False Claims
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) protects investors and maintains a fair, orderly, and efficient marketplace. While the SEC has historically focused its enforcement efforts on public companies, recent announcements from Acting Chief Accountant Paul Munter suggest the SEC is taking a closer look at other actors who play a role in fair and efficient
This article was originally published on August 19, 2022 in Reuters and is republished here with permission.
Companies today face increased risks from numerous regulatory bodies at the municipal, state, and federal levels. As we discussed in our previous article, “Preparing Companies for a New Day in Multistate AG Investigations,” sophisticated regulators —