Opportunities for Obtaining and Using Litigation Reserves and Disclosures

In late 1975, the accounting and legal professions reached an accord that led to three new professional standards: (1) a new financial accounting rule for contingencies, (2) an auditing standard addressing the requirement that an auditor obtain evidence about an audit client\u27s contingent liabilities to determine whether the client has properly treated those items in its financial statements, and (3) the American Bar Association\u27s Statement of Policy Regarding Lawyers\u27 Responses to Auditors\u27 Requests for Information under that auditing standard. The Commentary that accompanied the Statement of Policy explicitly stated that the organized bar\u27s expectation that communications between lawyers and auditors in accordance with the Statement of Policy would not prove prejudicial to clients engaged in or facing adversary proceedings. If developments occurred to negate that expectation, the Statement of Policy recognized that the American Bar Association may need to review and revise both the Statement of Policy and the accord. Using several recently settled cases as examples, this article shows that existing law often allows litigation opponents access to significant information about the evaluations of an enterprise\u27s management, auditor, and attorneys about the enterprise\u27s exposure in the litigation, potentially evidenced by amounts that the enterprise has already accrued as an expense under the financial accounting rules. Since the accord and the Statement of Policy, three important developments have significantly changed the then-present legal landscape: the enhanced federal securities law disclosures in the Management\u27s Discussion and Analysis requirements, the Supreme Court\u27s 1984 opinion in United States v. Arthur Young & Co., and the economic performance requirement that the Tax Reform Act of 1984 added to Section 461(h) of the Internal Revenue Code. Given those developments, the article calls for a review of the accord and the Statement of Policy. Pending such review, this article also proposes a new rule of evidence that, similar to Rule 411 of the Federal Rules of Evidence on liability insurance, would allow the discovery of information about litigation reserves, but generally bar such information from admission into evidence at trial

18th Annual Conference on Legal Issues for Financial Institutions

Materials from the 18th Annual Conference on Legal Issues for Financial Institutions held by UK/CLE in 1998

A multiphase mixed-methods analysis of UK e-commerce privacy policies

Database technology and advanced statistical processes have rendered it possible to process unprecedented volumes of personal data. However, tension exists between the rights of those that are the subject of personal data processing and the interests of commercial organisations and governments. Privacy policies are supposed to describe how and why personal data is processed. The aim of this research was to explore how these statements could be improved in the context of UK e-commerce. A novel, mixed method phased approach was adopted to address the research aim. In phase one a content analysis of UK e-commerce privacy policies was carried out. Findings showed UK e-commerce privacy policies do not consistently follow good practice guidelines. Moreover, results revealed several information gaps that need to be addressed considering the transparency obligations outlined in the General Data Protection Regulation. Phase two explored user attitudes towards UK e-commerce privacy policies. Barriers to readership and heuristics are outlined along with perceived positive and negative characteristics of UK e-commerce privacy policies. Phase three examined user attitudes towards a layered prototype privacy policy revealing preferences for summary and full layered notices. Phase four demonstrated perceived ease of use and perceived efficiency differences in support of the prototype layered privacy policy compared to a typical privacy. In addition, findings highlighted user support for privacy policy standardisation. Findings from phases one to four are synthesised and evidence-based recommendations are made that are aimed at improving UK e-commerce privacy policies in the short and long term

Computer Law Institute

Materials from the Computer Law Institute held by UK/CLE in May 1999

E-Discovery\u27s Threat to Civil Litigation: Reevaluating Rule 26 for the Digital Age

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, even though they were amended in 2006 specifically to address the costs and scale of ediscovery, not only fail to contain the cost or scope of discovery, but, in fact, encourage expensive litigation ancillary to the merits of civil litigants\u27 cases. This Article proposes that the solution to this dilemma is to eliminate the presumption that the producing party should pay for the cost of discovery. This rule should be abandoned in favor of a rule that would equally distribute the costs of discovery between the requesting and producing parties

Access Versus Privacy: Approaches to State Information Policy (1995)

https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/conferences/1002/thumbnail.jp

4th Annual Computer & Technology Law Institute

Materials from the 4th Annual Computer & Technology Law Institute held by UK/CLE in November 2002

The Protection of Student Data Privacy in Wisconsin School Board Policies

American schools have increasingly adopted technology resources to fulfill their educational obligations. These tools are for instruction, communication, and storing and analyzing student information. Student data can be directory information, enrollment records, achievement data, and student-created products. This increased utilization began with the passage of No Child Left Behind in 2001, and the COVID-19 pandemic led to more educational technology use of student data. Districts turned to third-party vendors for assistance with data systems and virtual learning resources. Before, during, and after the pandemic, stakeholders were concerned about information security and the students\u27 privacy. School leaders looked to federal regulations to ensure appropriate and legal practices for student data use. The Family and Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) was implemented in 1974, and the growth of educational technology and digitization of student information has moved beyond the original guidance of the regulation. District leaders also looked to state laws, but Wisconsin statutes provide little guidance. These leaders rely on their local board policies to ensure they benefit from educational technology while protecting the privacy of their students. I utilized the methodological approach of document analysis and the contextual integrity privacy framework to understand how Wisconsin districts address student data privacy in local board policies. In addition, I examined how federal regulations are addressed and the role of leadership in policy implementation. Findings from this study indicate differences for districts using a policy consultation service. These policies address federal regulations and account for the use of data by modern educational technology. The leadership activities required for student data privacy align with previous research for effective educational leadership. These findings show the need for local policies to address federal regulations for student privacy in the context of educational technology utilization