Mcglinchey Stafford

The Litigation Byte is the new name and format for McGlinchey’s Commercial Law Bulletin. Our new format reflects McGlinchey’s national coverage and...

Today is another red-letter date for Ohio. The Ohio Department of Development’s Division of Cannabis Control (DCC) has issued 98 Certificates of Operation (COOs) to dispensaries across the state, allowing them to sell adult-use marijuana at their existing medical marijuana locations (i.e., a “dual-use” license). The issued COOs represent nearly 75% of the provisional licenses previously issued. The remaining provisional licenses will not be issued until those licensees have met the requirements for receiving a COO.

Despite the excitement of many over rescheduling cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III, the move does not make cannabis “legal” unless it is...

On July 31, 2024, the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division: Second Department affirmed the dismissal of a quiet title action, which sought to...

The recent decision in Serafine v. Crump by the Supreme Court of Texas primarily revolves around the interpretation of what constitutes “litigation” under Texas law, particularly in the context of determining whether someone is a “vexatious litigant.” This case settled a growing inconsistency within some courts of appeals.

On April 1, 2020, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) made various amendments to its rules and regulations governing blocking charges, the voluntary-recognition bar doctrine, and proof of majority support for labor organizations representing employers in the construction industry. The 2020 Rule became effective on July 31, 2020. The NLRB is rescinding the final three amendments to its rules and regulations made by the April 2020 Rule, election rules put into place by former President Trump. The new Rule will become effective on September 30, 2024.

On July 31, 2024, the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division: Second Department reversed the trial court’s denial of borrowers’ motion to dismiss a foreclosure action filed prior to the enactment of the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA) because under the new “savings statute” for foreclosure actions under FAPA, plaintiff was precluded from recommencement since the first foreclosure was dismissed as abandoned under CPLR § 3215(c). [1]

In July 2024, the United States Court for the District of Massachusetts dismissed a pro se litigant’s claims against Experian Information Services LLC (Experian), TransUnion LLC (TransUnion), and Equifax Information Solutions, Inc. (Equifax) (collectively, Credit Reporting Agencies) for alleged violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.

On July 18, 2024, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued notice of a proposed interpretive rule (Rule) that walks back a prior 2020...

In this installment of the More with McGlinchey #WhyMcGlinchey podcast series, Member Kelly Lipinski talks with Director of Talent Acquisition...