Financial Services

ABA Antitrust Plaintiffs’ Roundtable Will Feature Insights from Ian Papendick

New York and DOJ Introduce Stricter Data Privacy Requirements

New York Updates Data Breach Notification Law  

Upcoming Compliance Date Under the Corporate Transparency Act

The Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) requires certain U.S. and foreign corporations,LLCs and other entities created by filing a document with a secretary of state (a ReportingCompany) to file a report with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) aboutits beneficial owners and company applicants, unless an exemption applies.

Use of AI In Employment

If your Company uses any automated tools such as Upwork or TurboHire in its hiring process, youshould be aware that New York City has established new requirements governing such practices,which are set forth in the Automated Employment Decision Tool Law (AEDTL).

Enforcement of New California's Privacy Regulations Delayed

A California judge has made a last-minute decision to delay the enforcement of the CaliforniaPrivacy Rights Act (CPRA) regulations until March 29, 2024. The original plan was for theregulations to be enforced starting July 1.

Upcoming Compliance Date Under the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020

The California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (CPRA) has introduced a new body of rules toensure a higher level of protection of consumers' personal information. In a notable change,the CPRA also introduces new privacy rights for employees and extends data privacyprotections to consumer data exchanged in a business-to-business context.

Bartko Pavia Obtains Final Approval in Financial Advisor Class Settlement

The firm, representing a defined class of 135 former Wells Fargo financial adviser executives, obtained court approval of a settlement against the bank for a total of $7.42 million.  Wakefield, et al. v. Wells Fargo Company, et al., 3:13-05053 LB (ND Cal.).  The settlement also requires Wells to cease forfeiting deferred compensation of financial advisers who leave the bank to work for competitors. View pdf copy of the Order. The suit was commenced in 2013, on behalf of California and North Dakota financial advisers whose deferred compensation was forfeited due to competition, in violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 16600 and related provisions of North Dakota law.  After motion practice, mediation, and document discovery, the parties settled on terms which return to the plaintiff financial advisers 99% of their forfeited compensation for those plaintiffs who left Wells within four years of the suit being filed, and $10,000 each to those plaintiffs who left Wells earlier than four years before suit was filed.  The trial Judge, the Hon. Laurel Beeler, described the result as an “excellent recovery for class members” in her Order approving the final settlement.  Class recoveries of nearly 100% for class members are virtually unheard of and the firm is very proud of this result.  The settlement that was approved followed a mediation conducted by the Hon. Ron Sabraw (Ret.) of JAMS, and was prosecuted in conjunction with co-counsel at the Florida firm Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick, LLP.  Bartko Pavia attorneys responsible for the result include William Edlund, Rob Bunzel and Sony Barari.

Motion for Preliminary Injunction against ABD Insurance and Financial Services denied again

On August 28, 2014, United States District Court Judge Phyllis Hamilton again denied the motion for preliminary injunction filed by Wells Fargo against BartkoZankel client ABD Insurance and Financial Services (the “ABD Team”). Wells Fargo alleges that the ABD Team is infringing the ABD trademark that Wells Fargo acquired when it merged the former ABD Insurance and Financial Services, Inc. into its Wells Fargo Insurance Services subsidiary. In March 2013, the ABD Team defeated Wells Fargo’s first motion for preliminary injunction based on arguments that Wells Fargo abandoned the ABD trademark in 2009, when it failed to renew its federal trademarks to the term ABD, instructed its employees to no longer use the ABD name, and thereafter stopped using the name. The ABD Team started using the ABD name in July 2012. The Ninth Circuit reversed on the abandonment issue and remanded the case back to the trial court. 

Court Denies Wells Fargo’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction in Trademark Case

On March 8, 2013, United States District Court Judge Phyllis Hamilton entered an Order Denying the Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Wells Fargo Bank against BartkoZankel client, The ABD Team.  The case concerns Wells Fargo’s claim that the ABD Team is infringing the ABD trademark that Wells Fargo acquired when it merged the former ABD Insurance and Financial Services, Inc. into its Wells Fargo Insurance Services subsidiary.  The ABD Team asserts that Wells Fargo abandoned the ABD trademark in 2009, when it failed to renew its federal trademarks to the term ABD, instructed its employees to no longer use the ABD name, and thereafter stopped using the name.  The ABD Team started using the ABD name in July 2012.

Bartko Pavia Attorneys Win Approval of $17.2M Class Action Settlement with Merrill Lynch

February 2012: Bartko Pavia attorneys William I. Edlund, Robert H. Bunzel and Simon Goodfellow secured final approval for a plaintiff class of 83 former Merrill Lynch California financial advisors who claimed Merrill Lynch improperly forfeited their deferred compensation accounts solely because these advisors left Merrill Lynch between 1996 and 2010 to work for competitors. U.S. District Court Judge Claudia Wilken signed the Order Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlement, and entered Judgment for the class resulting in a $17,720,000 settlement fund. Settlement funds have been paid out to class members in December 2011 and January 2012 and the Judgment was finally satisfied in February 2012. The settlement and judgment concludes a lawsuit filed by the firm in August 2010. Class members have recovered 96.9% of their previously forfeited accounts with class members within the 4 year statute of limitations receiving 100% of their forfeitures. Merrill Lynch has confirmed in writing to its California financial advisors that all such forfeitures are discontinued after December 2010 and a class statistical expert estimated that this will result in future payments of between $3.8 and $6.2 million to Merrill Lynch financial advisors. We believe this is a tremendous result for the class. View recent PDF article in Law 360 and contact Rob Bunzel at rbunzel@bartkolaw.com for more information.