Bite-Sized Business Law

Boeing is setting a standout example of how Fortune 500 companies can implement and maintain ESG practices in their daily operations. In today's episode, we sit down with Boeing South Carolina's Senior Director of Government Operations, Lindsay Leonard, to talk about her work since taking up this position, her perspective on the aerospace industry's most pressing issues, and the ecosystem that Boeing has created since setting up in South Carolina. Lindsay talks about shifting attitudes towards ESG, the implications of the commitments that have been made by the aerospace industry, and how she and her team want to take things beyond the minimum and performative. In an industrial space that has required some of the most obvious change, Boeing has a real strategy and practical plan that goes beyond compliance; Lindsay talks about their approaches to value creation and innovation and creating a better understanding of sustainability in relation to ESG. So to hear all this, and a whole lot more from our great guest, press play! Key Points From This Episode:Lindsay explains the project at Boeing South Carolina.Unpacking Boeing South Carolina's corporate conservation strategy. The need for constant focus on ESG in all decisions in a field such as aerospace. Real steps and initiatives towards promotion of ESG within the aerospace industry. Sustainable value for shareholders; programs at Boeing that exemplify what is possible. Lindsay's thoughts on the year ahead, the recession, and the effects this will have on corporate ESG initiatives. Advice from Lindsay for sticking by ESG commitments through economic constraints.  The importance of reporting requirements, and the different forms this can take. Lindsay shares some thoughts on maintaining a focus on the elements of ESG that actually matter. Links Mentioned in Today’s Episode:Fordham University School of Law Corporate Law CenterLindsay Leonard on LinkedInBoeing The Nature ConservancyDreamlearnersWiskWe Edit Podcasts

Should nonlawyers be allowed to own law firms to increase capital and access to the legal system, or are there ethical concerns associated with nonlawyer involvement and their lack of fiduciary duties? On this special live episode of the Bite Sized Business Law Podcast, we are joined by seasoned litigator and former New York State Bar Association President, Stephen Younger and the founder and managing director of Bench Walk Advisors, Adrian Chopin to discuss this controversial issue. Tuning in, you’ll hear all about what nonlawyer ownership of law firms means, why it has become a massive debate in the USA, how the UK has implemented it, and the main concerns of this type of model. Stephen argues that nonlawyer-owned firms are not bound by the same ethical duties, will ignore pro bono obligations to make money, and do not contribute to the legal system positively, while Adrian believes that this model does not create any more capital issues than traditional firms, supports incredible innovation, and can solve many problems in the system. We delve into the importance of modernizing the legal system before our guests share how they think this model will evolve in the near future. Finally, we open up to the floor for some interesting and informative questions from our live audience. Be sure to join us for this nail-biting debate and hear two sides of a controversial argument in legal practice today!Key Points From This Episode:A brief overview of the Corporate Law Center at Fordham University. What Associate Dean Joe Landau loves about the Bite Sized Business Law Podcast. An introduction to today’s guests, Stephen Younger and Adrian Chopin. The basic principle behind nonlawyer ownership of law firms and why it’s such a debate. Adrian shares what is happening in the UK with alternative business structured law firms. Why Stephen likes litigation finance and how it differs from this new scenario. The differences (or lack thereof) between capital from lawyers and capital from third parties.The main concern with regards to nonlawyer ownership of law firms. Why nonlawyer law firm owners may not be bound by the same ethical duties as lawyers. How well-known brand names absorbing law firms may affect the practice of law. The importance of modernizing legal practice. How this model affects pro bono services and why. How our guests think this model will play out in the next few years. Why Stephen wants to see a model that will solve access to justice in America. Why Adrian thinks this model can solve many other problems. The consequences to the investor when it comes to unethical practice. How the role of lawyers is approached differently in the US as opposed to other countries. How outside shareholders may approach highly controversial cases. Links Mentioned in Today’s Episode:Fordham University School of Law Corporate Law CenterStephen Younger on LinkedInAdrian Chopin on LinkedInAdrian Chopin on TwitterJoseph Landau on LinkedInMatthew Diller on LinkedInRichard Squire on LinkedInAmelia Martella 

Climate disclosures are probably the most prominent ESG issues these days, and today’s episode is all about the SEC’s expansion into ESG disclosures and why this decision isn’t valid under the constitution, nor is it wise. Joining us to share his thoughts on the topic is Professor Sean Griffith, an expert in corporate and securities law who teaches at Fordham Law School and is the author of the paper entitled ‘What's controversial about ESG?’ Historically, the SEC has asked corporations to describe their assets, their management, and their corporate governance, but by getting into climate disclosure they are broaching a whole new territory, and by doing so they are opening themselves up to challenges to their authority. To read the full paper visit the link https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4118755This conversation is guaranteed to give you a lot to think about! Key Points From This Episode:The focus of Sean’s most recent piece, ‘What’s Controversial About ESG?’Sean shares what motivated him to write this piece.An overview of the SEC’s current climate proposals. The definition of materiality. Pre-existing rules that require companies to make climate-related disclosures.Where the SEC derives its authority to mandate disclosures. What most SEC regulations require of corporations. The role of the SEC.The two opposing camps of belief on the constitutionality of the SEC’s decisions. Exploring the Commercial Speech Doctrine. The key to winning a constitutional law case. Sean explains what makes the SEC’s ESG proposal so controversial.What all investors want. Ways by which institutional asset managers can rate investments for ESG investors. Three first amendment arguments around SEC regulations relating to climate disclosures. Why Sean thinks it is highly likely that the SEC’s rules in the ESG area won’t survive. What the SEC should and shouldn’t be doing. Links Mentioned in Today’s Episode:Sean Griffith on LinkedIn‘What’s Controversial About ESG?’Climate RationalityFordham University School of Law Corporate Law Center

During this special episode, Richard Squire joins us to discuss the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank. Richard is a Professor of law at Fordham University School of Law, where he teaches corporate, business, and bankruptcy law, and he is here today to provide an overview of what has happened at Silicon Valley Bank, and analyze the elements that have led to this point. Join us to hear his perspective on the Federal Reserve’s failures, the role of moral hazard, and how middle class tax is redistributed to the wealthy. We discuss fractional reserve banking, Dodd-Frank, and interest rates, before we theorize about what the world would look like without inflation from money printing. Hear why Richard doesn’t advocate for lifting the insurance cap on deposits, which program is working in tandem with deposits, and why deflation is undesirable for the Federal Reserve with money multiplication and division in mind. Join us today to hear all this and more from today’s highly knowledgeable guest. Thanks for tuning in!Key Points From This Episode:An introduction to today’s guest, Professor Richard Squire.Richard’s rundown on the bank run at Silicon Valley Bank.What Richard means by bad practices: a failure of risk management.The two main problems that caused the bank to fall into bankruptcy. How the social media component fueled the panic around this crisis.The Federal Reserve’s failure to monitor interest rates at Silicon Valley Bank.Moral hazard at various scales.The redistribution of middle class tax to the wealthy in Silicon Valley.The cost of money printing.Fractional reserve banking.How different our approach to banking would be without inflation from money printing.Where Dodd-Frank fell short in addressing risk.Why Richard doesn’t advocate for lifting the insurance cap on deposits.The program that is working in tandem with deposits.Why deflation is in conflict with what the Federal Reserve wants.Money multiplication and money division.The impact of having no risk officer at SVB.A note that the insurance limit has not been limited for other banks.Why there is global interest in the Federal Reserve’s interest rates.Links Mentioned in Today’s Episode:Richard Squire on LinkedInSilicon Valley BankDodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection ActFordham University School of Law Corporate Law Center

Financial litigation is a new sector causing disruption and creating new opportunities for law and finance, but what is financial litigation? What type of assets are involved? How can organizations take advantage of new opportunities? To help unpack this complicated topic is  Matt Cantor, Senior Managing Director at Pretium, a specialized investment firm with more than  $50 billion in assets under management. Matt is known for his handling of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy and liquidation case. He has a wealth of experience in corporate restructuring at big law firms and has worked at various respected investment firms. In our conversation, we unpack the definition of litigation finance, how it relates to the justice system, and where finance litigation originated. We discuss how the shift in the economy has created new legal opportunities, his approach to selecting the best organizations to work with, how to monetize digital assets, how Matt remains objective during finance litigation processes, the ethical considerations, balancing risk and returns, and the value of intangible corporate assets. Hear about his experience working with Lehman Brothers, a practical example of litigation finance,  and Matt’s opinion on regulating the sector. Tune in and learn about the new world of litigation finance and the associated opportunities with Matt Cantor! Key Points From This Episode: Background about Matt and his vast experience in business law. Learn about Pretium and how he first got involved in litigation finance. What litigation finance is and how it helps with accessibility to the justice system. Hear how law firms are leveraging the shift in the economy and corporate assets. How organizations acquire funding for litigation and how many are awarded funding. His approach to selecting clients to work with and acquiring funding. Matt shares how he avoids ethical pitfalls and other challenges. Find out whether the historical return is higher with digital asset classes. Whether litigation finance is correlated or affected by capital markets. He explains how more than one litigation firm can work together on a case. We discuss whether regulation of the sector is inevitable. Ways in which financial litigation works in the context of bankruptcy.  Links Mentioned in Today’s Episode:Matt Cantor on LinkedInPretiumFordham University School of Law Corporate Law Center

The rise and fall of SPACs, or Special Purpose Acquisition Companies, is a trending topic in legal and financial conversations. Why were they so attractive, and what caused some to come grinding to a halt? Today we talk about what the heck happened to SPACs! Here with us on the Bite Sized Business Law Podcast is Maria Charon. She is a corporate lawyer who started her career at renowned Wall Street law firm, Sullivan & Cromwell. Most recently, Maria has been part of a SPAC management group. Maria talks us through what a SPAC is, why they’re seemingly attractive, and what a de-SPAC merger is. She shares specifics on how SPACs function, what investors can expect, and we speculate on the effects of pending regulations from the SEC. We discuss the similarities of the SPAC trend with other past trends like the dot-com bubble and the crypto-craze and the future of the SPAC market. For all this, and more, don’t miss this informative conversation with Maria Charon.Key Points From This Episode:A quick introduction to our guest, Maria Charon.A definition for ‘SPAC’ which can also be referred to as a Blank Check Company.Maria explains why SPACs were so attractive when they first “came on the scene.”What a de-SPAC merger is.How to gain enough information to discern whether to invest or not.How SPAC investors can redeem their investments.Why SPACs came to a grinding halt.How the threat of regulation affected the SPAC market.What happens to failed SPACs.Maria explains more about SPAC sponsors and their roles.We compare the SPAC trend with other past trends (dot-com bubble and crypto-craze).How a good economy engenders a highly speculative instrument like a SPAC.The future of SPACs.Comparing SPACs to the IPO model.The nature of SPACs and the relationship between sponsor groups and retail investors.Why SPACs were attractive to non-accredited investors. What the next hot asset class could be, according to Maria.Links Mentioned in Today’s Episode:Maria Charon on LinkedInSECFordham University School of Law Corporate Law Center

Given the recent collapse of some of the major players in the crypto space, its future is uncertain. Joining us for the very first episode of the Bite Sized Business Law Podcast to discuss crypto bankruptcies and what some are calling the ‘crypto winter’, is business law professor and faculty director of Fordham University School of Law’s Corporate Law Center, Richard Squire. Richard breaks down some of the similarities that exist between the auto industry bubble, the dot-com bubble, the 2008 financial crisis, and what we’re currently seeing in the crypto space. We discuss the interconnectedness between companies and whether or not insolvency leads to insolvency before Richard sheds light on what he expects for the future of crypto. You’ll hear his thoughts on whether or not we should expect more regulation, why he doesn’t believe there is a path forward for FTX, and the likelihood of FTX’s creditors getting their money back. To find out why Richard is actually positive about the future of crypto despite its current state, tune in today!Key Points From This Episode:An introduction to Professor of Business Law, Richard Squire.Today’s topic: crypto bankruptcies or the ‘crypto winter’. Parallels between the auto industry bubble, the dot-com bubble, the 2008 financial crisis, and what’s happening currently in crypto. To what extent there will be contagion. Concerns about the Federal Home Loan Bank system lending billions to crypto companies and whether or not insolvency leads to insolvency. The expansion of the monetary base by the Federal Reserve in recent years and how this has affected what has happened in crypto.Whether or not we should expect more regulation on crypto than that which already exists.Why big firms are in favor of stricter regulations. Whether or not there’s a path forward for FTX, as its CEO believes there is.  The likelihood of the FTX creditors getting their money back. The emergence of markets where you can buy and sell FTX claims and whether or not they are specific to crypto bankruptcy.Links Mentioned in Today’s Episode:Richard Squire FTXFordham University School of Law Corporate Law Center