Mitchell

December 17, 2008 | New York Law Journal

Clyde Mitchell, adjunct professor of banking law at Fordham University School of Law, writes: From a federal banking legislation, regulatory and market perspective, 2008 has been "The Year That Was," a dizzying frenzy of activity that, hopefully, we will not see again. Never before have we experienced such an explosion of legislative and regulatory activity that so abruptly altered our financial system.

By Clyde Mitchell

15 minute read

May 14, 2002 | New York Law Journal

T he tragic events of Sept. 11 had a dramatic impact on our financial and political systems. One of the government`s major responses was the enactment of the USA-PATRIOT Act (act) which was approved by the House on Oct. 24, 2001 by a 356-66 vote and by the Senate on Oct. 25 by a 98-1 vote and signed by President George W. Bush on Oct. 26.

By Clyde Mitchell

14 minute read

December 21, 2006 | Law.com

The First Session of the new 110th Congress will bring us new committee chairpersons of the House Financial Services Committee and the Senate Banking Committee, with a Democratic majority for each. While forecasts have been made regarding several pending issues, not much has been said on possible restructuring of federal bank regulators. Fordham Law School adjunct professor Clyde Mitchell details the current system of multiple, overlapping regulators and discusses the possibilities of a reorganization.

By Clyde Mitchell

13 minute read

April 08, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Clyde Mitchell, adjunct professor of banking law at Fordham Law School, discusses the movement to anoint the Federal Reserve Board as our systemic risk regulator, although other candidates, such as the FDIC, the OCC, the SEC or a new entity, also have their proponents. The determination may rest upon exactly what will the SRR do: will it be responsible for the "whole nine yards" - spotting the risk-prone entity, trying to supervise it out of the problem and, if unsuccessful, taking it over, and then either winding it up or selling it - or just the first and second steps?

By Clyde Mitchell

15 minute read

October 15, 2008 | New York Law Journal

Clyde Mitchell, adjunct professor of banking law at Fordham University School of Law, writes: The financial services world is standing on its head. Each Monday brings us some new and startling development. The key players and regulators are reacting. What has happened since March? What can we expect? This truly was "the eight months that was!"

By Clyde Mitchell

18 minute read

October 18, 2006 | New York Law Journal

Clyde Mitchell, adjunct professor of banking law at Fordham Law School, writes that virtually the only major financial services legislation enacted this year was the Federal Deposit Insurance reform legislation. Since the first session of Congress basically has come to an end, the only time remaining is the lame duck session in November.

By Clyde Mitchell

16 minute read

June 18, 2002 | New York Law Journal

O n Jan. 3, the Federal Reserve Board and the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) issued for public comment their (agencies) joint proposal that would permit Financial Holding Companies (FHCs) and financial subsidiaries of national banks to engage in real estate brokerage and real estate management. Extensive comments were received and, at the request of a number of interested persons, the comment period was extended from March 2 through May 1, 2001. This topic originally was covered in my June 20, 2001 a

By Clyde Mitchell

15 minute read

March 27, 2006 | New Jersey Law Journal

Purchasers of properties subjected to a discharge of hazardous substances too often proceed with the mistaken belief that they will be protected from future liability for cleanup costs as long as the seller has, or will receive, a "No Further Action Letter" from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.

By Mitchell H. Kizner and Donna T. Urban

8 minute read

October 10, 2008 | New Jersey Law Journal

A discussion of YouTube's handling of intellectual property rights.

By Cathryn A. Mitchell

6 minute read

July 17, 2002 | The Legal Intelligencer

The EPA has developed internal guidance identifying that in most cases, Prospective Purchaser Agreements are no longer necessary. With the recent enactment of the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act, EPA believes that the act`s liability protection to prospective purchasers of contaminated property eliminates the need for PPAs with a few limited exceptions.

By Stacy A. Mitchell

11 minute read