Featured Stories
Ropes & Gray Advises Bluegem Capital Partners on Its Acquisition of Rispo Group, a Leading Italian Platform of Premium Frozen Specialties
BOSTON, Massachusetts, Oct. 17 -- Ropes and Gray, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Ropes & Gray Advises Bluegem Capital Partners on its Acquisition of Rispo Group, a Leading Italian Platform of Premium Frozen Specialties
October 16, 2026
Ropes & Gray has advised Bluegem Capital Partners ("Bluegem"), the pan-European mid-market private equity firm specialising in real economy staple businesses, on its agreement to acquire Rispo Group ("Rispo" or "the Group"), a leading Italian producer of premium frozen specialties, from funds managed by Europe Capital Partners and advised by CS
... Show Full Article
BOSTON, Massachusetts, Oct. 17 -- Ropes and Gray, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Ropes & Gray Advises Bluegem Capital Partners on its Acquisition of Rispo Group, a Leading Italian Platform of Premium Frozen Specialties
October 16, 2026
Ropes & Gray has advised Bluegem Capital Partners ("Bluegem"), the pan-European mid-market private equity firm specialising in real economy staple businesses, on its agreement to acquire Rispo Group ("Rispo" or "the Group"), a leading Italian producer of premium frozen specialties, from funds managed by Europe Capital Partners and advised by CS& Associati.
Rispo's management team will reinvest alongside Bluegem, retaining a minority stake in the Group. The transaction is subject to customary regulatory approvals and closing conditions.
The Ropes & Gray team was led by private equity partners Cataldo Piccarreta and Giorgia Lugli with support from associates Ginevra Rebecchini and Carlo Grisostomi Travaglini, and trainees Marianna Pessi, Roberta Vitale, Costanza Cappelli, Elena Boaretto and Alessandro My. Additional support was provided by regulatory counsel Luca Amicarelli and associate Riccardo Marcolongo, and antitrust & FDI counsel Jacopo Figus Diaz.
* * *
URL: Bluegem Capital Partners
* * *
Original text here: https://www.ropesgray.com/en/news-and-events/news/2026/10/ropes-gray-advises-bluegem-capital-partners-acquisition-rispo-group
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
McGuireWoods Advises Dynamic Access in Sale to Blue Sea Capital
RICHMOND, Virginia, Oct. 17 -- McGuireWoods, a law firm, issued the following news release:
* * *
McGuireWoods Advises Dynamic Access in Sale to Blue Sea Capital
October 16, 2026
McGuireWoods served as legal counsel to Dynamic Access, a leading outsourced provider of vascular access services to hospitals and post-acute facilities across 25 states, in its acquisition by Blue Sea Capital.
Based in Dallas, Dynamic Access deploys specialized clinical teams to place and manage PICC lines, midlines and peripheral IVs on-site, complementing its services with clinical education and supply management
... Show Full Article
RICHMOND, Virginia, Oct. 17 -- McGuireWoods, a law firm, issued the following news release:
* * *
McGuireWoods Advises Dynamic Access in Sale to Blue Sea Capital
October 16, 2026
McGuireWoods served as legal counsel to Dynamic Access, a leading outsourced provider of vascular access services to hospitals and post-acute facilities across 25 states, in its acquisition by Blue Sea Capital.
Based in Dallas, Dynamic Access deploys specialized clinical teams to place and manage PICC lines, midlines and peripheral IVs on-site, complementing its services with clinical education and supply managementsupport that help facilities reduce complications and improve patient outcomes.
Partners Timothy Malloy and Greg Hawver and associate Kara Bennett led the McGuireWoods deal team. Andrew Skowronski, Ray Villani, James Schanaberger, Paul Navarro, Austen Gilbert, Janet Peyton, Stephanie Martinez, Christina Zarou, Matt Giordano, Alex Brackett and Holly Buckley assisted in the transaction.
"It was a privilege to assist Dynamic Access in this important transaction, which positions the company for future growth," Malloy said. "This was a tremendous team effort by McGuireWoods lawyers across multiple practices to successfully close this deal."
McGuireWoods is a dominant player in private equity deals involving physician practices, hospitals, outpatient and urgent-care providers, pharmacies, medical device manufacturers and distributors, and other healthcare services. The firm's M&A and private equity capabilities have earned nationwide recognition from Chambers USA and The Legal 500.
* * *
URL: Dynamic Access
* * *
Original text here: https://www.mcguirewoods.com/news/press-releases/2026/10/mcguirewoods-advises-dynamic-access-in-sale-to-blue-sea-capital/
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Littler: New York City Commission on Human Rights Adopts Final Rules Implementing Amendments to Fair Chance Act
SAN FRANCISCO, California, Oct. 17 -- Littler, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
New York City Commission on Human Rights Adopts Final Rules Implementing Amendments to Fair Chance Act
By Stephen A. Fuchs and Christine McDaniel Novak
October 16, 2026
At a Glance
* New York City's Commission on Human Rights adopted amended Fair Chance Act rules effective October 30, 2026.
* Most changes conform the Fair Chance Act regulations to statutory amendments that took effect in 2021 and prior Commission guidance, while clarifying employer procedures, identifying per se violations, and eliminating
... Show Full Article
SAN FRANCISCO, California, Oct. 17 -- Littler, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
New York City Commission on Human Rights Adopts Final Rules Implementing Amendments to Fair Chance Act
By Stephen A. Fuchs and Christine McDaniel Novak
October 16, 2026
At a Glance
* New York City's Commission on Human Rights adopted amended Fair Chance Act rules effective October 30, 2026.
* Most changes conform the Fair Chance Act regulations to statutory amendments that took effect in 2021 and prior Commission guidance, while clarifying employer procedures, identifying per se violations, and eliminatingthe early resolution process for Commission-initiated complaints.
-
On October 7, 2026, the New York City Commission on Human Rights issued final notice of its adoption of rules promulgated pursuant to the New York City Fair Chance Act./1 The Fair Chance Act, enacted in 2015 and amended in 2020, prohibits most employers from inquiring about an applicant's criminal history before making a conditional job offer. It also requires employers to follow specific procedures when considering an applicant or employee's criminal history, including providing a written individualized assessment, the "Fair Chance Act Notice," to the individual and an opportunity to respond prior to any adverse action. The new rules take effect October 30, 2026.
The updated rules respond to statutory changes to the Fair Chance Act that took effect in July 2021 and codify or clarify standards previously reflected in the Commission's Fair Chance Act Enforcement Guidance posted in July 2021. While the amendments to the rules do not impose new substantive obligations on employers, they significantly identify per se violations and eliminate the Commission's early resolution procedure for Fair Chance Act complaints.
Key Definitions and Fair Chance Analysis
Incorporating existing statutory requirements, the amended rules revise the definition of "conditional offer of employment" to mirror existing law and codify that a conditional offer of employment, promotion, or transfer may not be revoked except based upon 1) a criminal background check conducted in accordance with the New York City Human Rights Law, 2) a medical examination permitted by the Americans with Disabilities Act, or 3) information the employer could not reasonably have known before making the offer that would have caused the employer not to make the offer in the first place regardless of the criminal background check result.
By codifying the "two-tiered" process that requires clearance of an applicant's non-criminal history before a conditional offer and before any inquiry regarding an applicant's criminal history, the amended rules do not respond to employer concerns about the impracticality and inherent delays of this approach.
The amended rules also update these other key definitions:
* "Non-conviction" now applies specifically to adjournments in contemplation of dismissal (ACDs), terminations in favor of the individual, youthful offender adjudications, violations even if unsealed, specified sealed convictions, and comparable federal or out-of-state dispositions.
* "Pending case" now specifically includes any criminal accusation or arrest based on a criminal accusation that has not yet resulted in a conviction under specified state law or a comparable status in other jurisdictions if the matter has not yet been adjudicated to a verdict, resulted in a plea or been dismissed at the time of the Fair Chance Employment Analysis that must be conducted by an employer prior to taking adverse action based on an employee or applicant's criminal history. The definition clarifies that an ACD is a non-conviction and is not a pending case unless the ACD order has been revoked and the case restored for prosecution before the employer conducts the Fair Chance Employment Analysis.
Fair Chance Employment Process
Conforming the rules to existing law, the updated rules increase the minimum response period for applicants from three to five business days of receipt of the Fair Chance Act Notice by the candidate or employee, codifying the minimum five-business-day response period for employees previously reflected in Commission guidance.
Unpaid Leave Pending Investigation
While existing law allows an employer to place an employee on unpaid leave for a reasonable period while conducting the individualized assessment required by the Fair Chance Act when considering a pending case or conviction that occurred during employment, the amended rules further establish a rebuttable presumption that a reasonable period will not exceed five business days. This means that if an employee is suspended for more than five business days during the Fair Chance Act Process, this will be presumed to constitute an adverse action.
Timely Response
Codifying existing Commission guidance, the amended rules also require employers to consider information that the individual submits and to notify the individual in writing and in a timely manner if, after reviewing that information, the employer decides not to hire the applicant or to take adverse employment action against the employee.
Intentional Misrepresentation Process Clarified
The amended rules further clarify the treatment of alleged intentional misrepresentations, largely codifying existing law and Commission guidance. Before taking adverse action for a misrepresentation, an employer must provide the individual with the information supporting its determination, allow the individual at least five business days from receipt of notice to respond, and consider the response. A discrepancy between a criminal background check and self-reported criminal history does not necessarily establish an intentional misrepresentation.
Direct Relationship and Unreasonable Risk
Consistent with prior Commission guidance, the amended rules clarify the standard for determining direct relationship and unreasonable risk under the Fair Chance Employment Analysis. The direct relationship exception requires the employer first to identify a direct connection between the conduct underlying the conviction or pending case and specific job duties and responsibilities. If such a connection exists, the employer must consider all relevant Fair Chance Act factors to determine whether the concerns presented by the relationship have been mitigated.
To claim the unreasonable risk exception, the employer must apply the New York City Fair Chance employment factors, which are articulated in the statute, to determine if the risk exists. The amended rules clarify that a conviction or pending case alone generally does not establish an unreasonable risk, and the seriousness of an offense alone (which tends to be an employer's primary consideration) is not dispositive without consideration of the other applicable factors.
Pre-Hire Information and Per Se Violations
The amended rules expressly permit job advertisements and other employment materials to encourage individuals with criminal records to apply and permit employers to respond when applicants ask whether criminal history checks are conducted.
The amended rules also identify conduct that constitutes a per se violation of the Fair Chance requirements. For example, using employment forms or applications that request or refer to criminal history before making a conditional offer constitutes a per se violation even if the materials contain a disclaimer or instruct applicants to skip the criminal history questions, unless another federal, state, or local law requires the language.
In addition, the amended rules expressly make it a per se violation to fail to conduct a new Fair Chance Employment Analysis before adverse action after an applicant or employee identifies a material error in the criminal history used in the analysis. Conducting a new analysis applying the Fair Chance Act factors when a deficiency has been noted can be a way for employers to mitigate any deficiencies in their initial review.
Exemptions
The amended rules add detail on exemptions for laws requiring criminal background checks or employment bars, largely codifying prior Commission guidance. A mandatory bar exemption allows employers to disqualify employees without a Fair Chance Act review only based on criminal offenses that the applicable law considers disqualifying for the specific role (for example, crimes of dishonesty and certain positions in banks). Other adverse actions not required by the legal mandate remain subject to the Fair Chance Employment Process. While an employer may conduct a criminal background check before the conditional offer of employment when required by law, if the law does not require adverse action, the employer must complete the remaining applicable Fair Chance steps before taking adverse action.
The amended rules also reflect prior guidance providing that an employer generally may not state that a background check is required in a job advertisement unless another law explicitly requires such a statement.
Enforcement
Unlike many of the changes discussed above, the amended rules make a direct change to the existing regulatory enforcement framework by eliminating the Commission's early resolution process for Commission-initiated Fair Chance complaints. The former regulatory provisions establishing the procedure and its penalty schedule are deleted. The Commission explains that the change is intended to make enforcement of Fair Chance Employment protections consistent with other Human Rights Law protections now that the law has been in effect for a significant period.
Action Items for Employers
In light of the amended rules, employers can consider taking the following steps:
* Review and revise, as needed, existing criminal history and background check processes, forms and screening procedures for compliance with the amended rules.
* Update, as needed, Fair Chance procedures for response periods, review of supplemental or corrected criminal history information, and final adverse action decisions.
* Conduct direct training of those personnel responsible for hiring, background check adjudication and criminal history review on the clarified direct relationship, unreasonable risk, and intentional misrepresentation standards.
* * *
See Footnotes
1/ N.Y.C. Admin Code Sec.8-102 and 8-107(11) et seq.
* * *
Authors
Stephen A. Fuchs
Shareholder
New York
sfuchs@littler.com
* * *
Christine McDaniel Novak
Knowledge Management Counsel
cnovak@littler.com
* * *
Original text here: https://www.littler.com/news-analysis/asap/new-york-city-commission-human-rights-adopts-final-rules-implementing-amendments
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Littler: FMLA Leave and RIF Decisions - Why the Record Matters
SAN FRANCISCO, California, Oct. 17 -- Littler, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
FMLA Leave and RIF Decisions: Why the Record Matters
By Brittney Polo and Rocio Blanco Garcia
October 16, 2026
A reduction in force may be driven by legitimate business needs, but an unclear selection process or inconsistent internal communications can turn a defensible decision into a jury question. A recent decision from the Northern District of Georgia offers a practical reminder for employers: When an employee using protected leave is selected for a RIF, objective criteria and a consistent contemporaneous
... Show Full Article
SAN FRANCISCO, California, Oct. 17 -- Littler, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
FMLA Leave and RIF Decisions: Why the Record Matters
By Brittney Polo and Rocio Blanco Garcia
October 16, 2026
A reduction in force may be driven by legitimate business needs, but an unclear selection process or inconsistent internal communications can turn a defensible decision into a jury question. A recent decision from the Northern District of Georgia offers a practical reminder for employers: When an employee using protected leave is selected for a RIF, objective criteria and a consistent contemporaneousrecord are critical.
In Donald v. Toppan USA, Inc., the plaintiff had used intermittent FMLA leave for several years to care for his wife. The company implemented a RIF in response to a significant production slowdown. After his use of leave increased, the company included the plaintiff in the RIF and notified him of his termination on a day he was using FMLA leave. The plaintiff was one of 15 employees selected, and the company conducted additional layoffs the following year. The company maintained that his selection was based on his relative seniority among production supervisors.
The contemporaneous record, however, raised questions about that explanation. Draft post-RIF organizational charts did not consistently reflect whether the plaintiff would remain employed, and internal communications suggested that his supervisor did not want to retain him despite acknowledging that he was performing satisfactorily. Other employees in comparable production roles also remained employed.
Although the court disposed of the plaintiff's discrimination claims, it allowed his FMLA interference and retaliation claims to proceed. The timing of the termination, the supervisor's knowledge of the leave, the internal communications, and evidence suggesting that other positions may have remained available created factual disputes about whether the plaintiff's FMLA leave affected his selection. The court also concluded that the company's history of approving his leave did not foreclose the possibility that the leave was later considered during the RIF process.
Donald is a helpful reminder that employers planning a RIF should:
* Define the selection criteria before making individual decisions and retain documentation showing how the criteria were applied.
* Review draft organizational charts, emails, and other contemporaneous communications for consistency with the stated rationale.
* Examine whether similarly situated employees or comparable positions are being treated differently and document legitimate reasons for any distinctions.
* Conduct an additional legal and HR review when a selected employee recently used protected leave or engaged in other protected activity.
Donald does not suggest that employees using FMLA leave are insulated from an otherwise lawful RIF. It does underscore, however, that the stated business reason must match the record. The same takeaway that should guide the process at the outset should guide the final review: Use objective criteria, apply them consistently, and ensure the contemporaneous record supports the decision.
Employers considering a reduction in force--particularly one involving employees who recently used protected leave or engaged in other protected activity--should consult employment counsel to review the proposed selection criteria, supporting documentation, and potential risk areas before decisions are finalized.
* * *
Authors
Brittney I. Polo
Associate
Miami
bpolo@littler.com
* * *
Rocio Blanco Garcia
Shareholder
Miami
rblancogarcia@littler.com
* * *
Original text here: https://www.littler.com/news-analysis/asap/fmla-leave-and-rif-decisions-why-record-matters
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Hughes Hubbard: Jeremy Paner Discusses Potential Easing of Russian and Iranian 'Shadow Fleet' Sanctions With Financial Times
NEW YORK, Oct. 17 -- Hughes Hubbard and Reed, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
October 16, 2026
Jeremy Paner Discusses Potential Easing of Russian and Iranian 'Shadow Fleet' Sanctions with Financial Times
U.S. considers measures that could allow sanctioned tankers to return to global trade.
Highlights
* The U.S. is considering measures to ease restrictions on sanctioned "shadow fleet" tankers linked to Russia and Iran.
* The measures could include authorizing the sale of blacklisted vessels to legitimate operators and removing sanctions on those vessels on a case-by-case basis.
*
... Show Full Article
NEW YORK, Oct. 17 -- Hughes Hubbard and Reed, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
October 16, 2026
Jeremy Paner Discusses Potential Easing of Russian and Iranian 'Shadow Fleet' Sanctions with Financial Times
U.S. considers measures that could allow sanctioned tankers to return to global trade.
Highlights
* The U.S. is considering measures to ease restrictions on sanctioned "shadow fleet" tankers linked to Russia and Iran.
* The measures could include authorizing the sale of blacklisted vessels to legitimate operators and removing sanctions on those vessels on a case-by-case basis.
*Paner discussed how facilitating the purchase of sanctioned tankers could avoid issuing new authorizations linked to Russia.
-
Jeremy Paner spoke with the Financial Times about potential changes to U.S. sanctions on "shadow fleet" tankers - vessels used to transport sanctioned oil - linked to Russia and Iran.
The article examines measures under consideration that could allow sanctioned vessels to be sold to legitimate buyers and returned to the global commercial shipping industry as the administration seeks to increase shipping capacity and lower fuel costs.
Paner said that by facilitating the purchase of sanctioned tankers in the shadow fleet, the administration could potentially remove the "bad look" of issuing new authorizations linked to Russia.
Read the article (https://www.ft.com/content/6dfa9879-589a-4af3-9374-b546a945a219?syn-25a6b1a6=1).
* * *
Featured Lawyers
Jeremy P. Paner
Partner
Locations
Washington, D.C.
jeremy.paner@hugheshubbard.com
202/721-4614
* * *
Original text here: https://www.hugheshubbard.com/news-insights/insights/jeremy-paner-discusses-potential-easing-of-russian-and-iranian-shadow-fleet-sanctions-with-financial-times
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Hooper, Lundy and Bookman: Charles Oppenheim To Speak at HCCA Healthcare Enforcement Compliance Conference
LOS ANGELES, California, Oct. 17 -- Hooper, Lundy and Bookman, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Charles Oppenheim To Speak at HCCA Healthcare Enforcement Compliance Conference
10.16.26
Charles Oppenheim will present "Stark, Anti-kickback and EKRA Developments," on October 27, 2026, for Health Care Compliance Association (HCCA)'s Healthcare Enforcement Compliance Conference.
This session will cover:
* The differences between the requirements of Stark, Anti-Kickback Statute, and EKRA
* Recent regulatory and enforcement updates to compliance risk assessments
* Common pitfalls that
... Show Full Article
LOS ANGELES, California, Oct. 17 -- Hooper, Lundy and Bookman, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Charles Oppenheim To Speak at HCCA Healthcare Enforcement Compliance Conference
10.16.26
Charles Oppenheim will present "Stark, Anti-kickback and EKRA Developments," on October 27, 2026, for Health Care Compliance Association (HCCA)'s Healthcare Enforcement Compliance Conference.
This session will cover:
* The differences between the requirements of Stark, Anti-Kickback Statute, and EKRA
* Recent regulatory and enforcement updates to compliance risk assessments
* Common pitfalls thatlead to violations under these statutes
* * *
Professional
Charles B. Oppenheim
Partner
Los Angeles & San Francisco
* * *
Original text here: https://hooperlundy.com/charles-oppenheim-to-speak-at-hcca-healthcare-enforcement-compliance-conference/
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
Dorsey's London Corporate Practice and Partners Earn Chambers UK 2027 Rankings
MINNEAPOLIS, Minnesota, Oct. 17 -- Dorsey and Whitney, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Dorsey's London Corporate Practice and Partners Earn Chambers UK 2027 Rankings
October 15, 2026
Dorsey & Whitney's London Corporate team and two of its Partners, Kate Francis and Mark Taylor, have been recognized by Chambers & Partners for Corporate/M&A in its recently released annual guide, Chambers UK 2027.
Dorsey's London office has once again earned a Band 3 ranking in the Corporate/M&A: pound sterling10-100 million category, reflecting the continued strength of the Firm's Corporate practice
... Show Full Article
MINNEAPOLIS, Minnesota, Oct. 17 -- Dorsey and Whitney, a law firm, issued the following news:
* * *
Dorsey's London Corporate Practice and Partners Earn Chambers UK 2027 Rankings
October 15, 2026
Dorsey & Whitney's London Corporate team and two of its Partners, Kate Francis and Mark Taylor, have been recognized by Chambers & Partners for Corporate/M&A in its recently released annual guide, Chambers UK 2027.
Dorsey's London office has once again earned a Band 3 ranking in the Corporate/M&A: pound sterling10-100 million category, reflecting the continued strength of the Firm's Corporate practiceand its experience advising clients on complex domestic and cross-border transactions.
Kate Francis maintained her Band 1 ranking in Corporate/M&A: pound sterling10-100 million. She holds expertise in domestic and cross-border M&A. She is also active in capital markets transactions, where she assists clients with IPOs and placings on AIM.
Mark Taylor earned a Band 4 ranking in Corporate/M&A: pound sterling10-100 million. Mark comes recommended for his strong practice advising on public and private M&A and issues governed by the Takeover Code. He is active in technology, media, and real estate sectors.
The rankings highlight the London Corporate team's continued commitment to providing commercially focused legal counsel and exceptional client service.
Chambers & Partners surveys and interviews clients and lawyers across the globe to identify leading law firms and attorneys. Rankings assess key qualities, including technical legal ability, professional conduct, client service, commercial astuteness, diligence, and commitment.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.dorsey.com/news/dorseys-london-corporate-practice-and-partners-earn-chambers-uk-2027-rankings
[Category: BizLaw/Legal]
