Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

We are Working in a Virtual, Video-Conferencing World – But What About Wiretapping?

Businesses and other organizations often have a need or desire to record telephone conversations related to their business interests and customer dealings; however, this practice is not always permissible as federal and state laws vary on this issue. Knowing and understanding your jurisdiction’s rules and regulations on this practice is essential to remaining in compliance with the law. 

Under the federal Wiretap Act, phone conversations typically may be recorded as long as one party to the conversation consents. Exceptions to this general rule exist, however, including when the consenting party intends to use the recording for criminal or tortious purposes. 

With that said, a state law that varies with the federal by requiring a more stringent two-party consent standard will supersede federal law. Moreover, state laws which do follow the federal one-party standard, but address and outline allow different or additional exceptions to the standard will rule in that regard as well. 

It should further be noted that these laws extend to virtual meetings as well, including those conducted through video-conferencing technologies such as Zoom, Microsoft Teams, etc. — even if the purpose of the meeting is for educational and/or training programs. As popularity in the use of these platforms is on the rise, businesses should be mindful of the civil and/or criminal liabilities associated with the use of these technologies, particularly when seeking to record sessions.

So, what should you do if you believe that you’ve been recorded? Can you ask if you’re being recorded, and does the person answering have to be honest in their response? Unsurprisingly, the answers to these questions vary by jurisdiction as well depending on how strict of a standard your state follows. A one-party consent state has different and more lenient requirements than a two-party consent state. 

Penalties for failing to follow any of the above-mentioned federal and/or state wiretapping laws are serious, so ensuring notice and consent before recording as required can mean the difference between compliance and potential fines as well as prison time. 

Knowing and understanding the implications and permissibility of recording phone and/or video conferencing conversations is increasingly important in light of ongoing stay-at-home orders leading to the growing use of these technologies. If you have any questions regarding the scope of your specific jurisdiction’s law on these issues, please contact Amanda L. Waesch, Esq. at alwaesch@bmdllc.com.

Explosive Growth in Pot of Gold Opportunity for Bank (and Other) Cannabis Lenders Driving Erosion of the Barriers

Our original article on bank lending to the cannabis industry anticipated that the convergence of interest between banks and the cannabis industry would draw more and larger banks to the industry. Banks were awash in liquidity with limited deployment options, while bankable cannabis businesses had rapidly growing needs for more and lower cost credit. Since then, the pot of gold opportunity for banks to lend into the cannabis industry has grown exponentially due to a combination of market constraints on equity causing a dramatic shift to debt and the ever-increasing capital needs of one of the country’s fastest growing industries. At the same time, hurdles to entry of new banks are being systematically cleared as the yellow brick road to the cannabis industry’s access to the financial markets is being paved, brick by brick, by the progressively increasing number and size of banks that are now entering the market.

2021 EEOC Charge Statistics: Retaliation & Impact of Remote Work

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) released its detailed information on workplace discrimination charges it received in 2021. Unsurprisingly, for the second year in a row, the total number of charges decreased as COVID-19 either shut down workplaces or disconnected employees from each other. In 2021, the agency received a total of approximately 61,000 workplace discrimination charges - the fewest in 25 years by a wide margin. For reference, the agency received over 67,000 charges in 2020, and averaged almost 90,000 charges per year over the previous 10 years.

Ohio’s Managed Care Overhaul Delayed – New Implementation Timeline

At the direction of Governor Mike DeWine, the Ohio Department of Medicaid (ODM) launched the Medicaid Managed Care Procurement process in 2019. ODM’s stated vision for the procurement was to focus on people and not just the business of managed care. This is the first structural change to Ohio’s managed care system since the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' (CMS) approval of Ohio’s Medicaid program in 2005. Initially, all of the new managed care programs were supposed to be implemented starting on July 1, 2022. However, ODM Director Maureen Corcoran recently confirmed that this date will be pushed back for several managed care-related programs.

Laboratory Specimen Collection Arrangements with Contract Hospitals - OIG Advisory Opinion 22-09

On April 28, 2022, the Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General (“OIG”) published an Advisory Opinion[1] in which it evaluated a proposed arrangement where a network of clinical laboratories (the “Requestor”) would compensate hospitals (each a “Contract Hospital”) for specimen collection, processing, and handling services (“Collection Services”) for laboratory tests furnished by the Requestor (the “Proposed Arrangement”). The OIG concluded that the Proposed Arrangement would generate prohibited remuneration under the federal Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”) if the requisite intent were present. This is due to both the possibility that the proposed per-patient-encounter fee would be used to induce or reward referrals to Requestor and the associated risk of improperly steering patients to Requestor.

Property Owner Protection from Tax Valuation Challenges

New legislation provides significant new protections for commercial property owners against challenges to valuation primarily by local school boards and prohibiting side agreements to avoid tax valuation changes. The Ohio Legislature has approved House Bill 126 which will go into effect July 2022 but will effectively apply to the 2023 tax valuation year.