Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Special Advisory Bulletin on Contractual Joint Ventures (SAB) is the OIG's latest reiteration in a series of missives that invoke the Federal anti-kickback statute, 42 U.S.C. ' 1320a-7b(b) (AKS). It's all part of an attempt to chill the proliferation of business arrangements between companies that are in the business of supplying medical equipment, pharmacy items, and/or services to patients (generically, 'suppliers') and providers such as hospitals and physicians (generically, 'providers') who are in a position to refer or 'steer' patients to a supplier. On April 23, 2003, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) for the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) issued the SAB, which describes various arrangements as 'potentially problematic.' See http://oig.hhs.gov/fraud/docs/alertsandbulletins/042303SABJointVentures. While many suppliers and providers may choose to alter or terminate their arrangements as a pragmatic reaction to the SAB, the conceptual underpinnings of the SAB are suspect themselves.
Background
In 1989, the OIG issued a special fraud alert challenging arrangements between durable medical equipment (DME) suppliers and physicians who refer patients for DME. Apparently concerned that the fraud alert had not had the desired effect, the OIG reprinted the fraud alert, along with several others, in 1994. See 59 FR 65372 (Dec. 19, 1994). Nine years later, the SAB expounds upon the same types of arrangements as the fraud alert, but expands the factual scenarios in which they arise as well as the discussion of the purported evils of such arrangements.
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.