Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Custody litigators use expert testimony and tests to influence the court's decision about which parent should have custody of the child(ren). Psychologists and the MMPI2 test are two tools frequently utilized, but they should be viewed with caution. The American Psychology Association Guidelines for Use in Custody Cases (Guidelines), which were promulgated by the American Psychological Association in 1994, have been a source of discussion and controversy in the courtroom since they were first published. Are they guidelines or are they mandatory directives for the approaches to be taken by the evaluator in the custody evaluation process? For those of us who handle custody litigation, a recent case in Pennsylvania is instructive.
Features
Over the years, there has been an increase in estate litigation, especially in second-marriage situations where the children are often close in age to the second spouse. Primarily because of increased wealth, we have a more litigious society. However, litigation is not only about money, it is also about emotions. Litigation is on the rise not only between the surviving spouse and children, but also among the children themselves, especially when one of them was actively engaged in a business with the decedent. There are also emotional upsets when a parent attempts to take into consideration the wealth of his or her children.
Features
As zealous advocates, lawyers should try to influence custody evaluators -- within limits. Here are some suggestions from someone who has fielded such attempts and talked extensively with other experts about them.
Features
In many cases, a creditor in a bankruptcy case (the 'Primary Creditor') has the benefit of a guaranty, an escrow, or a letter of credit provided by a third party (the 'Subrogee') to which it can turn in order to satisfy its claim against the debtor. When the Subrogee pays the debtor's obligation to the Primary Creditor after the debtor has filed a petition in bankruptcy, the Subrogee will in most cases be entitled to assert a subrogation claim against the debtor in the bankruptcy case. Below, we discuss the relevant considerations in determining whether a subrogation claim is valid.
Without any reservation, it is safe to say that insolvency crisis facing the U.S. auto industry ' from myriad Tier 2 suppliers right up to the legacy-burdened OEMs ' has become the cause c'l'bre of the professional restructuring community, and for objectively good reason. In this year alone, at least eight parts makers (among them, Collins & Aikman Corp., Meridian Automotive Systems, Inc., Tower Automotive, Inc., Jernberg Industries, Inc., Harvard Industries, Inc., Jacobs Industries, Inc., and Delphi Corp.) filed for Chapter 11 relief. And many industry experts believe that these cases represent merely a harbinger of even bigger things to come.
Bankruptcy claims traders are currently on the lookout for a decision from the Enron bankruptcy court that could add significant uncertainty to distressed debt markets. The court has under advisement the issue of whether claims sold post-petition are subject to disallowance under ' 502(d) or equitable subordination as a result of pre-petition conduct or receipt of avoidable transfers by the transferor.
Features
Recent rulings from around the country.
Features
Courts and administrative law judges have begun grappling with issues concerning the scope of SOX's whistleblower provisions in two types of situations that any U.S.-based multinational corporation might encounter: 1) where the whistleblower is located and the whistleblowing occurred outside the U.S., and 2) where the whistleblower's employer is a nonpublic subsidiary of a publicly traded company.
In its first employment-related decision of this term, the U.S. Supreme Court held in <i>IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez</i> that the time food-processing workers spend walking between changing and production areas is compensable under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), as amended by the Portal-to-Portal Act. <i>IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez</i>, 2005 WL 2978311 (U.S., Nov. 8). The Court's ruling disposed of appeals from both the Ninth and First Circuits, and resolves a split among the circuit courts.
National rulings of interest to you and your practice.
