Account

Sign in to access your account and subscription

LJN Newsletters

  • Everything contained in this issue in an easy-to-read list.

    May 31, 2005ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
  • All the latest you need to know.

    May 31, 2005ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
  • New York municipalities have often conditioned development approvals on developers' agreements to provide services ordinarily provided by the municipality. These agreements are typically silent on the tax consequences of the municipality's failure to provide services. Under what circumstances, then, can landowners challenge the municipality's power to collect taxes for services the municipality does not provide? Two cases recently decided -- one by the Court of Appeals and one by the Second Department -- shed light on that question.

    May 31, 2005Stewart E. Sterk
  • Recent rulings you need to know.

    May 31, 2005ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
  • Analysis of the most recent decisions.

    May 31, 2005ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
  • Law firms carry on a juggling act when it comes to associate development. Associates grumble that they receive insufficient training. They worry not only about their competence to deal with their current assignments, but whether they will have marketable skills for the future. Partners find this frustrating and bewildering. Their firms have large catalogs of courses, provided both in-house and externally at significant cost to the firm. What more can associates want?
    Is there a way to break the cycle? Sure, but someone's got to have the courage to do something different. Here's one approach.

    May 31, 2005Elaine Barlas
  • Much has been written about the popular culture of the "baby-boom" generation (those born in the post WWII era and now in their 50s-60s), but not much about that age group in law firms and how to take them into account in long-term firm strategy. Part One of this article looked at a model (Model 1) with Partner A ' a full-share equity "baby-boomer" partner (BBP) and rainmaker with a substantial client base. Part Two looks at a BBP who is well-respected, and while not a great business generator, has technical skill.

    May 31, 2005Sheldon I. Banoff
  • A covenant not to compete is an increasingly popular device employers use to bind employees not to work for, or as, a direct competitor. Such covenants are most often found in employment contracts, but they can also be a separate document, signed by the employee at hiring, during employment, or upon leaving. However, in many states, a covenant not to compete cannot stand alone as a binding agreement, but must be ancillary to an employment or other type of contract that provides some benefit to the employee.
    While covenants not to compete may be used by employers in certain court-delineated circumstances, ethical rules specifically bar the application of such restrictive covenants to attorneys.

    May 31, 2005Debra L. Raskin and Stephanie A. Darigan
  • Ex-partners Lose Bid To Speed Funds from Fish & Neave
    Nixon Peabody Employees On Board at Piper
    Pillsbury Strikes Oil

    May 31, 2005ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
  • So much has been written about knowledge management in the past 10 years and so many products purporting to enable knowledge management have been pushed on the legal community, that I am not sure that the term is relevant anymore. However, I have always thought some of the main tenets of KM make a lot of sense.
    An exciting project that we are rolling out at Baker Donelson starting this month conforms to those main tenets of KM.

    May 31, 2005John D. Green