Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Features
Law firms are starting to spend on technology again, focusing on projects that will help the enterprise run more smoothly and efficiently. Not that many years ago, before the economic downturn, firms were toying with Web-based systems to manage client relationships and other newfangled ideas. In the lean years, those projects fell by the wayside, and firms show no signs of reviving them anytime soon. <br>The central theme of the ninth annual survey conducted by Legal Tech's sibling publication AmLaw Tech, is simple: Firms are making roof repairs rather than remodeling the kitchen.
Features
The U.S. Supreme Court has long recognized that forum selection clauses are enforceable. These clauses have become "boilerplate" in all types of commercial contracts, since today's business reality requires that companies transact business with each other in multiple legal jurisdictions. Of course, once a dispute does arise, the selected forum is often more convenient and desirable for one party than the other. So the case law is replete with decisions on whether and to what extent these clauses are enforceable.<br>So how do you make your forum selection stick?
Features
In my experience with complex business litigation, I have seen my clients make some brilliant business litigation decisions, and I have seen some less than brilliant decisions. Some are critical and can spell the difference between success and failure. <br>In particular, I have repeatedly seen the same five business litigation mistakes
Attorney-client privilege should technically apply equally to in-house and outside counsel. However, it has been narrowed in the context of in-house counsel, partly due to the fear that mere participation of in-house counsel will be used to seal off disclosure of information about the basis for business transactions simply by funneling their communications through an attorney. <br>Determining when the attorney-client privilege applies to in-house counsel is a fact-specific analysis complicated by different roles that in-house counsel play.
Features
In 1998, the Supreme Court reminded employers that "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." Today, as a result of <i>Faragher v. City of Boca Raton</i>, <i>Burlington Indus. v. Ellerth</i>, and the many cases that followed, in-house counsel are responsible for ensuring that their companies avoid harassment and, if it unfortunately occurs, what steps can be taken to preserve the <i>Faragher/Ellerth</i> affirmative defense. <br>Every in-house counsel should adopt these nine steps to prevent and defend against a harassment claim.
Features
Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.
The number of total bankruptcy petitions filed for the 12-month period ending June 30, 2004 has decreased for the first time since 2000 over this time period, according to the latest figures prepared by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
Talk about a balance of power. Debtors want to sell assets for maximum value. Bidders want to buy cheaply and with finality. While debtors want flexible auctions, if the rules are open-ended, bidders will stay home. So what happens to bidder confidence when, after the auction concludes, but before the sale is approved, a late bidder offers more money? Bankruptcy courts must weigh the potential benefits to the estate against the reasonable expectations of the auction participants and the impact of accepting a late bid on the integrity of bankruptcy auctions. Recently, the Seventh Circuit examined this tension in <i>Corporate Assets, Inc. v. Paloian</i>, 368 F.3d 761 (7th Cir. 2004) (<i>Paloian</i>) [as analysed in last month's issue].
Features
There has been a perceptible increase in the number of bankruptcy transactions taking place with the underlying arrangements being placed under seal. In other instances, the debtor indicates in its motion seeking approval of the transaction that it will not be providing the underlying agreement on which the transaction is based except to the major parties in the case (typically the judge, the creditors' committee, the DIP lenders and the United States Trustee). The burden then shifts to parties in interest to seek to obtain the information if they desire to review it. Part One of a Two-Part Article.
On Aug. 25, 2004, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) released its long-anticipated report on its proposed changes to the FTC Rule on Franchising and Business Opportunity Ventures (FTC Rule). When the new FTC Rule comes into effect, franchisors will have to make significant changes to their existing disclosure documents and follow new rules for how and when they are delivered to prospective franchisees. There are also new exemptions for large transactions and large franchisees, and the FTC Rule will not apply to international franchise locations.