LJN Newsletters

From what I've observed, most firms would be better off if they scrapped their marketing plans, projects, budgets and staffs completely. Save the money and spend it on summer associate swag, the holiday party, better seats at sporting events ' whatever. Why? Because marketing relies on something that many firms seem content to do without ' purpose.

After years of foot-dragging, large U.S. law firms have embraced the mainstream business practice of countering rising health care costs by steering employees and partners into managed care plans. A recent comprehensive survey of large law firms' employee benefit practices conducted by The Segal Company shows, among other findings, that less than one in five firms offers a traditional indemnity health plan today. The survey also found that health plans at law firms continue to reflect the special needs of these professional service organizations as a whole ' as well as those of the individual firms that participated.

A common expression in the tax arena is the "red flag" ' the concern that a tax deduction is so large, or the tax benefits of a transaction are so favorable to the taxpayer, that it is comparable to waving a red flag at the IRS, inviting scrutiny and possible adverse consequences. Over the past few years, certain retirement plans created under the provisions of Section 412(i) of the Internal Revenue Code have been designed using methods that are questionable, at best, in terms of compliance with the tax code and regulations. This problem became so pervasive that it was widely anticipated the IRS would respond to the red flags, and put an end to the abuses. Last month, it happened. IRS guidance and proposed regulations were enacted to try to get everyone to play by the rules. Not that the rules are bad; a 412(i) plan could still be right for you.

As previously reported in LFPBR, several states have upheld the forfeiture of non-qualified retirement benefits otherwise payable to a partner choosing to compete with the firm. In Borteck v. Riker, Danzig, Scherer, Hyland, and Perretti, LLP (A-31-03) (April 5, 2004), the New Jersey Supreme Court unanimously concluded that the retirement provisions of a law firm's partnership agreement did not violate N.J. Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC) 5.6, and held the competing partner to lose his retirement benefits. The case provides further guidance for firms in designing, drafting and defending enforceable forfeiture-for-competition agreements.

Movement among major law firms and corporations.

This article begins a feature that periodically will examine a specific section or clause in the Uniform Franchise Offering Circular (UFOC). In a UFOC, a typical third-party beneficiary clause reads like this: "No third-party beneficiaries. Nothing in this Agreement is intended, nor will be deemed, to confer rights or remedies upon any person or legal entity not a party to this Agreement."

Highlights of the latest equipment leasing news from around the country.

Best practices" seem to be on the tips of everyone's tongues these days. At the recent ELA Executive Roundtable Conference, the concept of applying best practices to leasing companies was a key focus of discussion. This trend is a clear endorsement of continually benchmarking performance and learning from others what works and what doesn't.