Features
When to Conduct Voir Dire of Expert Witnesses
Last month, we discussed tactical considerations when challenging expert witnesses' qualifications. This month, we focus on the optimal time to conduct <i>voir dire</i>.
Features
Med Mal News
National news of interest to you and your practice.
Recent Developments from Around the States
National cases of interest to your practice.
Recent Developments in Executive Compensation
Although executive compensation has been the subject of evolving reform for several years, the bright spotlight of public attention is now focused on this issue, due in part to the bursting of the stock market bubble, the collapse of Enron, and a number of other highly publicized corporate scandals. The image of executives enjoying excessive compensation packages as revenues and earnings decline, and stock values of the companies they manage plummet, is a dangerously common stereotype.
Features
Bullies in the Workplace
Bullying isn't just a playground issue. In an era of declining unionization, job insecurity, and the global profit squeeze, bullying has become a serious workplace problem, even though workplace bullies usually prefer memos, informal disciplinary meetings and grinding criticism to spitballs. Left unchecked, on-the-job abuse adversely affects both employers and employees. Current legal theories, though, are inadequate to address this recent phenomenon.
Features
National Litigation Hotline
Recent cases of importance to your practice.
Investors May Be Liable to WARN Act Plaintiffs
Major investors in companies that commit violations of the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act may not be immune to liability, according to a federal court sitting in the Southern District of New York. <i>Vogt v. Greenmarine Holding, LLC</i>, No. 02 Civ. 2059 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 1, 2004). Relying on Department of Labor (DOL) regulations, the court denied a motion to dismiss the claims of a class of plaintiffs who were terminated by a bankrupt company against the investors in the bankrupt entity.
The Bankruptcy Hotline
Recent cases of importance to you and your practice.
Features
Critical Ruling on Compensation from Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has held that Bankruptcy Code Section 330(a)(1) does not allow a Chapter 7 debtor's attorney to be compensated from the estate unless the attorney is employed by the Trustee with the approval of the Bankruptcy Court. Lamie v. United States Trustee, 2000 WL 110846 (U.S. 2004). This decision conclusively ends the controversy over the 1994 amendments to that Section, and puts Chapter 7 debtors' counsel on notice that, if not retained pursuant to Section 327, they are on their own with respect to fees.
What Should You Know About the Rules of Evidence?
In last month's issue, we discussed the fact that bankruptcy lawyers may think they do not have to worry about the rules of evidence ' and we then went on to prove otherwise. The Federal Rules of Evidence apply to most issues that arise in bankruptcy cases, according to Rule 9017 of the Federal rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. We discussed two of the four useful subjects under these rules: attorney-client privilege, and attorney work-product doctrine. Part Two of this article, below, discusses settlement offers and affidavits.
Need Help?
- Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
- Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.
MOST POPULAR STORIES
- A Lawyer's System for Active ReadingActive reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.Read More ›
- The Brave New World of Cybersecurity Due Diligence in Mergers and Acquisitions: Pitfalls and OpportunitiesLike poorly-behaved school children, new technologies and intellectual property (IP) are increasingly disrupting the M&A establishment. Cybersecurity has become the latest disruptive newcomer to the M&A party.Read More ›
- The 'Sophisticated Insured' DefenseA majority of courts consider the <i>contra proferentem</i> doctrine to be a pillar of insurance law. The doctrine requires ambiguous terms in an insurance policy to be construed against the insurer and in favor of coverage for the insured. A prominent rationale behind the doctrine is that insurance policies are usually standard-form contracts drafted entirely by insurers.Read More ›
- Removing Restrictive Covenants In New YorkIn Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?Read More ›
- The New York Uniform Commercial Code Comes of AgeParties in large non-consumer transactions with no connection whatsoever to New York often choose its law to govern their transactions, and New York statutes permit them to do so. What most people do not know is that the New York Uniform Commercial Code is outdated.Read More ›