Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Features
<b><i>Remember the father who challenged the Pledge of Allegiance? He's back.</i></b>
Features
Attorneys and courts struggle with ways to determine which parent would be the better primary caretaker. If only there were a test ... Because there is not such a determining factor, the legal system has come up with many tests - and people to evaluate them. Rather than simplify the decision, this process may have further complicated it. In addition to the questions of objectivity raised about the tests themselves, there are the questions raised about the individuals who evaluate them.
Features
As distinguished from cases of supervisory harassment, an employer may not be held liable for a sexually hostile environment created by a victim's co-worker unless the employer knew or should have known about the sexual harassment and failed to take appropriate corrective action. Accordingly, in assessing the potential for employer liability it is important to determine, in the first instance, whether the alleged harasser is properly classified as a supervisor or a co-worker for Title VII purposes.
General counsel are increasingly recognizing the need not only to manage the talent within their departments, but also to develop and enhance the group and its individual lawyers. <BR>In this, the second article in a three-part series on talent management, we focus more closely on what innovative initiatives law departments are using to capitalize on existing capabilities and what steps some of them have taken to continually add to the effectiveness of team performance.
In the years since <i>Farragher</i> and <i>Ellerth</i>, numerous courts have been asked to decide whether or not constructive discharge (<i>ie</i>, the employee felt forced to resign because conditions were unbearable) is a tangible job action negating the employer's ability to raise the affirmative defense. The decided cases have had differing outcomes.
Features
One of the many challenges faced by corporate counsel when conducting or overseeing an internal workplace investigation is how not to compromise critical attorney-client privilege during the process.
After writing the perfect resume, tuning up your cover letter and targeting your job search, you'll have to show up to get the job. Don't sweat it. Interviewing skills are not brain surgery.
This month's question: <br>Many of the lawyers in my firm still resist doing any selling because they see it as "unseemly" for lawyers. How can I help them overcome this crippling bias?
RESPECT: Earn It, Keep It, Advance Your Career<br>Wednesday, Nov. 19, 2003<br>12:00 p.m. ' 1:30 p.m. EST
Features
The NJ Supreme Court has recently elected to hear appeals in two coverage actions involving the same basic issue ' namely, reconciling the application of the Owens-Illinois "continuous trigger theory" with the application of specific policy provisions under New Jersey law. In the first of these two cases, <i>Spaulding Composites Company, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety,</i> the court strongly affirmed the viability of the continuous trigger theory, invalidating a clear and unambiguous non-cumulation clause that it found conflicted with this approach. <i>Spaulding Composites Company, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety,</i> 176 N.J. 25, 46 (2003). In the second case, <i>Benjamin Moore & Company v. Aetna Casualty & Surety,</i> which is pending, the court must now determine how to apply the continuous trigger theory to self-insurance features contained in a series of unambiguous policy endorsements which do not appear to conflict with a continuous trigger. No. A-4423-01T2F, 2003 WL 1904383 (App. Div., Jan. 14, 2003), appeal granted, 176 N.J. 70 (2003).