Litigation
November 30, 2003
Recent rulings of importance to your practice.
IP News
November 01, 2003
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news and cases from around the country.
The Creditor in Possession
November 01, 2003
A hallmark of United States bankruptcy law has been the principle that a debtor should be provided with an opportunity to use the bankruptcy to get a "fresh start." That principle, initially applicable to individuals, was carried forward as an underlying premise of business reorganizations and coupled with the belief that reorganizations preserved going concern values. The value of reorganization as compared with liquidation in cases of major business failures was first realized in connection with the reorganization of railroads during the latter part of the 19th century that continued into the 20th century. In the context of the current economic environment, the underlying premise of railroad reorganizations of preserving going concern value may no longer be viable.
Contribution, Indemnification or Contract
November 01, 2003
Faced with hefty legal bills, damage awards, or settlements as a result of discrimination or harassment claims, employers have attempted to recover costs from third parties whom they perceive as causing or sharing responsibility for the problem. To this end, employers have sued unions and even their own employees in an effort to spread the financial responsibility. The theories behind such suits, and their results, have been mixed.
Supreme Court Clarifies Standard of Proof for Mixed-Motive Discrimination Cases
November 01, 2003
At the conclusion of its most recent 2002-2003 term, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision clarifying plaintiffs' standard of proof in "mixed-motive" employment discrimination cases under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991. In <i>Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa</i>, the Court held that a plaintiff is required to prove by direct evidence that an unlawful factor was a "motivating factor" in the challenged adverse employment action. Instead, a plaintiff can prove his or her discrimination claim in a mixed-motive case by circumstantial evidence. As a result of this decision, defendants will find it more difficult to obtain summary judgment dismissing mixed-motive discrimination cases prior to trial, the result of which will be that more such cases will be subjected to the uncertainties of jury trials.
Child Removal: A Matrimonial Litigator's Checklist
October 06, 2003
In matrimonial practice, the frequency of child removal litigation has increased exponentially. The growing number of corporate downsizings, business mergers and acquisitions, and the general growth in employment mobility are all likely to result in a continuation of this trend. This article, which provides a checklist of five areas of inquiry, is intended to help the family law litigator anticipate and prepare for the legal and factual issues presented when child removal is in issue.
