'But That Wasn't The Deal!'
June 01, 2005
In the not too distant past, the only way business people could communicate in a real time, convenient and spontaneous way was through face-to-face meetings and telephone conversations. When the all-too-common dispute arose as to who said what to whom, the traditional "my word against your word" battle would play itself out. <br>Fast-forward to the 21st century, where e-mail ' easy, instant, and universally accepted ' has become virtually the default mode of communication. What was once an unverifiable conversation is now a transaction set forth in print. As a result, the "my word against your word" conundrum becomes more of a contest between e-mails, as opposed to a competition between the memories of testifying witnesses.
New HSR Rules for Transactions Involving Partnerships and LLCs
June 01, 2005
Forget what you know about the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act (HSR) and partnerships. Forget what you know about HSR and LLCs. The rules have changed ' again. The good news is that the rules make more sense, and certain exemptions to the filing requirements have been codified or expanded. The bad news is that a small number of deals that used to slide under the HSR radar may now be caught. More strategically speaking, the rules now provide more opportunities to "choose" whether your next joint venture will be subjected to substantive agency review under the HSR scheme, heightening the value of HSR counselors' advice on structure issues at early planning stages.
Property Taxation Without Services
May 31, 2005
New York municipalities have often conditioned development approvals on developers' agreements to provide services ordinarily provided by the municipality. These agreements are typically silent on the tax consequences of the municipality's failure to provide services. Under what circumstances, then, can landowners challenge the municipality's power to collect taxes for services the municipality does not provide? Two cases recently decided -- one by the Court of Appeals and one by the Second Department -- shed light on that question.
Development
May 31, 2005
Recent rulings you need to know.
Index
May 31, 2005
Everything contained in this issue in an easy-to-read list.
Covenants Not To Compete: For Everyone At The Firm Except Attorneys?
May 31, 2005
A covenant not to compete is an increasingly popular device employers use to bind employees not to work for, or as, a direct competitor. Such covenants are most often found in employment contracts, but they can also be a separate document, signed by the employee at hiring, during employment, or upon leaving. However, in many states, a covenant not to compete cannot stand alone as a binding agreement, but must be ancillary to an employment or other type of contract that provides some benefit to the employee. <br>While covenants not to compete may be used by employers in certain court-delineated circumstances, ethical rules specifically bar the application of such restrictive covenants to attorneys.
Associate Development ' A Singular Proposal
May 31, 2005
Law firms carry on a juggling act when it comes to associate development. Associates grumble that they receive insufficient training. They worry not only about their competence to deal with their current assignments, but whether they will have marketable skills for the future. Partners find this frustrating and bewildering. Their firms have large catalogs of courses, provided both in-house and externally at significant cost to the firm. What more can associates want? <br>Is there a way to break the cycle? Sure, but someone's got to have the courage to do something different. Here's one approach.
