Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Search


The Costs of Code Upgrades
January 01, 2004
When a property is physically damaged by some insurable event &mdash; such as a flood or fire &mdash; laws or ordinances that were not in place when the original property was first constructed must be considered in the repairing or rebuilding of that property. After Hurricane Andrew in 1992, for example, Dade County Florida required that ruined houses be rebuilt in compliance with stricter severe-weather standards than the damaged houses had previously exhibited. These upgrade requirements must be reconciled with replacement-cost insurance for property owners, which puts the insured in the <i>same</i> position, with the same quality of property, as existed before the insured event &mdash; not in a <i>better</i> position, with a higher quality of property (<i>eg,</i> a stronger roof, better ventilation, wider egresses, and the like). Consequently, courts, insurers and insureds need to resolve the question of which party pays the costs of compliance with changed construction codes.
Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Eliciting an Insured's Personal Financial Information
January 01, 2004
When an insured's personal finances are essential to establishing a monetary motive for his or her conduct (particularly in insurance fraud cases), it is necessary to ask pointed, and, yes, sometimes embarrassing questions at examination under oath or deposition.
Case Briefs
January 01, 2004
Highlights of the latest insurance cases from around the country.
Undifferentiated Support Orders: Can They Be Taxable Alimony?
January 01, 2004
The income tax effect of cash payments made by one spouse in a divorce proceeding to the other is determined under section 71 of the Internal Revenue Code. To be taxable to the recipient of the payments as alimony, and deductible by the payor, the payments must meet the four requirements of section 71(b)(1). Of these requirements, the one that has caused the most difficulty is found in section 71(b)(1)(D): there can be "no liability to make any such payment after the death of the payee spouse ... " nor can there be any liability to make a substitute payment.
Massachusetts and Same-Sex Marriages: An Update
January 01, 2004
As reported on these pages late last year, on Nov. 18, 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decided <i>Goodridge v. Department of Public Health</i>, holding, in a 4-3 decision, that the denial of marriage licenses to same-sex couples in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts violated the state's constitution.
Two Biological Mothers: Who Gets Custody?
January 01, 2004
A woman whose eggs were fertilized, implanted in the womb of her lesbian partner, and produced twin girls is being denied parentage of the children.
Sarbanes-Oxley Litigation Trap?
January 01, 2004
In-house counsel focused on complying with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act should be wary of falling into a trap that could increase the business risks and liability exposure of their company and its executives.
In the Courts
January 01, 2004
Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.
Business Crimes Hotline
January 01, 2004
The latest rulings of interest to your practice.
The Perils of an Ineffective Compliance Program
January 01, 2004
Are ethics programs no longer optional but mandatory? If the program is not good enough, is that fact itself the basis for liability? A recent civil case filed by the creative health care prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney's Office in Philadelphia asserts that a company's "ineffective" compliance program satisfies the scienter requirements of the civil False Claims Act (FCA).

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Private Equity Valuation: A Significant Decision
    Insiders (and others) in the private equity business are accustomed to seeing a good deal of discussion ' academic and trade ' on the question of the appropriate methods of valuing private equity positions and securities which are otherwise illiquid. An interesting recent decision in the Southern District has been brought to our attention. The case is <i>In Re Allied Capital Corp.</i>, CCH Fed. SEC L. Rep. 92411 (US DC, S.D.N.Y., Apr. 25, 2003). Judge Lynch's decision is well written, the Judge reviewing a motion to dismiss by a business development company, Allied Capital, against a strike suit claiming that Allied's method of valuing its portfolio failed adequately to account for i) conditions at the companies themselves and ii) market conditions. The complaint appears to be, as is often the case, slap dash, content to point out that Allied revalued some of its positions, marking them down for a variety of reasons, and the stock price went down - all this, in the view of plaintiff's counsel, amounting to violations of Rule 10b-5.
    Read More ›
  • Meet the Lawyer Working on Inclusion Rider Language
    At the Oscars in March, Best Actress winner Frances McDormand made “inclusion rider” go viral. But Kalpana Kotagal, a partner at Cohen Milstein Sellers &amp; Toll had already worked for months to write the language for such provisions. Kotagal was developing legal language for contract provisions that Hollywood's elite could use to require studios and other partners to employ diverse workers on set.
    Read More ›