In the article "Thinking About Settlements: Should Retirement Plans Be Discounted for Taxes?" published in the June issue of <i>New York Family Law Monthly</i>, I explained that retirement plans are complex assets, comprised of both tax-deferred (asset) and taxable (liability) components. Because of this complexity, I explained that the true value of these assets is context-dependent and closely tied to the financial situation of the ultimate owner. Attempting to divide these assets equitably in the one-dimensional environment of the yellow legal pad is not without peril.
<b><i>Part Two of a Two-Part Article</i></b>In last month's article, we explained that divorce psychology remains in its infancy, and that, given the extreme complexity of the psychological issues at hand in custody matters, it is no surprise that our discipline in this area is evolving. However, that does not mean there are not real problems at hand. This month's article continues the discussion about the debate currently surrounding certain developmental theories that are often the central underpinnings of custody recommendations.
<b><i>'Overreaching' Added to Case Law</i></b> Justice Anthony J. Falanga of the Supreme Court, Nassau County has added another twist to the case law fixing dates for the valuation of marital property when a previous action for divorce is abandoned.
<b><i>All About the 'New Predatory Lending Law'</i></b> Hidden defects in title are one of the nightmares of the title insurance industry - as well as one of the protections that make the purchase of title insurance the more alluring. Although only experience may supply the ultimate answer, there is a possibility that the new "predatory lending law" in New York will generate lurking infirmities in titles devolving through mortgage foreclosure actions that may render tenuous the issuance of insurance on such properties.
“Baseball arbitration” refers to the process used in Major League Baseball in which if an eligible player's representative and the club ownership cannot reach a compensation agreement through negotiation, each party enters a final submission and during a formal hearing each side — player and management — presents its case and then the designated panel of arbitrators chooses one of the salary bids with no other result being allowed. This method has become increasingly popular even beyond the sport of baseball.
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.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.
