Exploring Alternatives to the Franchise Model
October 30, 2006
We have all run into a situation where an existing or potential client has outlined a deal management wants to do (or, in some cases, has already done), which meets the legal definition of a franchise, but the client is adamant about avoiding the real or perceived burdens of being deemed a franchisor. Establishing a franchise system may require, among other things, compliance with franchise sales laws, public disclosure of financial statements, observing contractual limitations imposed by franchise relationship laws, and enduring the public image of being a franchise. There are a variety of distribution models other than franchising available to clients for structuring envisioned expansion. However, if certain elements are involved in the proposed transaction, creation of a franchise system may become legally necessary. This article addresses the issues practitioners face in advising clients in these scenarios and explores some of the various alternatives to the franchise model and exemptions from franchise disclosure law that are available to your clients.
<i>Book Review</i>: Understanding Standards of Value In Depth
October 30, 2006
Standards of Value: Theory and Applications, written by Jay E. Fishman, Dr. Shannon P. Pratt, and William J. Morrison, addresses the standard of value as applied in four distinct contexts: estate and gift taxation, shareholder dissent and oppression, divorce and financial reporting. The book is written in a fashion that will prove useful for judges, lawyers and practitioners to better understand the theory and conceptual underpinnings related to the various standards of value in both judicial and regulatory applications. The depth of the book in several areas reaches well beyond anything published to date with respect to how the recognized standards of value relate to these four very different purposes in application.
Risk of Lawsuits Over Legal Recruiting Fees
October 30, 2006
In May, just 1 month after Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld announced Chang-Joo Kim had joined its New York office as a partner, the law firm cut a check to recruiting firm Boston Executive Search for $227,500. <br>But did it pay the right recruiter? New York search firm Sivin Tobin Associates says it sent Akin Gump a package about Kim last December, along with a term sheet. Sivin Tobin is now suing the law firm, alleging breach of an implied contract. In September, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Jane S. Solomon denied Akin Gump's motion to dismiss.
Analyzing Law Firm Business Capabilities With Heat Mapping
October 30, 2006
Law firms have been largely unable to take advantage of modern business improvement methods such as Six Sigma and the Theory of Constraints ' complex techniques often applied to manufacturing processes ' with much success. Those methodologies are measurement-based strategies that focus on process improvement and variation reduction.
Revisiting Obviousness
October 30, 2006
Many technology companies believe the current law on obviousness hinders product development by extending patent protection to insignificant advances. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ('CAFC') reconfigured the obviousness framework established by the Supreme Court to limit the subjectivity of obviousness determinations by adding a 'teaching-suggestion-motivation' test, which is at the heart of a case the Supreme Court has recently agreed to consider. In <i>Teleflex</i>, the CAFC applied the 'teaching-suggestion-motivation' test in vacating a lower court finding of obviousness. <i>Teleflex Inc. v. KSR Intern. Co.</i>, 119 Fed.Appx. 282 (Fed. Cir. 2005). Substantially unchecked to date, this will be the first full hearing on the obviousness doctrine in more than 30 years.
Recharacterization
October 30, 2006
In the recent case of <i>In re Dornier Aviation (North America), Inc.,</i> the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that ' 105(a) of the Bankruptcy Code provides the bankruptcy court with authority to recharacterize a claim from debt to equity. In upholding the recharacterization of a parent's $84 million claim against its wholly owned subsidiary, the Fourth Circuit made clear that form will not prevail over substance in the context of inter-company transactions. The Fourth Circuit failed, however, to provide any guidance on how inter-company transactions might be structured to avoid recharacterization under ' 105(a). This article presents one obvious, albeit not often utilized, solution: Parent corporations should collect debts due and owing from their subsidiaries to avoid the possibility of being relegated to the unenviable position of an equity investor in the event of a bankruptcy proceeding.
Recent Bankruptcy Trends
October 30, 2006
The era of 'easy money' may be coming to an end soon, as there are signs of increasing economic pressure in certain sectors of the economy. At the same time, the passage of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA), the principle provisions of which became effective in October 2005, is fundamentally changing certain aspects of the Chapter 11 process. Although no one is able to predict with certainty what will happen in the restructuring field in the near future, here are some of the signs that the bankruptcy field is about to undergo a substantial change.
Patent Strategy Questions Raised By the eBay Decision
October 27, 2006
The effect of the Supreme Court's May 2006 opinion in <i>eBay v. MercExchange</i> is already visible in the world of intellectual property litigation. A handful of subsequent district court opinions relating to damages and permanent injunctive relief for patent infringement have been handed down with outcomes substantially outside of what would have normally been expected less than even a year ago, using the <i>eBay</i> decision as precedent. Although the true and long-lasting effect of this decision on litigation remains to be seen, its directional influence is clear. However, what is unclear is the effect that <i>eBay</i> will have on real-world intellectual property management and investment. The appropriate manner in which to react to these recent changes in the litigation realm is currently an area of much discussion by corporate IP departments, patent licensing and enforcement companies (P-LECs) and financiers.
