Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Are Law Firm 'Partners' Really 'Employees'?
The Clackamas Decision
Law firm management often assumes that some attorneys, such as partners, shareholders and of counsels, are not covered by various civil rights statutes, eg, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). As firms which have been sued by such attorneys or which have faced broad Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) investigations have learned, however, such assumptions are often not well founded.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently rendered a decision that provides further proof that, depending upon the circumstances, some partners, of counsels and shareholders will be regarded as 'employees' to whom federal employment statutes provide protection. That decision, Clackamas Gastroenterology Associates, P.C. v. Wells, No. 01-1435 (April 22, 2003), was authored by Justice Stevens. Clackamas involved four physicians who were actively engaged in the practice of medicine as owners/shareholders and directors of a professional corporation. The issue was whether they should be counted as 'employees' for purposes of establishing the 15-employee threshold for ADA coverage. A disabled bookkeeper who was terminated by the medical practice argued that the physicians should be counted. If she was right, then the ADA applied. Otherwise, it did not.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.