Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The New York case of Simkin v. Blank, N.Y.3d 46 52 (2012), infamous for its ties to Bernard Madoff, illustrates one of the common financial mistakes made in divorce. In this case, pursuant to a settlement agreement incorporated but not merged into their judgment of divorce, the parties retained respective ownership of separately titled properties, including a brokerage account in the husband's name, managed by the Madoff firm, which had an agreed-upon value of $5.4 million. To balance this exchange and effectuate what they believed to be a fair and reasonable division of marital property, the husband paid the wife $6.25 million, and transferred to her $368,000 in retirement assets to equalize their retirement holdings.
Approximately two and a half years later, the Madoff brokerage account was effectively rendered valueless when Madoff's Ponzi scheme was exposed. The husband asked the court to reform the agreement based on the doctrine of mutual mistake, but the court declined, stating: “This situation, however sympathetic, is more akin to a marital asset that unexpectedly loses value after dissolution of a marriage; the asset had value at the time of the settlement but the purported value did not remain consistent.” As the court emphasized, rescission or reformation of a property settlement is limited to “exceptional situations.” Id. at 52 (quoting Da Silva v. Musso, 53 N.Y.2d 543, 552 (1981)).
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
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.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.