Features
Recent Developments from Around the States
National cases of interest to you and your practice.
The <i>Horn</i> Decision: Significant Victory for Employers
New York's Court of Appeals recently issued an important decision in which it declined to expand the narrow exception to the 'at-will' employment doctrine enunciated in <i>Wieder v. Skala</i> for attorneys to physicians employed by non-medical employers. The court's decision in <i>Horn</i>, however, arguably is limited to that particular class of physicians whose duties are not limited to providing medical treatment, but include non-medical-related management responsibilities as well. Consequently, the court will likely be faced with future attempts by professionals, including physicians employed by medical employers, to expand the Wieder doctrine to them.
Features
Understanding the ADA's 'Reassignment' Obligation
One of the most controversial questions since the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) has been whether an employer must reassign an employee who can no longer perform his or her job because of a disability. After years of conflicting decisions and arguments, the answer is now easy ' yes.
Features
Who Will Run Your Franchised Hotel?
Management agreements provide the vehicle through which investors in hotels, restaurants, and other commercial properties engage professional managers to operate their properties. The practice began in the lodging industry after the end of World War II when hotel construction boomed in response to demand from middle-class American families for clean, moderately priced travel accommodations ' the same demand that spawned the Holiday Inn chain and other lodging industry franchises. Investors with no experience in hotel management fueled the boom in hotel construction with their capital, but professional managers generated the returns on investment the investors craved.
Features
CASES IN COURT
The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued a landmark decision in a much anticipated case, Cook County v. United States ex rel. Chandler, 2003 WL 890268, S.Ct. (March 10, 2003). The Court's unanimous opinion authored by Justice Souter resolved a split among the circuit courts by holding that municipal corporations are 'persons' amenable to qui tam actions under the False Claims Act, and subject to the imposition of civil penalties, treble damages, and costs.
REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS
On March 13, 2003, Tommy G. Thompson, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), announced two proposed rules from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that are intended to improve patient safety and are part of a strategic initiative by the FDA to reduce adverse events involving products that it regulates.
In the Spotlight
A settlement in principle has been reached between the FTC and giant drug manufacturer Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (whose total domestic net sales last year exceeded $13 billion). On March 7, 2003, the FTC announced the settlement. It resolves allegations filed by the FTC (In the Matter of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company) that the company violated federal antitrust laws and abused FDA's regulatory process in preventing generic drug manufacturers from competing against three of its widely prescribed products ' Taxol ' (paclitaxel) and Platinol (anti-cancer drugs), and BuSpar' (an anti-anxiety drug). The result of Bristol-Myers' conduct, according to the government, was that consumers were forced to pay hundreds of millions more than they needed to had generic products been available.
Features
Doing Business After Sarbanes-Oxley
In a recent article in this newsletter, we described a hypothetical situation about a publicly traded health care entity that was under attack by government regulators, disgruntled shareholders, and likely a qui tam relator. See, Michael E. Clark, Proffer Agreements May Be a Viable Strategy for Negotiating with Government, (Health Care Fraud & Abuse Newsletter, October 2002). This hypothetical situation continues in this article, as we illustrate some of the heightened compliance risks facing officers, directors, and attorneys who represent publicly traded entities as a result of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 ('Sarbanes-Oxley'), Pub. L. 107-204, 116 Stat. 745 (2002), which ushered in major reform measures when signed into law on July 30, 2002 (and also in light of other proposals for strengthening corporate accountability from the major self regulatory organizations and exchanges: the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) (see NASDAQ Corporate Governance Proposals, September 13, 2002) and The New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) (see Corporate Governance Rules Proposals Reflecting Recommendations from the NYSE Corporate Accountability and Listings Standards Committee As Approved by the NYSE Board of Directors, August 1, 2002).
BRIEFS
Highlights of the latest franchising news from around the country.
COURT WATCH
Highlights of the latest franchising cases from around the country.
Need Help?
- Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
- Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.
MOST POPULAR STORIES
- Internet Goods and Product LiabilityThe Internet's value arises in part from its ability to provide images, data and content quickly and at little cost. This ability results from the fact that Internet products — whether they be images, data or content — are each reduced to a digital format. Sharing products that have been so reduced may result in product liability.Read More ›
- Compliance Officers: Recent Regulatory Guidance and Enforcement Actions and Mitigating the Risk of Personal LiabilityThis article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.Read More ›
- The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year LaterThe 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.Read More ›
- Understanding the Potential Pitfalls Arising From Participation in Standards BodiesChances are that if your company is involved in research and development of new technology there is a standards setting organization exploring the potential standardization of such technology. While there are clear benefits to participation in standards organizations — keeping abreast of industry developments, targeting product development toward standard compliant products, steering research and intellectual property protection into potential areas of future standardization — such participation does not come without certain risks. Whether you are in-house counsel or outside counsel, you may be called upon to advise participants in standard-setting bodies about intellectual property issues or to participate yourself. You may also be asked to review patent policy of the standard-setting body that sets forth the disclosure and notification requirements with respect to patents for that organization. Here are some potential patent pitfalls that can catch the unwary off-guard.Read More ›
- A Lawyer's System for Active ReadingActive reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.Read More ›
