Protecting Your Company from Consumer Protection Claims
March 26, 2007
Companies in virtually every sector of the economy have become targets of allegations that their business practices or products have injured consumers. These cases often arise as class actions, frequently exposing target companies to the risk of significant defense costs, liability, or a product recall. In the face of the ever-increasing risk of consumer protection claims, most companies have put into place risk management strategies that principally rely on a variety of insurance policies. All too often, though, when a company needs its insurance most, it finds that it does not get the protection that it expects. Instead, insurers frequently make every effort to evade payment under their policies.
Exchange-Traded Solvency Derivatives
March 26, 2007
In the last ten years, the credit derivatives market has grown from its infancy to approximately $26 trillion of notional value according to the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. ('ISDA'). The most highly utilized type of credit derivative, the credit default swap, is used by investors to bet on a company's creditworthiness or hedge a position in a fashion that protects against the company's failure to make a payment or satisfy other terms.
Wage Hour Laws Provide Traps for the Unwary
March 26, 2007
It has often been said that the most frequently violated federal employment-related statute is the Fair Labor Standards Act ('FLSA'), 29 U.S.C. '' 201-19 (Supp. 2006). This law, enacted in 1938, regulates, among other things, the payment of overtime to employees who work for employers. Our experience indicates that most, if not all, employers do not intend to violate the provisions contained in the FLSA but, instead, do so out of ignorance of its requirements. This article highlights some of the key provisions of the FLSA, makes reference to recent pronouncements by the United States Department of Labor (the federal agency principally responsible for interpretation of the statute) and presents advice on how to avoid the pitfalls inherent in the FLSA.
Pros and Cons of Sequenced Retirement
February 28, 2007
Coming to terms with retirement is difficult and, like most things, is even harder if you are a law firm partner. As soon as you begin to think about throttling things back a tad, your clients demand a quicker response time and your partners want you to bring in more business. At the same time, what seemed just a short time ago to be a distant respite is now looming over you and you may not even know what to do or if you can even afford to do it. Moreover, even if you do not want to retire, your partnership agreement may have a mandatory retirement provision that takes away your choice.
Supporting Non-Equity Career Opportunities Through Two-Tier Ownership Structures
February 28, 2007
Lately, we've been hearing from a growing number of our (Hildebrandt International, Inc.) clients about escalating concerns relating to career path and non-equity opportunities. Although 79 AmLaw 100 firms and 169 of the NLJ 250 firms acknowledge a tiered ownership structure, and a large number of others utilize a de facto two-tier structure, many firms still adhere to a single-tier model.
Revenue-Focused Leaders
February 28, 2007
Go to Amazon.com. Locate the books section, type in leadership, and see what shows up. There are more than 197,500 results for this inquiry! Clearly, there is no shortage of approaches to leadership. What is in short supply are models that work for our profession. To help narrow the focus, we will look at a subset of leadership, the art of developing revenue-focused leaders.
Partnership Investments
February 28, 2007
With profits per partner continuing to rise, many attorneys have more discretionary income available for investment. In addition to investing directly in both traditional and nontraditional sources, some partners may also choose to invest (either inside or outside their law firms) in opportunities that arise in the law firm setting.
The Insurance Industry Takes Another Swing at Efficient Dispute Resolution
February 28, 2007
The widespread use of arbitration in insurance and reinsurance disputes was intended to allow parties to resolve complex disputes quickly and efficiently by having persons with knowledge of the specialized terminology, standards, and practices of the insurance industry act as decision makers. This aspiration has been superseded by protracted and voluminous discovery, continual delays and postponements, extensive briefing, and lengthy hearings. In essence, all of the foibles of litigation have crept into the world of arbitration, leaving the insurance industry once again in search of an efficient method to resolve disputes.
