<b>Corner Office: </b>Who's Running The Store?
October 31, 2006
To understand why many managing partners might have difficulty answering this question, one needs to examine the resource pool within law firms from which managing partners are chosen. Among the popular choices are: those with the biggest books of business, the most widely recognized reputations, the best rainmakers, the best lawyers and the most effective client service partners. Most partners feel that anyone who has attained any of those levels practicing law ought to be just as proficient at running a law firm. Not quite!
How to Stand Out from the Crowd
October 31, 2006
The language is clear: 'An advertisement or solicitation shall not depict the use of a courtroom or courthouse.' While using a courthouse in an ad for your law firm may be a clich' ' and fail to set you apart from the competition ' it hardly seems intuitive that doing so would violate advertising guidelines. That will be the case in New York, if a proposed rule goes into effect this month. Across the country, advertising rules continue to evolve, so pinpointing how to best spend your marketing dollars can be challenging.
Waiver or Ratification of Alleged Misrepresentations By Subsequent Insurance Company Conduct
October 30, 2006
<i>'Fraud!' cried the maddened thousands, and echo answered fraud;But one scornful look from Casey and the audience was awed.' Ernest Lawrence Thayer,</i> Casey at the Bat.As most readers will know, after this couplet in which the baseball player Casey scorns to dispute the umpire's call on the second strike, Casey proceeds to swing and miss the third pitch, striking out. Thayer's poem does not contain any indication that the slugger then sought to go back and contest the ruling on the second strike.Unlike the notorious batsman, however, insurance companies frequently bring actions to void coverage on the grounds of alleged misrepresentation or 'fraud' in the application for insurance, when they themselves have scorned to contest coverage upon first learning that they may have a basis to do so. Whatever the rules were concerning untimely protests in 1880s semipro baseball, today's insurance coverage law is clear: An insurance company waives any right to void coverage for alleged misrepresentations or omissions in the application, if, after it learns it may have grounds for such relief, it does not promptly seek the relief, but instead takes any action inconsistent with an intent to treat the policy as void.
Internet Gambling Banned
October 30, 2006
The House and Senate worked late into the night on Friday, Sept. 29, 2006 to finalize 'H.R. 4954: Security and Accountability For Every Port Act' or the SAFE Port Act and get it to the House floor. By early in the morning on Saturday, Sept. 30, 2006, just before adjourning for the election break, the House had passed the bill by a count of 409-2, and the Senate had agreed to the conference report by unanimous consent. Senate Majority Leader, and Presidential hopeful Bill Frist (R-TN) was the point-person for certain groups lobbying to ban Internet gambling with the addition of Title VIII to the legislation.
Deference to Agency Decisions: Lessons from Recent Pharmaceutical Pre-emption Decisions
October 30, 2006
One question that has been raised in pre-emption decisions is the degree of deference to be shown an agency's explicit statement that it intends certain failure-to-warn claims to be pre-empted. For example, in the pharmaceutical arena, the Food and Drug Administration ('FDA') through the Department of Justice ('DOJ') filed amicus briefs in several lawsuits to reiterate its position on pre-emption of state law tort claims. In these briefs, the United States stressed that in the context of warnings, 'more is not always better.' <i>Amicus</i> Brief for the United States, <i>Kallas v. Pfizer</i>, No. 04-00998 (D. Utah Sept. 29, 2005) at 28. The FDA's regulation of prescription drugs ensures each drug's optimal use by requiring inclusion of only scientifically substantiated warnings. <i>Id.</i> Plaintiffs' failure-to-warn claims therefore 'stand as an obstacle' to the FDA's accomplishment of its congressionally mandated purpose of ensuring the public health and are therefore pre-empted. <i>See Id.</i> The FDA has also stated its position on pre-emption in the preamble to its Rulemaking for Labeling requirement, which became effective on June 30, 2006. <i>See</i> 21 C.F.R. '10.85(d)(1) (2006).
Negotiating Broker Agreements
October 30, 2006
Your company (the 'Company') has decided it needs to find additional space for lease and/or to dispose of excess space and, after extensive due diligence, the Company has identified the ideal real estate broker (the 'Broker') to work with in the transaction(s). You and your new Broker have shaken hands on the basic terms of engagement (such as term and commission rates), and you have received and are now asked to review your Broker's standard form of retention agreement (the 'Agreement'). The Agreement, as is customary with most broker's standard forms of retention agreements, is only a couple of pages long. Should the Company sign it? After you have considered the issues described in this article and negotiated to protect the Company's interests to fit your particular circumstances, the answer is 'yes.' This article discusses some of the common issues that you may want to explore before the Company signs and delivers the Broker's form of retention agreement.
Bit Parts
October 30, 2006
Accounting-Malpractice Claim/Arbitration<br>Contributory and Vicarious Copyright Infringement/Interlocutory Appeal<br>Copyright Infringement/Substantial Similarity<br>Copyright-Infringement Filing/Bankruptcy Purchase
Practice Notes
October 30, 2006
Major L.A. Firms Face Fallout From Reshuffling<br>Cooley-Alschuler Merger Talks Ended<br>Loeb's Base Expands To Media, Internet
Revised Proposal: Understanding the Interagency Statement on Complex Structured Finance Activities
October 30, 2006
Many U.S. financial institutions that have participated in equipment leasing transactions (particularly in the large-ticket and municipal markets) in the last 20 years will be keenly aware that as the structures grew ever more complicated, Congress and the federal regulatory agencies grew intensely interested. Whether the institution had a major role in the transaction or simply provided a service, some degree of scrutiny could be expected, often in conjunction with a tax audit of its client. The risks to financial institutions from participating in complex structured finance transactions of all types became a source for concern for banking and securities regulators. The principal federal regulators responded in 2004 with a proposal that financial institutions investigate, and bear responsibility for evaluating, the legal, tax, and accounting basis of their clients' complex structured finance transactions. The goal: to limit the institutions' own credit, legal, and reputational risk from such participation.
