Immigration Law
Form I-9 Requirement Flexibility to End on July 31, 2023
The U. S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) recently announced the end of COVID-19 temporary flexibilities for Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification.[1] Starting July 31, 2023, employers must complete in-person physical document inspections for employees whose documents were inspected remotely during the temporary flexibilities. Employers who have been using the COVID-19 flexibilities have until August 30, 2023, to complete the physical inspection of identity documents. The change does not impact the ability of employers to use 3rd party authorized agents to conduct the required in-person inspections.[2] The flexibility provisions allowed employers that are operating remotely to complete Form I-9 Section 2 document review remotely (e.g., electronically over video link, fax, or email) within three business days of hire. The flexibility provisions are for employees who are working remotely due to COVID-19 precautions “until they undertake non-remote employment on a regular, consistent, or predictable basis, or the extension of the flexibilities related to such requirements is terminated, whichever is earlier.” Employers who conducted remote Form I-9 document review are advised to begin implementing the in-person verification of identity and employment eligibility documentation for employees who were hired on or after March 20, 2020, and who presented such documents for remote inspection in reliance on the flexibilities first announced in March 2020. After documents have been physically inspected, the employer should add “COVID-19” and “documents physically examined” with the date of inspection to the Section 2 additional information field on the Form I-9, or to Section 3 as appropriate. A large number of employees now work remotely and are not in proximity to the employer. An authorized representative may be used for completing Section 2 of the Form I-9. Anyone other than the employee may serve as an authorized representative, subject to state law. Once the authorized representative completed Section 2, the employer must ensure that the form appears to be free of errors. The employer has liability for any paperwork deficiencies in the Form I-9 completed by the authorized representative. Immigration laws and regulations may change over time, so it's important to consult with an immigration attorney or refer to the official sources, such as the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) website, for the most up-to-date information. The I-9 form is used to verify the identity and employment authorization of individuals hired for employment in the United States. Previously, due to COVID-19 restrictions, the U.S. government temporarily allowed employers to inspect Section 2 documents remotely (e.g., via video conference) when completing the I-9 verification process. Since the remote inspection option will no longer be available, employers will need to resume in-person verification procedures as outlined in the I-9 instructions. Many third-party services are available to employers wishing to conduct inspections outside their geographic reach, employers may also use their law firms to do this.[3] Furthermore, Employers are required to conduct a physical inspection of original documents related to previous remote I-9s. Here are some key points to consider: In-person verification: Employees should present their original, unexpired documents in person to their employers or an authorized representative. The employer or representative must physically examine the documents to determine their authenticity. Timing: Section 2 of the I-9 form must be completed within three business days of the employee's first day of work. During this time, the employer must review and record the information from the employee's documents on the I-9 form. Acceptable documents: The employee must present acceptable documents that establish their identity and employment authorization. The USCIS provides a list of acceptable documents on the back of the I-9 form, which includes items such as a U.S. passport, driver's license, Social Security card, and permanent resident card (green card). Completing the form: The employer or authorized representative should complete Section 2 of the I-9 form, including recording the document title, issuing authority, document number, and expiration date (if applicable). The employer must sign and date the certification section. Annotation of compliance for prior remote I-9s: For prior completed I-9s under the remote rules Employers should annotate forms I-9 to verify the physical inspection.[4] The reverification should be added to the Additional Information field in Section 2. Best practice is to include the date and full name and title of the individual who completed verification. Review of information: Employers should establish a review process of all I-9s to make sure all forms are valid, and information is entered correctly. Errors happen and can be costly for employers, a simple review process can head off a lot of issues early on. Retaining and storing forms: Employers are required to retain I-9 forms for each employee and make them available for inspection by authorized government officials if requested. The forms should be stored securely and maintained for three years after the initial date of hire of the employee, or one year after the date employment ends, whichever is later. Consult the USCIS guidelines for details on retention and storage requirements. It’s important for employers to stay informed about any changes or updates to the I-9 verification process. Checking the USCIS website or consulting with an immigration attorney will help ensure compliance with the latest requirements. [1] https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/ice-updates-form-i-9-requirement-flexibility-grant-employers-more-time-comply [2] https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/toolkits/pages/complying-with-i9-and-everify-requirements-in-the-united-states.aspx [3] Many services have sprung up in this space that act as authorized agents for physical inspections - there are many like this out there: https://workforce.equifax.com/solutions/i-9-anywhere?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=https://workforce.equifax.com/solutions/i-9-anywhere?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=EWS_ES_I-9-Anywhere_2023&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_term=&utm_content=&gad=1&gclid=CjwKCAjw04yjBhApEiwAJcvNoXj_RnOCaE4EaXxp9hrUXzgZSubb5HxDKKQypMMQL9nOFRrzZ3TQeBoCXFAQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds https://dcmobilenotary.com/i-9. [4] Form I-9 Examples Related to Temporary COVID-19 Policies | USCIS
June 20, 2023
Intellectual Property
Chew on This – SCOTUS Rules that Dog Toy Parodying Jack Daniel’s Can’t Hide Behind First Amendment
On June 8, the US Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of Jack Daniel’s in Jack Daniel’s Properties, Inc. v. VIP Products LLC, overturning the decision of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Justice Elena Kagan wrote the opinion, holding that VIP Products’ sale of a dog chew toy in the shape of a Jack Daniel’s bottle, which also has a label replacing “Jack Daniel’s” with “Bad Spaniels” and other parodying of the Jack Daniel’s label in a manner referring to dog defecation, was not sufficiently protected under the First Amendment to avoid liability for trademark infringement or dilution. The SCOTUS decision was not a complete victory for Jack Daniel’s. Having held that the “Bad Spaniel’s” chew toy was not protected from claims of trademark infringement and dilution, Justice Kagan sent the case back down to the US District Court for a determination of whether there is a likelihood of confusion and whether “Bad Spaniels” dilutes Jack Daniel’s trademarks. VIP Products’ position was that its “Bad Spaniels” chew toy was an expressive work that conveyed a humorous message and that, therefore, the First Amendment protects the use from a claim of trademark infringement. However, VIP Products had also claimed that “Bad Spaniels” and other parodying elements were trademarks owned by VIP Products. This contributed to VIP Products’ downfall: because VIP Products was using “a trademark to designate the source of its own goods—in other words, … used a trademark as a trademark,” as Justice Kagan put it, VIP Products was not entitled to special First Amendment protection. In making this ruling, Justice Kagan made a point of saying more than once that the parody aspect of the “Bad Spaniels” toy could factor into an analysis of the likelihood of confusion. In other words, where such content is a parody, consumers are less likely to be confused into thinking that the parodic products come from the same source as the product being parodied. SCOTUS also knocked down the 9th Circuit’s holding that there was no trademark dilution. Under federal trademark dilution law, owners of famous trademarks can sue users of identical and very similar trademarks even where there is no likelihood of confusion. The 9th Circuit said VIP Products’ use was “noncommercial” because it was a parody and conveyed a humorous message. Justice Kagan disagreed, finding that the 9th Circuit’s view was too expansive and noting that there are limitations in the dilution law where the parodying content is used as a source identifier of the accused product. What can we take away from this decision? This is by no means an absolute bar on selling items that may constitute a parody of a brand, even a famous one. However, creators of such products would do well to avoid treating the parodying elements as trademarks and avoid any content or action that could mislead the public into thinking there is a source connection between the parodied product and the parodying one.
June 13, 2023
Franchise Law
COVID-19 and State Franchise Renewals
Originally posted on June 12, 2020, content updated on June 12, 2023. This blog post may contain information that was accurate at the time of publication but could become outdated over time. We strive to provide relevant and timely content, but circumstances, facts, and data can change. Users are encouraged to verify the current status of any information presented and seek updated guidance where necessary. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the work of state franchise regulators as well as the franchisors they regulate and the franchise buyers who benefit from state regulation. The pandemic also affected accounting firms, sometimes delaying the completion of audited financials, resulting in late renewal filings. Several states took positive steps to ease their filing rules as a result of COVID-19. It’s worthwhile to reflect on these changes so that we can do even better in the face of future calamities, whether that means a recurrence of the pandemic before a vaccine is available or the outbreak of a different pandemic. Extended deadlines Some states extended their franchise renewal filing deadlines. As a result, franchisors that missed their renewal deadlines were not required to submit new initial applications for franchise registration. This would have increased their filing fees. At the time, the fee for an initial registration in New York, for example, was $750, while the renewal fee was $150. In the State of Washington, the initial fee was $600, while the renewal fee was $100. Of course, these extensions did not allow franchisors to sell franchises during the period in which the franchise registration had lapsed. California On March 22, 2020, the California Commissioner of Business Oversight issued a notice stating that, through June 30, 2020, the Department of Business Oversight would waive the additional $225 filing fee for franchise renewals that are filed after the registration has lapsed. At the time, the initial registration fee in California was $675, and the renewal fee was $450. Hawaii The Hawaii Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, which normally requires renewal filings within three months after the end of each year, at that time extended the deadline from March 31, 2020, to April 30, 2020. Illinois At that time, the Illinois Attorney General’s Office issued a notice stating that a franchisor whose registration was due to expire between April 1, 2020, and June 1, 2020, was automatically granted an extension of 60 days from its anniversary date to file a franchise renewal application without penalty. Indiana The Indiana Securities Commissioner announced on April 7, 2020, that “any franchise registration that was set to expire between March 16, 2020, and May 31, 2020, was automatically extended to June 30, 2020.” Maryland The Securities Commissioner of Maryland issued an order on March 17, 2020, stating that a franchisor whose registration was due to expire during the Coronavirus State of Emergency was granted an extension of that registration “for a period of time equal to 30 days after the date the Governor of Maryland declared the end of the Coronavirus State of Emergency.” Minnesota The Minnesota Commerce Department issued a Guidance notice on March 30, 2020, stating that the deadline for franchisors whose annual reports were due by April 30, 2020, was extended to June 30, 2020. New York New York law normally requires franchisors to file updated Franchise Disclosure Documents (FDDs) no later than four months after the end of each fiscal year. In a notice dated March 24, 2020, as revised on May 12, 2020, the Office of the Attorney General granted a filing deadline extension. Any registration renewal or amendment that was due between March 1, 2020, and June 6, 2020 (the “Relief Period”) was extended for 90 days from the end of the Relief Period. Virginia On March 17, 2020, the Virginia State Corporation Commission extended the renewal deadline for franchises whose registration was due to expire while the Judicial Emergency Declaration by the Supreme Court of Virginia remained in effect. The initial 21-day extension was extended on April 2, 2020, “to remain in effect during the pendency of the Judicial Emergency Declaration or any similar subsequent declaration, declaration extension or order of the Supreme Court of Virginia or such other time period as may be subsequently ordered by the Commission.” Washington The Washington Department of Financial Institutions issued a notice on April 8, 2020, stating that “applicants may pay the renewal fee of $100 to complete an application for franchise registration … for any offering that was previously registered and that expired, or that will expire, between March 1, 2020, through June 30, 2020, until further notice.” Electronic filings Paper and CD ROM filings can be a challenge when filers work from their homes. Online filings are usually the easiest and always the fastest way to file. For some states, franchise filings continue to be accepted electronically. Minnesota, Rhode Island and Wisconsin, for example, offer electronic filing. Indiana required franchise applications to be made electronically since January 1, 2020. California’s DocQNet self-service portal existed long before the pandemic, but in its notice of March 22, 2020, the California Commissioner of Business Oversight stated that “the Department is strongly urging” that all franchise filings be submitted electronically during the COVID-19 pandemic. In its notice of April 8, 2020, the Washington Department of Financial Institutions reminded filers that all franchise filings are now required to be submitted online through the Department’s electronic filing system. Hawaii also encouraged franchisors to file online using the state’s securities portal. New York never offered electronic franchise filings until New York City became the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic. But while New York’s COVID-19 notice required that all franchise filings “be submitted by email in addition to the required paper and/or CD filings,” the email submission must also contain a copy of the check that must still be mailed to the Department of Law. Remote Notarization and E-Signatures A few states required the franchisor’s certification to be signed by an officer of the franchisor before a notary public. It may have been impossible during a pandemic to find a notary or an officer willing to sign before a notary when almost everyone was sheltered in place. For this reason, Washington waived notary requirements “while social distancing directives remain in effect.” New York and Hawaii temporarily suspended the requirement that the notary be physically present at the signing. In other words, audio-visual technology was adequate. Of course, this worked only when the signing officer and the notary were present in the same state. California went a step further by announcing that it would accept documents “filed on DocQNet that are signed electronically using e-signature software, such as DocuSign, in which case notarization of signatures will not be required.” Final Thoughts Extending deadlines is a useful tool when special circumstances affect large numbers of filers. But electronic filings and e-signatures are helpful to everyone with or without a pandemic. We can hope that states that do not offer online filings may now see the need to move quickly and institute online alternatives to paper and CD-ROM requirements, and that more states allow e-signatures as an alternative to in-person notarization requirements.
June 12, 2023
Business
Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) Loan Forgiveness Primer
This blog post may contain information that was accurate at the time of publication but could become outdated over time. We strive to provide relevant and timely content, but circumstances, facts, and data can change. Users are encouraged to verify the current status of any information presented and seek updated guidance where necessary. Originally posted on 6/9/2020, no content changes. You applied for and obtained a Paycheck Protection Program loan. Now it is time to ask for the loan to be forgiven. Listen and watch here for a 30 minute presentation from the Offit Kurman CV-19 Business Response Team on the what, when and how to that apply to the loan forgiveness process, along with keen insights into that process. This presentation was recorded on June 5, 2020. For any updates to the loan forgiveness rules since then, please contact us.
June 9, 2023
Family Law
There is More Than One Way to Get Divorced
One of the most important decisions that a couple makes after they have made the difficult decision to separate and divorce is choosing which process to use to make the significant decisions about the terms of their separation. Many separating parties do not even realize this is a choice that can be made; instead, by default, they fall into a process without making an educated decision concerning their process options. There are five main process options that everyone going through a separation should be educated about: “Kitchen Table” Negotiation: “Kitchen Table” negotiation is characterized by two spouses having conversations and negotiating the terms of their separation directly with one another. One or both spouses may have an attorney in the background, with whom they may consult as needed and who may draft a written agreement. But the spouses primarily engage with one another in the negotiation process. Some spouses are able to negotiate some topics via this method, but not others. For example, spouses may be able to resolve how they are dividing their furniture and furnishings using the “Kitchen Table” method but then need to use another process option to resolve the remaining issues. Mediation: In Mediation, the two spouses work with a neutral mediator whose job is to help the spouses discuss the issues and reach an agreement. The mediator does not represent either spouse and cannot offer advice to either spouse. Either spouse may have their own attorney who they can consult with before and after mediation sessions. If the spouses agree, they may bring their attorneys to the mediation sessions. There are mental health professionals who specialize in mediating parenting issues. Some couples choose to work with a mental health professional-mediator to mediate their parenting plan and then use an attorney-mediator (or another process entirely) to facilitate the negotiation of financial issues. The Mediation process is often used in conjunction with other process options. The Collaborative Process: The Collaborative Process is an out-of-court dispute resolution process in which both spouses have their own Collaboratively trained attorney who represents them and advises them throughout the process. The spouses and their attorneys meet together to discuss the various issues and work together to brainstorm and agree on options that work for both spouses. At the start of the Collaborative Process, the spouses and the attorneys sign an agreement committing that they will only work together in settlement negotiations and that these attorneys will not represent the parties in a contested court litigation. This helps to ensure that both spouses and both attorneys are focused on and properly incentivized to reach an agreement. In the Collaborative Process, spouses commit to disclose all relevant information and documents that are necessary so that both spouses can make informed decisions. In addition, the spouses commit to maintain the status quo until they reach an agreement otherwise. This means that neither spouse can make any significant unilateral changes while in the Collaborative Process. The spouses can choose to retain mental health professionals and financial professionals to be part of the Collaborative team. In these cases, the mental health professionals typically take the lead on parenting issues and address emotional issues that are impeding a settlement. The financial professionals help the spouses gather their financial documents and then prepare cash flow projections and schedules of assets and liabilities to help inform the negotiations. Attorney-Led Negotiations: This is the most loosely defined “process” and can vary considerably, depending on the attorneys involved. In essence, each spouse retains an attorney to represent them in the negotiation. The attorneys communicate directly with one another, and any formal settlement negotiations are exchanged between the attorneys. Often, the attorneys facilitate an informal exchange of documents that both sides have the information they need to engage in informed settlement discussions. The spouses speak with their attorneys to create and respond to settlement proposals. Proposals are exchanged until an agreement is reached, and the attorneys draft a written agreement for the spouses to sign. This process is often used in conjunction with mediation or litigation. The process timeline can vary considerably. Litigation: The Court Process involves filing appropriate paperwork with the Court and asking that a Judge make decisions for you. In litigation, the parties are giving up control over the outcome. But, for parties whose settlement positions are so far apart that reaching an agreement will not be possible or practical, then it may be necessary to have a judge render a decision so that the parties can obtain a final resolution. Litigation is also the only process where you can force an unwilling party to engage; or, if they still won’t engage, then can obtain relief in the absence of their participation after fulfilling certain requirements. The Court process can be very difficult to navigate without legal representation. The financial cost associated with litigation often makes it the most expensive process. There is no one “right” process. In making a process choice, it’s important to consider your individual circumstances to determine which process(es) are most likely to be successful for you. Factors to consider in making this process decision include, but are not limited to, the dynamic between you and your spouse; the needs of your children; the emotional support you and your spouse will need; the technical complexity of the issues; and your financial resources/constraints. In any initial consultation with an attorney, you should be ready to inquire about these process options and engage in an individual conversation about which process(es) may work for you.
June 1, 2023
Family Law
The Current Approach to Adoption Records and Further Need for Change
New Jersey’s Current Policy New Jersey allows an adoptee access to only certain specific records and restricts who can view these records and what kinds of information may be redacted. In May 2014, the New Jersey State Legislature passed a law permitting individuals born and/or adopted in the State of New Jersey, who are at least 18 years of age, to be able to access their original birth certificate beginning in January 2017. In addition to the adoptee, a direct descendant or spouse of the adoptee, an adoptive parent or legal guardian, and/or an agency of the state or federal government may also access the original birth certificate. As the law was passed in May 2014 but not effective until January 2017, birth parents were permitted to submit a request to redact their name or other identifying information before December 31, 2016. Under this law, birth parents MAY submit a contact preference form to the State Registrar, which allows a birth parent to indicate whether or not they would like to, or prefer not to, be contacted by an adoptee. If a birth parent files a contact preference with the Registrar, they must simultaneously complete and submit a family history form. The form includes medical, cultural, and social history information regarding the birth parent. Any birth parent who requests no contact is asked for, but not required, to update their family history information every ten years until age 40 and every five years after that. The Problem With New Jersey’s Current Approach So – what’s the problem with this approach? First and foremost, a birth parent is not required to submit a contact preference form with the State Registrar, and if they choose not to, they have no requirement imposed upon them to complete and submit a family history form. This leaves all of the information and decision-making in the hands of the birth parent and may potentially deprive the adoptee of necessary and essential background information. Notably, a birth parent is not required to update their family history information. This means that if a birth parent submits a form and then in future years either learns of essential biographical or ancestral information or has a major change in health information, they have no duty to report this information. Additionally, an adoptee is not permitted to obtain their birth certificate until reaching age 18. Should any health concerns arise before said age, the adoptee has no opportunity to obtain necessary biological information. Although this legislative change demonstrates a shift in favor of unsealing at least some information, this approach still fails to provide an adoptee with information. It also fails to impose any duty on the birth parent to provide said information. A birth parent does not need to send said information to anyone directly. Still, a duty to file this information with the Registrar would at least allow an adoptee to access this information. New York’s Current Policy On November 14, 2019, Governor Andrew M. Cuomo signed a new bill which was memorialized in Public Health Law 4138 and went into effect on January 15, 2020. This law provides unrestricted access to original birth certificates for all adult-adopted persons. It also allows access to copies of original birth certificates for direct line descendants or legal representatives. The Problem With New York’s Current Approach While this law permits an adoptee access to their original birth certificate, there is no procedure in place or information provided regarding the use of contact registries or access to the background, biological, and medical information. In addition to the lack of awareness surrounding contact registries, this law creates no obligation on behalf of the birth parent to provide updated background information. Other states have made similar amendments to their respective laws in recent years, but the general, larger issue of access to information remains. Without requirements that birth parents file a detailed background and history with their State Registrar and have a continuing obligation to amend and update same, adoptees will lack essential information for their own lives and future generations.
May 31, 2023
Tax
Operating Agreements: The Power of the Partnership Representative
Recently, a colleague asked me to review an operating agreement (not one that my colleague had drafted) from a tax standpoint. The LLC was classified as a partnership for federal income tax purposes. Setting aside the tortured regulatory allocations (it was a service partnership, distributions were pro rata, and there was no 704(c) property (property with a built-in gain or loss at the time the property was contributed to the LLC)), it was fairly straightforward. But therein lies the problem. The often-overlooked section designating a partnership representative needed substantial work. Wait, what!? The Bipartisan Budget Act ("BBA") of 2015 made the centralized partnership audit regime applicable to all partnerships for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017. I frequently encounter many older operating agreements that refer to a "Tax Matters Manager," which came about under the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA) of 1982. If your operating agreement is one of these, for the reasons discussed below, it needs to be updated. Under TEFRA, before the effective date of the centralized regime, partnerships could elect the centralized audit regime or have each individual partner audited. Obviously, large partnerships preferred the centralized regime, while smaller ones frequently elected to have an audit at the partner, not the partnership level. The BBA changed all that by taking away the election and making the centralized regime mandatory for partnerships with more than one hundred (100) partners, while partnerships with one hundred (100) or fewer partners can opt out of the centralized audit regime. IRC § 6221(b); Treas. Reg. § 301.6221(b)-1(b). Sadly, I have seen many small partnerships, or, more appropriately, the lawyer drafting the operating agreement, simply copy these provisions from an operating agreement they thought looked good without ever giving a moment's thought to the impact and consequences of these provisions. In fact, the LLC whose operating agreement prompted this particular column had less than ten (10) members. And as Professor Ted Seto, my partnership tax professor, drilled into us, partnership tax is the one area of tax law where the Code and Regs dictate the business deal. The power of the partnership representative is august, cannot be overstated, and definitely should not be overlooked. Under the BBA, the partnership representative is the sole person with authority to act on behalf of the partnership and its partners! Treas. Reg. § 301.6223-2(a). Further, "no partner, or any other person, may participate in an administrative proceeding without the permission of the IRS." Treas. Reg. § 301.6223-2(d). So, even if you wanted to participate, absent the Service's permission, you can't. The partnership representative's decisions are binding on each partner of the partnership. Treas. Reg. § 301.6223-2(a). Disagree with a decision made by the partnership representative in an audit? Tough. You're bound. Can't we limit the power of the partnership representative by including provisions in our operating agreement? As far as the Service goes, no. In fact, any such limits are prohibited by Treas. Reg. § 301.6223-2(c)(1), which states, "[n]o state law, partnership agreement, or other document or agreement may limit the authority of the partnership representative or the designated individual as described in section 6223 and this section." Yikes! The partnership must designate a partnership representative separately for each tax year, and the designation is effective only for the tax year for which it is made. Treas. Reg. § 301.6223-1(c)(1)). The designation is made on the partnership's tax return (IRS Form 1065) and is effective when the return is filed. Treas. Reg. § Regs. Sec. 301.6223-1(c)(2). The partnership representative need not be a partner. Also, the partnership representative does not have to be a person, though if the partnership representative is an entity, it is required to have a "designated individual" so the Service has an actual human being as its point of contact. Clearly, the regs say plenty of things a partnership can't do, which begs the question, what can a partnership do? What you can do is include provisions in your operating agreement that: (1) require the partnership representative to acknowledge it acts in a fiduciary capacity with respect to the partners; (2) requires the partnership representative to provide notice to each partner immediately upon the receipt of any notice (and provide a copy of any such notice) the partnership representative receives from the Service that seeks to make any adjustment or impose any penalty with respect to the partnership or its partners; (3) requires the partnership representative to employ experienced tax counsel to represent the partnership in connection with any audit or investigation of the partnership by the Service and in connection with all subsequent administrative and judicial proceedings arising out of such audit; (4) requires the partnership representative to get approval from the partners before taking any position or action with the Service, including but not limited to any decision: (i) to enter into a settlement agreement which purports to bind the partners other than the partnership representative (which, as noted above any decision will); (ii) to file a petition or request contemplated in Section 6227(a) of the Code; (iii) to enter into an agreement extending the period of limitations as contemplated in Section 6235(b) of the Code. Finally, under the BBA, the partnership can either pay an assessment or penalty at the entity level or pass it down to the partners to be paid pro rata by each partner. This election can be made with respect to each separate assessment or penalty, so to provide the most flexibility, the operating agreement should permit this decision to be made by the partners on a case-by-case basis, then communicated to the Service through the partnership representative. What's in your operating agreement? Scott Tippett is a principal at Offit Kurman, PA, where he concentrates his practice on corporate, partnership, and employee benefit tax matters. He is a member of the firm's Business Law Transactions and Intellectual Property groups. Offit Kurman PA is a national law firm that provides simple, clear solutions to complex business and tax issues. The views expressed herein are solely those of the author, are not intended as, and do not constitute legal or tax advice.
May 24, 2023
Estates and Trusts
Special Care with Special Needs Trusts (SNTs)
Providing Security and Care for our Disabled Loved Ones I was inspired to write about Special Needs Trusts (SNTs), a legal tool that can provide security and care for our disabled loved ones, as I was waiting to cross Madison Avenue. I stood beside a woman in a wheelchair as the traffic whizzed by, impatient pedestrians hovered and huffed to move around her chair and I thought of how vulnerable she must have felt at that moment – or maybe more accurately, how vulnerable I felt on her behalf. It made me think of so many of us when planning for our loved ones with special needs: financial security and long-term care can be especially triggering. Years ago, family members had to disinherit their disabled loved ones to ensure that their public benefits were not disturbed by an inheritance. Funds meant to support the disabled loved ones were left to someone else to manage, which often led to disaster. As a result, the concept of Special Needs Trusts (SNTs) was born. SNTs became a powerful tool to address these concerns and ensure that individuals with disabilities could maintain their eligibility for government benefits while maintaining access to the necessary financial resources. What is a Special Needs Trust (SNT)? A Special Needs Trust, also known as a Supplemental Needs Trust, is a legal document that holds funds for the benefit of a disabled person; the funds in an SNT are not “counted” by the government. The primary purpose of an SNT is to enhance the disabled person’s quality of life by supplementing government benefits without jeopardizing their eligibility for essential programs such as Medicaid and Supplemental Security Income (SSI). Three Types of Special Needs Trusts First-Party Special Needs Trust: A First-Party SNT is funded with the disabled individual’s own assets, such as an inheritance, personal injury settlement, or accumulated savings. The trust allows the individual to maintain eligibility for means-tested benefits. Upon the disabled person’s death, any remaining funds must reimburse the government for benefits received during the disabled person’s life. Third-Party Special Needs Trust: A Third-Party SNT is created and funded by someone other than the disabled individual. Parents, grandparents, siblings, or any other loved one can establish a Third Party SNT. Unlike a First Party SNT, there is no requirement to reimburse the government for benefits received upon the beneficiary’s passing – known as a “pay-back provision.” All remaining funds can be designated for the disabled beneficiary’s heirs, the third party’s heirs, or charitable organizations. Pooled Special Needs Trust: Pooled SNTs are administered by nonprofit organizations. Pooled SNTs allow multiple individuals with special needs to “pool” their resources into one SNT. Each beneficiary then has a separate account within the SNT, and a professional trustee from the charity manages the investment and disbursement of funds. This option is particularly beneficial for those without substantial assets or when family members cannot assume the responsibilities of managing a trust. Benefits of Special Needs Trusts Preserving Government Benefits: One of the primary advantages of an SNT is that it enables individuals with disabilities to continue receiving crucial government benefits. The assets held in a properly drafted SNT allow the disabled individual to maintain eligibility for these programs, thus ensuring access to vital healthcare services, income support, and other assistance like housing allowances. Supplementing Basic Needs: SNTs provide a supplemental source of funds that can be used to enhance the beneficiary’s quality of life. These funds may cover expenses not typically covered by government benefits, such as education, therapy, specialized equipment, home modifications, transportation, and recreational activities. Professional Management: Trusts require careful management to ensure compliance with legal and financial regulations. Professional trustees handle investment decisions, disbursements, and record-keeping responsibilities, alleviating the burden of family members and ensuring the trust is managed effectively and in the beneficiary’s best interest. Peace of Mind: By establishing an SNT, families gain peace of mind knowing that their disabled loved one will have the necessary financial resources and care even after they are no longer around. Establishing an SNT can provide a sense of security for both the beneficiary and their family. SNTs play a vital role in securing the future of individuals with disabilities by providing them with financial resources, care, and an enhanced quality of life. SNTs provide families a means to protect their disabled loved ones' eligibility for government benefits while supplementing those needs. If you would like more information on Special Needs Trusts (SNTs) and how these and other legal tools can provide security and care for your disabled loved ones, please feel free to contact me. If you want to learn more about how you can benefit your favorite charity while creating an income stream for you or your beneficiaries, check out my post on Charitable Remainder Trusts by clicking here.
May 23, 2023
Estates and Trusts
“de facto” Wills and the Harmless Error Rule - Part 2
Virginia maintains a signature requirement even for “de facto” wills With its added signature requirement, Virginia’s version of the Harmless Error Rule differs materially from the proposed uniform version of the Rule. The first part of the Virginia statute, Section 64.2-404(A), expressly permits writings not executed in compliance with the statutory attestation requirements [i.e., without all the whistles and bells] to be admitted to probate under the relevant circumstances. It was and remains the primary purpose of the Harmless Error Rule’s adoption and continued application. Virginia’s version of the Rule adds the language of Section 64.2-404(B), which (except in two very discreet situations) refuses to protect as harmless error “compliance with any requirement for a testator’s signature” and, in this respect, differs materially from the uniform code provision. The uniform code’s version of the Harmless Error Rule would overlook as “harmless” in appropriate circumstances not only the attestation requirements but also the signature requirement itself. Virginia legislators were collectively unwilling to be nearly as forgiving in this regard. With the addition of Section 64.2-404(B) and its signature requirement, the General Assembly clearly circumscribed the list of potentially “harmless errors” capable of being overlooked to allow an otherwise non-compliant will document to be accepted for probate. In one of several litigated matters relating to the Estate of Marvin Sacks, an Arlington circuit judge had occasion to address multiple facets of the statute, including not only alterations to an existing will but also to the Section 64.2-404(B) signature requirement itself. At the threshold, the respondent in Sacks sought to prevent the probate of a “de facto will” by challenging the testator’s failure to execute the document in compliance with all the attestation whistles and bells. As the Arlington court recognized, however, although Section 64.2-404 specifically references a “testator’s signature” requirement, it would be self-defeating for the statute to require “execution” of the writing in question by the testator as would otherwise be mandated by Section 64.2-403 (i.e., the whistles and bells section). Had the General Assembly intended the “testator’s signature” reference in Section 64.2-404(B) to mean a document “executed in compliance with § 64.2-403,” they would have thereby negated the purpose of the Harmless Error Rule itself. Failure to satisfy the attestation whistles and bells can only be corrected if a judicial ruling is sought within one year from the testator’s death. The right afforded under the Harmless Error Rule statute to have a court intervene to deem a non-compliant will legally enforceable has a limited lifespan. The protections otherwise afforded under Section 64.2-404(B) only survive the testator by one year. There is no exception. With the addition of subpart B to the Harmless Error Rule statute, the General Assembly saw fit to impose a time limit, what is known as a statute of limitation, by which time a proponent of a non-compliant will could otherwise seek the help of the court in having such a will declared legally enforceable is limited to the first anniversary of the testator’s death. In other words, an attestation error, otherwise deemed harmless and correctable under the Rule, ceases to be harmless one year after death. What constitutes clear and convincing evidence in this context? Prior to the 2007 adoption of the Harmless Error Rule in Virginia, all wills and changes to wills had to meet all the statutory attestation whistles and bells to be legally enforceable. Section 64.2-404 opens the door to allowing potentially harmless errors from preventing enforceability but affords such allowances only if the proponent of a will without all the requisite whistles and bells meets an elevated burden of proof regarding the testator’s intentions reflected therein and the signature appearing thereon. So what evidence is needed to meet the elevated clear and convincing standard? I include here a non-exhaustive list of factors to consider when evaluating whether a document without all the attestation whistles and bells might nevertheless be upheld as a “de facto” will. One should consider evidence of the following factors along with any other evidence tending to support or refute whether the document in question truly reflects the decedent’s testamentary intentions (and not merely draft considerations) at the time the document was made: (i) the preparation and signing of the document itself (how, where, and under what circumstances did the document come into being and/or come to be signed); (ii) witnesses to the de facto will (did they formally “witness” (i.e., sign) or were they mere coincidental observers); (iii) the temporal proximity of the de facto will to the onset of testator’s terminal condition or death; (iv) questions or concerns regarding capacity of the testator (including age of the testator and possible undue influence); (v) motivation(s) and/or (dis-)incentive(s) for the de facto will proponent to lie; (vi) the level of independence of the source of information to be considered; and (vii) the status of the documentation of testator’s most recent prior known testamentary disposition(s). Additionally, evidence of consistencies and/or inconsistencies with the following are all potentially relevant considerations as well: (i) the de facto will provision(s) compared to the testator’s previously articulated intentions; (ii) the manner of document creation compared to prior testamentary dispositions (e.g., typed or holographic; physical or mental impairments impacting writing); (iii) the manner of document creation compared to current changed circumstances (e.g., typed or holographic; physical or mental impairments impacting writing); and/or (iv) the manner of maintaining/storing the de facto will be compared to prior known testamentary disposition documentation (e.g., nightstand v. bank safe deposit box). 10 “clear and convincing” evidentiary factors: Testator Capacity/Undue Influence Testator Age/Health Signature Circumstances Witnessing Formalities Temporal Proximity – Will/Death Proponent’s Self-interestedness Source(s)’ Independence Prior Will(s) (In)consistencies – time, place, manner, and intent Finality When setting forth one’s intentions regarding the disposition of one’s property when one dies, certain formalities are expected to be followed, and with good reason. At least two witnesses together in the same place at the same time to observe the signing of a will is not an unreasonable expectation when the resulting document is intended to affect the disposition of property only upon the death of the person willing it to be so. It is, after all, for the testator’s own protection that we generally require all the whistles and bells, all the pomp and circumstance, associated with a formal will signing because the testator will not be around to answer questions about their intentions after they are dead – the only time the language of the will actually has any legal impact. When such formalities have all been adhered to, we can be sufficiently certain that the resulting document validly reflects with sufficient certainty the final wishes of the testator. The Harmless Error Rule, as set forth in Virginia Code Section 64.2-404, is there as a safety net for when things don’t always go exactly as planned or for circumstances when, despite the best of intentions, people make changes to a will without understanding or appreciating that any such edits might serve to nullify the formalities they had previously paid to achieve. This work is intended for the non-lawyer wondering whether to involve a lawyer in the preparation of one’s will or a change to one previously made (you absolutely should!) and for family members or friends of departed loved ones who discover a document which you think might or could have been an attempt by the dearly departed to express their testamentary wishes in a form and manner that may or may not be legally sufficient to be accepted as the final will of the decedent. If you happened upon this article while conducting online legal research on the subject, I commend you to the prior publication. The earlier piece was intended for legal practitioners, complete with case and statutory citations and cross-references to scholarly sources upon which I relied at the time. Since publishing the original work, I have continued to be involved in cases with ever-evolving fact patterns of situations where proponents and opponents legally battle over the legal enforceability of documents which may or may not have been intended as testamentary dispositions, i.e., will documents seeking to dispose of one’s property at death.
May 22, 2023
One Minute of Overtime
Computer-Related Exemptions
Welcome to One Minute of Overtime, where I will share insights on Labor and Employment Law topics, mostly related to minimum wage and overtime compliance issues. Compliance in this area of law is nuanced and technical, so it is critical for employers to audit and adjust their practices to remain compliant, so stop by to stay up-to-date and in-the-know. Computer systems analysts, computer programmers, software engineers, and other similarly skilled workers in the computer field may qualify for an FLSA exemption when both compensation requirements and job duties requirements are met. In contrast, IT help desk employees are generally non-exempt.
May 17, 2023
Litigation
House Bill 551 – What Will This Mean for Landlords?
In my very first newsletter, I provided commentary on the recent uptick in evictions and summary ejectment proceedings in North Carolina. I went on to cover a local story involving corporate housing tenants who were pushing for legislatures to act and introduce a bill concerning rent control, hindering landlords' ability to unilaterally increase rent by imposing a rental cap. One month later, enter House Bill 551, which was filed on April 3, 2023, and sponsored by Representatives Bradford of District 98, Hardister of District 59, K. Hall of District 91, Crutchfield of District 83, F. Jackson of District 45, McNeely of District 84, Ward of District 5, and Warren of District 76. Unfortunately, it appears that legislatures are doubling down regarding their position on rent control. As stated in my March newsletter, NCGS § 42-14.1 provides that "no county or city may enact, maintain, or enforce any ordinance or resolution which regulates the amount of rent to be charged for privately owned, single-family or multiple residential or commercial rental property." House Bill 551 further enforces this and introduces an act that would prohibit counties and cities from adopting ordinances, rules, and regulations that would prohibit landlords from refusing to rent to tenants because a tenant's lawful source of income to pay rent includes funding from a federal housing assistance program. The bill also addresses the regulation of support animals and service animals in residential tenancies and expands litigation costs, in summary, ejectment matters and homeowner's associations. Currently, under NCGS 42-46, landlords are able to recover some fees and costs related to the filing of a complaint in summary ejectment and, although limited, attorney's fees. The statute currently does not provide for recovery of appeals of summary ejectment matters. House Bill 551 modifies NCGS 42-64 to include the following language: "all actual reasonable attorneys' fees paid or owned for any appeals of summary ejectment matters." Lastly, with the addition of NCGS 42-47 regarding support and service animals, the bill also modifies NCGS 42-53, which permits landlords to charge a reasonable, nonrefundable fee for pets kept on the premises by the tenant to exclude service and support animals as defined in newly added NCGS 42-47. House Bill 551 passed its third reading on April 27, 2023, with 87 representatives voting in favor of its passage. The bill will now be sent to the Senate. What do you think about this bill? Is this legislation necessary? Do you think the passage of this bill will have a positive or negative impact? House Bill 551 is one of many that have been filed and introduced during the 2023-2024 legislative session that addresses landlord tenant related issues. Click on the following link to access a copy of House Bill 551: House Bill 551 (2023-2024 Session) - North Carolina General Assembly (ncleg.gov)
May 16, 2023
Estates and Trusts
LGBTQ+ Home Care Law Set to Go Into Effect in New York Next Month
It is no surprise to LGBTQ+ individuals and their allies that nine out of ten of those who identify as LGBTQ+ fear discrimination in medical settings. According to Services and Advocacy for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Elders (SAGE), LGBTQ+ people are two times as likely to age alone and four times less likely to have children who might otherwise serve as caregivers and advocates. This means the LGBTQ+ population is even more vulnerable as they age. As a result, and at long last, Governor Hochul signed a law that is intended to address this discrimination related to the medical care received by the LGBTQ+ community in the home care and nursing home setting. Beginning next month, New York State will require that all home health aides, certified nurses’ aides, and personal care aides – essentially the backbone of a senior’s long-term care team– will receive training focused on providing care to patients of diverse sexual orientations, expressions, and gender identities. This ambitious and much-needed law includes several components that will be incorporated into the training program. Much of the training relates to the education of the caregivers to provide comprehensive explanations of various terms related to the LGBTQ+ community. It provides an understanding of why patients with diverse sexual orientations and gender identities or expressions may conceal their identities. The goal of the training is, of course, to incorporate the concerns of these patients and ensure that they receive “person” directed care and to address the unique healthcare needs of LGBTQ+ patients. In light of the nearly 400 anti-LGBTQ+ legislative actions pending in the states across the country, it’s heartening that New York is taking the lead to combat this discrimination, especially for the most vulnerable in the LGBTQ+ population.
May 15, 2023
Estates and Trusts
Charitable Remainder Trusts: A Way of Giving Back by Paying it Forward
Many of our clients look to explore the ways in which they can give back to their favorite charities. One of the avenues worth considering is using a charitable remainder trust (CRT). CRTs are an excellent way to support your favorite charities in the future while providing an income stream now for yourself and your heirs and reducing the estate tax burden to your heirs in the future. How Charitable Remainder Trusts Work A CRT is an estate planning document, similar to a trust, that you might create to manage your assets and avoid probate. To set up a CRT, you transfer the chosen asset(s) to the trust, which a trustee then manages. You can serve as the trustee of a CRT; you could also appoint your spouse, your child, or even the charity. The trustee is responsible for investing or managing the donated assets and distributing income to you and your other income beneficiaries for your lifetime or a specified period. At the end of the trust term, the remaining assets are transferred to the charitable organizations of your choice as a charitable contribution. Types of Charitable Remainder Trusts There are two primary types of CRTs: charitable remainder annuity trusts (CRATs) and charitable remainder unitrusts (CRUTs). A CRAT pays a fixed income stream based on the initial value of the trust assets, while a CRUT pays a variable income stream based on the value of the assets determined each year. Which type of trust you choose will depend upon your personal financial goals and circumstances. A CRAT may be a better option if you want a fixed income stream and are more concerned about the stability of that income. In comparison, a CRUT may be a better option if you wish to add assets over time, are more comfortable with fluctuations in income, and wish to potentially benefit from increases in the value of the trust assets over the trust term. Benefits of Charitable Remainder Trusts Clearly, one of the primary benefits of a CRT is that you can receive income from the trust while also benefiting your favorite charity. The reason why CRTs are particularly useful is because many of our clients have highly appreciated assets with a low-cost basis, such as stocks or real estate. Instead of selling those assets, paying capital gains taxes, and then donating what is left of the proceeds to the charity, a CRT allows you to donate the highly appreciated assets to the CRT and have the CRT sell the asset, thus avoiding the capital gains tax entirely. Moreover, you are entitled to take federal and possibly a state income tax deduction for making the charitable donation to a CRT. Additionally, CRTs can provide significant estate planning benefits. Because the assets in the trust are ultimately transferred to a charitable organization, they are removed from your estate, reducing estate taxes for your heirs. CRTs can be an excellent way to support a charity while also receiving financial benefits. If you are interested in setting up a CRT, it is important to work with a qualified estate planning attorney who can help you determine the best course of action for your individual circumstances.
May 12, 2023
Family Law
Smart Home Devices and Domestic Abuse
Originally Posted 5/13/2019, no content changes. Modern homes are increasingly powered by internet-connected devices, from speakers to televisions, from thermostats to door locks, from security cameras to baby monitors. For some, this so-called “smart” technology can make life a little more convenient. For survivors of domestic violence or abuse, however, it’s fast becoming a vector for physical and psychological torment. The American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers (AAML) recently published an article about the myriad ways abusers are weaponizing smart home devices. AAML notes that such devices “are set up by one spouse/partner but used by both spouses/partners.” It’s a situation that can create an uneven—and, at times, terrifying—power dynamic when the couple splits up and the person who has moved out of the house “wishes to destroy the emotional or mental calm of the other spouse.” In one example, an ex changed their partner’s alarm time on an Echo device from 7 am to 2 am. In another, a man spoiled his ex-wife’s food by switching off the refrigerator. Other reported incidents involve people surveilling their exes through speakers and TVs and turning up the heat remotely during summer months. In some cases, abusers seek to damage not only the psyches of their victims but survivors’ credibility as well. An article in domesticshelters.org offers a horrific pair of anecdotes: “Another abuser would repeatedly unlock a survivor’s home and car doors remotely. When the survivor tried to report it, the abuser petitioned the judge in their children’s custody case that this was a security issue he was worried about, making the survivor appear as an unfit mother. Another abuser would unlock a survivor’s electronic front door, go inside and take just one item from her home at a time, like a bracelet or a pair of shoes. The survivor kept thinking she was losing things and, in some respect, her mind along with them. She knew reporting these missing items to the police without any proof of a break-in would sound outrageous.” What can you do to protect yourself? First, make a list of all smart devices in your home and make sure you’re able to access and control each one. Change the passwords for every device as soon as a partner or spouse moves out and periodically thereafter. If you suspect that someone is spying on you, harassing you, or tampering with your home, speak to your lawyer immediately. The attorneys of Offit Kurman’s Family Law Practice Group can help you protect your home and family and obtain logging information for later use in court.
May 12, 2023
Family Law
How to Prepare for Divorce
Whatever brought you to the decision to consider divorce, as with most situations, knowledge is power. If you have determined that your spouse is considering separation or divorce, or if you have decided that you have tried to resolve matters and are ready to part ways, consulting with an experienced family lawyer will provide you with information so that you can make informed decisions. One of the first steps you should take is to prepare a chronology of events from the date of your relationship, noting important dates. The chronology need not be in great detail, but organizing your thoughts and recollection will be very helpful when it’s time for you to explain your situation to your attorney, counselors, mediators, etc. “Once and done” will relieve you of the need to review your history over and over again. Your attorney will request a summary of your and your spouse’s income, expenses, assets and liabilities. You will need to provide information as to what accounts, property, etc., is jointly or solely owned by one or both of you or if the assets are owned by a corporation or partnership. Generally speaking, you will be asked to provide the following documents: Income tax returns for the past five years Recent pay stubs for you and your spouse Bank statements for all joint and separate accounts Estate plans, including trust information Shareholder or partnership agreements Titles to cars, boats, airplanes, etc. Information regarding cryptocurrency Retirement plan statements Investment account statements Information regarding all debt - including mortgages, HELOC Accounts, personal loans, etc. Investment account statements Information regarding inheritance that you or your spouse received Information regarding pre-marital assets or gifts received from someone other than your spouse (or that your spouse has received from someone other than you) Be aware that your attorney will ask you to complete a financial statement, so becoming knowledgeable of your regular expenses will be very helpful. Consider counseling, which will be very helpful during this stressful and emotional time. Choose a divorce attorney who is recognized as an expert in this field. Sandy and Cheryl are both Fellows in the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers as well as the International Academy of Family Lawyers, having been recognized by their peers and the Court as experts in the field of Family Law. In addition, both Sandy and Cheryl have been included in Best Lawyers, Super Lawyers and other publications.
May 11, 2023
Family Law
How to Protect Your Privacy
While you will be sharing a great deal of information during the divorce process, it is important for you to take steps to protect your privacy. You will be required to produce financial documents, and you may also be required to provide copies of emails and text messages. Emails and texts between yourself and your attorney are protected due to privilege. However, the same is not true as to communication with others. If you believe that your spouse has access to your computer, iPad or phone, you should take steps to protect your privacy. You may want to purchase a new iPad or computer that you use only when communicating with your counsel or your therapist. If you do that, ensure that you are using a password that is difficult to break, such as a phrase. It is natural to want to discuss the divorce process with friends and family, but that may be to your detriment if too much detail or strategy is shared. This is a good reason to confide in a counselor or therapist to discuss the process and your feelings.
May 11, 2023
Family Law
College Decision Day – Now, Who Pays?
May 1 is an important and exciting day for high school seniors around the country, as this day is known as National College Decision Day. On May 1 each year, high school seniors are required to have made their formal commitment to the university they intend to attend by accepting their offers of admission and placing their college deposits. While some states have laws that grant courts the authority to order a non-custodial parent to contribute to a child’s college expenses, New Jersey does not have this requirement. Instead, New Jersey law grants the court the discretion to require that divorced or separated parents both contribute to a child’s college education and related expenses. In Newburgh v. Arrigo, 88 N.J. 529 (1982), the Supreme Court of New Jersey set forth several factors to consider in determining parents’ college contributions. These factors include: whether the parent, if still living with the child, would have contributed toward the costs of the requested higher education; the effect of the background, values, and goals of the parent on the reasonableness of the expectation of the child for higher education; the amount of the contribution sought by the child for the cost of higher education; the ability of the parent to pay that cost; the relationship of the requested contribution to the kind of school or course of study sought by the child; the financial resources of both parents; the commitment to and aptitude of the child for the requested education; the financial resources of the child, including assets owned individually or held in custodianship or trust; the ability of the child to earn income during the school year or on vacation; the availability of financial aid in the form of college grants and loans; the child’s relationship to the paying parent, including mutual affection and shared goals as well as responsiveness to parental advice and guidance; and the relationship of the education requested to any prior training and to the overall long-range goals of the child. Id. at 545. Subsequent case law in New Jersey has narrowed the obligation for contribution to a period in which there is an affirmative request and subsequent agreement or Order directing each party’s contribution. See Gac v. Gac, 186 N.J. 535 (2006). If you are looking to require your ex-spouse/partner to contribute to your child’s college contribution, here are some tips to consider to help achieve a favorable outcome: Assist your child in first obtaining all available loans, scholarships, grants, and aid. Keep the other parent informed of what schools the child is considering, the tuition costs, etc. If the two of you do not reach an agreement as to how the costs will be paid by May or June immediately preceding the child’s metrication to university, you should make the appropriate application to the court to avoid application of Gac. We strongly recommend that you consult with a knowledgeable family law attorney licensed in New Jersey regarding the facts and nuances of your matter, as all cases are fact sensitive and specific to the family involved. If you would like to discuss this issue or any other with us, please contact us by email at Emily.Ingall@offitkurman.com and msmith@offitkurman.com or by phone at 929-476-0046 or 267-338-1378.
May 10, 2023
Family Law
New York’s Laws Fail to Recognize Gender Neutrality
"How are you supposed to be believed about the harm that you experience when people don't even believe that you exist?[1] The legal system has long been criticized for its lack of inclusivity and support for marginalized communities. One such community is the gender non-binary or genderqueer community. People who identify as they/them often encounter challenges in accessing justice, as the legal system is structured around a gender binary. New York's laws assume that individuals identify as either male or female, and they often fail to recognize, let alone support, those who do not conform to these traditional gender roles. In New York State, there is currently no legal recognition of non-binary gender markers like "they/them" on government issued identification documents. As a result, people who identify as they/them are often stripped of their rights and may face discrimination and exclusion in various aspects of their lives, including access to healthcare, education, employment, and housing. In addition, legal documents, such as identification cards, passports, and birth certificates, also present challenges for those who identify as they/ them, as these documents require gender marker designations. This results in many people being misgendered or having to conform to a gender identity that does not accurately represent who they are. Moreover, the legal system's lack of support for those who identify as they/them is particularly concerning when it comes to cases involving domestic violence and sexual assault. These individuals often face additional barriers to accessing justice and may be further marginalized by the legal system. Opposition From Conservative Groups There has been some opposition from conservative groups who argue that recognizing non-binary gender markers on identification documents goes against traditional gender norms and could lead to confusion or fraud. However, advocates for non-binary recognition argue that it is a necessary step towards greater inclusivity and recognition of all individuals, regardless of their gender identity. Ultimately, the decision to recognize non-binary gender markers on identification documents will be up to lawmakers and policymakers. There are solutions, however, to address the concerns raised by conservative groups regarding non-binary recognition on identification documents. One potential solution could be to provide educational resources and training for government officials and individuals on the importance of recognizing non-binary gender markers. Another solution could be to implement safeguards to prevent fraud, such as requiring additional documentation or verification. Some other types of safeguards that could be implemented include biometric identification technologies, such as facial recognition, fingerprinting, or iris scanning. These technologies can be used to verify an individual's identity and prevent fraud. However, it is important to balance the need for security with the need for inclusivity. This requires a careful consideration of the potential impact on non-binary individuals and ensuring that any safeguards do not place an undue burden on them. It also requires ongoing dialogue and collaboration between stakeholders to ensure that the needs of all individuals are being met. In Conclusion The inclusion of non-binary gender markers in government-issued documents would have a significant impact on the lives and experiences of non-binary individuals in New York State. It would provide them with greater recognition and visibility and help reduce discrimination and exclusion based on gender identity. This could also lead to improvements in healthcare, housing, employment, and other services that are often difficult for non-binary individuals to access. Ultimately, it will require a collaborative effort between lawmakers, advocates, and community members to find a solution that addresses concerns while also promoting inclusivity and recognition of non binary individuals. There are ongoing efforts to push for legislative changes and updates to the current system to be more inclusive of non-binary individuals. Organizations like the National Center for Transgender Equality and the New York Civil Liberties Union are actively advocating for these changes. It is important for non-binary New Yorkers to consult with a lawyer who has experience navigating the legal issues related to gender identity. This can include issues related to changing legal documents, accessing healthcare services and other services, and experiencing discrimination or harassment. _________________________________________________ [1] -- Alok Vaid-Menon, Beyond the Gender Binary
May 10, 2023
Business
UPDATE: Did Your Business Need a PPP Loan? Borrowers May Return Funds by May 14 Without Fear of Civil or Criminal Enforcement
This blog post may contain information that was accurate at the time of publication but could become outdated over time. We strive to provide relevant and timely content, but circumstances, facts, and data can change. Users are encouraged to verify the current status of any information presented and seek updated guidance where necessary. Originally posted on 5/6/2020, no content changes. UPDATE: On May 6 the SBA extended the safe harbor deadline to return PPP funds from May 7 to May 14 in FAQ #43. FAQ #43 also noted this is an automatic extension of the safe harbor and that borrowers do not need to apply for the extension. The safe harbor applies to any borrower who applied for a PPP loan prior to April 24, 2020 and repays it in full by May 14, 2020. As the SBA has provided little guidance on what it means to “need” a PPP loan, the SBA has promised to provide additional guidance on this issue prior to May 14, 2020. *All May 7th deadlines have been extended to May 14th In response to adverse publicity, a number of high-profile entities, including listed companies, that had received loans in recent weeks under the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), announced that they were returning the money. The decision by these entities was prompted in part by the SBA’s publication on April 23, 2020 of FAQ 31, emphasizing that loan applicants should think carefully before certifying, as required, that the loan was really necessary to support ongoing operations considering the uncertainty of economic conditions. The stakes were raised even further on April 28, 2020, when Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin announced that all companies receiving more than $2 million of PPP money, and other loans as appropriate, would be audited and could face criminal prosecution if their certification of “need” was false and they did not return the money by May 14th*. Predictably this sudden scrutiny of “need” by businesses that received loans has created uncertainty and anxiety among business owners who had applied in good faith, had been able to check all the qualification boxes on the application, and felt fortunate to have received the quick infusion of capital. However, the same business owners who a few weeks ago asked their attorneys and accountants for help in applying, are now asking these same advisors, with trepidation, should they keep the money? The problem of course is that the CARES Act legislation, and supporting regulations, were hastily drafted and did not provide clarity, especially with respect to “need”. Facing a hard May 14th* deadline, what should a business owner do now if he has any concerns regarding entitlement to the loan? Certainly, this requires a case-by-case analysis, beginning with making certain that the proceeds of the loan will be put to use as Congress intended: putting workers back on the payroll promptly, i.e., within the first eight weeks of receiving the loan. If a business is in an industry that cannot function during the lockdown, e.g., hospitality, the need for PPP money is difficult to justify. Second, businesses that have access to other sources of capital through, the public securities markets, private equity or hedge funds, should take a closer look at their “need”. On a more subjective basis, any company that would consider the scrutiny of a federal audit to be bad optics, e.g., a defense contractor, should carefully consider the consequences of not being able to support the need for the money. These special circumstances aside, what should the owners of a business that received a significant PPP loan be thinking about, and doing, in the next few days before the May 14th* deadline? If a borrower decides to retain the PPP Funds, affirmative steps must be taken now, if they have not been taken already, to document in writing the need for the loan. Put differently, in the event of audit by the SBA, the borrower must demonstrate that it had a good faith belief that “[c]urrent economic uncertainty makes this loan request necessary to support the ongoing operations of the Applicant.” While the Treasury and SBA have provided very little guidance on the interpretation of this borrower certification, documentation to establish a good faith belief should examine all issues the borrower faces as to economic uncertainty and necessity of the funds. Projections of revenue and cash flow under various scenarios should be made, with the margin of solvency resulting from each scenario closely analyzed. Further, the borrower should focus on issues specific to its business and also in the industry/region in which the borrower operates. Specifically, the borrower should review and document, among other items: Financial stability - budgets and projections, including payroll shortfall projections; Liquidity - cash on hand and alternative sources of funds; Geographic Location – will the area and region in which the borrower operates open first or last; Risks – is the borrower a favored “mom and pop” business; Employee Availability – cost to train, find and replace staff; Materiality of the Loan Amount – will the business be able to operate without the loan and for how long; Sensitivity to Public Scrutiny – what is the impact of an audit on prospective business opportunities; and Projected Uses of the Funds – when and how. Although the absence of clarity in the PPP legislation and rules makes good faith compliance challenging and uncertain for all, business owners should address these issues with a team of advisors including their attorneys and accountants.
May 8, 2023
Business
Why is M&A Due Diligence Important?
The success of a Merger and Acquisition (M&A) deal depends heavily on the due diligence process. Due diligence refers to the investigation and analysis of a company's financial and legal information to identify potential risks and opportunities associated with an M&A transaction. M&A due diligence is critical for several reasons. First, it helps the acquiring company to identify potential risks associated with the acquisition, such as legal or financial liabilities, compliance issues, or hidden costs. This information is vital in negotiating the terms of the deal and determining the fair value of the target company. Second, due diligence can help identify potential synergies and opportunities for growth that the acquisition may bring. By analyzing the target company's financial and operational data, the acquirer can identify areas where cost savings can be made, revenue can be increased, or efficiencies can be gained. Lastly, due diligence can help the acquirer to develop an integration plan and manage the transition process more effectively. By understanding the target company's operations and culture, the acquirer can plan and execute a seamless integration that minimizes disruption and maximizes value. Key Steps in M&A Due Diligence The due diligence process can be complex and time-consuming, involving a range of activities, such as financial analysis, legal review, and operational assessments. Below are some of the key steps involved in M&A due diligence: Identify Key Areas for Investigation: The first step in the due diligence process is to identify the key areas of investigation. This may include financial statements, tax records, legal documents, customer contracts, employee agreements, and operational data. Conduct Financial Analysis: The financial analysis involves a detailed review of the target company's financial statements, including income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements. This analysis helps identify potential financial risks and opportunities associated with the acquisition. Review Legal Documents: The legal review involves a thorough analysis of the target company's legal documents, such as contracts, agreements, leases, and intellectual property rights. This review helps identify any legal risks or liabilities associated with the acquisition. Assess Operational Data: The operational assessment involves a review of the target company's operations, including production processes, supply chain management, and customer service. This assessment helps identify potential synergies and opportunities for operational improvement. Identify Risks and Opportunities: Based on the findings of the due diligence process, the acquirer can identify potential risks and opportunities associated with the acquisition. This information is used to negotiate the terms of the deal and develop an integration plan. Develop an Integration Plan: The integration plan outlines the steps required to integrate the target company into the acquirer's operations successfully. This plan should address key areas such as organizational structure, culture, systems integration, and communication.
May 4, 2023
Labor and Employment
What You Should Know About the New Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
There’s another new federal law providing additional protections to pregnant employees. The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) requires employers with 15 or more employees to provide “reasonable accommodations” to a worker’s known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, unless the accommodation will cause the employer an “undue hardship.” It becomes effective on June 27, 2023. Beginning on that date, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) will accept charges based upon violations of this law. To date, the EEOC has issued no proposed regulations, although it will do so. It offers some guidance here. Your state may already have a similar law, but even if it does, the EEOC guidance may be helpful. The PWFA adopts the familiar ADA interactive process in order to determine if the limitations may be accommodated without undue hardship. The EEOC defines “undue hardship” as “significant difficulty or expense for the employer.” The House Committee on Education and Labor Report on the PWFA provided some examples of accommodations, including the ability to sit or drink water; receive closer parking; have flexible hours; receive appropriately sized uniforms and safety apparel; receive additional break time to use the bathroom, eat, and rest; take leave or time off to recover from childbirth; and be excused from strenuous activities and/or activities that involve exposure to compounds not safe for pregnancy. It’s sometimes difficult to determine whether a request for accommodations is reasonable or an undue hardship. Don’t assume that the request is a hardship. Remember that a leave of absence may be a reasonable accommodation; consult your employment attorney, who can provide the latest court guidance on the issue.
May 3, 2023
Labor and Employment
The Power of Mediation: Mediator Settles Fox News v. Dominion Voting Systems During European River Cruise
Mediator to the rescue again! Mediator Jerry Roscoe was called in by counsel for Fox News and Dominion Voting Systems at the eleventh hour the night before the trial began. A huge amount of money and public images were at stake in the defamation trial. After attorneys failed to broker a deal over the weekend, Judge Davis had ordered the parties to attempt again to settle. At the time of the call, Mr. Roscoe was celebrating his birthday on a cruise ship sailing from Budapest to Bucharest. Notwithstanding this situation, he accepted the surprise job and reportedly estimated that he conducted as many as 50 calls with the parties from Sunday night through Tuesday afternoon (when the jury was selected and sworn in). CNN quoted Mr. Roscoe driving home the point: “Presence in the courtroom often tends to crystalize the focus of the risks and benefits of litigation. “Once the jury sits down and you’re looking at people who are going to decide your fate, it’s an awakening experience.” The moral of the story: don’t pay astronomical court and attorneys’ fees only to roll the dice with a jury in the public eye. Instead, save time, money, and reputation by agreeing to privately mediate disputes between employers and employees. Put it in writing and make sure it’s a legally enforceable agreement. Moreover, other commercial disputes include a mediation clause. Agree to settle arguments with your neighbors, even without a written agreement. I’ve mediated those, too. This is another example of the wisdom of calling a mediator. Sometimes, we perform what seems like an impossible task. Kudos to Mr. Roscoe for settling a case for one of the largest defamation awards in history.
April 27, 2023
Estates and Trusts
“de facto” Wills and the Harmless Error Rule – Part One
This is the first of a two-part article on “de facto” wills based in substantial part on a piece I previously published several years ago in the Virginia State Bar’s Trusts and Estates Section Newsletter, Vol. 22 No. 13. In part one, I explain the basics of the statutory Harmless Error Rule and how when timely seeking a court’s application of the Rule, an otherwise non-compliant, legally deficient will might nevertheless be deemed to be legally enforceable in certain circumstances. Is a document that is not valid will capable of being deemed a will – a “de facto” will, if you will? Yes, a document intended to be a will, but failing to satisfy all the statutory requirements for being automatically accepted as such, might nevertheless be capable of being deemed a will in appropriate circumstances. To understand what I mean by a “de facto” will, it is first necessary to appreciate what it takes to be a valid will. Not every state applies the same test for recognizing a valid or “self-proving” will, i.e., a document that is legally accepted as a will without the need for any additional evidence. If all the necessary signature attestation requirements have been followed (for instance, notarized signatures, witnesses’ signatures, etc.) -- what I like to refer to simply as all of the attestation “whistles and bells,” a document will be accepted officially without the need for anyone to testify or otherwise establish the specifics as to how it was prepared, who was present at the time, etc. The will, in effect, proves itself! Not every document intended as a will meets all the statutory requirements, however. Formerly, a document intended as a will without all the whistles and bells was simply rejected as if it had never been written. Nowadays, with the adoption of the so-called “Harmless Error Rule,” or, simply, “the Rule,” an otherwise legally deficient document determined to have been intended as a will (or an improperly carried out change to an otherwise proper will) may be upheld as a valid testamentary disposition in certain circumstances. In other words, even if you screw it up, legally speaking, the law now allows for certain screw-ups to be overlooked or overcome with sufficient evidence as to what you really meant to do. Section 64.2-404 calls upon a will proponent to establish by clear and convincing evidence that the decedent intended the document or writing as or to accomplish one of several possible outcomes: adding to, altering, or revoking an existing will; making a new will; or reviving a previously revoked will in whole or in part. Virginia Code Section 64.2-404, derived from Section 2-503 of the Uniform Probate Code (UPC), is Virginia’s enactment of the Harmless Error Rule. In effect, the Rule states that certain defects may be forgiven if sufficient proof can be shown at trial that the testator intended the faulty document to be the testator’s will. One seeking to have such a document upheld as a will, known as the “proponent” of the will, must present clear and convincing evidence to establish that the testator intended the document (or alteration) to effect a final testamentary disposition, that is to say, a transfer at death. A key word here is “final.” The actual statutory language allows a writing not executed with all the proper attestation whistles and bells to be admitted to probate as a will if it is supported by clear and convincing evidence of intentionality and finality. The purpose of the Rule is to allow a judge to excuse certain otherwise harmless errors in creating a will in much the same manner as has long been allowed for similar mistakes made with other important end-of-life documents such as with life insurance beneficiary designations, for example. Case studies and evidence considered during the development of the statutory Rule suggested that the remedial impact of the Rule would primarily apply in situations either where witness signatures were lacking or instances where the testator marks up an otherwise valid will (for example, inserting/adding a provision or crossing out one term or name and replacing or substituting another in its place). Let it be said here for emphasis -- one should not make such changes to a properly executed final will document. Don’t do it! As should be plain from context, doing so potentially invalidates the entire document. Minimally, it calls into question the finality of the document as a whole and raises questions as to the timing of the change, the capacity of the person at the time of making the change, and, absent proper witnessing, whether the change was made by the testator him- or herself (or perhaps with some form of “gun to the head” when doing so!). One of the key factors to be considered if a court is to be convinced that any missing whistle or bell is, in fact, harmless error is the extent to which the proponent can establish convincingly the circumstances at the time the testator created the less than perfect document or made any changes to an existing document. What about handwritten (or holographic) wills -- the exception to the exception? It is true that, at least in Virginia, a signed will prepared entirely in the handwriting of the testator is legally sufficient as a will, even without all the attestation whistles and bells. A fully handwritten will does not need to be witnessed or notarized to be valid and enforceable. Such an exception is still subject to burdens of proof imposed on the will’s proponent. For instance, a proponent of such a will faces the burden of establishing sufficiently that the handwriting and signature are that of the testator. In part 2, I will address Virginia’s non-uniform additions to the Harmless Error Rule (the signature requirement and one-year limitations period); what one might look for when trying to meet the heightened “clear and convincing” evidentiary burden. This work is intended for the non-lawyer wondering whether to involve a lawyer in the preparation of one’s will or a change to one previously made (you absolutely should!) and for family members or friends of departed loved ones who discover a document which you think might or could have been an attempt by the dearly departed to express their testamentary wishes in a form and manner that may or may not be legally sufficient to be accepted as the final will of the decedent. If you happened upon this article while conducting on-line legal research on the subject, I commend you to the prior publication. The earlier piece was intended for legal practitioners, complete with case and statutory citations and cross-references to scholarly sources upon which I relied at the time. Since publishing the original work, I have continued to be involved in cases with ever-evolving fact patterns of situations where proponents and opponents legally battle over the legal enforceability of documents which may or may not have been intended as testamentary dispositions, i.e., will documents seeking to dispose of one’s property at death.
April 27, 2023
Family Law
Current Policy on Sealing Adoption Records and the Need for Change
Beginning in the early 1900s, almost every state in the United States enacted legislation to permanently seal an adoptee’s original birth certificate and the records from the adoption proceeding. The process of sealing an adoptee’s birth records originated to protect adoptees from social attitudes and stigmas towards illegitimacy. Throughout the early 1900s, the prevailing view was to keep records sealed until the adoptee became an adult when they could then receive their records and their birth parent’s information. Only after World War II did states enact statutes that sealed the adoption records for all parties, and the only way to release these records was by court order. This type of sealed records statute is one that most states still retain today. The process of sealing an adoptee’s birth records originated to protect adoptees from social attitudes and stigmas towards illegitimacy. In the 1970s, adoptees began challenging the sealed records process as they asserted their right to know their biological background, medical history, and related information. These challenges were brought in largely due to changes in society, specifically surrounding stigmas and views on race and religion, as transracial adoptions became popular. In many instances, society started to view adoption as a blessing. Award-winning actress and singer Kristin Chenoweth has publicly stated how she feels about her adoption — “an adoption is a full circle blessing.” In terms of her feelings regarding her birth mother, she said, “I knew my birth mother loved me so much that she wanted to give me a better life.” Chenoweth’s statements reflect a change in how society views adoption, specifically that the negative stigmas prevalent in the 1900s are no longer prevalent today. States that have passed this type of legislation require agencies to write complete adoptive profiles on the adoptee and their biological parents at the time of their adoption placement. State legislatures began responding to adoptees’ assertions of their “right to know” by enacting provisions allowing adoptees access to non-identifying information about their adoption. States that have passed this type of legislation require agencies to write complete adoptive profiles on the adoptee and their biological parents at the time of their adoption placement. Although this profile gives an adoptee some information, such as the demographics of their birth parents, states are still in control of how much information can be shared. Most only allow non-identifying information, usually consisting of descriptive details about an adoptee’s birth relatives. This information includes the date and place of birth, age of the birth parents, general physical description, race, religion, and medical history of the birth parents at the time of birth. States that have passed this type of legislation require agencies to write complete adoptive profiles on the adoptee and their biological parents at the time of their adoption placement. On the other hand, identifying information consists of names, addresses, employment, and additional information that may lead to identifying the birth parents. While non-identifying information can provide an adoptee with some sense of their background, many jurisdictions still limit the release of this information. In attempting to limit the release of information, most adoption statutes provide for all records to be sealed unless specific circumstances are met, such as a compelling demonstration of good cause, the protection and/or promotion of the welfare and best interest of the child, or medical necessity. Other states have implemented a system of good cause, establishing a burden on the requesting party to demonstrate that there is a medical or psychiatric need for the sealed information and that the information is not attainable elsewhere. In attempting to limit the release of information, most adoption statutes provide for all records to be sealed unless specific circumstances are met… However, as adoptions have become more popular and the stigmas surrounding the non-traditional family have subsided, some states have implemented programs that, while limiting, do provide adoptees with some information. For example, states such as Arkansas and Iowa have created Mutual Consent Registries. These registries are one method used to arrange the consents that are required for the release of identifying information, wherein an individual directly involved in an adoption (either the birth parent or the adoptee) can indicate their willingness, or lack thereof, in having their identifying information disclosed. However, as adoptions have become more popular and the stigmas surrounding the non-traditional family have subsided, some states have implemented programs that, while limiting, do provide adoptees with some information. While states have certainly made progress in an adoptee’s access to information in the 20th century, many of these systems are ineffective because they are not properly or commonly advertised, and there are no informational guidelines in place to demonstrate how they work. Additionally, states have made small but significant changes in recent years, and minimal information is publicized regarding the changes in place and how they impact adoptees. Curious about what your state’s laws are? Stay tuned for updates on New York and New Jersey's current laws, recent amendments, and recommended improvements.
April 26, 2023
Estates and Trusts
Can Your Spouse Disinherit You? How Marriage Protects the Family
It’s the stuff of low-budget movies. The grieving widow, dressed in black with her face veiled, sits in the attorney’s oak-paneled conference room for the reading of the will. Mystery surrounds the proceedings. Who among the family members present will inherit the patriarch’s vast estate? The gray-headed attorney breaks the will’s wax seal and begins to read. Dramatic music swells as he utters phrases like “being of sound mind,” “heirs of the body,” and “give, bequeath, and devise.” The widow’s gaze intensifies as the attorney comes to the words she has been waiting for: “And to my wife of many years, I leave . . . nothing.” Audible gasps are heard as the widow faints in despair and is carried to a nearby sofa. Had her years of dutiful service meant nothing to the man she loved? So much fiction. In the real world, there is no reading of the will (the beneficiaries will likely receive a copy by email). Women seldom wear veils. And a would-be disinherited spouse has options. One of the benefits of marriage is protection from disinheritance. In fact, one of the benefits of marriage is protection from disinheritance. In Maryland, a surviving spouse can “elect against the will” by taking a “spousal share.” This usually amounts to one-half or one-third of the estate, depending on whether there are children. But conniving spouses were known to game the system. Some would transfer their property into a trust or name someone other than their spouse as the beneficiary on assets like retirement accounts and life insurance, which transfer outside the will. Maneuvers such as these placed the assets beyond the reach of the spousal share, and surprisingly enough, they were perfectly legal. To protect the surviving spouse from such attempts at disinheritance, Maryland has expanded the pool of assets that are subject to the elective share. A surviving spouse can now take a share of the “augmented estate.” This includes both the “probate” assets of the estate and any “non-probate” assets, which transfer outside the will. Probate and Non-probate Assets Probate assets include any property a deceased person owned in his or her name alone, such as a bank account, house, or investment portfolio. This property is controlled by the person’s will and generally goes to the beneficiaries named in the document. Non-probate assets, on the other hand, include things like retirement accounts and life insurance policies, which generally name a beneficiary directly on the asset. The beneficiary will receive the account or death benefit regardless of what the will might say. Non-probate assets also include most jointly owned property—whether real estate or bank accounts—which passes outside the will to the surviving owner. Assets the late spouse put into a trust are non-probate as well, as are any accounts that name a “transfer on death” or “pay on death” beneficiary. Before Maryland changed its laws protecting the surviving spouse from disinheritance, he or she was generally limited to a portion of the probate assets when taking an elective share. By adding the non-probate assets to the mix under the augmented estate, the law allows for a larger distribution to the surviving spouse when he or she would otherwise receive little or nothing under the will. This change to the augmented estate would seem to be a vast improvement over the older setup. There can be times, however, when disinheriting a spouse is completely appropriate. For example, someone who has children from a prior marriage might want them to inherit their entire estate, rather than their new spouse. In this circumstance, a prenuptial agreement can help ensure that the prior children receive their intended inheritance. The rules surrounding the augmented estate are complex and include many exceptions. Whether you want to leave your entire estate to your spouse or not, consulting with an Estates & Trusts attorney is an essential first step.
April 24, 2023
Immigration Law
Disappointed That it Did Not Work Out For You in the H-1B lottery? Do Not Despair, There are Other Options!
Did you apply for the H-1B lottery and were not selected? It is not the end of the road, and you have some alternative options. This year we had several H-1B lottery submissions. In prior years competition for limited visa numbers was keen. The number of H-1B visa applications received and the number of applications selected in the lottery process can vary from year to year. The H-1B lottery system is a random selection process that is conducted when the number of applications exceeds the available number of visas. The number of visas available is capped at 85,000 per fiscal year, which includes 65,000 for regular H-1B visas and an additional 20,000 for applicants with advanced degrees from U.S. universities. The USCIS usually announces the number of H-1B visa applications received and the number of applications selected in the lottery after the lottery is completed, which typically occurs in April of each year. For FY 2023, USCIS received 483,927 H-1B registrations. Since the annual limit is only 85,000, that means over 80% of H-1B registrations for FY 2023 and over 70% for FY 2022 did not result in an employer hiring a new foreign national employee chosen in the random selection process. Before you throw in the towel, consider the below options: Nonimmigrant Visa Options: TN Visa: If you are a citizen of Canada or Mexico and have a job offer in the United States that falls under the NAFTA professions list, you may be eligible for a TN visa. E-3 Visa: If you are an Australian citizen and have a job offer in a specialty occupation, you may be eligible for an E-3 visa. H-1B1 Visa: If you are a citizen of Chile or Singapore and have a job offer in a specialty occupation, you may be eligible for an H-1B1 visa. O-1 Visa: If you have extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics, you may be eligible for an O-1 visa. L-1 Visa: If you have worked for a company overseas for at least one year and have been offered a job in the United States with the same company or a subsidiary, affiliate, or branch office, you may be eligible for an L-1 visa. F-1 Visa: If you are a student and want to pursue academic studies in the United States, you may be eligible for an F-1 visa. J-1 Visa: If you want to participate in an exchange program to study, teach, conduct research, or receive training in the United States, you may be eligible for a J-1 visa. Immigrant Visa Options: EB-1 Visa: If you have extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics, or are an outstanding professor or researcher, you may be eligible for an EB-1 visa. EB-2 Visa: If you have an advanced degree or exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, you may be eligible for an EB-2 visa. EB-3 Visa: If you have a bachelor's degree, are a skilled worker, or are an unskilled worker with less than two years of experience, you may be eligible for an EB-3 visa. EB-4 Visa: If you are a religious worker, broadcaster, or Afghan or Iraqi translator, you may be eligible for an EB-4 visa. EB-5 Visa: If you want to invest in a new commercial enterprise in the United States and create at least ten full-time jobs for U.S. workers, you may be eligible for an EB-5 visa. Keep in mind that each visa has its own eligibility criteria and application process. Consider consulting with an experienced immigration attorney to determine the best course of action based on your individual circumstances.
April 24, 2023
Labor and Employment
PUMP Act Changes Protections for Working Mothers
Congress passed the bipartisan Providing Urgent Maternal Protections (PUMP) for Nursing Mothers Act as part of the omnibus budget bill for the fiscal year 2023. The PUMP Act is an extension of the Break Time for Nursing Mothers Act (the pumping break time law), which is part of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The ACA requires employers to provide reasonable break time to nurse or pump and a private place to pump. Employers must provide “a place, other than a bathroom, that is shielded from view and free from intrusion from coworkers and the public, which may be used by an employee to express breast milk.” Also, employers must give “reasonable break time” to their employees to pump for up to one year after the birth of their child. Women whose positions were exempt from overtime were not entitled to these ACA protections; the PUMP Act applies to all working mothers. In addition, the PUMP Act outlines legal remedies if an employer has violated any aspect of the Act or retaliated against an employee for behaving according to the Act. Employees may immediately file suit if employers ignore the break time requirement or have indicated that they don’t intend to provide private space to pump or if they were fired for requesting break time or a private location to pump. As a practical solution, short of court, employees must notify their employers if they have not provided a space to pump, and the employer then has ten (10) days to provide an appropriate space. Keep in mind the specific requirements and take note that putting an employee into a room with a camera (even if it’s turned off) or a private room where she may be viewed through a window or door will not comply with the law. Pumping breaks may be unpaid time and scheduled at employees’ regular break time.
April 20, 2023
One Minute of Overtime
Fluctuating Workweek
Welcome to One Minute of Overtime, where I will share insights on Labor and Employment Law topics, mostly related to minimum wage and overtime compliance issues. Compliance in this area of law is nuanced and technical, so it is critical for employers to audit and adjust their practices to remain compliant, so stop by to stay up-to-date and in-the-know. Under the fluctuating workweek method, an employee receives a fixed weekly salary and overtime pay is based on the average hourly rate in a specific workweek. The average hourly rate will change from week to week depending on how many hours the employee actually worked and must always exceed the minimum wage. While this keeps the overtime premium to 0.5 times the hourly rate, it also prevents the employee from reducing pay below the agreed upon threshold when the employee works less than 40 hours in a week.
April 19, 2023
Family Law
The State of Artificial Reproductive Technology Today
The best way to predict the future is to create it. – Abraham Lincoln. April 23-29, 2023, is National Infertility Awareness Week® (NIAW). NIAW is a movement founded in 1989 by The National Infertility Association. Its mission is to empower us all, change the conversation around infertility, raise awareness about fertility issues and promote better access to fertility care for people who need it. For most individuals and/or couples trying to have a baby, when the conversation of conceiving through natural means ends, a new dialogue begins that which focuses on having a baby with the help of artificial reproductive technology. Introduction The field of artificial reproductive technology, "ART," has made significant advancements since its inception in the mid-20th century. With the ability to manipulate and control the human reproductive system, ART has revolutionized the way we approach infertility and has also presented new ethical and legal challenges. This article will provide an overview of ART, its past, present, and future, and the myriad of legal and ethical issues it faces. Clinical Definitions, Historical Discrimination, Familial Reality and Legal Concerns Clinically/historically/ discriminatorily, infertility is a reproductive disorder defined as the failure to achieve a clinical pregnancy following at least 12 months of unprotected heterosexual intercourse1. It can be related to female factors, male factors, both, or remain unexplained. In women, it is commonly caused by ovulatory dysfunction, tubal obstructions, and/or endometriosis. In men, it is often a result of abnormalities in sperm production and function or sperm duct blockages. In helping people to have the children they desire, ART challenged and altered forever conventional clinical and societal definitions of "family." It threw open the doors for those wanting to be single parents (with no need for a partner) and has broken down the barriers for members of the LGBTQIA+ community to create their own families. The nuclear family is still often considered as an entity defined only by biological ties, even though living arrangements with children (families) have become increasingly diverse in recent decades, with unmarried families, adoptive and stepfamilies, and families with same-sex parents becoming increasingly common. ART adds to this growing complexity by providing treatments to single people and gay and lesbian couples, as well as to heterosexual couples to whom the conventional definition of infertility applies.2 These former groups have also been described as facing "social infertility." 3 The use of ART worldwide has led to the conception and birth of over nine (9) million babies since being implemented in the United Kingdom in 19784. ART, as it is commonly known, refers to any technique used to assist in the conception of a child without sexual intercourse. The most common methods of artificial reproduction include in vitro fertilization (IVF), intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), and gamete intrafallopian transfer (GIFT). There are various legal considerations when it comes to artificial reproduction. There are various laws and regulations governing these practices, including requirements for informed consent, screening and testing of donors and surrogates, and restrictions on the use of certain types of genetic material. One of the key issues is related to parental rights and responsibilities. In many cases, the child conceived through artificial reproduction will have genetic material from one or both parents who are not legally recognized as the child's parents. This can create complex legal situations, particularly if the parents separate or divorce. Another legal issue that arises in the context of artificial reproduction is the question of who has control over the genetic material used in the process. This includes issues such as sperm and egg donation, surrogacy, and embryo adoption. There are various laws and regulations governing these practices, including requirements for informed consent, screening and testing of donors and surrogates, and restrictions on the use of certain types of genetic material. Additionally, there are ethical considerations to be taken into account. Some people may have moral objections to certain methods of artificial reproduction, such as using donor eggs or sperm or creating embryos for the purpose of research. Overall, the legal landscape around artificial reproduction can be complex and is constantly evolving. It is important for individuals considering these techniques to consult with legal and medical professionals to ensure they fully understand their rights and responsibilities. ________________________________________________ 1 https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/infertility/index.htm 2 Zegers-Hochschild F., Adamson G.D., Dyer S., Racowsky C., de Mouzon J., Sokol R., Rienzi L., Sunde A., Schmidt L., Cooke I.D., Simpson J.L., van der Poel S. The International Glossary on Infertility and Fertility Care, 2017. Hum. Reprod. (Oxford, England) 2017. 3 Daar J. Yale University Press; 2017. The New Eugenics: Selective Breeding in an Era of Reproductive Technologies. [Google Scholar] [Ref list] 4 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles The Past The first successful in vitro fertilization (IVF) was achieved in 1978 by Dr. Robert Edwards and Dr. Patrick Steptoe in the United Kingdom. This groundbreaking event paved the way for numerous developments in ART, including intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), and cryopreservation of eggs, sperm, and embryos. Legal regulation of ART began in the 1980s, with the United Kingdom being the first country to pass laws governing ART procedures. The U.S. followed suit with the passage of the Fertility Clinic Success Rate and Certification Act of 1992 and the creation of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) in 1944. This author's home state of New York did not "get with the program" until the Child-Parent Security Act of 2021. Present ART has become more widely available and accessible over the years, with clinics offering a variety of treatments and services to individuals struggling with infertility. In addition to IVF and ICSI, ART now includes egg and sperm donation, surrogacy, and gestational carrier arrangements. The legal landscape of ART is complex and varies from state to state and country to country. In the U.S., there is no federal regulation of ART, with each state having its own laws and regulations. This has led to a patchwork of laws that can be confusing for patients and providers alike. One of the most significant legal challenges facing ART today is the issue of parental rights. With surrogacy and gestational carrier arrangements, the question of who has legal rights to the child can be complicated. Additionally, the use of donor gametes raises questions about the rights of the donor and any resulting offspring. Future Advancements in ART technology are rapidly evolving, with researchers exploring new techniques to improve success rates and decrease risks. One area of focus is the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to analyze large datasets of patient information to identify factors that contribute to successful outcomes. Another promising development is the use of gene editing technology to address genetic diseases and disorders. While still in the early stages of research, this technology has the potential to revolutionize the field of ART by allowing parents to screen for and eliminate genetic diseases before implantation. Back to the Future: Legal Concerns With all the good news about ART, there are some serious issues, namely, the regulation of fertility clinics and other providers of fertility services. In many countries, including the United States, fertility clinics are subject to strict regulations that govern everything from the storage and use of genetic material to the types of services they can offer. These regulations are designed to protect patients and ensure that fertility treatments are safe and effective. Another legal consideration is the use of donor material in assisted reproduction. When donor eggs or sperm are used to fertilize an egg, there may be legal issues related to parental rights and responsibilities. Additionally, there may be questions around the ethical implications of using donor material, particularly when it comes to issues related to identity and family relationships. Another recent development that has significant legal and ethical implications is the use of donor eggs and sperm, which can allow people who are unable to conceive naturally to have children. However, this technology also raises questions about the rights of donors and the potential for unintended consequences, such as the possibility of unwitting incest between donor-conceived siblings. Another important aspect of infertility and the law is the legal rights and responsibilities of parents who conceive through these technologies. For example, in cases of surrogacy, legal agreements must be put in place to establish custody and visitation rights for the intended parents as well as the surrogate mother. Similarly, in cases of egg or sperm donation, legal agreements must be put in place to establish parental rights and responsibilities. Other legal concerns related to infertility may include issues around adoption, paternity and genetic testing, and the use of reproductive materials after death. It is important for anyone dealing with infertility to consult with an experienced attorney who can help navigate the legal landscape and protect their legal rights and interests through the process. It is also important to consider the role of insurance and other financial considerations in fertility care. In many cases, infertility treatments can be expensive, and insurance coverage may be limited or nonexistent. This can create significant barriers to access for individuals and families who need fertility care. Overall, there are many legal and ethical considerations to think about when it comes to assisted reproductive technologies. As we continue to explore the potential benefits and drawbacks of these technologies, it is important to strike a careful balance between innovation and regulation and to prioritize the needs and interests of patients above all else. Back to the Future: Ethical Concerns There have been several recent technological advancements in fertility treatments that have significant implications for the legal and ethical considerations surrounding assisted reproductive technologies. Some people argue that these technologies blur the line between natural conception and artificial intervention and that they represent a potential threat to human dignity and autonomy. Others argue that these technologies have the potential to improve the lives of millions of people around the world who struggle with infertility and other reproductive issues. One of the most important developments in this area is the use of in vitro fertilization (IVF) with pre-implantation genetic testing (PGT). This technology allows doctors to screen embryos for genetic abnormalities before they are implanted in the uterus, potentially reducing the risk of certain genetic disorders and increasing the chances of a successful pregnancy. However, PGT also raises serious ethical concerns, as it allows parents to select embryos based on their genetic characteristics, such as gender and physical characteristics, potentially leading to a future in which only certain traits are valued, and others are deemed undesirable or even unacceptable; which could lead to discrimination or perpetuate harmful societal norms. To balance these competing concerns, it is important for society to engage in open and transparent discussion about the use of PGT and to ensure that regulations are in place to prevent abuse of this technology. This could include limiting the types of conditions that can be screened for, as well as creating oversight committees to review and approve PGT applications. Additionally, it is important for individuals and families to have access to accurate and unbiased information about PGT, so they can make informed decisions about whether or not to use this technology in their own fertility treatment. By considering both the potential benefits and ethical concerns of PGT, we can work towards a more equitable and responsible approach to healthcare. Finally, there has been growing interest in the use of artificial intelligence (Al) and machine learning to improve the accuracy of fertility diagnosis and prediction. While these technologies have the potential to revolutionize fertility care, they also raise concerns about data privacy and the potential for biased algorithms to perpetuate existing inequalities in healthcare. Overall, the recent technological advancements in fertility treatments have significant legal and ethical implications, and it is crucial that we carefully consider these issues as we continue to develop and implement new and innovative technologies in this field. Conclusion Infertility and the law is a complex, multi-faceted issue that encompasses a range of legal and ethical considerations. Laws governing these practices vary state by state and country by county and may include regulations around consent, screening, and financial compensation. ART has come a long way since its inception in the late 1970s, and its future is promising. However, as technology advances, legal and ethical challenges will continue to arise. It is crucial for lawmakers and healthcare providers to work together to create clear and comprehensive regulations that protect the rights of patients and any resulting offspring.
April 13, 2023
Labor and Employment
Post-McLaren: How Confidentiality and Non-Disparagement Provisions in Severance Agreements Interact with Section 7 Rights
Confidentiality and non-disparagement clauses are frequently included by employers when negotiating and drafting severance agreements. Several recent challenges, on both the state and federal level, have been made to these types of provisions, specifically, whether they are illegal on their face and/or unduly coercive. The National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) recently chimed in, holding in McLaren Macomb, 372 NLRB No. 58, that an employer violates Section 7 of the NLRA “when it proffers a severance agreement with provisions that would restrict employees’ exercise of their NLRA rights,” including agreements containing broad confidentiality and/or non-disparagement prohibitions. Thus, under McLaren, an employer violates the NLRA, which applies to both union and nonunion employees, anytime it offers a severance agreement to an employee that contains an unreasonably broad confidentiality and/or non-disparagement provision – whether the employee signs the agreement is irrelevant. The McLaren decision has sparked significant interest. On March 22, 2023, NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo issued GC Memo 23-05 (the “GC Memo”), which addresses questions raised by the decision and provides guidance to employers. The memo confirms that confidentiality clauses that are narrowly tailored to restrict the dissemination of proprietary or trade secret information, have a limited duration, and are based on legitimate business reasons are permissible. Similarly, the memo notes that it is acceptable to restrict employee statements that are “maliciously untrue, such that they are made with knowledge of their falsity or with reckless disregard for their truth or falsity.” The memo also confirmed that the McLaren decision will apply retroactively; therefore, agreements proffered to employees prior to February 21, 2023, may be subject to challenge up to six months after the unlawful proffer if unsigned. Executed agreements containing unlawful provisions are not subject to any time bar if they do not contain an expiration date. Importantly, the GC Memo also clarified that the decision is not limited to severance agreements. The types of provisions that may interfere with Section 7 rights include noncompete clauses, non-solicitation clauses, no-poaching clauses, broad liability releases and covenants not to sue that go beyond the employer and/or employment claims, and cooperation requirements involving any current or future investigation or proceeding involving the employer as that affects the employee’s right to refrain under Section 7, such as if the employee were asked to testify against co-workers that the employee assisted with filing an unfair labor practice charge. Considering the McLaren decision and the GC Memo, employers should review and update their template agreements to mitigate or eliminate risk. This includes not only severance agreements, but also any separation or settlement agreements and other employment-related documents. Employers may also want to consider whether to take the preemptive remedial action of notifying prior recipients of agreements that overbroad confidentiality and non-disparagement restrictions will not be enforced.
April 11, 2023
Page 26 of 35
About the Blog
Receive timely content, newsletters and event information delivered to your inbox.
