Twitter LinkedIn


Amendment to the FLSA: The Tip Income Protection Act of 2018 >
April 2, 2018
The Legal Intelligencer
By: Andrea M. Kirshenbaum
Restaurants and hotels increasingly have found themselves over the last several years as defendants in lawsuits or the subject of investigation by the DOL's Wage and Hour Division challenging their "tip pooling" practices. hospitality industry employers typically collect a percentage of the tips received from staff who receive tips and redistribute, which often provides additional wages to staff who typically earn less in tips, like hosts or bellhops. On March 23, Congress got into the act via The Omnibus Spending Bill.

Pa. High Court Ruling Erodes Medical Peer Review Protection >
March 30, 2018
By: Robin Locke Nagele
On March 27, 2018, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decided Reginelli v. Boggs, its first major peer review analysis in more than two decades since its plurality decision in McClellan v. HMO of Pennsylvania. The opinion is striking and signals two very significant shifts in Pennsylvania peer review analysis. First, the court held that a physician practice group that employed physicians and other licensed health care providers did not qualify for peer review privilege protection either for its own internal peer review activities or for peer review activities that it had been engaged to conduct on the hospital's behalf. Second, the court, in dicta, appears to have eliminated peer review protection for hospital credentialing.

Polygraph Protection Act Claim Denied in Recent Case >
March 19, 2018
The Legal Intelligencer
By: Sidney R. Steinberg
Although we often plead or defend various state law claims ancillary to our more usual employment discrimination actions, they rarely drive cases and we rarely have the opportunity to discuss such claims in this column. But the recent post-trial decision in Accurso v. Infra-Red Services involves a wide variety of seldom-litigated claims.

False Claims Act Case Addresses Causation Discrimination Cases >
February 16, 2018
The Legal Intelligencer
By: Sidney R. Steinberg
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit's recent decision in DiFiore v. CSL Behring is instructive, not just for False Claims Act claims, but for a lengthy discussion of the causation standards under Title VII, the Age Discrimination Employment Act and Family and Medical Leave Act. The case also addresses the standard for successfully stating a claim of constructive discharge.

Tax-Exempt Organizations Face A New Excise Tax >
February 8, 2018
By: James R. Malone, Jr.
On Dec. 22, 2016, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act became law. For exempt organizations, the TCJA included a key change: There is now an excise tax applicable to exempt organizations on "excess" executive compensation.

How to Use IRAC Strategies for a Successful Job Interview >
February 1, 2018
The Legal Intelligencer
Some strategies young attorneys and new law school grads can use for successful interviews, using the IRAC paradigm.

Gaining a Winning Perspective in Mediation: It's All About the Frame >
January 16, 2018
The Legal Intelligencer's ADR Supplement
By: Michael W. Winfield
The article examines how to best understand a client's needs when entering mediation and how to define a "win" post-conflict resolution.

Contested Harassing Statements Leads to Denial of Summary Judgment >
January 11, 2018
The Legal Intelligencer
By: Sidney R. Steinberg
"He said, she said" is one of the clearest paths to trial for a plaintiff claiming workplace harassment or discrimination. This is particularly so when the statements in question are explosive. A clear example of this conundrum for employers was addressed in the recent decision of El v. Advance Stores.

When Government Knowledge Of Industry Practice Bars FCA Claims >
January 3, 2018
By: Carolyn H. Kendall
On Nov. 16, 2017, the Third Circuit ended a long-fought False Claims Act case of alleged Medicare Part D fraud, holding that a pharmacy benefit manager's limited noncompliance with pharmacy claims processing requirements was not material to Medicare's payment decisions within the meaning of the U.S. Supreme Court's Escobar decision. The Third Circuit's affirmation of the district court's summary judgment dismissal relied heavily on evidence that the government was aware that the alleged noncompliance was an industry practice, even though the government may not have been aware of the specific PBM's alleged noncompliance.

Changes in Partnership Audit Procedures Call for Changes in Partnership Agreements >
December 18, 2017
The Legal Intelligencer
By: F. Traynor Beck and James R. Malone, Jr.
As 2017 draws to a close, changes that will go into effect for tax years that begin after Dec. 31 mean that every business that is treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes needs to revise their partnership or operating agreement. The changes, which include the treatment of small partnerships, control over the audit process, and shifting of the tax bill from partners to the partnership, will render existing agreements obsolete and leave partners' interests unprotected.

PSQIA Prompts Federal Courts to Reconsider a Federal Common Law Peer Review Privilege >
December 1, 2017
AHLA's MedStaff News
By: Robin Locke Nagele and Elizabeth M. Hein
Health care entities and other organizations conducting medical peer review have, for years, faced uncertainty regarding whether documents created in the course of medical peer review will be discoverable in litigation. While all 50 states have enacted medical peer review statutes, which grant varying degrees of protection to documents used by peer review committees, courts often have narrowly interpreted the privileges created by such statutes.

Mr. Mueller's Options, Short Of Indictment >
November 27, 2017
By: Ronald H. Levine
Suppose special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation unearths evidence that falls short of the legal standard to indict (probable cause), or falls short of the DOJ policy standard required to seek an indictment (admissible evidence probably sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction). Suppose further that - as a matter of national security or noncriminal malfeasance - this evidence would likely be of great interest to the public and/or relevant to congressional committees investigating parallel and related matters. Do potential disclosure options exist notwithstanding the general rule of grand jury secrecy? Yes.

« previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next »