Article(s) published by this organization: 133
| 1 | Beware the Inadvertent Tax Shelter Steven D. Bortnick; Pepper Hamilton LLP; July 16, 2008, previously published on June 2008 Congress and the IRS continue to view tax shelters with a high level of scrutiny, and to enact legislation and rules designed to limit the ability of taxpayers to take certain tax positions. One of the weapons in the IRS's arsenal is its ability to identify certain transactions as "listed... |
| 2 | U.S. Tax Court Warns Taxpayers to Mind Their Methods - Capital One Financial Corp. v. Commissioner Ellen McElroy, Marc Nickel; Pepper Hamilton LLP; July 16, 2008, previously published on June 2008 On May 22, 2008, the Tax Court granted the IRS's motion for partial summary judgment, and ruled that Capital One Financial Corp. and two of its subsidiaries failed to obtain consent to change the treatment of late-fee income from their credit card business. |
| 3 | Sustaining Trust: The AAMC Adopts Report of Task Force on Industry Funding of Medical Education Kevin J. Dill; Pepper Hamilton LLP; July 16, 2008, previously published on June 2008 On June 19, 2008, the Executive Council of the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) unanimously approved a report recommending that all medical schools and academic medical centers adopt policies to govern the relationship between their academic mission and industry involvement. |
| 4 | Los Angeles Study Shows Problems with DMEPOS Compliance Nirvana Harris; Pepper Hamilton LLP; July 16, 2008, previously published on June 2008 Suppliers of durable medical equipment, prosthetics, orthotics and supplies (DMEPOS) should be aware of the latest report on vulnerabilities found in the DMEPOS benefit, released by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (OIG) in February 2008. |
| 5 | 'Unassumable' Executory Contracts - Surviving the Ride through Bankruptcy David M. Fournier, Anne Marie Aaronson; Pepper Hamilton LLP; July 16, 2008, previously published on June 30, 2008 Among the most valuable restructuring tools available to a chapter 11 debtor is the ability to assume or reject executory contracts pursuant to Section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code. A debtor that elects to assume a contract can cure defaults, provide adequate assurance of future performance and... |
| 6 | When Carrying Out a RIF, the U.S. Supreme Court Holds that Employers Have a New Burden to Defend Against Age Discrimination Claims Maureen Quinn Dwyer; Pepper Hamilton LLP; July 10, 2008, previously published on June 24, 2008 Employers now have a new burden of proof to successfully defend against disparate impact claims of age discrimination when carrying out a reduction in force (RIF). |
| 7 | New Connecticut Data Protection Law Imposes a Maximum Fine of $500,000 for Willful Violations M. Peter Adler; Pepper Hamilton LLP; July 7, 2008, previously published on June 19, 2008 On June 10, 2008, Connecticut Gov. M. Jodi Rell signed into law SB 5658, which subjects individuals to civil fines of up to $500,000 for an intentional failure to safeguard personal information maintained in paper or electronic form. |
| 8 | North Carolina Appellate Court Holds Limitation of Damages and Indirect Damages Provisions in Engineering Contract to Be Enforceable Pepper Hamilton LLP; July 7, 2008, previously published on June 2008 Mostellar Mansion, LLC (Mansion) entered into a contract with Mactec Engineering and Consulting of Georgia, Inc. (Mactec) in connection with Mostellar's plan to purchase a tract of land for the construction of an apartment complex (the Project Site). |
| 9 | Are You a Trustee? Pepper Hamilton LLP; July 7, 2008, previously published on June 2008 If you are presently serving as a trustee, you should know that Pennsylvania's Uniform Trust Act requires the trustee in certain circumstances to send notice of the trust to various persons. In many cases, the deadline for sending the notice is November 8, 2008. When and to whom notice must be sent... |
| 10 | New York Appellate Court Holds That No Damages for Delay Clause Does Not Bar Recovery of Early Completion Bonus Pepper Hamilton LLP; July 7, 2008, previously published on June 2008 The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York held that an early completion bonus in a construction contract was not barred by a "no damages for delay" clause as it was a bid item of the contract. |
