Best Lawyers in America® has named Lewis Rice members Craig S. Biesterfeld, Joseph E. Martineau, and Charles F. Miller among its “Lawyers of the Year” for 2019. Best Lawyers compiles lists of outstanding attorneys by conducting exhaustive peer-review surveys in which thousands of leading lawyers confidentially evaluate their professional peers. Only one attorney in each practice area and designated metropolitan area may receive the honor of “Lawyer of the Year.”
Three months ago, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, holding that the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) does not prevent the use of arbitration agreements with class and collective action waivers covered by the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”). (See our discussion of Epic here.) The Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has now similarly concluded in Gaffers v. Kelly Services, Inc., that the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) does not bar such arbitration arrangements. While this is not a surprising outcome in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling, the decision underscores the influence that Epic has had and will continue to have as courts evaluate efforts to evade promises to arbitrate.
Andrés José Hernández Lossada was selected in Legal Week’s Private Client Global Elite: ‘Ones to Watch’ 2018.
Lewis Rice is pleased to announce that 56 attorneys have been named to the 2019 Best Lawyers in America® annual list. We would also like to recognize Charles F. Miller, Craig S. Biesterfeld, and Joseph E. Martineau for being honored as Best Lawyers’ “Lawyers of the Year” for 2019. Click here to read more about the “Lawyers of the Year.”
One of the most common questions in an international transaction is the tax liability of the non-resident on the income proposed to be generated in India on provision of managerial, technical or consultancy services in India. In this article, we will be addressing the issue faced vis-à-vis a withholding tax implication on payments made to foreign collaborators for provision of technical services.
In Brief: Significant recommendations and 29 associated actions to stabilise employer and public liability insurance costs have been published by The Cost of Insurance Working Group (CIWG). Key proposals include:- Encouraging transparency through the establishment of an insurance price index; Limiting personal injuries awards; and Formulating guidelines on suspected fraudulent claims.
Statement 1 of the Statements of Antitrust Enforcement Policy in Health Care recognizes that small hospitals, particularly those in rural areas, may be unable to achieve cost savings through efficiencies, such as those that could be achieved by larger hospitals. Statement 1 also notes that, in many cases, a small rural hospital may be the only hospital in the relevant geographic market. As a result, Statement 1 provides an antitrust safety zone for mergers involving small hospitals; the antitrust enforcement agencies will not challenge transactions involving these small hospitals, “absent extraordinary circumstances.”
Minnesota: High court strikes down tax on trust income from the sale of shares in Minnesota corporation
The Supreme Court of Minnesota recently struck down the State Tax Commissioner’s attempt to impose an income tax on trust income from the sale of shares in a Minnesota corporation. The Court issued its opinion in Fielding v. Commissioner of Revenue on July 18, 2018, finding that the tax violates constitutional due Process protections against extraterritorial taxation.
Washington, DC (August 16, 2018) – Epstein Becker Green (EBG) is pleased to announce that Neil P. Di Spirito, an attorney with more than two decades of experience advising pharmaceutical, medical device, biologic, and life sciences clients on compliance with U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, has joined as a Member of the Firm in the Health Care and Life Sciences practice in the District of Columbia and Florida.
In this briefing we look at two recent Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decisions relevant to dismissal: In the first, Quintiles Commercial UK Ltd v Barongo, the EAT considered whether an Employment Tribunal had been correct in deciding that a dismissal for a first offence of misconduct had been automatically unfair where the conduct in question had been serious, but not “gross”, misconduct; Afzal v East London Pizza Ltd T/A Dominos Pizza, on the other hand, addressed the crucial question of whether the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures has wider application to dismissals for some other substantial reason.