October 17, 2010
Lidings has authored the title “An Introduction to Russian Business Law”
Lidings, the Russian law firm dedicated to advising foreign companies on all aspects of Russian law, has recently authored the title “An Introduction to Russian Business Law”. Published by Aspatore Books, a Thomson Reuters business, this book discusses key aspects of Russian business law, providing an overview of theoretical legal issues as well as concentrating on practical areas of the law and analyzing recent findings from court cases.
Along with descriptions of the major fields within Russian business law, such as corporate, foreign investment, competition, employment, litigation, and arbitration, this book emphasizes the legislative regulation of specific business areas, including mining, banking and insurance, telecommunication, pharmaceutical, construction, retail, and others.
The authors also focus on more practical topics, from conducting legal due diligence in Russia to providing recommendations to investors on what corporate structure to choose.
October 15, 2010
Readers of this blog know that, in October 2009, in Sunbelt Rentals, Inc. v. Ehlers, 333 Ill.Dec. 791, 915 N.E.2d 862 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009), an Illinois appellate court reexamined and rejected over thirty years of well-established precedent regarding the enforceability of restrictive covenants. Specifically, it rejected the “legitimate business interest” test long applied as a threshold issue by Illinois courts when deciding the enforceability of a restrictive covenant (i.e., before an Illinois court will address the reasonableness of a restrictive covenant, the employer must first establish that it is supported by a “legitimate business interest” – a tall order given how that term is defined in Illinois).
October 13, 2010
By Michael Kun
Employers with operations in California continue to await a ruling from the California Supreme Court on the question of whether employers must “ensure” that meal and rest breaks are taken, or merely make them “available.”
The issue has long been before the Court in the similarly-named Brinker and Brinkley cases, and will turn largely on a single question: what does the word “provide” mean.
ILN Today Post
October 13, 2010
British Columbians are eagerly awaiting the release of the Ministry of Environment’s consultation papers on the proposed Cap and Trade Emissions Trading Regulation and the Cap and Trade Offsets Regulation, which were set to be posted on the Ministry’s website in September 2010. Once the consultation papers are posted a 45 day consultation period will follow where the Ministry will be seeking comments from stakeholders, First Nations and the general public on the proposed regulations.
October 13, 2010
On October 14, the IRS announced that the Health Care Reform Law’s requirement that employers report the cost of health insurance on W-2’s along with wages will be delayed by one year. Now, employers must report health insurance cost on the 2012 W-2s, which in most cases will be issued to employees in January 2013.
The announcement explained that “the Treasury Department and the IRS have determined that this relief is necessary to provide employers the time they need to make changes to their payroll systems or procedures in preparation for compliance with the new reporting requirement.” The announcement also clarified that health insurance amounts listed on W-2s are not taxable as wages.
October 12, 2010
* Co-Authored by Christie O. Tate.
When drafting employee confidentiality agreements, there is a tendency to think that no restriction can be too tight. However, a recent decision by the Illinois Appellate Court, The Town of Cicero v. Wayne A. Johnson, held that a confidentiality provision in a separation agreement was so onerous that the entire provision was unenforceable.
Wayne A. Johnson served as the Inspector General and Superintendent of Police for the Town of Cicero, Illinois from February 2003 to April 2005. On April 12, 2005, Johnson and Cicero entered into a “Confidential Severance Agreement and General Release,” which was drafted by a Cicero attorney. Under the confidentiality provision of that agreement, Johnson agreed that, in addition to keeping the terms of the agreement confidential, “neither he nor his agents will disclose anything relating to his employment” to Cicero’s “remaining employees, former or prospective employees, people doing business with [Cicero], and to the media” (emphasis added).
ILN Today Post
October 8, 2010
On October 7, 2010, Davis Malm attorneys Samuel B. (Sandy) Moskowitz and Rebecca L. Andrews won a significant victory for their condominium-unit-owner clients in a much-anticipated Massachusetts Land Court decision supporting developer flexibility in setting percentage interests in condominiums containing affordable housing units. The case involved a challenge to a 20-year old condominium’s schedule of percentage interests by the owners of units subject to affordable housing restrictions limiting the prices at which they could be sold. Those owners had argued that, in setting the percentage interests in 1988, the developer had unlawfully ignored the price restrictions on the affordable units and thus assigned percentage interests to those units that were too high, leading to the affordable units being overcharged for common expenses for 20 years. Judge Trombly of the Land Court rejected their arguments, ruling that the Condominium Statute did not obligate the developer to set the units’ percentage interests based on their original sale prices and that the developer had properly taken other considerations into account when he assigned percentage interests per the units’ relative “fair values,” as the Statute provided. While the decision was pending, the Condominium Statute was amended to provide more flexibility in this regard, but it is not clear that the amendment can be applied retroactively and it was not a factor in the Court’s decision.
ILN Today Post
October 6, 2010
As we await federal medical loss ratio (“MLR”) standards and federal rulemaking by the Secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) related to new federal reporting obligations by health insurance issuers of “unreasonable premium increases,” it is helpful to consider recent health insurance premium rating activities and challenges in Massachusetts. In summary, on April 1, 2010, the Massachusetts Division of Insurance (“Division”) disapproved all premium rate increases filed by health insurance carriers for small business and individual customers that exceeded 7.7 percent – which was 150 percent of the New England Medical CPI for 2009. The affected health insurance carriers filed administrative appeals of the Division’s disapprovals of their premium rates. All of these administrative appeals have now been resolved, with mixed results. This client alert summarizes the Massachusetts rate disapproval proceedings and resolutions, the new Massachusetts rate filing legislation, and the implications of the Massachusetts experience for national health reform.
ILN Today Post
October 4, 2010
Davis Malm is pleased to announce that Paul L. Feldman, David Rapaport, and Michael D. Weisman have been selected 2011 “Best Lawyers in America” for their exceptional work in their respective areas of Real Estate Law, Labor and Employment Law, and Personal Injury Litigation. Selections are featured in the just-released 2011 edition of The Best Lawyers in America and will be excerpted in theBoston Globe in 2011. Please click here to see Davis Malm’s listing in the 2011 edition.