DurstNotes on Divorce Law - # 5

no picture

DurstNotes on Divorce Law is a nine part podcast series, and is part of the Divorce Law Podcast with Robert J. Durst, Shareholder and Chair of Stark & Stark's Divorce Law Group. DurstNotes on Divorce Law podcast series is designed to give you a brief overview of the several most common areas of divorce law, enabling you to better understand your divorce and the law.

This is the fifth installment of DurstNotes on Divorce Law, and will discuss alimony. The podcast will address the factors that are considered in determine alimony, a discussion on the differences between alimony and child support, and the ability to modify an alimony payment.

You can download installment #5 here. (5.9 MB)

Installment 5 Show Notes (PDF)

Tags:

DurstNotes on Divorce Law - # 4

no picture

DurstNotes on Divorce Law is a nine part podcast series, and is part of the Divorce Law Podcast with Robert J. Durst, Shareholder and Chair of Stark & Stark's Divorce Law Group. DurstNotes on Divorce Law podcast series is designed to give you a brief overview of the several most common areas of divorce law, enabling you to better understand your divorce and the law.

This is the fourth installment of DurstNotes on Divorce Law, and will discuss the payment of college expenses for a child. The podcast will address the determining factors of college expenses such as the amount of contribution being sought, the ability of each parent to pay the anticipated amount, and the financial resources of the child.

You can download installment #4 here. (5.1 MB)

Installment 4 Show Notes
(PDF)

Tags:

New Law Requires Removal of Snow and Ice From Handicapped Parking Within 24 Hours

no picture

On January 13, 2008, Governor Jon Corzine signed into law C. 39:4-207.9, which requires that snow and/or ice must be removed from handicapped parking spaces to provide accessibility for disabled persons within twenty four (24) hours after the weather condition causing the snow or ice ceases.  This new provision amends the previous law, which required handicapped parking spaces to be cleared within forty eight (48) hours after a snow or ice storm.  The new provision also increases potential fines for persons who violate the law to up to $1,000 for each parking space that is obstructed.  The full text of this legislation can be found here.

As specified in the text of the legislation, the obligation to remove snow and ice is imposed upon a person “who owns or controls a parking area which is open to the public or to which the public is invited ... ”.  Although it is arguable as to whether the parking areas in a private community association would be considered “open to the public”, and thus fall under the requirements and potential penalties associated with this law, the prudent approach for all community associations with handicapped parking spaces on common property is to comply with these new requirements.  In addition, associations should consider incorporating these requirements into any contracts regarding snow removal services.

If you would like to discuss this legislation or how it affects your community associations in more detail, please contact Jonathan H. Katz at (609) 219-7448 or via e-mail at jkatz@stark-stark.com.  

DurstNotes on Divorce Law - # 3

no picture

DurstNotes on Divorce Law is a nine part podcast series, and is part of the Divorce Law Podcast with Robert J. Durst, Shareholder and Chair of Stark & Stark's Divorce Law Group. DurstNotes on Divorce Law podcast series is designed to give you a brief overview of the several most common areas of divorce law, enabling you to better understand your divorce and the law.

This is the third installment of DurstNotes on Divorce Law, and will discuss the emancipation of a child. This podcast will address state regulations and the exceptions to these regulations, what factors are considered when emancipation is an option, and how a family's lifestyle can determine whether or not emancipation is the best option for the child.

You can download installment #3 here. (4.5 MB)

Installment 3 Show Notes (PDF)

Tags:

Ensuring the Benefit of the Bargain - Due Diligence for Business Acquisitions

no picture

Before purchasing a business, the proposed buyer of company should request and review extensive documents about the target company’s ownership, function, income, assets, obligations and liabilities.  That process, called “due diligence” affords the buyer the last real chance understand exactly what he or she is buying. 

The importance of conducting due diligence in an organized and exhaustive way cannot be overstated.  Failure to do so could lead the buyer to unknowingly purchase a company that is not viable under new ownership, or a company that is facing serious legal or financial issues. Therefore, to ensure the benefit of the bargain, the shrewd buyer should take full advantage of due diligence.

Having represented clients in both local business and multinational corporate acquisitions, I’ve realized that the due diligence process for each is surprisingly similar. That is because no matter the size of the target company, buyers have universal concerns about the target company remaining profitable under new ownership. 
 
Depending upon the nature of the transaction, such as in the case of a small business owner who does not want to upset the employees, the sale purchase agreement may require the buyer to conduct due diligence discreetly by, for example, visiting the business off-hours or by only contacting a designated individual for follow-up.  Due diligence may also require a personal visit to the target company, or even the seller opening all of its files for review in a designated place (usually a conference room or online on a secure website).

Ideally, a trusted professional should issue the due diligence requests, and then review all of the responsive documentation. An experienced attorney can be invaluable in that respect by knowing exactly what documents to seek, by helping the buyer to identify irregularities in the responses, and by drawing  the buyer’s attention to the important risks of the deal.  It may also be beneficial to have an accountant review the financial documents provided in due diligence to advise the buyer as to the target company’s financial health.

In order to capture the complete picture of target business for the buyer, the due diligence requests and documentary responses should at least address the following aspects:

Corporate Documents
The buyer should review and understand the implications of all of the governing documents for the target company along with minutes of the board of directors or shareholders, Certificates of Good Standing; stock certificates and stock ledgers.  That way, the buyer can understand how the company has operated and how it should continue to operate under new ownership.

Intellectual Property
Name recognition is always an issue.  Therefore, the buyer should review evidence of any trademarks, trade names, service marks, patents or copyrights that may be registered, pending, rejected, searched, or even contemplated by the target company.  The buyer should also seek a list of all know-how, trade secrets and technical information material to the target company’s business to make sure that the buyer will be able to continue to operate the business after the acquisition.

Furthermore, the buyer should analyze the way the target company has protected the intellectual property, and should review all contracts or documents relating to the protection of proprietary information such as agreements with independent contractors, confidential information policies and non-disclosure agreements.  Otherwise, the intellectual property may not be worth very much if it has been or may easily be disclosed to the public.

Material Contracts and Agreements

The buyer needs to know if the target company is contractually obligated or restricted from taking action after the acquisition, and whether or not the target company may assign all of its business contracts to the buyer as the new owner. For example, if most of the target company’s revenue stems from a service contract with a local government, the buyer should ensure that the target company will be able to continue providing services under that contract even after the buyer becomes the new owner.

It is therefore imperative for the buyer to review all of the contracts that affect the target company’s performance.  Some examples include the target company’s credit agreements, mortgage agreements, financial or performance guaranties, notes, indemnifications, sales & service agreements, non-solicitation agreements, non-compete and marketing agreements.

Litigation
Thorough due diligence includes a search to determine if the target company is subject to or even threatened by litigation that may be extremely expensive to defend.  While the claims facing the target company may be of little substance, the buyer should at least know what to expect, and to make sure that he or she is properly indemnified against the cost of pre-existing claims or litigation in the sale purchase agreement. 

Employees
The buyer should be able to identify at least the key employees to understand how each one contributes toward the target company’s daily operations, in addition to understanding how the employees are (and may continue to be) compensated. In that respect, the buyer should review all: employee lists, employment agreements, benefits policies, retirement plan policies and compensation schedules.

Financial Information
It is often advisable for the buyer to have an accountant review the target corporation’s income tax returns and financial statements to evaluate the target company’s financial health, to determine if there are any tax issues, and perhaps to advise if the purchase price is fair under those circumstances.

Property
Because the target company’s real and personal property may be the most expensive aspect of the deal, the buyer needs to know all of the details surrounding such property.  Buyers therefore often seek bills of sale, deeds, appraisals, depreciation schedules or restrictions on that property.

Insurance
The buyer or the buyer’s attorney should review all material insurance policies affecting the target company, and should ensure that the policies are appropriate and up-to-date.

Governmental Regulations
Finally, all target companies answer to a higher authority . . . the government.  Therefore, the buyer may request OSHA, EPA, IRS, EEO, or other governmental agency inquiries, as well as copies of all permits and licenses necessary to conduct the company's business.

After conducting due diligence, the buyer should have a full understanding of the target company and its relative value as a going concern.  If the buyer chooses not to conduct extensive due diligence, well, caveat emptor.

Kerviel Haunts Credit Agricole, HSBC and Toronto-Dominion Too

no picture

Bill Singer, Shareholder and member of Stark & Stark's Securities group, was quoted in the article Kerviel Haunts Credit Agricole, HSBC and Toronto-Dominion Too on Bloomberg.com.

Mr. Singer was interviewed for the article and credits the recent $7.1 billion loss incurred by a Societe Generale trader through his fraudulent trading practices to an inexperience in young traders who don't always know that it's often better to take a short loss than to try to trade their way out .

You can read the full article here.

New York Condominiums Sue Town Over Municipal Services

no picture

In late January, a group of condominium associations and owners filed suit against the Village of Piedmont, charging that Piedmont had violated their civil rights and failed to provide equal protection under the law as a result of unfair taxes and assessments.  The owners allege that Piedmont has taxed them for services they have not received – such as trash collection and snow removal – and that they are required to pay for such services as part of their monthly common condominium charges.  So what are these owners and associations seeking in damages? $85 million...
   
In most states, municipalities provide certain municipal services – such as snow removal, trash collection, recycling and street lighting – to residents of traditional single family homes, but do not offer these same services to residents of condominiums or other common interest communities.  Yet, owners in these communities pay the same property taxes as single family homeowners in addition to their respective common expense assessments, essentially requiring that owners in community associations pay twice to receive basic municipal services, such as a weekly trash pick-up or the plowing of their streets following a snow storm.

Unlike New York, New Jersey addressed this issue of double taxation by enacting the Municipal Services Act, N.J.S.A. 40:67-23.2 to -23.8, which was the first legislation in the country to address municipal services equalization for common interest communities.  Pursuant to this Act, every municipality in New Jersey is required to either provide certain services to each qualified private community within its borders or reimburse the association for these services, including snow removal, trash collection and recycling.  The purpose of the Act is to require “that a municipality enact ordinances to provide the same services along the roads and streets of a qualified private community as it provides to other residents along its public roads and streets” and to eliminate “double payment for some services which the residents of qualified private communities now pay through property taxes and fees to their association.”

While not unique, New Jersey is one of only a few states that provide for such benefits to its residents. New York has not yet followed suit, but the Piedmont lawsuit may begin to change people’s opinions about how condominium associations are taxed and receive municipal services.  Only time will tell how New York will address the issue of municipal services equalization and the problem double taxation of common interest communities. It is possible that the elected representatives in these states will enact legislation similar to that of New Jersey’s Municipal Services Act, which provides at least some relief to community association members.  Until then, owners in these communities continue to pay the same property taxes as single family homeowners on top of their respective common expense assessments, essentially paying double for their municipal services.

If you would like to discuss this issue or how it affects your association in greater detail, please contact Jonathan H. Katz at (609) 219-7448 or via e-mail at jkatz@stark-stark.com.

Case Denying Coverage Has Limited Relevance

no picture

Thomas J. Pryor, Shareholder and member of Stark & Stark's Insurance Coverage & Liability and Litigation groups, has authored the article Case Denying Coverage Has Limited Relevance: Recent appellate decision did not shore up erosion of Weedo's current relevance for the February 4, 2008 issue of the New Jersey Law Journal.

You can read the full article here.

DurstNotes on Divorce Law - # 2

no picture

DurstNotes on Divorce Law is a nine part podcast series, and is part of the Divorce Law Podcast with Robert J. Durst, Shareholder and Chair of Stark & Stark's Divorce Law Group. DurstNotes on Divorce Law podcast series is designed to give you a brief overview of the several most common areas of divorce law, enabling you to better understand your divorce and the law.

This is the second installment of DurstNotes on Divorce Law, and will discuss child support. This podcast will address guidelines for the amount of support that needs to be paid from one parent to another, as well as medical expenses, work-related daycare expenses, educational tutoring, athletic fees and additional extracurricular activities.

You can download installment #2 here. (3.9 MB)

Installment 2 Show Notes (PDF)

Tags:

Failure to Respond to a Tax Assessor's Chapter 91 Request May Not Bar An Appeal

no picture

Timothy P. Duggan, Shareholder and member of Stark & Stark's Condemnation and Bankruptcy & Creditor's Rights groups, has authored the article Surviving the Silent Killer: Failure to Respond to a Tax Assessor's Chapter 91 Request May Not Bar An Appeal for the January 28, 2008 issue of the New Jersey Law Journal.

The article discusses the recent change in the nation's real estate market, what these changes can mean for a property owner's tax assessments, and address when a tax assessment appeal is warranted.

You can read the full article here.

Higher Foreclosure Rates Mean Closer Oversight By Associations And Managers

no picture

It seems impossible to watch the news or read the paper these days without hearing about the troubled real estate market, as well as the troubles Americans are having with their mortgages.  According to the California-based real estate tracking company,  RealtyTrac, roughly 2.2 million homes received foreclosure-related warning notices in 2007.  In 2006, 1.3 million homes received those warning notices.  Because of missed payments noted at the end of 2007, it is expected that the number of homes to receive foreclosure-related warning notices in 2008 will be even larger. 

Evidence shows that the states hardest hit by foreclosures are Nevada, Florida, Michigan and California.  In 2007, New Jersey saw 53,652 foreclosure filings, up 34% from 2006.  New Jersey's foreclosure rate for 2007 was 0.9% (or, less than one property in foreclosure for every 100 properties in New Jersey).  In contrast, the foreclosure rate in 2007 for Nevada was 3.4% and for Florida it was approximately 2%.  Historically, and fairly obviously, the number of defaults in association and cooperative fees increase as well during times of increased mortgage defaults. 

In turn, it is even more imperative that associations and cooperatives act aggressively to ensure payments, early in any deficiency.  For associations, it is essential that liens be recorded early to ensure protection in the event of an owner's bankruptcy and to secure a better position in the face of any mortgage foreclosure.

Counsel Fees & Costs May Be Awarded In A New Jersey Law Against Discrimination Case

no picture

In a recent Appellate Division case, Michael vs. Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital, et al., the New Jersey Superior Court - Appellate Division was presented with a question of whether reasonable counsel fees could be awarded to a Defendant who prevails in an action under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination.  Typically, counsel fees are only awarded to a prevailing Plaintiff under the Law Against Discrimination.  In the Michael case, Plaintiff was a part-time employee of Defendant Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital for more than twenty years and filed a lawsuit alleging age discrimination, a hostile work environment and other tort based claims.  Plaintiff’s claims centered on the hospital’s vacation policy, tuition reimbursement policy and Plaintiff’s performance evaluations.  The trial court granted summary judgment dismissing Plaintiff’s claims without a trial.


After the trial court entered summary judgment, the Defendant moved for counsel fees and costs, relying on the Frivolous Lawsuit Statute and on the Law Against Discrimination.  The Law Against Discrimination provides that reasonable attorney fees may be awarded to the prevailing party where there is a determination that the complainant brought the charge in “bad faith”.


The Appellate Division held in Michael that the determination of the term “bad faith” must be viewed within the context of the particular matter being considered.  The Appellate Division equated “bad faith” with a reckless disregard or purposeful obliviousness of the known facts.
   

The Michael Appellate Court remanded the matter back to the trial court to determine if the complaint was filed in “bad faith” and if it was, what constituted a reasonable award of counsel fees taking into account the Plaintiff’s ability to pay and the extent to which the Plaintiff relied on the advice of counsel.
   

Conclusion
 

This case is instructive as reasonable counsel fees and costs may be awarded  to a successful Defendant who prevails in an action under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination if it is found that Plaintiff’s complaint was brought in “bad faith” and that Plaintiff had the economic circumstances to pay an attorney fee award.  This decision permits a trial judge to consider the award of counsel fees to a prevailing Defendant if it is determined that the discrimination lawsuit was brought in “bad faith”.  Although the “bad faith” standard will be difficult for a Defendant to prove, it will give pause to the Plaintiff who files a frivolous lawsuit.

Equitable Distribution in Domestic Partnerships

no picture

In the first decision of its kind in New Jersey, a Gloucester County judge has ruled that persons who registered as domestic partners since 2004 but who did not form a civil union under the 2006 law are nonetheless entitled to an equitable distribution  of assets in the same way such assets would be distributed in the divorce of a married couple.


In addition, the judge discussed the "special circumstances" of gay couples who often had years of a committed relationship before being able to legally formalize it in 2004 or 2006, concluding that the period of equitable distribution began at the formation of the parties' relationship in 1999 rather than their establishment of the domestic partnership in 2004.


This case is important in terms of the court's consideration of the entire span of a committed same sex relationship,  since no legal recognition was available until 2004.


Whether the decision will be appealed is unknown; however, it represents the first step in what  some family lawyers, including myself, believe will be the evolution of expanded rights and remedies for same sex couples in New Jersey.

Tags:

DurstNotes on Divorce Law - # 1

no picture

DurstNotes on Divorce Law is a nine part podcast series of the Divorce Law Podcast with Robert J. Durst, Shareholder and Chair of Stark & Stark's Divorce Law group. DurstNotes on Divorce Law podcast series is designed to give you a brief overview of the several most common areas of divorce law, enabling you to better understand your divorce and the law.

This is the first installment of DurstNotes on Divorce Law, and will discuss custody of the children. This podcast will address common aspects of child custody related matters, such as physical and legal custody, supervised visitation rights, use of a parenting coordinator, and how to agree on an arrangement in the best interest of the child.

You can download podcast # 1 here. (6 MB)

Installment 1 Show Notes (PDF)

Continue Reading...
Tags: