|
Click here for USLAW Member News!
|
Launched in 2001, USLAW is an organization of independent law firms with offices throughout the United States. Through USLAW, these firms share information in order to enhance the speed, efficiency and quality of legal services provided to each member's clients. By sharing this information, USLAW firms provide high quality legal services, without unnecessary expense to the client. |
Click here for more information about USLAW!
USLAW welcomes aticles, case law, trial results and items of interest to be submitted for future e-newsletters.
Please e-mail Roger M. Yaffe with submissions
|  |
|
|
The Importance of a National Law Firm Network
by Charles Carr, Carr Allison Pugh Howard Oliver & Sisson, Mobile, AL
A southern business publication recently called me in connection with an article that he was writing about the merger of law firms in the south. He said that his research had led him to the conclusion that our firm was a candidate for a merger with a large law firm looking to beef up its litigation practice. He had noticed that we were a 60 lawyer firm heavily involved in commercial, self-insured and insurance litigation. He said that other firms similar to ours had been absorbed by mega-firms in other states. I told him that our involvement with USLAW Network had led us to conclude that we would not be considering a merger at all.
[CLICK FOR FULL STORY]
|
Cutting-Edge Approaches for Managing Mass Tort Litigation in the New Millenium
USLAW FEATURED ARTICLE
by Ken Petty & Bob Manlowe, Williams, Kastner & Gibbs, PLLC, Seattle, WA
Ken Petty and Bob Manlowe have defended dozens of clients in mass tort litigation since 1979. At Williams, Kastner & Gibbs, they have developed a unique team approach and organizational structure for handling extremely challenging matters for companies with litigation and crisis management issues in many states and regions. Both Ken and Bob have engineering degrees and gained several years’ industry experience prior to becoming lawyers. Their cutting-edge approach to medical and scientific litigation defenses and their creative and liberal use of technology have led to their appointment as National Coordinating Counsel for multiple clients handling tens of thousands of mass tort cases throughout the country.
[CLICK FOR FULL STORY]
|
USLAW Transportation Practice Group Meeting to be Held in Boulder, Colorado, August 5-7, 2004
It is not too late to sign up for the 2nd USLAW Transportation Seminar in Boulder, Colorado which will be held August 5 through 7, 2004. For a quick hyperlink to the full brochure click on the following: http://www.uslawnetwork.org/servlet/viewWhitePaper?gmr_id=16&dbtb=upload_files
[CLICK FOR FULL STORY]
|
Department of Labor Modifies "White Collar" Exemption Rules
by Tom Birchfield, Greenebaum Doll & McDonald PLLC, Louisville, KY
On Tuesday, April 20, 2004, the United States Department of Labor ("DOL") announced long-awaited changes to the regulations governing overtime eligibility under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"). The new regulations, which will go into effect on August 23, 2004, constitute the first significant change to the exemptions affecting "white collar" employees since 1949.
[CLICK FOR FULL STORY]
|
USLAW Member Firm to the Rescue
by Keith Dunlap, NTA, Inc., Omaha, NE
USLAW Client Advisor
About three years ago, one of our trucking clients experienced a significant injury loss with one of their owner-operator’s. The owner-operator was in inclement weather in California. His trailer had just been loaded at a shipper’s location and was on his way out of the dock area when he noticed a problem with his brakes.
[CLICK FOR FULL STORY]
|
USLAW Member Spotlight
In each edition of USLAW NETWORK NEWS, we will focus on three firms that are members of the organization. This issue we shine the light on our Richmond, Virginia; Miami, Florida; and Atlanta, Georgia member firms.
[CLICK FOR FULL STORY]
|
U.S. Supreme Court Permits Affirmative Defense for Constructive Discharge Cases
by Bob Kilgore and Foy Meyer, Cox & Smith Incorporated, San Antonio, TX
Employees who quit their jobs as a reasonable response to an abusive working environment are entitled to sue their employers for constructive discharge under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In Pennsylvania State Police v. Suders, No. 03-95, 2004 WL 1300153 (June 14, 2004), the Supreme Court clarified under what circumstances employers defending against such claims are strictly liable, and under what circumstances they may rely on the Ellerth/Faragher affirmative defense.
[CLICK FOR FULL STORY]
|
The "Galatis" Loophole
by Megan Faust, Jennifer Souza, Jerome Wyss, Roetzel & Andress, Akron, OH
On November 5, 2003, in the much anticipated decision of Galatis v. Westfield (2003), 100 Ohio St.3d 216, the Ohio Supreme Court severely limited Scott-Pontzer v. Liberty Mutual Fire Ins. Co. (1999), 85 Ohio St.3d 660 and expressly overturned Ezawa v. Yasuda Fire & Marine Ins. Co. (1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 557. The Court "... restrict[ed] the application of uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage issued to a corporation to employees only while they are acting within the course and scope of their employment...." Galatis, 100 Ohio St.3d at 217.
[CLICK FOR FULL STORY]
|
District of Columbia Court of Appeals Invalidates New Hours of Service Rule
On July 16, 2004, the U.S. Court of Appeals (DC Circuit) issued a decision in Public Citizen V. FMCSA et al. The Court found that the current hours of service regulation promulgated in April of 2003 and effective on January 4, 2004 was not properly promulgated and vacated the current hours of service rules. Specifically, the Court found that the FMCSA failed to consider the impact of the new rules on the health of drivers, a factor that it must consider under 49 U.S.C. 31136.
The FMCSA has announced that under the rules of procedure, it has 45 days within which to review the decision and decide whether or not to appeal or seek other remedies. At least during this 45-day review period, the existing hours of service rules for truck drivers will remain in effect.
Click the following link for the opinion. http://www.uslawnetwork.org/servlet/viewWhitePaper?gmr_id=21&dbtb=upload_files
|
The Big Apple Was a Big Success
by Renee McElhaney, Cox & Smith Incorporated, San Antonio, TX
USLAW and the City was a hit. The seminar, sponsored by the Employment Law Practice Group, hosted close to 50 participants, including attorneys from member firms all over the country and a wide array of client contacts.
[CLICK FOR FULL STORY]
|
Seventh Circuit Upholds Anti-Stacking Clauses
by Richard Valentino, O'Hagan, Smith & Amundsen, Chicago, IL
The issues of "stacking" tend to arise frequently in the context of automobile coverage. In a recent case before the Seventh Circuit, anti-stacking clauses were upheld to prevent the doubling of an auto insurer's liability limits. For an insurer's counsel or risk manager, the case provides reasoning and lines of argument that can be extended to anti-stacking cases involving other types of coverages as well.
[CLICK FOR FULL STORY]
|
ACOG Research Results In Reevaluation Of Fetal Brain Injuries
In the late 1970s and early 1980s, a series of research studies were published in several leading medical journals. These studies concluded that a constellation of neurologic symptoms discovered in term infants including alterations in consciousness, poor reflexes and muscle tone with depressed respiratory function were attributable to intrapartum events.
[CLICK FOR FULL STORY]
|
Recent Trial Results of USLAW Member Firms
Numerous USLAW firms have had positive trial outcomes in the past few months. USLAW will profile these and others in the future newsletters.
[CLICK FOR FULL STORY]
|
Hall Booth Avows the Only Thing Better Than Virginia Home Cooking is LeClair Ryan
A USLAW Success Story
Plaintiffs’ one million dollar eve of trial demand crashed and burned recently in a serious injury trucking case defended in federal court in Atlanta by Jim Fisher of Hall Booth, thanks to Charlie Meyer of Leclair Ryan.
[CLICK FOR FULL STORY]
|
Employers Score a Victory with the NLRB!
No Right to Have Co-Worker Present During Workplace Investigation in a Non-Union Setting
by Donna McElroy, Cox & Smith Incorporated, San Antonio, TX
On June 9, 2004, the National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB") gave employers a welcome victory by holding that non-union employees do not have the right to have a representative or co-worker present during a workplace investigation, in IBM Corp., 341 NLRB No. 148 (June 9, 2004).
[CLICK FOR FULL STORY]
|
The Latest Weapon in the Arsenal of the Plaintiff's Bar: The Tort of Abuse Process
by Neil Singh, Jones Skelton & Hochuli, P.L.C., Phoenix, AZ
Most insurers doing business in Arizona are well-informed about the threat of bad faith allegations that claimants can raise when the circumstances are right. Due to a recent opinion by the Arizona Court of Appeals, insurers now have reason to be on the alert for another theory: the tort of Abuse of Process.
[CLICK FOR FULL STORY]
|
The Tripartite Relationship - Ethical and Practical Considerations
by Michael Rabus, Ahmuty, Demers & McManus
Albertson, NY
The unique relationship that exists between and among insurance carriers, their insureds and defense counsel has generated ethics opinions from many States throughout the Country. Included here is an overview of the current thinking of the American Bar Association and the Defense Research Institute from ethical and practical viewpoints. In balancing these relationships, counsel must always be aware that the primary allegiance is to the client while recognizing the important business and contractual allegiance owed to the client’s insurer.
[CLICK FOR FULL STORY]
|
USLAW Construction Group Meets in Cleveland
The Construction Litigation Section held its inaugural fly-in meeting in Cleveland, Ohio, on June 8. The meeting was hosted by member-firm Roetzel & Andress. Twenty-five attorneys from nineteen firms attended. For most of those in attendance, this was their first USLAW function.
[CLICK FOR FULL STORY]
|
Paid Family Leave Creates New Benefits For Employees and Increased Legal Concerns for California Employers
by Cassondra Halpin, Murchison & Cumming
Los Angeles, CA
On January 1, 2004, most California employees saw an increase of 8% in their state disability withholdings. This additional withholding is being used to fund California’s new Paid Family Leave program, also known as Family Temporary Disability. Beginning on July 1, 2004, nearly every California employer may see an increase in the number of employees taking leave due to a “serious health condition” of a family member or because of the birth, adoption or foster placement of a child.
[CLICK FOR FULL STORY]
|
|
| |
|
|
Are Medicare Set-asides Required in Cases Other than Workers’ Compensation?
Same-Sex Marriages: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Ruling Enables Gay Couples to Marry
California Legislature Makes Confidentiality Provisions Difficult in Elder Abuse Cases
The HIPAA Privacy Rule Contains Estate Planning Considerations
USLAW Environmental/Toxic/Mass Tort Practice Group Fly In Meeting
July 23, 2004
Hyatt Regency O'Hare
Rosemont, Illinois
USLAW Midwest Region Meeting
July 29, 2004
Hyatt Regency O'Hare
Rosemont, Illinois
USLAW Business/Commercial/Class Action & Products Practice Group Fly In Meeting
July 30, 2004
Hyatt Regency O'Hare
Rosemont, Illinois
USLAW Southeast Region Meeting
August 19-20, 2004
Memphis, Tennessee
USLAW Retail Practice Group Fly In Meeting
August 30-31, 2004
Firestone Country Club
Akron, Ohio
USLAW Transportation Seminar
August 5 - 7, 2004
Omni Interlocken Hotel
Broomfield, Colorado
2004 USLAW Member Meeting
September 16 - 18, 2004
Westin Savannah Resort
Savannah, Georgia
USLAW West Region Meeting
November 12, 2004
Las Vegas, Nevada
USLAW Quail Hunt
November 18 - 20, 2004
Mexico
2005 USLAW Client Conference
March 10 - 12, 2005
Royal Sonesta Hotel
Nw Orleans, Louisiana
Birmingham, AL
Carr Allison Pugh Howard Oliver & Sisson, P.A.
Phoenix, AZ
Jones Skelton & Hochuli, P.L.C.
Tucson, AZ
Chandler & Udall, LLP
Little Rock, AR
Quattlebaum, Grooms, Tull & Burrow
Los Angeles, CA
Murchison & Cumming
Santa Barbara, CA
Snyder Law, P.C.
San Diego, CA
KLINEDINST, P.C.
San Francisco, CA
Dillingham and Murphy, L.L.P.
Jacksonville, FL
Marks Gray, P.A.
Miami, FL
Wicker Smith O'Hara McCoy Graham & Ford, P.A.
Tallahassee, FL
McFarlain & Cassedy, P.A.
Atlanta, GA
Hall Booth Smith & Slover, P.C.
Chicago, IL
O'Hagan Smith & Amundsen, L.L.C.
Louisville, KY
Greenebaum Doll and McDonald, P.L.L.C.
New Orleans, LA
McCranie Sistrunk Anzelmo Hardy Maxwell & McDaniel, P.C.
Boston, MA
Donovan Hatem, L.L.P.
Detroit, MI
Clark Hill, P.L.C.
St. Paul, MN
Larson King, L.L.P.
Gulfport, MS
Carr Allison Pugh Howard Oliver & Sisson, P.A.
Ridgeland, MS
Copeland, Cook, Taylor & Bush, P.A.
St. Louis, MO
Lashly & Baer, P.C.
Las Vegas, NV
Jones Vargas
Albuquerque, NM
Modrall Sperling
Alberston, NY
Ahmuty, Demers & McManus
Hawthorne, NY
Traub, Eglin, Lieberman & Straus
Dickinson, ND
Mackoff Kellogg Law Firm
Akron, OH
Roetzel & Andress, LPA
Oklahoma City, OK
Pierce Couch Hendrickson Baysinger & Green, L.L.P.
Portland, OR
Williams, Kastner & Gibbs, PLLC
Pittsburgh, PA
Pietragallo Bosick & Gordon
Philadelphia, PA
Sweeney & Sheehan, P.C.
Columbia, SC
Sweeny Wingate & Barrow, P.A.
Charleston, SC
Buist Moore Smythe & McGee, P.A.
Pierre, SD
Riter, Rogers, Wattier & Brown, L.L.P.
Memphis, TN
Martin, Tate, Morrow & Marston, P.C.
Beaumont, TX
Orgain, Bell & Tucker, L.L.P.
San Antonio, TX
Cox & Smith Incorporated
Richmond, VA
LeClair Ryan, P.C.
Seattle, WA
Williams Kastner & Gibbs, PLLC
Huntington, WV
Huddleston Bolen, LLP
Milwaukee, WI
O'Hagan Smith & Amundsen, L.L.C.
|
