April 2016

Federal lawsuits might become less burdensome

“Discovery” is the phase of a lawsuit before trial in which the two sides have a right to demand relevant information from each other. Sometimes, big companies suing little companies try to “bury” the little company with endless requests for information, hoping to find some stray helpful tidbit or simply pressure the little company to settle to avoid the burden and expense. But starting in 2016, the federal court rules have been changed to limit this

Read More »

When is a competitor’s name too similar to yours?

This can be a tricky question, because it often turns on whether the public is likely to actually be confused. In one recent case, a California company called White Oak Vineyard & Winery brought a lawsuit against a Florida vodka distiller called White Oak Spirits. The vodka company argued that wine and vodka are different products, and that no one would be confused by the two names, especially since White Oak Vineyard was not a nationally

Read More »

Federal contractors must provide paid sick leave

Starting in 2017, companies that have federal contracts must allow employees to earn up to seven paid sick days per year, under an executive order signed by President Obama. Employees can earn one sick day for each 30 hours worked, up to seven days per year. These days carry over from one year to the next, although an employee who quits or is fired without using them doesn’t have to be compensated for them. Sick leave

Read More »

Business gets salary back from ‘disloyal’ employee

Did you know that executives and other employees may have a legal obligation to be “loyal” to their companies? This means that they have to act in the company’s interest, and not deliberately harm the company or take advantage of it for their own interest. This came up in a recent New Jersey case where a timeshare company hired a COO who made $500,000 a year. The company eventually fired the COO, claiming that he had

Read More »

Company can’t require workers to buy its merchandise

The Abercrombie & Fitch clothing chain cannot require its salespeople to buy and wear Abercrombie & Fitch clothes in order to work there, says a federal court in California. The court okayed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of 62,000 Abercrombie employees in the state, based on the claim that the company’s “look policy” required them to buy Abercrombie clothes – and then buy new Abercrombie clothes every time the company issued a new sales guide. The

Read More »

Clicking or e-mailing can create a binding contract

A New York company ran a loan-application website. As part of the application process, users had to click a box to get from one screen to the next. Above the box it said, “Clicking the box below constitutes your acceptance of … the borrower registration agreement.” The borrower registration agreement wasn’t on the page, but the words “borrower registration agreement” were a hyperlink to another page that included the complete contract. In fine print, the contract

Read More »

Here’s a problem with employee arbitration clauses

A software company called TIBCO tried to protect itself by including a non-compete clause in its employment agreements. It also required that any disputes over the employment relationship go to arbitration rather than being tried in court. When an employee left to work for a competitor, TIBCO filed a lawsuit and asked for an emergency injunction so it could immediately stop the employee from competing against it. But the court said – surprise! – that it

Read More »

What can you do if a competitor lies in its ads?

Your competitor’s advertising makes false claims about how great its products are – or worse yet, disparages your own products. What are your options? You have a range of alternatives, from complaining to a private or government agency to filing a lawsuit. Here’s a look at some of the choices. If your competitor is saying things it shouldn’t, the simplest approach is to complain to the Better Business Bureau’s National Advertising Division, or NAD. The NAD

Read More »

New tax break for rich unmarried homeowners

You can deduct your mortgage interest on your income taxes, but there’s a limit – you can only deduct the interest on up to $1 million of mortgage debt used to buy the property, plus $100,000 in home equity loans. In a recent California case, a wealthy unmarried couple jointly owned a home that had a $2 million mortgage. They got into a dispute with the IRS over whether the $1 million limit applied to them

Read More »
Email us now
close slider