Law School Rankings: Past, Present, and Future
I am presenting Law School Rankings: Past, Present, and Future at the LSAC Annual Meeting and Education Conference today in Tucson, Arizona. I am speaking on a panel on The Future of Law School Rankings. Here is the description of the panel:As consumers, prospective students want answers to questions about law school. Like it or not, an ever–growing number of applicants rely on rankings to answer those questions. This session will explore whether law school rankings in general remain relevant and the impact rankings have. How can admission professionals use substantive information gleaned from rankings to inform and recruit students, and what else can law school administrators do to improve the situation? Are candidates aware of the drawbacks and limitations of the U.S. News & World Report rankings? Are there other methodologies, resources, or ranking systems available that offer candidates better comparative data? A law professor and the author of a book comparing law schools will offer their thoughts on the future of rankings.
My co-panelist is Richard Montauk, Stanford Law grad, former Latham & Watkins lawyer, founder of the Degree of Difference educational consulting firm, and author of How to Get Into the Top Law Schools (part of his series of books How to Get Into the Top MBA Programs and How to Get Into the Top Colleges).
Whom Would Billy Beane Admit?
In keeping with my back to first principles theme, I have been wondering for some time what the Billy Beane approach to law school admissions would be. We know that Billy Beane's principal contribution to running a baseball team was to discover underutilized statistics that were better at predicting big league performance than those being used by other clubs. (For example, Beane was one of the first general managers to make regular use of OPS.) In this article, Beane describes his project as essentially arbitrage for baseball players:
"Arbitrage. We don't use that word too much in baseball, but that's what it is. In a market where people are competing for scarce assets -- for us, it's players or, really, the things that players can do -- there's always going to be some inefficiency. We're always going to have to find that dark corner, the stone that hasn't been turned over."By looking under different rocks than the other GMs in the league, Beane was able to gain a competitive advantage and to sign promising players overlooked by others.
Are there similar, underused criteria for admission to law school? We know that most schools use some combination of LSAT score and undergraduate GPA (UGPA) as the primary factors in their admissions, largely because these factors are agreed to be less bad at predicting law school performance than others. If a school could find other criteria that worked even marginally better than LSAT and UGPA, they would be at a huge competitive advantage with regard to admissions.My colleague Joyce Sterling and I spent some time looking for these factors a few years ago. We ran a multivariate regression on a number of possible admissions criteria -- undergraduate major, presence of an advanced degree, work experience since undergraduate graduation -- to determine whether we could find the OPS of law school admissions. We found nothing that correlate but if we had I sure wouldn't share it here. If everyone picks their players based on OPS, the advantage is lost.
California Tax Burden Among Worst in Nation
According to an article published last year, California ranks among the worst of the states in terms of its tax burdens on businesses and individual residents. The article points to last year's election results in which California voters approved additional taxes, as adding to the state's already high tax burden:
Likewise, California-based Countrywide Financial's CEO told shareholders employees that don't need to be in California will increasingly be hired in or relocated to Arizona instead, as a result of the tax and regulatory environment in California, which he characterized as out of control.
For most California small businesses, however, it makes little sense to form a corporation or LLC out of state (e.g., in Nevada or Delaware), which in most instances ends up costing more in initial and ongoing legal and accounting expenses, and saving nothing in taxes. If the business' owners are willing to relocate, then indeed California is, as the article points out, due to its political climate, among the least attractive for businesses, and Nevada is certainly preferable. But for those Californians not willing to move out of state and take their business with them (as many have in recent years), California remains the logical choice for incorporating a California business in most instances.
California may be back on its way to becoming Taxifornia – and that's before voters give their verdicts on Propositions 86 (cigarette tax), 87 (oil tax), 88 (property tax) and 89 (corporation tax). California was rated as having the 45th-worst tax climate among the 50 states in 2007, down from 42nd in 2005, according to the Tax Foundation's State Business Tax Climate Index, released this week.Taxifornia, Here We Come, Orange County Register (California), October 26, 2006
The index measures five tax rates: corporate, individual income, sales, unemployment and property. The best states are, in order, Wyoming, South Dakota, Alaska, Nevada and Florida. After California, the worst states are Vermont, New York, New Jersey, Ohio and, worst of the worst: Rhode Island.
Curtis S. Dubay, an economist at the foundation and co-author of the report, told us that California's drop in the listings was not major, down just three spots, and was due to slight improvements in other states more than any worsening in California, where tax rates pretty much held steady the past year, except for the passing of some local school bonds. "It's possible to drop in the rankings just by standing still," he said. "The states tightly clump up at the bottom of the rankings. So any small change could make a difference."
The bottom line is that California's ranking was low, and remains low. Most jolting for Californians should be the comparison with neighboring states. In the overall tax index, Nevada ranks fourth, Oregon, 10th; Washington state, 11th; Utah, 16th; and Arizona, 28th.
The study offers an example from 2005 of how businesses make decisions based on tax rates: When Intel decided "to build a multibillion-dollar chip-making facility in Arizona due to its favorable income tax system. California struggles to retain businesses within its borders because Nevada provides a low-tax alternative." The study concludes that "taxes matter to businesses, and those places with the most competitive tax systems will reap the benefits of tax-friendly tax climates."
Likewise, California-based Countrywide Financial's CEO told shareholders employees that don't need to be in California will increasingly be hired in or relocated to Arizona instead, as a result of the tax and regulatory environment in California, which he characterized as out of control.
For most California small businesses, however, it makes little sense to form a corporation or LLC out of state (e.g., in Nevada or Delaware), which in most instances ends up costing more in initial and ongoing legal and accounting expenses, and saving nothing in taxes. If the business' owners are willing to relocate, then indeed California is, as the article points out, due to its political climate, among the least attractive for businesses, and Nevada is certainly preferable. But for those Californians not willing to move out of state and take their business with them (as many have in recent years), California remains the logical choice for incorporating a California business in most instances.
Rethinking a Dean's Role
I doubt I have missed many opportunities in the course of posting to moneylaw and classbias to criticize the deaning I have observed or heard about in 28 years of law teaching. I do not mean all deans all of the time but for the sake of simplicity and avoiding naming names, I will comment in general terms. Too often deans just follow orders – the orders of the most influential wing of the faculty. They hoard information, spin statistics, and avoid transparency except when it suits them. For many deans the first goal is to continue to be dean. The analogy to elected politicians whose decisions or even morals seem dictated by the desire to be reelected seems apt but actually presents a more positive picture that law school deans. At least elected politicians have to be responsive to those who they represent. Law school deans on the other hand, in theory operate law schools for benefit of stakeholders (taxpayers, students, contributors), but are nearly wholly responsive to faculty. Think “faculty as lobbyists” – the NRA -- and you get the picture.At my School we have yearly meetings with our dean. For the most part they are pleasant exchanges. He is a nice guy and seems actually to be interest in a variety of scholarship issues. In preparation for my meeting I composed a list of things I wish were handled differently at the Law School. I think I came up with 20 in all. The items ranged from minor things like not having a system to avoid scheduling make up classes at the same time for the same group of students to bigger issues like grossly uneven teaching loads and a lack of accountability when it comes to our very generous summer research grants.
Reviewing my list and thinking about Sam’s post asking how much credit should deans get, it occurred to me that except for 3 of my 20 items, these were things a Dean should never have to address. They were general issues of faculty advantage-taking, irresponsibility, externality production, or lack of professionalism. My sense was that in a law firm these behaviors would occur less frequently and would be less likely to be tolerated by peers. Isn't log rolling less likely to pay off and aren't peers quicker to “correct” a fellow worker? If everyone were professional and substantively collegial, most of my list would disappear without a dean saying a word.
This lead to a series of questions. What are a dean’s duties when faculty fail to perform, capture a law school to advance their own ends, and are substantively uncollegial? In these cases, should a dean be expected to act as “the parent” of the faculty? This is an odd role when the children are professionals. Conversely, should deans only be expected to operate as though they are simply working along side of , albeit in a different role, professionals who are focused on the same goal? More directly, how and why should a dean’s job be defined as babysitting?
How Do We Know If We're Winning?
In thinking about coming on board here, I talked to a number of my colleagues about this blog. I usually describe the blog as "How would Billy Beane run a law school?" The people who got it really got it. The people who didn't...So for my first substantive post, I wanted to go back to that foundational idea: If Billy Beane or Jim Chen or Nancy Rapoport or Joe Torre were running a law school, how would we be able to tell if he or she was doing a good job?
Jim wrote the other day about how he hopes one day to read the dullest newspaper paragraph imaginable; one that proclaims that his law school admitted a qualified class, taught them well, prepared them for the bar and sent them out into the legal profession ready for the challenges they would face.
We could agree that that the dean of such a school was the manager of a winning team, couldn't we? Maybe. The newspaper article said nothing about the diversity of the class that this law school graduated; it didn't mention that the students had received ethics training beyond that required for accreditation; it did not describe the law school's commitment to providing lawyers for under-served communities. I mention all of these additional criteria not because I think they are more important than the criteria Jim listed. I mention them because, unlike in baseball, it's harder in our world to tell when a "team" is "winning". The criteria that Jim mentions are certainly good ones, but they're not the only ones.
Furthermore, even if we could agree that this was a winning team, how much credit should the dean get for that success? The dean of a successful law school might be a lot like Yankees' manage Joe Torre: she might simply have much better "players" to manage than do the deans at other schools. Torre is the beneficiary of a team built with the highest payroll in baseball and some portion of his success as a manager is attributable to the fact that he has better raw materials to work with than do his peers. No one attributes the success of Yale Law grads principally or even primarily to the quality of the dean. Most of us assume that the students there came in ready to achieve and that little of their subsequent success can be fairly attributed to the person who happened to be dean during their three years in New Haven.A school with a low bar pass rate might be doing wonders with a student-body with very low predictors; a school without an impressive record of scholarly achievement by its faculty might be truly dedicated to teaching every student. Couldn't the deans at these schools claim at least as high a level of performance as the dean of the school described in the newspaper? And couldn't they claim a lot of the credit for that performance?
In baseball the goal is to win more games than the other guy. The New York Yankees are 9.5 games behind the Boston Red Sox this morning. This means that the Red Sox are doing better than the Yankees. (Or does it? If the Yankees are turning a tidy profit for their owners, does anyone besides the fans care that the Yankees are underperforming on the field?)
So this raises all sorts of questions: Who decides what a win is in our field? Should the faculty be able to set its own goals? Should the university? Alumni? The practicing bar? Furthermore, how much credit for success fairly goes to the dean when a school achieves these goals? How much of the blame when it doesn't?
An Introduction
Greetings.
Jim Chen has been nice enough to let me join the burgeoning MoneyLaw team as a member. Before I jump into the fray on collegiality, the proper use of faculty email, the New York Times rule, the market for letters of recommendation, and on and on I wanted to post a quick introduction.
I am in my 8th year at the University of Denver, Sturm College of Law where I teach Criminal Law and Procedure as well as, when my Associate Dean permits, Death Penalty Jurisprudence and Federal Courts. I am trained as a social scientist and, now that I'm tenured, I hope to return to the quantitative investigation of legal phenomena that is my academic passion.
I have been an avid reader and occasional commenter on this blog since its inception. As a lifelong fan of the Oakland A's, I read Michael Lewis's Moneyball with glee and Paul Caron's and Rafael Gely's What Law Schools Can Learn From Billy Beane and the Oakland Athletics with a mix of jealousy and awe. When this blog appeared, it seemed to be the intersection of so many of the things I'm interested in. But then, I'm a dork.
Thanks for having me on board and please bear with me as I try to figure out this whole "blogging" business.
Jim Chen has been nice enough to let me join the burgeoning MoneyLaw team as a member. Before I jump into the fray on collegiality, the proper use of faculty email, the New York Times rule, the market for letters of recommendation, and on and on I wanted to post a quick introduction.
I am in my 8th year at the University of Denver, Sturm College of Law where I teach Criminal Law and Procedure as well as, when my Associate Dean permits, Death Penalty Jurisprudence and Federal Courts. I am trained as a social scientist and, now that I'm tenured, I hope to return to the quantitative investigation of legal phenomena that is my academic passion.
I have been an avid reader and occasional commenter on this blog since its inception. As a lifelong fan of the Oakland A's, I read Michael Lewis's Moneyball with glee and Paul Caron's and Rafael Gely's What Law Schools Can Learn From Billy Beane and the Oakland Athletics with a mix of jealousy and awe. When this blog appeared, it seemed to be the intersection of so many of the things I'm interested in. But then, I'm a dork.
Thanks for having me on board and please bear with me as I try to figure out this whole "blogging" business.
Variations on the themes of Miranda and the New York Times
- You have the ability -- indeed, the obligation -- to remain silent.
- Anything you say can and will be used against you.
- You have no right to confide in your colleagues.
- Though you cannot confide in a colleague, several will appoint themselves as your putative confidants.
- You may assert contrary rights, elsewhere. Good luck finding another job.
Today the University of Louisville graduated its latest class of law students. Every student admitted to the class of 20__ remained in good academic standing throughout her or his law school career and graduated on time. The diploma received by each graduate complemented another document, perhaps less formal but no less important in practical terms: a firm job offer. Ten weeks from now, the Law School expects all of its graduates to pass the bar exam. And although the Law School is proud to deliver many of its finest graduates into law firms, businesses, schools, and public agencies in this community, this year's class has found jobs from Alaska to Delaware. Indeed, one student will be studying as a Fulbright Scholar in Slovakia. Tomorrow as today, a law degree from the University of Louisville will be recognized as an emblem of quality, sea to shining sea and beyond the water's edge.That, of course, is hardly news worth to print in the eyes of the New York Times, much less in the eyes of that newspaper's most careful readers within the academy. But it is worth doing. And now, having digressed, I must return to that task.
Getting the Rule Straight
Over on Legal Profession Blog, Jeff Lipshaw has attempted to straighten me out on the actual New York Times rule. My version -- and I thought I had coined the title myself -- came from a colleague shouting at me, "I won't write it down because I know not to write down anything that I would not want to see on the front page of the New York Times -- something no one obviously told you!!" Jeff says the actual rule is not to do anything you "wouldn't want published in the New York Times." Marie seems to concur and tactfully refers to the version of the rule I have stated as a "mutation of the New York Times rule by legal academics."
I had heard of the more positive rule, as related by Jeff, although not in terms of being on the front page of the NYTs. I more or less internalized it as "try your best not to be slimy."
What hit me in this exchange is how much Marie is right about how a rule that, as Jeff says, provides a nice ethical guideline -- don't do it -- has morphed into something that is exactly the opposite -- do it (or say it) as long as you can avoid responsibility. I also must smile at the delight I would have taken at informing my shouting colleague that he was just a tad off on the rule and that since he is an adherent he should be happy to follow the official version.
In any case, if it comes up again I will refer to my version as the "converse NYTs rule."
I had heard of the more positive rule, as related by Jeff, although not in terms of being on the front page of the NYTs. I more or less internalized it as "try your best not to be slimy."
What hit me in this exchange is how much Marie is right about how a rule that, as Jeff says, provides a nice ethical guideline -- don't do it -- has morphed into something that is exactly the opposite -- do it (or say it) as long as you can avoid responsibility. I also must smile at the delight I would have taken at informing my shouting colleague that he was just a tad off on the rule and that since he is an adherent he should be happy to follow the official version.
In any case, if it comes up again I will refer to my version as the "converse NYTs rule."
Say It to My Face
Jeff Harrison's recent post about a mutation of the New York Times rule by legal academics reflects frustration with faculty colleagues who exploit the difference between oral and written communication to achieve a kind of of plausible deniability. Jeff wonders whether the proliferation of e-mail as a mode of communication explains an adaptation of the New York Times rule that he coins the "e-mail fifth amendment." A colleague will decline to confirm in an e-mail something he or she has said orally, to achieve a desired political outcome without bearing the reputational cost.
I'm not surprised that Jeff Harrison would take issue with this kind of hypocriscy. It's especially troubling behavior for lawyers. With certain exceptions that Jeff Lipshaw has noted, everything a lawyer says, writes, or does is "on the record," whether it shows up in the New York Times, or on the refrigerator door in the coffee room. (The New York Times rule has been attributed to Edward Bennett Williams who unlike most law faculty did work interesting enough for the New York Times to care about).
I see another effect e-mail has had on faculty discourse that runs in the reverse direction. Some faculty members use e-mail to achieved a desired political outcome without bearing the cost of a personal, face to face communication. For these faculty, apparently, deniability isn't important. As teenagers apparently know, e-mail (now eclipsed by IM and texting) allows for virtual personal interaction at a fraction of the discomfort and risk of real personal interaction. It's faster, cheaper and easier to send an e-mail loaded with sanctimonious rhetoric "to the faculty" than to actually attend a faculty meeting, ask for the floor, and deliver the same point to real human colleagues who will no doubt react to the speaker live and in person. If lack of courage explains the "e-mail fifth amendment" Jeff Harrison observes, the same is at work in the use of e-mail as a low cost substitute for the spoken word.
I'm not surprised that Jeff Harrison would take issue with this kind of hypocriscy. It's especially troubling behavior for lawyers. With certain exceptions that Jeff Lipshaw has noted, everything a lawyer says, writes, or does is "on the record," whether it shows up in the New York Times, or on the refrigerator door in the coffee room. (The New York Times rule has been attributed to Edward Bennett Williams who unlike most law faculty did work interesting enough for the New York Times to care about).
I see another effect e-mail has had on faculty discourse that runs in the reverse direction. Some faculty members use e-mail to achieved a desired political outcome without bearing the cost of a personal, face to face communication. For these faculty, apparently, deniability isn't important. As teenagers apparently know, e-mail (now eclipsed by IM and texting) allows for virtual personal interaction at a fraction of the discomfort and risk of real personal interaction. It's faster, cheaper and easier to send an e-mail loaded with sanctimonious rhetoric "to the faculty" than to actually attend a faculty meeting, ask for the floor, and deliver the same point to real human colleagues who will no doubt react to the speaker live and in person. If lack of courage explains the "e-mail fifth amendment" Jeff Harrison observes, the same is at work in the use of e-mail as a low cost substitute for the spoken word.
What Exactly Is the New York Times Rule?
I started to write a comment in response to Jeff Harrison's post below, but it morphed into a full-fledged post. For a responsible opposing view, not of the Attorney General, but of the "front page test" rule, see LPB.
California Employees Granted Three Years to Sue Employers for Compensation for Missed Breaks
The California Supreme Court today ruled that employees have up to three years to pursue claims that their employer failed to provide required breaks, not one as was previously assumed by many employers. The stakes are high, because California law provides that, upon filing a claim, employers must pay to an employee one hour of pay for each rest or meal break that was not provided to the employee in accordance with California employment law. The law, enacted in 2000, has spurred numerous class action law suits.
California employers should take this opportunity to have an employment attorney review their employee manual and employment practices to ensure compliance and to assist in avoiding many of the legal land mines that exist in this area for unwary employers. Those without an employee manual or a knowledge of California employment law are especially vulnerable and should take heed of this warning.
The case in question is Murphy v. Kenneth Cole Productions, Inc., 07 C.D.O.S. 3958. More details on the ruling can be found at Law.com
California employers should take this opportunity to have an employment attorney review their employee manual and employment practices to ensure compliance and to assist in avoiding many of the legal land mines that exist in this area for unwary employers. Those without an employee manual or a knowledge of California employment law are especially vulnerable and should take heed of this warning.
The case in question is Murphy v. Kenneth Cole Productions, Inc., 07 C.D.O.S. 3958. More details on the ruling can be found at Law.com
Mr. Gonzales, Welcome to the Faculty
Should a law school hire Mr. Gonzales? It may depend on how much the New York Times rule is part of the norms of that faculty. My hunch is that it is pervasive but that is only a hunch. What is the New York Times rule? Here is an example of it in practice. A few months ago, in the midst of an admission by a faculty member that a faculty candidate had been invited to interview, in part, on a mistaken supposition about his race, I asked if the faculty member would send an email confirming this. The answer, "I don't write anything down that I would not want to see on the front page of the New York Times." Fans of Mr. Gonzales know where this leads. Adherence to the NYTs rule means you can always say "I do not recall."Adherence to this rule is something politicians learn at an early age -- from parents, teachers, big law firms?. When you think about it, it is not the New York Times rule that is the problem. It is the complementary rule -- "When you assert something that you may want to deny, speak it only." There is modern version of the NYTs rule that is the result of the proliferation of email. It says to ignore any question that one prefers not to answer. Think of it as taking the email Fifth. These are questions that would be answered if the interaction were in person but email mean writing and accountability. Somehow ignoring an email question provides the same kind of cover as the NYTs rule.
Why do politicians and some law professors prefer to be able to disown what they say and how far does it go? For example, do observers of the NYT rule regularly lie in depositions or in public hearings? This I cannot say but, as Mr. Gonzales' demonstrates, adherence to the NYTs rule means knowingly leaving oneself the freedom to be evasive.
There is an economic explanation for the NYTs rule. People say and write things in order to get a desired response. It gives them power. If you can get the desired reponse at a low cost so much the better. In day to day communications, the "low cost" is saying things in a form that can be denied or taken back. The New York Times rule is yet another form of greed and excessive self-interest.
There is, however, another economic consequence. Wide-spread use of the NYTs rule means that what is uttered, as opposed to what is written, is something that cannot be relied upon. This raises the overall cost of communications. Hopefully no Moneylaw school wants to raise the cost of communication in order to protect the individual interests of those who want to avoid accountability.
Elaine does Q & A
Have there been any new legal developments?
Judge McAuliffe submitted the notice of appeal to the Circuit Court of Appeals without our knowledge. We have 30 days to send in the $455 filing fee in order for the Court to proceed with the appeal. We do not intend to do this, as we have disavowed ourselves from their jurisdiction; to submit to the appeal would be placing ourselves back into their jurisdiction.
There has been no word on the county notary order of dismissal that was filed in Pennsylvania, nor any word from the Court of International Trade that was filed in New York three weeks ago. The judge has the order of dismissal, but has not moved on it. We think that they are trying to ignore it, as the county notary has more power than the judge, and the judge is not willing to acknowledge it. Elaine
How are ed & elaine feeling these days?
We are feeling quite peaceful, now. Since we removed ourselves from the jurisdiction of the court, we do not accept any of their mail, we simply send it back to them unopened. Life has thus become much simpler. We now know that man' law works only for the administration to their convenience, and no justice can be found there. Thus we have placed ourselves with the law of God. We have done all we could with man's laws, and have found that nothing works; they simply ignore everything that is not in their favor. So now that we can do no more in that corrupt system, we are standing with God's laws; we all know that we have Him on our side. Elaine
How many visitors do they have on a regular basis?
Almost every day, at least one person comes in. On weekends we might have as many as 10 or 12 people here at a time. Some bring things for us, we break bread with more people than we ever have. It is a great group of people, even though it is not always the same ones, but is those of like mind. They are with us, many to the end, hopefully is peaceful and successful one. Elaine
Is there anything they need?
Thank you for the thought. Sometimes we need muscle power to do some things we need to have done, but many people bring us things that we need, go shopping for us, etc. Elaine READ ON...
Opting In and Out of the Academy
I have a post up at Law and Letters on the Lisa Belkin NY Times articles on women opting out of and back into the workplace. I excerpt two Belkin articles; the first on the "Opt-Out Revolution" (2003), and one this week on such women trying to "opt-in" through re-training programs. I also excerpt at length an excellent critique of Belkin by Cathrine Albiston (Boalt Hall Law, JSP) from her article in the Berkeley Journal of Gender, Law and Justice. Here's a taste of my own thoughts on the matter:
For MoneyLaw readers, I will note that there seems to be an encouraging attitudinal and structural shift toward extending tenure clocks for those faculty who need to take time off to care for their new children or for a sick family member. This would represent a similar type of endogenous structural change in the work culture of academic institutions to recognize the work/life balance needs of their employees.
This would also reflect a growing recognition that today's academics are not the same as yesterday's, and that both male and female faculty alike will want and require more flexible work arrangements and tenure clocks. Moreover, this would help to make academia more attractive, welcoming, and feasible to those faculty who are in the position of primary caretaker--which, for better or worse, tend to be female faculty. I just hope that the shift is serious and not merely lip-service. I'm going to have to be a skeptic and wait to hear how the tenure decisions play out--and I'm looking forward to more organizational and empirical studies on how many faculty actually use the tenure extension policies, and whether their schools really think of the clock as really stopped for the purposes of evaluating scholarly productivity and commitment.
For more on extending tenure clocks:
The Chronicle of Higher Education
Inside Higher Education
Science Magazine
Examples:
Duke University's Policies
North Carolina State's Policies
University of Michigan's Policies
I will note that if we accept Belkin's reporting in the latter article, then the endogenous change of workplace leave/return policies and culture is significant. My dissertation will concern organizational responses to the Family and Medical Leave Act: how management interprets, promulgates, and enforces the terms of the FMLA, which creates an entitlement to up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave (subject to how the statute defines who is covered). The literature in the field suggest that it's the organizations and work culture that define the scope of the right: who is "entitled" to take leave, the desire to avoid being framed as a "slacker" or "bad worker" even if this is an entitlement, what is "work" and who is a "worker." I'd be pleased to see a top-down shift in workplace culture and governance.
For MoneyLaw readers, I will note that there seems to be an encouraging attitudinal and structural shift toward extending tenure clocks for those faculty who need to take time off to care for their new children or for a sick family member. This would represent a similar type of endogenous structural change in the work culture of academic institutions to recognize the work/life balance needs of their employees.
This would also reflect a growing recognition that today's academics are not the same as yesterday's, and that both male and female faculty alike will want and require more flexible work arrangements and tenure clocks. Moreover, this would help to make academia more attractive, welcoming, and feasible to those faculty who are in the position of primary caretaker--which, for better or worse, tend to be female faculty. I just hope that the shift is serious and not merely lip-service. I'm going to have to be a skeptic and wait to hear how the tenure decisions play out--and I'm looking forward to more organizational and empirical studies on how many faculty actually use the tenure extension policies, and whether their schools really think of the clock as really stopped for the purposes of evaluating scholarly productivity and commitment.
For more on extending tenure clocks:
The Chronicle of Higher Education
As it stands, Michigan offers only two reasons for delaying the tenure clock, and neither includes research complications. Scholars can get one year off the clock for the birth or adoption of a child or to care for a sick relative. Those who face research disasters have been known to appeal to the provost for extra time, and some have succeeded. Still, there is no guarantee. "If you know to ask, there are things that can be done that will allow them to weather the storm," says Ms. Pierce. "But for those who don't know to ask, they are often lost in the process."
In addition to concerns over research and productivity, Ms. Weiss's committee said more time on the tenure track would be a good thing for women. They are "particularly burdened" by family responsibilities, the report noted. It nonetheless devoted only one long paragraph to "family circumstances" at the end of its section on "Why Flexibility Matters," and few of the policy's supporters mentioned family reasons in conversations with The Chronicle.
Inside Higher Education
Higher education experts have increasingly been saying that, as baby boomers age and require more attention, and as more women flood academe, a bit of flexibility is in order.“Younger workers, male and female, are more interested in balancing work and family,” said Jeanne Miller, an information services manager at Michigan’s Center for the Education of Women. “And a lot more people are dealing with elder care.”
The options currently available for a faculty member working part time are either to stop the tenure clock completely and not receive credit for years of part-time work, or to let the clock continue as it would for a full-time worker, and risk going into tenure review with fewer years of full-time work. Duvernoy said that stopping the clock “removed the pressure,” but she has continued to publish and obtain grants, and feels that she should not be stuck in year two of her faculty career. Her only other choice would have been to let the clock
continue as normal while she worked part time.
One of the proposals recommends allowing part-time work to be counted as part-time work, so a faculty member working 70 percent of full-time could make 70 percent of a year’s progress toward tenure review.
One concern that the American Association of University Professors has about extending the tenure clock is that it would prompt institutions to string along assistant professors. That, according to Roger Bowen, general secretary of the AAUP, could mean a longer wait until the academic freedom that groups like AAUP argue that only tenure can impart.
One of the most important functions of the Michigan report, according to Janet Weiss, one of the committee co-chairs and dean of the Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies, is to create a culture where faculty members are not afraid to take advantage of family friendly policies. Weiss said that, in the past, many people were not aware they were entitled to leave, and others — especially women having children — were loathe to take advantage of policies for fear of being looked down on when tenure review came along. “We think making the policies fair and transparent and explicit will make it easier for people who need them to take advantage of them,” Weiss said.
Science Magazine
Two recent surveys at major research institutions point to the bind women faculty members face. Some 42% of women at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, for example, didn't request to go off the tenure clock even though they had reason to do so, and two-thirds of them said it was because of fear that an extension would have an adverse impact on their careers. "Had I stopped the tenure clock, I would have been viewed as weak by my senior colleagues," one faculty member wrote in her response, says study co-author Jean Waltman.
Women will go to great lengths to avoid that label, notes Waltman. Some reported that they had delayed pregnancy until after they got tenure. The survey also found that about one-third of the 86 women who had children did not request a lighter teaching load after giving birth.
A survey this fall at the nine University of California (UC) campuses found similar attitudes toward the school's tenure- extension policies. Although 48 women reported using it, 41 did not--most out of fear that it might derail their careers. Women who put their careers on hold, says one of the authors, UC Berkeley's Marc Goulden, must battle "the cultural conception that the faster you are, the better you are, particularly in the sciences. The expectation is that all the good people come up for tenure in 5 or 6 years, so God forbid if you take 7 or 8."
There are scant data on whether stopping the clock actually hurts a faculty member's chance of receiving tenure.
Even when the departmental climate is favorable, however, many women opt to defer pregnancy until after receiving tenure for fear of losing research momentum. "Many scientists worry that grant reviewers will note the gap in productivity and go 'Oh, this person took a year's break, they aren't really serious,' " says a biologist at the University of Illinois, Chicago (UIC), who requested anonymity. Her own lighthearted attempt at addressing the issue, she says, has been "to insert my child's name and birth date in the chronological order of publications."
And that's just a start, says Robert Drago, a labor economist at Pennsylvania State University, University Park, who studies bias against caregiving in the workplace: "From providing affordable housing near campus to subsidizing daycare, there's a lot that institutions should be doing if they mean business."
A few universities have reexamined how they do business, restructuring the tenure process to allow part-time tenure-track positions.
Examples:
Duke University's Policies
North Carolina State's Policies
University of Michigan's Policies
Aaron Russo Calls for a Revolution if Ron Paul is Removed from the Republican Party / Debates
On The Alex Jones show today, Aaron Russo put a call out for a revolution if Ron Paul gets removed from the Republican Party and is not able to participate in the debates. All I have to say about that is that I agree with him 100%! Do you love liberty? Do you love freedom? Well if so you better give this some serious thought, times are changing very rapidly, films like Russo’s film AFTF have changed the world. The walls are closing in all around us very fast, we will not go down without a fight!
"Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light."
Aaron Russo: Google Censored my movie because Ron Paul was in it.
Yes that’s right Aaron Russo, appeared on the Alex Jones radio show today, and revealed that the removal of his video from Google video was indeed censorship, because Ron Paul appeared in his film. There is censorship going on at the very highest levels of the internet. We must resist, we must promote Aarons movie, get it to everyone! Fortunately A New Copy of America From Freedom to Fascism has been re-uploaded to Google Video, you can access the new upload here.
New SSRN Tax Rankings
Check out the new monthly tax rankings, based on the number of all-time and recent SSRN downloads through May 1, 2007:
Top 25 Tax Professors
Top 25 Tax Faculties
Top 15 Graduate Tax Faculties
Kenneth Vercammen's NJ Laws email newsletter E244 May 10, 2007
In this issue:
1 Personal Legal Checkup
Recent cases:
2. Pocket bike is motorized vehicle subject to NJ Laws and DWI
3. Defendant guilty of leaving scene where defendant admitted contact with vehicle
4. Double-jeopardy did not bar new trial where mistrial declared if judge could not be neutral.
5. To be guilty of "fictitious reports" defendant must act with knowing mental state.
6. Effective Business Succession Planning
7. Major Changes in Municipal Court - DWI, Recent DWI and Criminal Cases and the New Alcotest Breath Machine
1 Personal Legal Checkup
1. Do you have a will which has been revised within the past 3 years? (Y, N)
2. Are there any estate planning changes which should be considered? (Y, N)
3. Have the liability policy limits of your insurance increased within the past three years? (Y, N)
4. Are there any potential claims which could be asserted against you? (Y, N)
5. Do you presently have a written and current listing of all important future dates, such as expiration, option, maturity and due dates? (Y, N)
6. Are you aware of, and do you have a current valuation of, all potential government benefits to which you are or will become entitled? (Y, N)
7. Do you have a file, stored in a secure and fireproof location, containing all important documents (wills, titles, securities, contracts, marriage/divorce papers, deeds, pension/profit sharing plans, etc.) (Y, N)
8. Have you within the past 3 years reviewed the beneficiary designation on all documents which require such information? (Y, N)
9. Do you have a complete and current personal financial statement which list in detail all of your personal assets and liabilities? (Y, N)
10. Do you have a complete and current inventory of all of your physical possessions, sufficient to support a claim in the event of a loss? (Y, N)
11. To the extent the foregoing question are relevant to your spouse(if any) and minor children (if any), are there any matters or issues which should be updated, reconsidered, or changed? (Y, N)
12. To the extent there are persons other than spouse or children for whom you may have some responsibilities ( e.g., aging parents ), are there items or issues which should be updated or changed? (Y, N)
13. Have any of these questions caused you to consider taking some action or making some further review? (Y, N)
Recent cases:
2. Pocket bike is motorized vehicle subject to NJ Laws and DWI. State v. Kaiser Appellate Division, A-2404-05T3, September 26, 2006, not approved for publication.
Conviction following a trial de novo of driving while intoxicated in violation of N.J.S.A. 39:4-50 affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed by the Law Division; the defendant argued on appeal that the “pocket bike” that he had operated on a public roadway was not a “motor vehicle” for the purpose of prosecution under §39:4-50; N.J.S.A. 39:1-1 defines “motor vehicle” to include “all vehicles propelled otherwise than by muscular power, excepting such vehicles as run only upon rails or tracks and motorized bicycles”; a “pocket bike” is not propelled by muscular power or the use of pedals, does not run on rails or tracks, and is not a “motorized bicycle” because it does not have pedals; therefore, a “pocket bike” was a “motor vehicle” when the defendant’s offense occurred; although the Legislature later enacted a regulatory scheme for “motorized scooters,” including “pocket bikes,” that is independent of the scheme for “motor vehicles,” there was no legislative intent to provide retroactive relief to drunk drivers who were convicted under prior law. Source: Facts-on-Call Order No. 20243
3. Defendant guilty of leaving scene where defendant admitted contact with vehicle. State v. Friedman Appellate Division, A-272-05T2, October 4, 2006, not approved for publication.
Conviction following a trial de novo of leaving the scene of an accident in violation of N.J.S.A. 39:4-129(b) affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed by the Law Division; a driver testified that her vehicle was stopped in traffic when a blue Jaguar hit it in the rear; the driver saw “a small indentation” and cracked lacquer on her bumper, and she wrote down the Jaguar’s license plate number; the Jaguar was determined to belong to the defendant, whom the driver identified in court; the defendant had driven from the scene without giving the driver his name and address, driver’s license, or vehicle registration; the defendant admitted that his Jaguar had touched the driver’s vehicle but asserted that the touching did not amount to an accident; however, the Law Division properly concluded that the defendant was aware that he had been in an accident and that the requirements of §39:4-129(b) therefore were satisfied; even if the impact was minimal, that was no defense to the charge. Source: Facts-on-Call Order No. 20285
4. Double-jeopardy did not bar new trial where mistrial declared if judge could not be neutral. State v. Logory Appellate Division, A-3582-04T3, October 19, 2006, not approved for publication.
Law Division decision that the retrial of the defendant in the Municipal Court on charges of driving while intoxicated and making an improper lane change was not a double-jeopardy violation affirmed; the first Municipal Court judge declared a mistrial sua sponte because he no longer could be neutral and detached in light of defense counsel’s conduct; at the retrial, the second Municipal Court judge convicted the defendant of both charges; the Law Division rejected the defendant’s double-jeopardy claim and convicted him of both charges following a trial de novo; the Appellate Division rejected the defendant’s argument that double-jeopardy principles barred his retrial because the first Municipal Court judge could have exercised reasonable alternatives to declaring a mistrial; “manifest necessity” and the “ends of public justice” required the first Municipal Court judge to recuse himself when he no longer could be fair and impartial and therefore to declare a mistrial sua sponte. Source: Facts-on-Call Order No. 20370
5. To be guilty of "fictitious reports" defendant must act with knowing mental state. State v. Taylor Law Division, Camden County, Appeal No. 02-2006, approved for publication June 20, 2006.
As a matter of first impression, the Law Division applied the “diminished capacity” statute, N.J.S.A. 2C:4-2, to the case of a defendant who, while in a hallucinatory state, had reported an offense to the police
that had not occurred, and it concluded that the State had not proved that the defendant had acted with the “knowing” mental state required by the fictitious reports statute, N.J.S.A. 2C:28-4b(1). Source: Facts-on-Call Order No. 93068
6. Effective Business Succession Planning
By Saul Simon
Business owners invest significant amounts of time and financial resources to make their enterprises successful. Quite often, due to the quick pace of day-to-day operations, planning for succession of ownership is relegated to a low-priority task. But there comes a point in the life cycle of any business when the owner is no longer able to manage the firm that he or she founded.
Because the timing of death or disability is difficult to predict, it’s prudent to have a succession plan in place now to safeguard your family’s financial well being, and to provide your business with leadership during a transition period.
A Family Affair?
One logical solution—and one that most entrepreneurs may want to choose—is to turn the reins over to their children. However, despite its emotional and intuitive appeal, the odds are stacked squarely against a business surviving a transfer down the bloodline.
According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, two-thirds of family-run enterprises fail to make the successful transition to a second generation of ownership, and less than 15% survive into the third generation. Making a successful transition even trickier are issues brought on by divorce, blended families, or rivalries among children.
The best course of action may be either to identify strong candidates within your company who can continue to run the business and provide a source of financial security for your family, or to look at the potential for selling the business to an outside party.
“You have to be realistic,” says Jack Kaewpalug, Certified Financial PlannerTM Practitioner with Lincoln Financial Advisors Corp. in Irvine, Calif. “If you’re the person who is responsible for 80% of the firm’s sales, you’ll need to identify somebody who can assume that role if you want to keep the operation going.”
Transitional Steps
Whichever course you eventually decide is right for your business, there are steps you can take now that will ease the transition.
* Groom new management. Who is best able to run the business in your absence? Perhaps your children have spent years growing up in the business and have become capable managers in their own right. If not, look to your existing management team, and make your intentions known. Be sure that candidates are capable and interested in taking over.
* Determine a value. Work with a valuation specialist to get a fair assessment of what your business might be worth. While valuation analysis may be an art as much as it is a science, you should place a value on your business in the event you decide to sell. There are several valuation methods, including book value, discounted cash flow, or you could hire a professional appraiser. If you decide to transfer the business to your children, a professional appraisal is generally required to withstand IRS scrutiny.
* Draft a buy-sell agreement. Depending on the structure of ownership, this document will be a binding agreement detailing the terms of ownership transfer between you and your offspring, you and a non-family successor, or you and your partners. Be sure to specify how the agreement will be funded. “Proceeds from a life insurance policy are frequently used as a way to fund a buy-sell arrangement,” says Kaewpalug, “Other options include loans from a bank or company earnings that are paid back through an ‘earn-out’ arrangement with your successor, whereby the loan is paid back in regular installments.
* ESOPs. If you have a large number of employees, another option is an Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP), whereby a bank lends money to the ESOP to purchase your interest in the business, and the employees then buy the shares through regular payroll deductions.
Planning for succession can be an unpleasant task, although the outcome can be even more unpleasant if you fail to plan. “You’ll have a lot more options if you start to plan when things are going great,” says Kaewpalug. “What you don’t want is a situation where your family is scrambling to salvage some value from the business after you’re gone.”
Simon Financial Group
399 Thornall Street, 12th Floor
Edison, NJ 08837
Phone: (732)623.2078
Fax: (732)623.2088
www.saulsimon.com
7. Major Changes in Municipal Court - DWI, Recent DWI and Criminal Cases and the New Alcotest Breath Machine
NJSBA Annual Meeting- Borgata Resort, Atlantic City
Thursday, May 17 10:30 a.m. - noon Studio III room
Discussion of new DWI law with .08 BAC; the new 7110 breathalyzer testing machine; recent cases involving DWI or drugs; the refusal law and pending legislation; court rules to limit plea bargaining; blood test admissibility in a DWI or drug case suppression and other pre-trial motions.
Speakers:
John Menzel, Esq.
Co-Counsel, State v Chun, State v Foley
Kenneth A. Vercammen, Esq.
Past Chair, NJSBA Municipal Court Section
Hon. Marilyn E. Williams
Newark Municipal Court
Richard M. Keil, Esq.
Oakhurst
Sponsors: Municipal Court Practice Section
Criminal Law Section
General Practice Section
Young Lawyers Division
ICLE
Certified Trial Attorneys: 1.5 criminal credits pending
PA CLE: 1.5 substantive credits pending
NY CLE (Transitional/Non-transitional): 1.5 professional practice credits
One speaker will also provide updated information on the 7100 Alcotest Mark III MK breath test machine that will replace the Breathalyzer Model 900 and 900A, used in New Jersey for the past thirty years. He will also discuss the science and operation of this new breath test machine, and consider its impact on breath testing in New Jersey. This information is critical for attorneys who represent plaintiffs or defendants in DWI matters.
Materials Provided to all Attendees:
Call NJSBA at 732-249-5000 for meeting registration details
_____________________________
Our law blog- http://njlaws1.blogspot.com/
Thank you for reading our newsletter! God Bless America USA #1
We appreciate continued referrals. We want to take the time to extend to our friends and clients our sincere gratitude because it is good friends and clients that make our business grow. Client recommendation is a very important source of new clients to us. We are grateful for the recommendation of new clients. We will do our best to give all clients excellent care. We shall do our best to justify all recommendations.
"Celebrating more than 21 years of providing excellent service to clients 1985-2007" Former Prosecutor
This newsletter is produced to be sent electronically. If you know someone who would also like to receive this email newsletter, please have them email us at newsletter@njlaws.com.
Free T- shirts and soda can holders available for all current and past clients. Please come into office.
Editor's Note and Disclaimer: All materials Copyright 2007. You may pass along the information on the NJ Laws Newsletter and website, provided the name and address of the Law Office is included.
KENNETH VERCAMMEN & ASSOCIATES, PC
ATTORNEY AT LAW
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
(Phone) 732-572-0500
(Fax) 732-572-0030
website: www.njlaws.com
Admitted to practice law in New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, US Supreme Court and Federal District Court
In this issue:
1 Personal Legal Checkup
Recent cases:
2. Pocket bike is motorized vehicle subject to NJ Laws and DWI
3. Defendant guilty of leaving scene where defendant admitted contact with vehicle
4. Double-jeopardy did not bar new trial where mistrial declared if judge could not be neutral.
5. To be guilty of "fictitious reports" defendant must act with knowing mental state.
6. Effective Business Succession Planning
7. Major Changes in Municipal Court - DWI, Recent DWI and Criminal Cases and the New Alcotest Breath Machine
1 Personal Legal Checkup
1. Do you have a will which has been revised within the past 3 years? (Y, N)
2. Are there any estate planning changes which should be considered? (Y, N)
3. Have the liability policy limits of your insurance increased within the past three years? (Y, N)
4. Are there any potential claims which could be asserted against you? (Y, N)
5. Do you presently have a written and current listing of all important future dates, such as expiration, option, maturity and due dates? (Y, N)
6. Are you aware of, and do you have a current valuation of, all potential government benefits to which you are or will become entitled? (Y, N)
7. Do you have a file, stored in a secure and fireproof location, containing all important documents (wills, titles, securities, contracts, marriage/divorce papers, deeds, pension/profit sharing plans, etc.) (Y, N)
8. Have you within the past 3 years reviewed the beneficiary designation on all documents which require such information? (Y, N)
9. Do you have a complete and current personal financial statement which list in detail all of your personal assets and liabilities? (Y, N)
10. Do you have a complete and current inventory of all of your physical possessions, sufficient to support a claim in the event of a loss? (Y, N)
11. To the extent the foregoing question are relevant to your spouse(if any) and minor children (if any), are there any matters or issues which should be updated, reconsidered, or changed? (Y, N)
12. To the extent there are persons other than spouse or children for whom you may have some responsibilities ( e.g., aging parents ), are there items or issues which should be updated or changed? (Y, N)
13. Have any of these questions caused you to consider taking some action or making some further review? (Y, N)
Recent cases:
2. Pocket bike is motorized vehicle subject to NJ Laws and DWI. State v. Kaiser Appellate Division, A-2404-05T3, September 26, 2006, not approved for publication.
Conviction following a trial de novo of driving while intoxicated in violation of N.J.S.A. 39:4-50 affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed by the Law Division; the defendant argued on appeal that the “pocket bike” that he had operated on a public roadway was not a “motor vehicle” for the purpose of prosecution under §39:4-50; N.J.S.A. 39:1-1 defines “motor vehicle” to include “all vehicles propelled otherwise than by muscular power, excepting such vehicles as run only upon rails or tracks and motorized bicycles”; a “pocket bike” is not propelled by muscular power or the use of pedals, does not run on rails or tracks, and is not a “motorized bicycle” because it does not have pedals; therefore, a “pocket bike” was a “motor vehicle” when the defendant’s offense occurred; although the Legislature later enacted a regulatory scheme for “motorized scooters,” including “pocket bikes,” that is independent of the scheme for “motor vehicles,” there was no legislative intent to provide retroactive relief to drunk drivers who were convicted under prior law. Source: Facts-on-Call Order No. 20243
3. Defendant guilty of leaving scene where defendant admitted contact with vehicle. State v. Friedman Appellate Division, A-272-05T2, October 4, 2006, not approved for publication.
Conviction following a trial de novo of leaving the scene of an accident in violation of N.J.S.A. 39:4-129(b) affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed by the Law Division; a driver testified that her vehicle was stopped in traffic when a blue Jaguar hit it in the rear; the driver saw “a small indentation” and cracked lacquer on her bumper, and she wrote down the Jaguar’s license plate number; the Jaguar was determined to belong to the defendant, whom the driver identified in court; the defendant had driven from the scene without giving the driver his name and address, driver’s license, or vehicle registration; the defendant admitted that his Jaguar had touched the driver’s vehicle but asserted that the touching did not amount to an accident; however, the Law Division properly concluded that the defendant was aware that he had been in an accident and that the requirements of §39:4-129(b) therefore were satisfied; even if the impact was minimal, that was no defense to the charge. Source: Facts-on-Call Order No. 20285
4. Double-jeopardy did not bar new trial where mistrial declared if judge could not be neutral. State v. Logory Appellate Division, A-3582-04T3, October 19, 2006, not approved for publication.
Law Division decision that the retrial of the defendant in the Municipal Court on charges of driving while intoxicated and making an improper lane change was not a double-jeopardy violation affirmed; the first Municipal Court judge declared a mistrial sua sponte because he no longer could be neutral and detached in light of defense counsel’s conduct; at the retrial, the second Municipal Court judge convicted the defendant of both charges; the Law Division rejected the defendant’s double-jeopardy claim and convicted him of both charges following a trial de novo; the Appellate Division rejected the defendant’s argument that double-jeopardy principles barred his retrial because the first Municipal Court judge could have exercised reasonable alternatives to declaring a mistrial; “manifest necessity” and the “ends of public justice” required the first Municipal Court judge to recuse himself when he no longer could be fair and impartial and therefore to declare a mistrial sua sponte. Source: Facts-on-Call Order No. 20370
5. To be guilty of "fictitious reports" defendant must act with knowing mental state. State v. Taylor Law Division, Camden County, Appeal No. 02-2006, approved for publication June 20, 2006.
As a matter of first impression, the Law Division applied the “diminished capacity” statute, N.J.S.A. 2C:4-2, to the case of a defendant who, while in a hallucinatory state, had reported an offense to the police
that had not occurred, and it concluded that the State had not proved that the defendant had acted with the “knowing” mental state required by the fictitious reports statute, N.J.S.A. 2C:28-4b(1). Source: Facts-on-Call Order No. 93068
6. Effective Business Succession Planning
By Saul Simon
Business owners invest significant amounts of time and financial resources to make their enterprises successful. Quite often, due to the quick pace of day-to-day operations, planning for succession of ownership is relegated to a low-priority task. But there comes a point in the life cycle of any business when the owner is no longer able to manage the firm that he or she founded.
Because the timing of death or disability is difficult to predict, it’s prudent to have a succession plan in place now to safeguard your family’s financial well being, and to provide your business with leadership during a transition period.
A Family Affair?
One logical solution—and one that most entrepreneurs may want to choose—is to turn the reins over to their children. However, despite its emotional and intuitive appeal, the odds are stacked squarely against a business surviving a transfer down the bloodline.
According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, two-thirds of family-run enterprises fail to make the successful transition to a second generation of ownership, and less than 15% survive into the third generation. Making a successful transition even trickier are issues brought on by divorce, blended families, or rivalries among children.
The best course of action may be either to identify strong candidates within your company who can continue to run the business and provide a source of financial security for your family, or to look at the potential for selling the business to an outside party.
“You have to be realistic,” says Jack Kaewpalug, Certified Financial PlannerTM Practitioner with Lincoln Financial Advisors Corp. in Irvine, Calif. “If you’re the person who is responsible for 80% of the firm’s sales, you’ll need to identify somebody who can assume that role if you want to keep the operation going.”
Transitional Steps
Whichever course you eventually decide is right for your business, there are steps you can take now that will ease the transition.
* Groom new management. Who is best able to run the business in your absence? Perhaps your children have spent years growing up in the business and have become capable managers in their own right. If not, look to your existing management team, and make your intentions known. Be sure that candidates are capable and interested in taking over.
* Determine a value. Work with a valuation specialist to get a fair assessment of what your business might be worth. While valuation analysis may be an art as much as it is a science, you should place a value on your business in the event you decide to sell. There are several valuation methods, including book value, discounted cash flow, or you could hire a professional appraiser. If you decide to transfer the business to your children, a professional appraisal is generally required to withstand IRS scrutiny.
* Draft a buy-sell agreement. Depending on the structure of ownership, this document will be a binding agreement detailing the terms of ownership transfer between you and your offspring, you and a non-family successor, or you and your partners. Be sure to specify how the agreement will be funded. “Proceeds from a life insurance policy are frequently used as a way to fund a buy-sell arrangement,” says Kaewpalug, “Other options include loans from a bank or company earnings that are paid back through an ‘earn-out’ arrangement with your successor, whereby the loan is paid back in regular installments.
* ESOPs. If you have a large number of employees, another option is an Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP), whereby a bank lends money to the ESOP to purchase your interest in the business, and the employees then buy the shares through regular payroll deductions.
Planning for succession can be an unpleasant task, although the outcome can be even more unpleasant if you fail to plan. “You’ll have a lot more options if you start to plan when things are going great,” says Kaewpalug. “What you don’t want is a situation where your family is scrambling to salvage some value from the business after you’re gone.”
Simon Financial Group
399 Thornall Street, 12th Floor
Edison, NJ 08837
Phone: (732)623.2078
Fax: (732)623.2088
www.saulsimon.com
7. Major Changes in Municipal Court - DWI, Recent DWI and Criminal Cases and the New Alcotest Breath Machine
NJSBA Annual Meeting- Borgata Resort, Atlantic City
Thursday, May 17 10:30 a.m. - noon Studio III room
Discussion of new DWI law with .08 BAC; the new 7110 breathalyzer testing machine; recent cases involving DWI or drugs; the refusal law and pending legislation; court rules to limit plea bargaining; blood test admissibility in a DWI or drug case suppression and other pre-trial motions.
Speakers:
John Menzel, Esq.
Co-Counsel, State v Chun, State v Foley
Kenneth A. Vercammen, Esq.
Past Chair, NJSBA Municipal Court Section
Hon. Marilyn E. Williams
Newark Municipal Court
Richard M. Keil, Esq.
Oakhurst
Sponsors: Municipal Court Practice Section
Criminal Law Section
General Practice Section
Young Lawyers Division
ICLE
Certified Trial Attorneys: 1.5 criminal credits pending
PA CLE: 1.5 substantive credits pending
NY CLE (Transitional/Non-transitional): 1.5 professional practice credits
One speaker will also provide updated information on the 7100 Alcotest Mark III MK breath test machine that will replace the Breathalyzer Model 900 and 900A, used in New Jersey for the past thirty years. He will also discuss the science and operation of this new breath test machine, and consider its impact on breath testing in New Jersey. This information is critical for attorneys who represent plaintiffs or defendants in DWI matters.
Materials Provided to all Attendees:
Call NJSBA at 732-249-5000 for meeting registration details
_____________________________
Our law blog- http://njlaws1.blogspot.com/
Thank you for reading our newsletter! God Bless America USA #1
We appreciate continued referrals. We want to take the time to extend to our friends and clients our sincere gratitude because it is good friends and clients that make our business grow. Client recommendation is a very important source of new clients to us. We are grateful for the recommendation of new clients. We will do our best to give all clients excellent care. We shall do our best to justify all recommendations.
"Celebrating more than 21 years of providing excellent service to clients 1985-2007" Former Prosecutor
This newsletter is produced to be sent electronically. If you know someone who would also like to receive this email newsletter, please have them email us at newsletter@njlaws.com.
Free T- shirts and soda can holders available for all current and past clients. Please come into office.
Editor's Note and Disclaimer: All materials Copyright 2007. You may pass along the information on the NJ Laws Newsletter and website, provided the name and address of the Law Office is included.
KENNETH VERCAMMEN & ASSOCIATES, PC
ATTORNEY AT LAW
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
(Phone) 732-572-0500
(Fax) 732-572-0030
website: www.njlaws.com
Admitted to practice law in New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, US Supreme Court and Federal District Court
ABA ELDER LAW COMMITTEE Newsletter May, 2007 ABA General Practice, Solo and Small Firm Division
Chairs - Kenneth Vercammen, Edison, NJ and Jay Foonberg, Beverly Hills, CA
In this issue:
1. Meeting Friday, May 11, 2007 12:10- 1pm
2. Medicaid, Public Benefits and Tax Numbers 2007
_____________________________
1. Meeting Friday, May 11, 2007 12:10- 1pm
Washington Court Hotel ABA Elder Law Committee meeting
Topic: Elder Law Practice- Changes in the law and ideas to Improve Your Practice by Giving Clients What They Want and Need, plus Marketing and Expanding an Elder Law Practice
, Chair's Suite
American Bar Association General Practice Section, Elder Law Committee
Chairs/ Speakers:
Jay Foonberg, Beverly Hills, CA
-Kenneth A. Vercammen, Esq. , Edison, NJ Chair- Elder Law Committee
If you are attending, email Kenneth Vercammen, Esq. at Kenv@njlaws.com
Elder Law may be the biggest practice area of your career. 50,000 baby boomers/ day turning 60 and soon to be on Medicaid and needing your help.
Topics:
New Medicaid Law 2006- Protect yourself from inaccurate advice and malpractice
Getting referrals from other professionals
The aftermath of the Terry Schiavo case.
Email newsletters
How to get more referrals and repeat business
How to manage telephone conversations with your clients
Marketing with written fee agreements
-Networking the Internet without backlash
-Ethics and marketing without violating the Rules of Professional Conduct
[Contact Kenneth Vercammen, Esq. for program information 732-572-0500]
2. Medicaid, Public Benefits and Tax Numbers 2007
By Thomas D. Begley, Jr., Esquire
Every year selected public benefits and tax numbers change. These are indexed to the cost of living. Here are some of the important numbers for 2007:
Medicaid
$1,869 Income Cap
$101,640 Maximum CSRA
$20,328 Minimum CSRA
$2,541 Maximum MMMNA
$1650 MMMNA (until July 1, 2007)
$495 Excess Shelter Allowance (until July 1, 2007)
Social Security
3.3% Social Security Increase
$623 SSI – Single
$934 SSI – Couple
$900 SGA - Disabled
$1,500 SGA – Blind
Medicare
$124 Medicare Co-Payment – NSF
$93.50 Medicare Part B Standard Premium (less than $80,000 income)
Medicare Part B –Related Premium
$106 Medicare Part B ($80,000-$100,000 income)
$124.70 Medicare Part B ($100,000-$150,000 income)
$143.40 Medicare Part B ($150,000-$200,000 income)
$162.10 Medicare Part B (more than $200,000 income)
Married and filing separate return
$143.40 Medicare Part B ($80,000-$120,000 income)
$162.10 Medicare Part B (more than $120,000
$131 Medicare Part B Deductible
$992 Medicare Part A Deductible
Tax
$12,000 Annual Gift Tax Exclusion
$125,000 Gifts to Non-Citizen Spouse
$10,450 Maximum Tax Estates and Trust
$2,000,000 Federal Estate Tax Exemption
$3,400.00 Personal Exemption *
$97,500 Max SSA Wage Base
PAAD/Senior Gold – NJ Prescription Plan
$22,572 PAAD Single Limit
$27,676 PAAD Married Limit
$32,572 Senior Gold Single Limit
$37,676 Senior Gold Married Limit
Eligible Long-Term Care Insurance
$290 40 or less
$550 more than 40 but not more than 50
$1,110 more than 50 but not more than 60
$2,950 more than 60 but not more than 70
$3,680 more than 70
*Subject to phase out for income above certain levels for various types of filers.
Begley & Bookbinder, P.C. is an Elder & Disability Law Firm with offices in Moorestown, Stone Harbor and Lawrenceville, New Jersey and can be contacted at 800-533-7227. The firm services southern and central New Jersey and eastern Pennsylvania.
_____________________________
Send us your articles & ideas
To help your practice, we feature in this newsletter edition a few articles and tips on marketing and improving service to clients. But your Editor and chairs can't do it all. Please send articles, suggestions or ideas you wish to share with others.
General Practice, Solo and Small Firm Division:
Elder Law Committee and the ESTATE PLANNING, PROBATE & TRUST COMMITTEE
Who We Are
This committee focuses on improving estate planning skills, substantive law knowledge and office procedures for the attorney who practices estate planning, probate and trust law. This committee also serves as a network resource in educating attorneys regarding Elder Law situations.
To help your practice, we feature in this newsletter edition a few articles and tips on marketing and improving service to clients. But your Editor and chairs can't do it all. Please send articles, suggestions or ideas you wish to share with others.
Let us know if you are finding any useful information or anything you can share with the other members. You will receive written credit as the source and thus you can advise your clients and friends you were published in an ABA publication. We will try to meet you needs.
We also seek articles on Elder Law, Probate, Wills, Medicaid and Marketing. Please send your marketing ideas and articles to us. You can become a published ABA author.
________________________________________
The Elder Law Committee of the ABA General Practice Division is directed towards general practitioners and more experienced elder law attorneys. The committee consistently sponsors programs at the Annual Meeting, the focus of which is shifting to advanced topics for the more experienced elder lawyer.
This committee also focuses on improving estate planning skills, substantive law knowledge and office procedures for the attorney who practices estate planning, probate and trust law. This committee also serves as a network resource in educating attorneys regarding Elder Law situations.
Kenneth Vercammen, Esq. co-Chair
Jay Foonberg, Beverly Hills Co-chair, Author of Best Sellers "How to
Start and Build a Law Practice" and "How to get and keep good clients', Beverly Hills, CA jayfoonberg@aol.com>
We will also provide tips on how to promote your law office, your practice and Personal Marketing Skills in general. It does not deal with government funded "legal services" for indigent, welfare cases.
KENNETH VERCAMMEN & ASSOCIATES, PC
ATTORNEY AT LAW
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
(Phone) 732-572-0500
(Fax) 732-572-0030
Kenv@njlaws.com
Chairs - Kenneth Vercammen, Edison, NJ and Jay Foonberg, Beverly Hills, CA
In this issue:
1. Meeting Friday, May 11, 2007 12:10- 1pm
2. Medicaid, Public Benefits and Tax Numbers 2007
_____________________________
1. Meeting Friday, May 11, 2007 12:10- 1pm
Washington Court Hotel ABA Elder Law Committee meeting
Topic: Elder Law Practice- Changes in the law and ideas to Improve Your Practice by Giving Clients What They Want and Need, plus Marketing and Expanding an Elder Law Practice
, Chair's Suite
American Bar Association General Practice Section, Elder Law Committee
Chairs/ Speakers:
Jay Foonberg, Beverly Hills, CA
-Kenneth A. Vercammen, Esq. , Edison, NJ Chair- Elder Law Committee
If you are attending, email Kenneth Vercammen, Esq. at Kenv@njlaws.com
Elder Law may be the biggest practice area of your career. 50,000 baby boomers/ day turning 60 and soon to be on Medicaid and needing your help.
Topics:
New Medicaid Law 2006- Protect yourself from inaccurate advice and malpractice
Getting referrals from other professionals
The aftermath of the Terry Schiavo case.
Email newsletters
How to get more referrals and repeat business
How to manage telephone conversations with your clients
Marketing with written fee agreements
-Networking the Internet without backlash
-Ethics and marketing without violating the Rules of Professional Conduct
[Contact Kenneth Vercammen, Esq. for program information 732-572-0500]
2. Medicaid, Public Benefits and Tax Numbers 2007
By Thomas D. Begley, Jr., Esquire
Every year selected public benefits and tax numbers change. These are indexed to the cost of living. Here are some of the important numbers for 2007:
Medicaid
$1,869 Income Cap
$101,640 Maximum CSRA
$20,328 Minimum CSRA
$2,541 Maximum MMMNA
$1650 MMMNA (until July 1, 2007)
$495 Excess Shelter Allowance (until July 1, 2007)
Social Security
3.3% Social Security Increase
$623 SSI – Single
$934 SSI – Couple
$900 SGA - Disabled
$1,500 SGA – Blind
Medicare
$124 Medicare Co-Payment – NSF
$93.50 Medicare Part B Standard Premium (less than $80,000 income)
Medicare Part B –Related Premium
$106 Medicare Part B ($80,000-$100,000 income)
$124.70 Medicare Part B ($100,000-$150,000 income)
$143.40 Medicare Part B ($150,000-$200,000 income)
$162.10 Medicare Part B (more than $200,000 income)
Married and filing separate return
$143.40 Medicare Part B ($80,000-$120,000 income)
$162.10 Medicare Part B (more than $120,000
$131 Medicare Part B Deductible
$992 Medicare Part A Deductible
Tax
$12,000 Annual Gift Tax Exclusion
$125,000 Gifts to Non-Citizen Spouse
$10,450 Maximum Tax Estates and Trust
$2,000,000 Federal Estate Tax Exemption
$3,400.00 Personal Exemption *
$97,500 Max SSA Wage Base
PAAD/Senior Gold – NJ Prescription Plan
$22,572 PAAD Single Limit
$27,676 PAAD Married Limit
$32,572 Senior Gold Single Limit
$37,676 Senior Gold Married Limit
Eligible Long-Term Care Insurance
$290 40 or less
$550 more than 40 but not more than 50
$1,110 more than 50 but not more than 60
$2,950 more than 60 but not more than 70
$3,680 more than 70
*Subject to phase out for income above certain levels for various types of filers.
Begley & Bookbinder, P.C. is an Elder & Disability Law Firm with offices in Moorestown, Stone Harbor and Lawrenceville, New Jersey and can be contacted at 800-533-7227. The firm services southern and central New Jersey and eastern Pennsylvania.
_____________________________
Send us your articles & ideas
To help your practice, we feature in this newsletter edition a few articles and tips on marketing and improving service to clients. But your Editor and chairs can't do it all. Please send articles, suggestions or ideas you wish to share with others.
General Practice, Solo and Small Firm Division:
Elder Law Committee and the ESTATE PLANNING, PROBATE & TRUST COMMITTEE
Who We Are
This committee focuses on improving estate planning skills, substantive law knowledge and office procedures for the attorney who practices estate planning, probate and trust law. This committee also serves as a network resource in educating attorneys regarding Elder Law situations.
To help your practice, we feature in this newsletter edition a few articles and tips on marketing and improving service to clients. But your Editor and chairs can't do it all. Please send articles, suggestions or ideas you wish to share with others.
Let us know if you are finding any useful information or anything you can share with the other members. You will receive written credit as the source and thus you can advise your clients and friends you were published in an ABA publication. We will try to meet you needs.
We also seek articles on Elder Law, Probate, Wills, Medicaid and Marketing. Please send your marketing ideas and articles to us. You can become a published ABA author.
________________________________________
The Elder Law Committee of the ABA General Practice Division is directed towards general practitioners and more experienced elder law attorneys. The committee consistently sponsors programs at the Annual Meeting, the focus of which is shifting to advanced topics for the more experienced elder lawyer.
This committee also focuses on improving estate planning skills, substantive law knowledge and office procedures for the attorney who practices estate planning, probate and trust law. This committee also serves as a network resource in educating attorneys regarding Elder Law situations.
Kenneth Vercammen, Esq. co-Chair
Jay Foonberg, Beverly Hills Co-chair, Author of Best Sellers "How to
Start and Build a Law Practice" and "How to get and keep good clients', Beverly Hills, CA jayfoonberg@aol.com>
We will also provide tips on how to promote your law office, your practice and Personal Marketing Skills in general. It does not deal with government funded "legal services" for indigent, welfare cases.
KENNETH VERCAMMEN & ASSOCIATES, PC
ATTORNEY AT LAW
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
(Phone) 732-572-0500
(Fax) 732-572-0030
Kenv@njlaws.com
Kenneth Vercammen's NJ Laws email newsletter E243
April 25, 2007
In this issue:
1. Real Estate Sales
2. Yearly Insurance Review
3 DWI suppression affirmed where reasons for ordering sobriety test not "reasonable suspicion."
4. Defendant can be guilty of .08 DWI even though Breath machine calibrated at .10 level
1. Real Estate Sales
To better serve our Probate and Senior citizen clients, Kenneth Vercammen has taken and passed the NJ Real Estate Salesperson test. The examination consists of numerous questions taken over a 4 hour period. Mr. Vercammen is now also a licensed real estate agent, is affiliated with Century 21, John Anthony Agency on 1815 Oak Tree Rd., Edison, NJ. Century 21 is one of the largest real estate agencies in the country. http://www.century21johnanthony.com/
If you will be selling a house, please give Kenneth Vercammen a call. Do not pay a 6% commission, but also don't rely on a 2% agency that merely lists your home on the internet, then expects you to do all the work.
SELLERS INFORMATION SHEET
The sale of a home is probably the largest transaction a person will ever undertake. Careful consideration should be given to the technical difficulties involved in the transfer.
The Contract of Sale
A Contract of Sale is an agreement for the purchase and sale of real estate. This is the most important document in any real estate transaction because it establishes the respective rights and responsibilities of the purchaser and the seller.
Since the Contract of Sale is important and legally binding New Jersey requires a 3 day attorney review period on Contracts prepared by a realtor. Please read the contract before signing. If you have any questions, please ask your real estate agent. If there are any clauses you want added, such as the house sale "As is", make sure they are added to the Contract before signing.
The 3 day attorney review period is to protect the buyer and seller from being forever bound by a contract without them receiving the benefit of legal advice. You only have three days to have your attorney review the contract and make the appropriate changes. Remember that once a Contract is signed and in final form after 3 days, your rights and obligations are fixed concerning the transaction. Your attorney will no longer have the opportunity to structure the Contract to meet your objectives.
Read and Understand the Contract Before Signing your Contract of Sale
Perhaps the seller may want to retain possession of the property for some time in order to find new accommodations. You should make sure these clauses are included in the contract defining such rights prior to signing. Never sign a contract involving the sale or purchase of real estate until you have done the following:
1. read the entire contract
2. written down your questions and posed them to your realtor
3. made sure all your requested clauses are included, such as the house being sold "as is"
These are only a few matters usually covered in the contract. However, they illustrate the variety of terms and conditions to be considered when you enter into such a transaction.
FEE AGREEMENT BY THE SELLER'S ATTORNEY
The seller's attorney should provide the seller with a written Fee Agreement in accordance with the requirements of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Please do not be put off by the formality of this letter as it is for your protection as a consumer of legal services.
Legal fees for sales vary. We still charge a flat rate of $800 plus any costs for a simple real estate house sale where the realtor prepares the contract.
We anticipate the following will be performed by your attorney in a real estate sale:
1. Review and analyze the contract of sale during attorney review after both buyer and seller sign the contract.
2. Recommend revisions to contract if needed. However, the seller should never sign the contract if it is missing clauses or language needed by the seller.
3. Initial Office consultation if requested with client after contract is signed by both buyer and seller;
4. Request from the Seller back title, including a photocopy of the Deed, survey, title policy and mortgage payoff statement.
5. Preparation of fax letter of representation to buyer's attorney
6. Opening of file
7. Prepare Representation statement to client with request for Seller's Information Sheet
8. Review old Deed, survey
9. Forward Deed, survey, title policy to the purchaser's attorney, thus expediting the search and survey process.
10. Three (3) free calls with client
11. Three (3) telephone calls with buyers attorney and other individuals
12. Three (3) correspondence to and from buyers attorney and clients
13. Review home inspection report
14. Review other documents supplied by client and buyer's attorney;
15. Work with the purchaser's attorney in resolving possession and closing date.
16. Remind the seller to contact their mortgage company and equity loan to obtain a written payoff/ balance due on their mortgage.
17. Review Title Binder and Judgment Searches, if applicable
18. Review RESPA pre-closing, if applicable
19. Preparation of Deed, fax to buyer's attorney
20. Preparation of Affidavit of Title, fax to buyer's attorney
21. Cooperate with the purchaser's attorney in preparing the final closing statement.
22. Review the Respa, which is the Federal Real Estate Settlement Procedure Statement/ Amounts paid and to be received
23. Represent you at the closing.
24. Attend closing, execute Deed, execute Affidavit of Title
25. Assist in Preparation of 1099 tax form
26. Offer sound legal advice to client;
27. Preparation of End of Case Letter and client questionnaire.
28. Make available to client in office upon request free client case folder, Real Estate brochure, Website brochure, and other information brochures on Wills and Power of Attorney;
29. Free Brochures provided on other legal topics such as Car Insurance Rights, Worker's Comp,
30. Free subscription to monthly e-mail newsletter. Provide your email address.
31. 3 free telephone calls during the 2 years after the closing on Probate, Wills and non real estate matters.
32. Invitation to client community events.
33. Free Magnet, Keychain, Pen upon request in the office
Costs are items such as filing and recording fees, Certified or Express postage and other out of pocket expenses.
This fee does not include costs or legal fees if there are judgments against the property, probate issues, defects in title or other work requested to be performed. If this closing does not take place, you will only be responsible for the legal fees and costs incurred.
Work with your Realtor
Your realtor is a highly trained licensed professional. Their goal is to help you through this closing. They perform substantial work and earn the commissions of between $8,000- $16,000. In order to keep your legal fees down, you should be calling you realtor with routine questions regarding the closing. We have learned by past experience if you, your realtor or you family call your attorney's office every day, these calls are not included in the $800 fee, and there will be a charge for excess calls. The buyer is entitled to obtain a termite inspection and home inspection. Inspections are scheduled by the realtors. If the buyer requests repairs after the home inspection report is done, speak with your realtor first.
The seller is responsible for obtaining the smoke detector certificate, plus municipal certificate of occupancy if required by your town. Discuss these with your realtor. Please also arrange the walk through with your realtor.
Closing date is approximate
You should understand that the proposed closing date in the Contract is an approximate closing date. The actual closing depends upon the buyer's mortgage company issuing a commitment and a mortgage check. We do not set the closing date, that is set by the buyer's attorney. The realtor should be calling the buyer's attorney to determine time of closing and directions to the closing, not our office.
If Seller fails to timely obtain a written mortgage payoff statement, there will be an additional charge of $100.00 for the Seller's attorney to obtain the written payoff statement.
SELLERS INFORMATION SHEET- To be filled out by seller and returned to seller's attorney
KENNETH VERCAMMEN & ASSOCIATES, PC
1. SELLERS NAME: (as it appears on deed)
___________________________________________________________
2. Real Estate being Sold: Lot No. _________ Block No. __________
Address: __________________________________________
3. Present Mortgage Company: _____________________________
Address: ___________________________________________
Loan No. ___________________ 800 Telephone No. ____________
(Provide copy of payoff amount)
4. Other Mortgages, including Bridge Loans or Home Equity:
Name of Mortgage Company: _____________________________
Address: __________________________________________
Loan No. __________________ 800 Telephone No. ____________
(Obtain written copy of payoff amount from bank, a verbal payoff will not be good enough)
5. Social Security Number: (H) ________________ (W) ___________
6. Is any Seller age 62 or over? If so, name and date of birth: _________
7. Name, Address, Telephone number of Condominium Association, if any
_______________________________________________________
8. Type of Fuel: Gas ___________________ Oil _______________
PLEASE ATTACH A COPY OF TITLE INSURANCE, SURVEY, & DEED (not original)
9. Marriage Information:
Date of Marriage __________ Maiden or Prior Name(s) __________
Prior Marriages ________________________
(copy of Final Judgment of Divorce needed, not original)
10. Address After Property Sale: _____________________________
2. Yearly Insurance Review
By Ray Pavese & Mike McCormick
Every year you should review your insurance policies to make sure you still have a policy that
meets your needs, as well as the needs of your family members and
loved ones.
One of the policies that most often gets overlooked is the life
insurance policy. Since this is often a long-term policy, most
insured individuals assume they are stuck with the same policy,
no matter what. Usually this is not the case, although it will
depend on your policy and company as to whether you receive
penalties when changing your insurance.
Even if penalties occur, changing your life insurance policy may
be essential to keeping up with your family's financial needs for
the future.
If you don't review your life insurance policy every year, you
should at least review your policy under these circumstances:
* Marriage/Divorce - Needs change depending on your marital
status. Keep this in mind as things change in your life. Even if
you don't want to change the value of your policy, you probably
want to change the beneficiary.
* Children - If you ask the majority of life insurance agents,
the major reason for changing a life insurance policy is because
of children. This is because many adults never believe they will
need extra money after death until they realize that they will
have someone preceding them in death. Children will need money
for basic food and shelter until they are 18 and possibly for a
future college fund as well. Keep that in mind, and tell others
you know that may be affected.
* An Illness - Although waiting to change your insurance policy
until you have a long-term illness will mean paying higher
premiums, it is best to at least review your policy limitations
and make necessary changes if you find out you have a potentially
life threatening illness.
If you have questions regarding a change you would like to make
on your life insurance policy, feel free to contact me anytime.
Sincerely,
Ray Pavese & Mike McCormick
Pavese-McCormick Agency, Inc.
mikem@pavesemccormick.com
______________________________
3 DWI suppression affirmed where reasons for ordering sobriety test not "reasonable suspicion." State v. Lord Appellate Division, A-3228-05T2, October 5, 2006, not approved for publication.
Law Division order granting the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence of the results of his sobriety tests affirmed; the police officer observed the defendant’s car cross both the shoulder and center lines, and he then activated his video recorder and followed the defendant’s car for about two and a half minutes; the officer testified that, during that time, the defendant came to a full stop several times, properly used his signals when executing turns, did not speed, and properly stopped his car when the officer signaled; there was no question that the initial motor vehicle violation allowed the officer to stop the defendant; however, the Law Division properly concluded that the reasons that the officer gave for ordering sobriety tests did not give rise to a “reasonable suspicion” that the defendant had been driving while intoxicated; although the defendant had been observed violating the motor vehicle laws, his behavior did not demonstrate any further violation, and he did not exhibit any physical impairment. Source: Facts-on-Call Order No. 20296
4. Defendant can be guilty of .08 DWI even though Breath machine calibrated at .10 level. State v. Pearson Appellate Division, A-1344-05T2, September 22, 2006, not approved for publication.
Conviction following a trial de novo of driving while intoxicated affirmed; the defendant registered blood-alcohol-content levels of 0.08 and 0.09 on two Breathalyzer tests; the defendant asserted that the State had not established that the Breathalyzer was in proper working order because it was calibrated for accuracy at a 0.10 blood-alcohol-content level rather than a 0.08 level; the State Police protocols were not changed when N.J.S.A. 39:4-50 was amended to reduce the blood-alcohol-content level needed to establish a per se violation from 0.10 to 0.08, and the protocols require periodic testing with a simulator solution to establish accuracy at the 0.10 level; there was no merit to the defendant’s argument in light of the well-established principle that a Breathalyzer that is tested pursuant to the protocols and satisfies them is in proper working order and thus satisfies the State’s burden of proving that the results from the Breathalyzer, if correctly operated by a qualified operator, are reliable. Source: Facts-on-Call Order No. 20227
_____________________________
Our law blog- http://njlaws1.blogspot.com/
Thank you for reading our newsletter! God Bless America USA #1
We appreciate continued referrals. We want to take the time to extend to our friends and clients our sincere gratitude because it is good friends and clients that make our business grow. Client recommendation is a very important source of new clients to us. We are grateful for the recommendation of new clients. We will do our best to give all clients excellent care. We shall do our best to justify all recommendations.
"Celebrating more than 21 years of providing excellent service to clients 1985-2007" Former Prosecutor
This newsletter is produced to be sent electronically. If you know someone who would also like to receive this email newsletter, please have them email us at newsletter@njlaws.com.
Free T- shirts and soda can holders available for all current and past clients. Please come into office.
Editor's Note and Disclaimer: All materials Copyright 2007. You may pass along the information on the NJ Laws Newsletter and website, provided the name and address of the Law Office is included.
KENNETH VERCAMMEN & ASSOCIATES, PC
ATTORNEY AT LAW
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
(Phone) 732-572-0500
(Fax) 732-572-0030
website: www.njlaws.com
Admitted to practice law in New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, US Supreme Court and Federal District Court
April 25, 2007
In this issue:
1. Real Estate Sales
2. Yearly Insurance Review
3 DWI suppression affirmed where reasons for ordering sobriety test not "reasonable suspicion."
4. Defendant can be guilty of .08 DWI even though Breath machine calibrated at .10 level
1. Real Estate Sales
To better serve our Probate and Senior citizen clients, Kenneth Vercammen has taken and passed the NJ Real Estate Salesperson test. The examination consists of numerous questions taken over a 4 hour period. Mr. Vercammen is now also a licensed real estate agent, is affiliated with Century 21, John Anthony Agency on 1815 Oak Tree Rd., Edison, NJ. Century 21 is one of the largest real estate agencies in the country. http://www.century21johnanthony.com/
If you will be selling a house, please give Kenneth Vercammen a call. Do not pay a 6% commission, but also don't rely on a 2% agency that merely lists your home on the internet, then expects you to do all the work.
SELLERS INFORMATION SHEET
The sale of a home is probably the largest transaction a person will ever undertake. Careful consideration should be given to the technical difficulties involved in the transfer.
The Contract of Sale
A Contract of Sale is an agreement for the purchase and sale of real estate. This is the most important document in any real estate transaction because it establishes the respective rights and responsibilities of the purchaser and the seller.
Since the Contract of Sale is important and legally binding New Jersey requires a 3 day attorney review period on Contracts prepared by a realtor. Please read the contract before signing. If you have any questions, please ask your real estate agent. If there are any clauses you want added, such as the house sale "As is", make sure they are added to the Contract before signing.
The 3 day attorney review period is to protect the buyer and seller from being forever bound by a contract without them receiving the benefit of legal advice. You only have three days to have your attorney review the contract and make the appropriate changes. Remember that once a Contract is signed and in final form after 3 days, your rights and obligations are fixed concerning the transaction. Your attorney will no longer have the opportunity to structure the Contract to meet your objectives.
Read and Understand the Contract Before Signing your Contract of Sale
Perhaps the seller may want to retain possession of the property for some time in order to find new accommodations. You should make sure these clauses are included in the contract defining such rights prior to signing. Never sign a contract involving the sale or purchase of real estate until you have done the following:
1. read the entire contract
2. written down your questions and posed them to your realtor
3. made sure all your requested clauses are included, such as the house being sold "as is"
These are only a few matters usually covered in the contract. However, they illustrate the variety of terms and conditions to be considered when you enter into such a transaction.
FEE AGREEMENT BY THE SELLER'S ATTORNEY
The seller's attorney should provide the seller with a written Fee Agreement in accordance with the requirements of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Please do not be put off by the formality of this letter as it is for your protection as a consumer of legal services.
Legal fees for sales vary. We still charge a flat rate of $800 plus any costs for a simple real estate house sale where the realtor prepares the contract.
We anticipate the following will be performed by your attorney in a real estate sale:
1. Review and analyze the contract of sale during attorney review after both buyer and seller sign the contract.
2. Recommend revisions to contract if needed. However, the seller should never sign the contract if it is missing clauses or language needed by the seller.
3. Initial Office consultation if requested with client after contract is signed by both buyer and seller;
4. Request from the Seller back title, including a photocopy of the Deed, survey, title policy and mortgage payoff statement.
5. Preparation of fax letter of representation to buyer's attorney
6. Opening of file
7. Prepare Representation statement to client with request for Seller's Information Sheet
8. Review old Deed, survey
9. Forward Deed, survey, title policy to the purchaser's attorney, thus expediting the search and survey process.
10. Three (3) free calls with client
11. Three (3) telephone calls with buyers attorney and other individuals
12. Three (3) correspondence to and from buyers attorney and clients
13. Review home inspection report
14. Review other documents supplied by client and buyer's attorney;
15. Work with the purchaser's attorney in resolving possession and closing date.
16. Remind the seller to contact their mortgage company and equity loan to obtain a written payoff/ balance due on their mortgage.
17. Review Title Binder and Judgment Searches, if applicable
18. Review RESPA pre-closing, if applicable
19. Preparation of Deed, fax to buyer's attorney
20. Preparation of Affidavit of Title, fax to buyer's attorney
21. Cooperate with the purchaser's attorney in preparing the final closing statement.
22. Review the Respa, which is the Federal Real Estate Settlement Procedure Statement/ Amounts paid and to be received
23. Represent you at the closing.
24. Attend closing, execute Deed, execute Affidavit of Title
25. Assist in Preparation of 1099 tax form
26. Offer sound legal advice to client;
27. Preparation of End of Case Letter and client questionnaire.
28. Make available to client in office upon request free client case folder, Real Estate brochure, Website brochure, and other information brochures on Wills and Power of Attorney;
29. Free Brochures provided on other legal topics such as Car Insurance Rights, Worker's Comp,
30. Free subscription to monthly e-mail newsletter. Provide your email address.
31. 3 free telephone calls during the 2 years after the closing on Probate, Wills and non real estate matters.
32. Invitation to client community events.
33. Free Magnet, Keychain, Pen upon request in the office
Costs are items such as filing and recording fees, Certified or Express postage and other out of pocket expenses.
This fee does not include costs or legal fees if there are judgments against the property, probate issues, defects in title or other work requested to be performed. If this closing does not take place, you will only be responsible for the legal fees and costs incurred.
Work with your Realtor
Your realtor is a highly trained licensed professional. Their goal is to help you through this closing. They perform substantial work and earn the commissions of between $8,000- $16,000. In order to keep your legal fees down, you should be calling you realtor with routine questions regarding the closing. We have learned by past experience if you, your realtor or you family call your attorney's office every day, these calls are not included in the $800 fee, and there will be a charge for excess calls. The buyer is entitled to obtain a termite inspection and home inspection. Inspections are scheduled by the realtors. If the buyer requests repairs after the home inspection report is done, speak with your realtor first.
The seller is responsible for obtaining the smoke detector certificate, plus municipal certificate of occupancy if required by your town. Discuss these with your realtor. Please also arrange the walk through with your realtor.
Closing date is approximate
You should understand that the proposed closing date in the Contract is an approximate closing date. The actual closing depends upon the buyer's mortgage company issuing a commitment and a mortgage check. We do not set the closing date, that is set by the buyer's attorney. The realtor should be calling the buyer's attorney to determine time of closing and directions to the closing, not our office.
If Seller fails to timely obtain a written mortgage payoff statement, there will be an additional charge of $100.00 for the Seller's attorney to obtain the written payoff statement.
SELLERS INFORMATION SHEET- To be filled out by seller and returned to seller's attorney
KENNETH VERCAMMEN & ASSOCIATES, PC
1. SELLERS NAME: (as it appears on deed)
___________________________________________________________
2. Real Estate being Sold: Lot No. _________ Block No. __________
Address: __________________________________________
3. Present Mortgage Company: _____________________________
Address: ___________________________________________
Loan No. ___________________ 800 Telephone No. ____________
(Provide copy of payoff amount)
4. Other Mortgages, including Bridge Loans or Home Equity:
Name of Mortgage Company: _____________________________
Address: __________________________________________
Loan No. __________________ 800 Telephone No. ____________
(Obtain written copy of payoff amount from bank, a verbal payoff will not be good enough)
5. Social Security Number: (H) ________________ (W) ___________
6. Is any Seller age 62 or over? If so, name and date of birth: _________
7. Name, Address, Telephone number of Condominium Association, if any
_______________________________________________________
8. Type of Fuel: Gas ___________________ Oil _______________
PLEASE ATTACH A COPY OF TITLE INSURANCE, SURVEY, & DEED (not original)
9. Marriage Information:
Date of Marriage __________ Maiden or Prior Name(s) __________
Prior Marriages ________________________
(copy of Final Judgment of Divorce needed, not original)
10. Address After Property Sale: _____________________________
2. Yearly Insurance Review
By Ray Pavese & Mike McCormick
Every year you should review your insurance policies to make sure you still have a policy that
meets your needs, as well as the needs of your family members and
loved ones.
One of the policies that most often gets overlooked is the life
insurance policy. Since this is often a long-term policy, most
insured individuals assume they are stuck with the same policy,
no matter what. Usually this is not the case, although it will
depend on your policy and company as to whether you receive
penalties when changing your insurance.
Even if penalties occur, changing your life insurance policy may
be essential to keeping up with your family's financial needs for
the future.
If you don't review your life insurance policy every year, you
should at least review your policy under these circumstances:
* Marriage/Divorce - Needs change depending on your marital
status. Keep this in mind as things change in your life. Even if
you don't want to change the value of your policy, you probably
want to change the beneficiary.
* Children - If you ask the majority of life insurance agents,
the major reason for changing a life insurance policy is because
of children. This is because many adults never believe they will
need extra money after death until they realize that they will
have someone preceding them in death. Children will need money
for basic food and shelter until they are 18 and possibly for a
future college fund as well. Keep that in mind, and tell others
you know that may be affected.
* An Illness - Although waiting to change your insurance policy
until you have a long-term illness will mean paying higher
premiums, it is best to at least review your policy limitations
and make necessary changes if you find out you have a potentially
life threatening illness.
If you have questions regarding a change you would like to make
on your life insurance policy, feel free to contact me anytime.
Sincerely,
Ray Pavese & Mike McCormick
Pavese-McCormick Agency, Inc.
mikem@pavesemccormick.com
______________________________
3 DWI suppression affirmed where reasons for ordering sobriety test not "reasonable suspicion." State v. Lord Appellate Division, A-3228-05T2, October 5, 2006, not approved for publication.
Law Division order granting the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence of the results of his sobriety tests affirmed; the police officer observed the defendant’s car cross both the shoulder and center lines, and he then activated his video recorder and followed the defendant’s car for about two and a half minutes; the officer testified that, during that time, the defendant came to a full stop several times, properly used his signals when executing turns, did not speed, and properly stopped his car when the officer signaled; there was no question that the initial motor vehicle violation allowed the officer to stop the defendant; however, the Law Division properly concluded that the reasons that the officer gave for ordering sobriety tests did not give rise to a “reasonable suspicion” that the defendant had been driving while intoxicated; although the defendant had been observed violating the motor vehicle laws, his behavior did not demonstrate any further violation, and he did not exhibit any physical impairment. Source: Facts-on-Call Order No. 20296
4. Defendant can be guilty of .08 DWI even though Breath machine calibrated at .10 level. State v. Pearson Appellate Division, A-1344-05T2, September 22, 2006, not approved for publication.
Conviction following a trial de novo of driving while intoxicated affirmed; the defendant registered blood-alcohol-content levels of 0.08 and 0.09 on two Breathalyzer tests; the defendant asserted that the State had not established that the Breathalyzer was in proper working order because it was calibrated for accuracy at a 0.10 blood-alcohol-content level rather than a 0.08 level; the State Police protocols were not changed when N.J.S.A. 39:4-50 was amended to reduce the blood-alcohol-content level needed to establish a per se violation from 0.10 to 0.08, and the protocols require periodic testing with a simulator solution to establish accuracy at the 0.10 level; there was no merit to the defendant’s argument in light of the well-established principle that a Breathalyzer that is tested pursuant to the protocols and satisfies them is in proper working order and thus satisfies the State’s burden of proving that the results from the Breathalyzer, if correctly operated by a qualified operator, are reliable. Source: Facts-on-Call Order No. 20227
_____________________________
Our law blog- http://njlaws1.blogspot.com/
Thank you for reading our newsletter! God Bless America USA #1
We appreciate continued referrals. We want to take the time to extend to our friends and clients our sincere gratitude because it is good friends and clients that make our business grow. Client recommendation is a very important source of new clients to us. We are grateful for the recommendation of new clients. We will do our best to give all clients excellent care. We shall do our best to justify all recommendations.
"Celebrating more than 21 years of providing excellent service to clients 1985-2007" Former Prosecutor
This newsletter is produced to be sent electronically. If you know someone who would also like to receive this email newsletter, please have them email us at newsletter@njlaws.com.
Free T- shirts and soda can holders available for all current and past clients. Please come into office.
Editor's Note and Disclaimer: All materials Copyright 2007. You may pass along the information on the NJ Laws Newsletter and website, provided the name and address of the Law Office is included.
KENNETH VERCAMMEN & ASSOCIATES, PC
ATTORNEY AT LAW
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
(Phone) 732-572-0500
(Fax) 732-572-0030
website: www.njlaws.com
Admitted to practice law in New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, US Supreme Court and Federal District Court
Tom Cryer on the Federal Income Tax
Segment 1 - Federal Income Tax
Segment 2 - Federal Income Tax
Segment 3 - Federal Income Tax
Segment 4 - Federal Income Tax
Of tenure, post-tenure review, and the "don't trust anyone over 30" phenomenon
Jeff Harrison has asked some great questions about tenure and post-tenure review (here) and weighed in on the Ave Maria controversy here.
On the latter topic, Jeff has suggested that, before we believe anything in particular about Ave Maria's situation, we use these two rules of construction:
Here's how I weave these two threads together:
First off, I think that tenure is still a good idea, but it must be coupled with real post-tenure review to avoid the problem of tenured faculty members who coast after they receive tenure.
The problem with post-tenure review run by the faculty is that there's a tendency to ignore bad behavior by colleagues, on a "there but for the grace of God go I" theory. So professors who don't write for years and years, teach poorly, and do little service don't get targeted for review, and (in my experience) they don't get the assistance of gentle peer pressure to improve, either.
The problem with post-tenure review run by the administration is that there's a risk that a bad dean will use PTR as an offensive weapon for people whom he wants to punish, rather than as a tool to help the school stay on track, with everyone performing her or her job duties.
If we can't leave PTR in the hands of the faculty or the dean, then what good is it to have PTR on the books? And without PTR, there's no way to guarantee that people who have earned tenure will continue to perform their duties as professors. I don't know the answer to this conundrum, but we have to find the right answer.
I recall that, at least during my time at Nebraska, the law faculty's standard for triggering PTR was that the professor had, over some period of time, failed to do that which had earned him tenure in the first place. That's really what PTR is all about, right? Tenure is such a privilege that professors should continue to perform their duties responsibly. Otherwise, a school is left with the "rights without responsibilities" situation.
I prefer to think that the global statements that Jeff made (in the block quote above) is borne of frustration. His statement reminds me of the "never trust anyone over 30" slogans of the sixties. Now that that group is well over 30, I'm guessing that some of the folks who repeated that slogan think that they may have made a mistake.
It's a sad situation if we state categorically that we can't trust deans or faculties. I guess I'm twitchy about those statements because I've been a dean, and I am a professor (and was one, even while I was serving as a dean). Individuals lie. Individuals tell the truth. Group membership really isn't a predictor for veracity.
On the latter topic, Jeff has suggested that, before we believe anything in particular about Ave Maria's situation, we use these two rules of construction:
My impression of this is that a good default position is:
1. Do not trust faculty versions of any story pertaining to a dean.
2. Do not trust a dean to play it straight with information, particularly
statistics.
Here's how I weave these two threads together:
First off, I think that tenure is still a good idea, but it must be coupled with real post-tenure review to avoid the problem of tenured faculty members who coast after they receive tenure.
The problem with post-tenure review run by the faculty is that there's a tendency to ignore bad behavior by colleagues, on a "there but for the grace of God go I" theory. So professors who don't write for years and years, teach poorly, and do little service don't get targeted for review, and (in my experience) they don't get the assistance of gentle peer pressure to improve, either.
The problem with post-tenure review run by the administration is that there's a risk that a bad dean will use PTR as an offensive weapon for people whom he wants to punish, rather than as a tool to help the school stay on track, with everyone performing her or her job duties.
If we can't leave PTR in the hands of the faculty or the dean, then what good is it to have PTR on the books? And without PTR, there's no way to guarantee that people who have earned tenure will continue to perform their duties as professors. I don't know the answer to this conundrum, but we have to find the right answer.
I recall that, at least during my time at Nebraska, the law faculty's standard for triggering PTR was that the professor had, over some period of time, failed to do that which had earned him tenure in the first place. That's really what PTR is all about, right? Tenure is such a privilege that professors should continue to perform their duties responsibly. Otherwise, a school is left with the "rights without responsibilities" situation.
I prefer to think that the global statements that Jeff made (in the block quote above) is borne of frustration. His statement reminds me of the "never trust anyone over 30" slogans of the sixties. Now that that group is well over 30, I'm guessing that some of the folks who repeated that slogan think that they may have made a mistake.
It's a sad situation if we state categorically that we can't trust deans or faculties. I guess I'm twitchy about those statements because I've been a dean, and I am a professor (and was one, even while I was serving as a dean). Individuals lie. Individuals tell the truth. Group membership really isn't a predictor for veracity.
Judge files Browns' appeal
Notice of Ed and Elaine Brown's desire to appeal their tax evasion convictions has been sent along to the federal appeals court in Boston, even though the couple have not indicated that they want to appeal.
The Browns, who have been holed up in their fortified Plainfield home for several months, have said on radio broadcasts and internet postings that they are returning any government mail unopened and have described the court as a "fiction" unworthy of their attention. They have not sent any new documents to the court since their sentencing hearing April 24.
Even so, Judge Steven McAuliffe, who oversaw their case, decided to infer from previous filings that the Browns intended to appeal, even if they failed to file the necessary paperwork by the deadline. READ ON...
America: From Freedom to Fascism
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173
Thanks to Samuel Anthony Ettaro. for Adding this movie back to Google Video!
Tenure for Law Profs?
Brian Tamanaha’s post questioning the utility of tenure over on Balkinization has drawn a number of interesting comments. As one would expect, some people agree and some do not. One even argues that tenure must be working because there are so few attacks on professors. This is a little like arguing that the moon must be working because there are so few attacks on earth from Martians.I wonder if a general tenure discussion can be applied to law professors. What does tenure do to increase the quality and quantity of what law professors do for the benefit of students and other stakeholders? That is the question, isn’t it? My hunch is, not much. This is not to say I think it should be abolished. As I have written elsewhere, despite the decrease in scholarship for post tenure professors and massive recycling, I favor meaningful post-tenure reviews but not the elimination of tenure.
Tenure and law professors? Think about it. I doubt there is a more conservative group of faculty on any campus that those found at a law school. Their own shadows give them nightmares. Just look at the rules most live by:
1. Do not be involved in controversy – any controversy.
2. Do not write anything down you would not want to see on the front page of the NYT (the NYTs rule).
3. Wait for someone else to voice your concerns.
4. Find out which way the wind is blowing before saying anything.
5. Observe the tenets of facial collegiality.
(Actually, I guess most deans live by these rules as well).
To be sure, many law professors get their kicks thinking they are “out there” but very few risks are ever taken.
I am pretty sure one can live this life without the benefit of tenure. So, if tenure for law professors is not about protecting their academic freedom, (What good is freedom if you waste it.) what does it do? The best thing it does is protect them from each other and this is no small thing. Internal attacks are very rarely based on the quality of one’s teaching or research.The downside of tenure is that it:
1) Keep positions from becoming available to others (opportunity cost).
2) Protects those whose hearts are really not in it and, thus, make minimal efforts.
3) Allows the continuation of self-referential research and teaching without regard for whether students or stakeholders ultimately benefit. It is not too much of a stretch to say that tenure for law professors protects a great deal of self-psychotherapy.
I am not sure how this balances out but I wonder if this would work:
1. To get tenure you must say something controversial about law that draws outside attention or at least irritates one-third of the faculty. Keep your head down, say nothing, play both sides, and you are out.
2. Tenured is revoked for any faculty member who has no enemies on the faculty and has not drawn criticism from outside the law school.
Tenure?
A thought-provoking post on tenure by Brian Tamanaha can be found over on Balkinization. The comments are also interesting. Would a moneylaw school have tenure? I think so but I also think it would be adjusted to eliminate as much of law professor shirking as possible.
Junk Mail: Three Markets to Tenure
Some weeks ago I wrote about the market for tenure review letters on scholarship. The demand was generated by tenure committees interested in glowing over-the-top reviews with a legitimizing reservation here or there. The suppliers were the letter writers willing to play the game while complaining they have too many requests to handle. (You really want to cut down on demand? Be candid.)I am wondering about the other market. This is the market for teaching evaluations. There are two types – some from students and some from class visitations. We all know about the market for high student evaluations. Teachers demand them and students supply them provided the professor plays his or her cards right. As far as I can tell there is no evidence that high evaluations are actually correlated with good teaching so, in this market, “playing them right” probably means something other than being effective and may require not being all that effective.
This leaves the written evaluations provided by class visitors. I am not sure it is fair to call this a market. I mean, is it a market when the suppliers are giving the laudatory letters away? In twenty years law teaching I could count on one hand the number of even remotely negative letters I have seen. It could be that the teaching is excellent on visitation days. (I have heard of an incident in which the faculty visitors discovered that the teacher was teaching the same material whenever they visited. You can bet that he had that day’s material down.) Or maybe it is really easy to be a good teacher – at least three or four days a year when you know someone is coming. If the tenure or promotion candidate is a social or political favorite, you can bet that those written evals are out of sight regardless of what went on in the classroom.
What does it matter? There are a couple of costs. First, creating a file full of overblown letters may come back to bite you in the butt if there is a change of heart. Second, since no one believes that every tenure and promotion candidate is as great as the letters say, Law Schools and law professors lose credibility with every subseqent reviewing body -- even those that appear to play along.
But maybe this is not a cost to the professors themselves. Afterall, they are always playing with house money.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)