News ReleaseSee also: California Corporate Compliance Annual Minutes
October 08, 2009
For Immediate Release
Contact: (916) 324-5500
Brown Sues 8 Individuals and 6 Businesses Operating Scams Targeting California Small Businesses
San Diego - Continuing his fight against "rip-off artists" operating in California, Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. filed suit today against eight individuals and six businesses that operated scams targeting small business owners. The lawsuits, filed today in San Diego Superior Court, seek to recover more than $3 million.
Schedule note: Brown is in San Diego this morning and is available to speak about these cases at approximately 10:30 -- at the Hilton Bayfront Hotel - downtown (Indigo A Room, 1 Park Blvd in San Diego 92101.
"These cases will send a powerful signal that small business owners must be on the alert," Brown said. "These rip-off artists sent official-looking documents through the mail for the sole purpose of duping small business owners into paying them money - for no value in return."
The three cases are separate scams, each following a similar theme. The defendants mailed to small businesses solicitations that appeared to be government documents featuring an official-looking seal, an official-sounding name, citations to the Corporations Code and a "reply by" date. The forms claimed that the business was in danger of losing its corporate or limited liability status if payment was not made within a short period of time.
In the first case, Anthony Williams operated Compliance Annual Minutes Board that mailed to California businesses official-looking forms demanding that the recipient complete the form and return it with payment of an "Annual Fee" of $150 or risk loss of corporate status. Williams claimed that in exchange for payment, he would provide corporate minutes. Instead, he prepared generic fictitious minutes for the business owners who paid his fee.
The next case involved George Alan Miller, Rebecca Miller, Arghisti Keshishyan and Kristina Keshishyan who together operated two corporations and one limited liability company: Annual Review Board, Inc., Business Filings Division and Corpfilers.com, LLC. Miller and his co-conspirators mailed solicitations to California limited liability companies and corporations, demanding that the recipients complete the form and return it with payment or risk penalties, fines and suspension. The payment amounts varied from $195 to $239, but all mailers were designed to be official-looking government documents that misled the recipients into sending money.
In the third case, Maria Jones operated Corporate Filings Division and Corporate Compliance Filings, Inc., which mailed official-looking forms entitled "Annual Minutes Disclosure Statement" to California businesses, implying that the recipient business was required to complete the form and return it with payment of an "Annual Fee" of $175 or risk loss of corporate status. In exchange for payment, Jones agreed to provide corporate minutes. The information she solicited, however, was inadequate for legitimate corporate minutes, and she instead provided fictitious minutes.
All defendants are accused of violating:
- Business and Professions Code section 17533.6 (Deceptive Solicitation Statute)
- Civil Code section 1716 (Phony Billing Statute)
- Business and Professions Code section 17500 (False Advertising Statute)
- Unfair business practices within the meaning of Business and Professions Code section 17200.
In all three cases, the Attorney General's Office seeks civil penalties, injunction and other equitable remedies and costs.
Since 2004, the Attorney General's Office has received more than 5,000 complaints against a growing number of individuals who mailed solicitations made to look like governmental forms to small businesses in California. Today's announcement adds to the five cases the office has already successfully handled since these scams were brought to the office's attention....
California Attorney General Targets Annual Minutes "Scam"
California's attorney general has filed suit against a nyumber of individuals and companies to combat what he calls a scam targeting small businesses:
Employment Law in a Social Networking, New Media World
I am quoted in a FOXBusiness small business article on how employers can protect their intellectual property rights in a Facebook/Twitter social networking world:
In an age of way-too-much information and widespread social-networking addiction, businesses are finding it increasingly difficult to protect trade secrets and practices. It’s important to know your rights as an employer and/or as an employee.What Rights Do Employers, Employees Have in Internet Age? by Hope Holland, FOXBusiness.com, October 22, 2009
If you are neither of the above at the moment, and are instead on the job hunt, you should keep in mind that potential employers have the right to (and will) research your online living activities. In one quick Google search, what might a recruiter learn about you? It’s important to always keep your professional goals in mind when posting personal details on sites that are publicly accessible.
If you pass the test and find yourself employed, you’ll then have to follow company policy regarding Internet activities. Because privacy is often a top concern for employer and employee, companies are adjusting to the new online environment and adopting rules and regulations accordingly to ensure protection.
Anita Campbell, founder and CEO of Smallbiztrends.com, said there’s a major difference between large corporations and small businesses when it comes to social media sites. Large corporations are more likely to block all social media sites, such as Facebook and Twitter, from being accessed on the company network.
However, she said most small businesses do not block these sites at work and, in some cases, require employees to participate in them for company benefits. Jonas M. Grant, a business attorney and expert, said some employers rightfully worry about the disclosure of confidential company information by employees who are either posting on Web sites under their own names or anonymously. But he said employers do have the right to legally prohibit certain social-networking activities involving the business to avoid a slip of an idea or secret.
According to Campbell, small businesses using social media networks can have advantages and disadvantages. Recommending your employees take full advantage of the power of social media for “free” marketing is a definite plus. But allowing employees to have access to social media all day can deter them from actually working, decreasing productivity.
“But the stickier issue is one of inappropriate communications by employees,” Campbell said.
Grant recommends companies have an employee manual and training program in place specifying acceptable workplace use of the Internet in general. He said employers should expressly tell their employees what they can and cannot talk about, especially in an age with constant Internet communication.
“Employers are also wise to have employees sign employee loyalty and confidentiality agreements at the time of hire,” Grant said.
Experts agree that prevention is key for small businesses, and preparing for “what-ifs” is the best protection. Grant said communicating concerns with employees, outlining company rules and restrictions, while implementing appropriate policies and agreements in conjunction with employment law counsel, is the best method of prevention.
Intellectual Property Protection in a Social Networking World
I am quoted in a FOXBusiness small business article on protecting intellectual property rights in a Facebook/Twitter social networking world:
Friend it, follow it or link to it. Brainstorming, would-be entrepreneurs around the world are continuously connecting through social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn. But, legal experts warn, users should beware of setting themselves up for Information-Highway robbery.Protect Your Business Ideas From Information-Highway Robbery by Hope Holland, FOXBusiness.com, October 22, 2009
You can lock the doors on your home and your vehicle. You almost need to rent storage space to store your many login and passwords in today’s Internet age. But, what about your revolutionary ideas for starting your own company or launching a new product line? Do you have any rights when it comes to protecting things you carry in your head?
Yes, the experts say. And they advise that you take them seriously, especially your most basic right for protecting your literally un-touchable valuables.
Remember, you have the right to remain silent.
“If you post a business idea on Twitter, someone could beat you to the punch,” said Jonas M. Grant, a small business lawyer and entertainment intellectual property attorney. “If your idea is what makes your for-profit business special, you should consult with an attorney to see what, if any, protections are available and save the Tweeting for when the business has launched. By posting an idea to a social networking site, you have contributed it to the public domain.”
It seems like a simple concept, but choosing how to protect your ideas can be a difficult and confusing process. Do you need a copyright? A trademark? A patent? What are trade secrets? FOXBusiness.com asked the legal experts to translate the legal jargon regarding intellectual property rights.
Anita Campbell, founder and CEO of Smallbiztrends.com, an online resource for small businesses and entrepreneurs, said if your creation is a book, blog post, artwork, cartoon, software, podcast recording, video, or anything along these lines, than a copyright is right for you. A copyright protects original creative works and the “expression of an idea,” she said. You can simply register for copyright protection with the U.S. Copyright Office.
So, you weren’t born yesterday – and you know better than to Tweet about your idea or write about it on your Facebook page. But what about the people you are including on your launch team? Or, how about if you’d like to discuss your brainchild with any consultants or potential future business partners and/or clients? Can you trust them to keep it off their online world?
The experts say no. If you don’t protect yourself ahead of time, you could wake up to an e-mail announcing the successful launch of your long-time-planned dream company -- and have no legal means to get back what is rightfully yours.
With start-ups predominantly using the cross-globe-reaching Internet and social networking sites to get things moving, Grant said no small business is “too small” to invest in protecting company information. He said this is the reason to have anyone you share your grand plan with sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA), also known as a confidentiality agreement, confidential disclosure agreement (CDA), proprietary information agreement (PIA), or secrecy agreement. He said to always protect your trade secrets or confidential business information to avoid losing an idea or strategy to another company.
In fact, Grant said small businesses should act like the largest companies in the world, and keep all future business plans secret until all available intellectual property protections are in place and it is time to launch to the public....
2010 Princeton Review Law School Rankings
Over on TaxProf Blog, I have published a series of rankings based on data extracted from the individual profiles of the 172 law schools in the 2010 edition of the Princeton Review's Best 172 Law Schools (with the University of Cincinnati College of Law on the cover). The rankings are based on a survey of 18,000 students at the 172 law schools, along with school statistics provided by administrators.
Home Loan Modification Advance Fees Now Illegal in California
As of October 11, 2009, advance fees for home loan modification services are illegal in California, even if charged by licensed attorneys. For more information, see California Department of Real Estate Announcement [PDF]
The non-profit continuing education service of: The New Jersey State Bar Association Rutgers - The State University of New Jersey Seton Hall University One Constitution Square, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901-1520 Phone: (732)214-8500 • Fax: (732)249-0383 • CustomerService@njicle.com • Privacy Policy |
ABA GP Solo ELDER LAW COMMITTEE Newsletter Fall, 2009
ABA General Practice, Solo and Small Firm Division
Chairs - Kenneth Vercammen, Edison, NJ and Jay Foonberg, Beverly Hills, CA
In this issue:
1. Elder Law, Estate Planning & Probate forms available from ABA Elder Law, Estate Planning & Probate Seminar
2. PERSONAL INJURY SETTLEMENT PRESERVATION TRUSTS
3. REDUCING A MEDICAID LIEN
1. Elder Law, Estate Planning & Probate forms available from ABA Elder Law, Estate Planning & Probate Seminar
The ABA General Practice Division held its popular program Elder Law, Estate Planning & Probate- New ideas to expand & excel your practice at the American Bar Association Annual Meeting in Chicago on August 1, 2009.
Speakers: Jay Foonberg, Esq. - Author of Best Sellers "How to
Start and Build a Law Practice" and "How to get and keep good clients', Beverly Hills, CA
Kenneth A. Vercammen, Esq. - co-author "Nuts & Bolts of Elder Law", Edison, NJ
Deborah Cole, Chicago, Il
Articles and forms were provided on CD. Below is a list of articles provided. If you want a few of the forms, send an email to kenvnjlaws@verizon.net and indicate which articles/ forms you want and the number of the article or form [max 5]
List of Kenneth Vercammen, Esq. Forms, Documents and Articles on CD
Elder Law, Estate Planning & Probate- New ideas to expand & excel your practice
Sat. August 1, 2009 2:00pm -3:30pm
Hyatt Regency Hotel, Chicago ABA Annual Meeting
1 New Client schedule appointment
2 Confidential Will Questionnaire
3 Will bill
4 WILL DRAFT CO
5. Doctor Cert sign POA, will Dr
6 Thank you for Referral
7 POA DRAFT lt
8 Will Signing Instruction
9 Referral Out Another Atty fax
10 No rep
11 Recommend Will to Client
12 Post WILL
13 Client questionnaire end case.
14 POA Grantor Now
15 Wills article
16 POA Power of Attorney- article
17 LIVING WILLS
18 Gay and Lesbians- Advance Directives
19 Letter of Instruction
20 Remove Executor
21 Alzheimer, POA Guardianship
22 ANSWERS to Questions Probate
23 Estate Planning 10 Ideas
24 Executor Duties
25 Prenuptial Ag
26 Undue Influence article
27 Attorney- Client Confidentiality
28 Pick up Docs
29 Executor to Pay and Notify Creditor
30 NJlaws website & articles
31 Trusts
32 Caveat to Will
33 Central Jersey Elder articles
34 ABA Estate Plan Winter 2008
35 Estate Plan ABA Nov 2007
36 ABA ELDER News Aug 2007 GP
37ABA ELDER LAW COMMITTEE Newsletter July 2007 ABA General Practice
38 Estate Probate ABA news May. 2007
39 Elder Law ABA news February, 2007
40 INTESTACY
41 If no Will
42 Probate Release Refund Bond
43 Lincoln 17- no charge
44 Guardianship bill
45 RETAINER Probate ESTATE
46 WILL - sign front notary
47Confidentiality Lt to Client
48 Elective Share of Spouse
49 Joint Bank Accounts Upon Death
50 ABA ELDER News Spring2008
51 ABA Elder Law Newsletter • April 2008
52 ABA GP Solo ELDER LAW COMMITTEE Newsletter July , 2008
53 ABA ELDER News Fall 2008
54 ABA ELDER News Winter 2009
55 ABA ELDER News Spring 2009
___ We need your email address for newsletter
2. PERSONAL INJURY SETTLEMENT PRESERVATION TRUSTS
By Thomas D. Begley, Jr., Esquire
Studies show that over 90 percent of the time a person receiving a personal injury settlement dissipates the funds within five years. There are three reasons why this is true. The first reason is that most people are not good money managers. Many people who are victims of personal injuries have never had money and are receiving a large sum at one time. They are often unsophisticated and do not have contacts with professional investment advisors. What to most people would seem a modest sum of money appears enormous to many of these unsophisticated people, and they believe that they can spend without restriction and never exhaust the settlement funds.
The second reason personal injury victims tend to squander their settlements is that many disabled people suffer from low self-esteem and tend to buy friendship by showering people with whom they would like to be friendly with gifts. Often, unscrupulous people learn of the existence of the personal injury settlement and feel that they are entitled to a portion of the settlement. This is particularly true in some family situations. It also could be true with strangers.
The third reason that personal injury plaintiffs exhaust their settlement funds quickly is that many of them are suffering from significant pain and are constantly receiving pain medication. This medication often clouds their judgment and leaves them prey for unscrupulous people.
The real purpose of a Settlement Preservation Trust is to protect the personal injury victim from their own weaknesses and to prevent them from exploitation by others. The trust is irrevocable and, if the recovery is significant, should involve a professional trustee as either sole trustee or co-trustee with a family member. The professional trustee is responsible for managing the lump sum portion of the settlement.
A Settlement Preservation Trust can be used in conjunction with a structured settlement. In this way, the benefits of the structured settlement, including utilization of a rated age and the income tax-free nature of the payments, can be preserved. Despite the existence of the Structured Settlement Protection Act, millions of structured settlement beneficiaries manage to sell their income stream each year. The Settlement Preservation Trust can restrict the sale of the structured settlement income stream by its terms, and the involvement of a professional trustee will make such a factoring transaction both unnecessary and unlikely.
In some cases, the entire settlement can be placed in a Settlement Preservation Trust, but in most instances it may be appropriate for the personal injury victim, assuming they are not receiving means-tested public benefits, to have control over a certain percentage of the recovery with the Settlement Preservation Trust being used as a safety net for the remaining settlement.
Copyright 2009 by Begley & Bookbinder, P.C., an Elder & Disability Law Firm with offices in Moorestown, Stone Harbor and Lawrenceville, New Jersey and Oxford Valley, Pennsylvania and can be contacted at 800-533-7227. The firm services southern and central New Jersey and eastern Pennsylvania.
Tom Begley Jr. is one of the speakers with Kenneth Vercammen at the NJ State Bar Association's Annual Nuts & Bolts of Elder Law & Estate Administration and co-author with Kenneth Vercammen, Martin Spigner and Kathleen Sheridan of the 500 plus page book on Elder Law.
Begley & Bookbinder, provides services in connection with protecting assets from nursing home costs, Medicaid applications, Estate Planning and Estate Administration, Special Needs Planning and Guardianships. If you have a legal problem in one of these areas of law, contact Begley & Bookbinder at 800-533-7227.
3. REDUCING A MEDICAID LIEN
By Thomas D. Begley, Jr., Esquire
There are three ways to reduce a Medicaid lien. These strategies can be used separately or in combination.
• Procurement Costs. Under New Jersey law, where a Medicaid recipient settles a case against a third party, the Medicaid lien can be reduced by attorneys’ fees and costs and expenses. Many lawyers simply ask for and receive a one-third or 25% reduction, depending on the engagement letter with the plaintiff. Expenses should always be included in the reduction. The procurement costs are based on a pro rata share. If the attorney’s fee is 33-1/3% and the costs and expenses are 10%, the total procurement cost should be 43%.
• Ahlborn. The second way to reduce a Medicaid lien is through the application of an Ahlborn argument. The Supreme Court discussed the Federal Anti-Lien Statute prohibiting liens against the property of an individual prior to his death on account of medical assistance paid. The court held that based on this statute, a state is prevented from attaching the past non-medical portion of the settlement. In the Ahlborn case, it was determined that the plaintiff received only one-sixth of the overall damages so that the right of the State of Arkansas was limited to one-sixth of the past medical claim. In order to determine the pro rata share to which the state is entitled, it is necessary to establish the reasonable value of the case. In the Ahlborn case, this was accomplished by a stipulation with the State Medicaid Agency. It is unlikely that will happen again. The stipulation could possibly be made by the defendant, but it would have to be a bona fide stipulation. A common method of arriving at the full value is to obtain a report from an expert witness, or finally a court order may be necessary. If the case is to be resolved by a settlement prior to trial and the State Medicaid Agency is unwilling to agree on a satisfactory reduction, it may be necessary to give notice to Medicaid and have the court enter the order.
• Collateral Source Rule. A third argument that could be made to reduce the Medicaid lien is the Collateral Source Rule. If a state has a Collateral Source Rule, such as exists in New Jersey, a Medicaid lien may not apply. Under the New Jersey statute, if a plaintiff receives or entitled to receive benefits for injuries allegedly incurred from any other source other than a joint tortfeasor, the benefit shall be disclosed to the court and the amount thereof which duplicates any benefit contained in the award shall be deducted from any award recovered by the plaintiff. The purpose of this type of statute is to avoid double recovery and reduce insurance costs. The statute prevents insured plaintiffs from seeking payment for costs for which they have already been compensated. In an interesting case, the plaintiff sought to enforce an ERISA lien against a personal injury settlement. The defendant argued that the money held in escrow could not be the specific funds that belong to the plaintiff ERISA plan, because the personal injury victim never came into possession of such funds as a matter of law. The personal injury plaintiff claimed that property recovered in New Jersey is not money on which the ERISA plan has an equitable claim. The personal injury victim took the position that the plan must pursue the tortfeasor itself. The court acknowledged that it must dismiss the claim, if the beneficiary never received such money in the tort action for medical benefits. "If state law prohibits a plaintiff's claim for medical benefits paid by his or her own insurance, there would be nothing to which Rhodia could attach its equitable lien or constructive trust and the court could not grant relief."
N.J.S.A. 30-4D-7.1(b).
2 Arkansas Department of Health and Human Services v. Ahlborn, 126 S. Ct. 1752 (2006).
3 42 U.S.C. §1396p(a)(1).
WE PUBLISH YOUR FORMS AND ARTICLES
To help your practice, we feature in this newsletter edition a few forms and articles PLUS tips on marketing and improving service to clients. But your Editor and chairs can't do it all. Please mail articles, suggestions or ideas you wish to share with others in our Tort and Insurance Committee.
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.
Send Us Your Marketing Tips
We are increasing the frequency of our newsletter. Send us your short tips on your great or new successful marketing techniques.
You can become a published ABA author. Enjoy your many ABA benefits.
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>
KENNETH VERCAMMEN & ASSOCIATES, PC
ATTORNEY AT LAW
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
(Phone) 732-572-0500
(Fax) 732-572-0030
Central Jersey Elder Law www.centraljerseyelderlaw.com
NJ Elder Blog http://elder-law.blogspot.com/
Estate Planning Ideas for Professionals and People who advise Seniors
Free Seminar- 2009 update Wills and Estate Planning
WHEN: Wednesday October 14, 2009 12:15-1:00 PM
WHERE: Law Office of Kenneth Vercammen, 2053 Woodbridge Ave, 2nd floor, Edison, NJ
The cost for this program previously at Middlesex County College was $29.00. If you email back prior to October 10 you can attend for free.
COST: Free if you pre-register. This program is limited to 15 people
Complimentary Sandwiches to pre-registered persons at 12:10
SPEAKER: Kenneth Vercammen, Esq.
(Author- Answers to Questions About Probate)
The new NJ Probate Law made a number of substantial changes in Probate and the administration of estates and trusts in New Jersey.
Main Topics:
1. The New Probate Law and preparation of Wills
2. 2009 increases in Federal Estate and Gift Tax exemption
3. NJ Inheritance tax
4. Power of Attorney
5. Living Will
6. Administering the Estate/ Probate/Surrogate
7. Question and Answer
COMPLIMENTARY MATERIAL: Brochures on Wills, "Answers to Questions about Probate" and Administration of an Estate, Power of Attorney, Living Wills, Real Estate Sales for Seniors, and Trusts.
Here is your opportunity to listen to an experienced attorney who will answer questions how to distribute your property as you wish and avoid many rigid provisions of state law.
Co-Sponsor: Middlesex County Estate Planning Council
To attend or for Information: Mike McDonald 732-572-0500
or email kenvnjlaws@verizon.net
Can’t attend? We can email you materials
Send email to kenvnjlaws@verizon.net
Our Summer 2009 NJ Probate Email Newsletter discussed increased duties of the Executor or Administrator. The email newsletter also discussed how the revised NJ Probate Law makes a number of substantial changes in Probate and the administration of estates and trusts in New Jersey. If you send us your e-mail address we can provide you with a Free report on the changes in the law which may affect you. We also recently established the NJ Elder Law blog at http://elder-law.blogspot.com.
Website www.njlaws.com now provides Legal Information on Probate and Elder Law.
Very truly yours,
KENNETH VERCAMMEN
Chair ABA Elder Law Committee, Solo & Small Firm Division
To receive the njlaws Free Legal newsletter via email with Estate Administration & Probate information, email us at kenvnjlaws@verizon.net or fax us your email address.
Fax 732-572-0030
We send the newsletter via email only.
Email address: __________________________
Tax Increases Expected by 2011
Higher Taxes Are Coming. Are You Prepared? Wall Street Journal, September 13, 2009:
As the recession and bailout have pushed this year's federal budget deficit to an unheard-of $1.6 trillion, an unpleasant reality has dawned: Taxes are going up. The only questions are when, how much, and for whom?See also: Barack Obama's Tax Policies
The answers depend on the shifting sands of wealth politics and the scope of health-care revision. "But everybody thinks that by 2011 tax rates will be higher, at least for those with higher incomes," says Thomas Ochsenschlager, a tax official at the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
This certainty turns traditional tax-planning logic upside-down. Taxpayers have long been advised to defer taxes as long as possible, especially by making contributions to tax-sheltered IRAs and 401(k)s or holding assets for years in order to postpone realizing gains.
Now taxpayers should reconsider this rule. The current top capital-gains rate of 15% on most assets is the lowest in living memory and the Obama administration has proposed raising it to 20%. Another proposal might tack on a 4.5% surtax for the wealthiest taxpayers. So it may make sense to realize long-term gains now, says Robert Gordon, who advises clients on sophisticated tax matters at Twenty-First Securities in New York....
Marketing Mix for Dummies
I can remember quite vividly when I was starting out in my career at one of the larger NY advertising agencies, attending in-house seminars on the inherent characteristics, benefits and drawbacks of the different media. Basically, within advertising, it came down to just six different types: television, radio, newspapers, magazines, cable TV, and outdoor. There was something comforting about applying one’s best creative thinking towards the development of media plans that incorporated these six elements.
Flash forward, and now there is a seemingly endless array of traditional as well as non-traditional (i.e., internet) mediums that potentially could be utilized in an advertising campaign. Augment this with the myriad of non-advertising tools such as public relations, direct marketing, SEO, and everything from personal networking to getting a page on Facebook, it’s no wonder that law firms have a difficult time when it comes to creating marketing plans that make sense.
With this in mind, the following offers a handy-dandy, nuts and bolts, “Marketing Mix for Dummies” chart on the positives and negatives of the marketing tools most often utilized by law firms. With apologies to skywriting, bathroom advertising, and in-video game product placement, it should provide law firms with a pretty good checklist of activities to consider (and/or to consider rejecting). No doubt, it will have failed to cite every possible use of every potential tool, nor will it accurately describe every inherent benefit of failing of each type of vehicle. But it’s a place to begin, a place to house all potential approaches under one roof, and an opportunity to examine how different tools can work together to create an effective, integrated marketing program.
As always, I look forward to hearing from you regarding anything I’ve missed or any refinements you might suggest.
Flash forward, and now there is a seemingly endless array of traditional as well as non-traditional (i.e., internet) mediums that potentially could be utilized in an advertising campaign. Augment this with the myriad of non-advertising tools such as public relations, direct marketing, SEO, and everything from personal networking to getting a page on Facebook, it’s no wonder that law firms have a difficult time when it comes to creating marketing plans that make sense.
With this in mind, the following offers a handy-dandy, nuts and bolts, “Marketing Mix for Dummies” chart on the positives and negatives of the marketing tools most often utilized by law firms. With apologies to skywriting, bathroom advertising, and in-video game product placement, it should provide law firms with a pretty good checklist of activities to consider (and/or to consider rejecting). No doubt, it will have failed to cite every possible use of every potential tool, nor will it accurately describe every inherent benefit of failing of each type of vehicle. But it’s a place to begin, a place to house all potential approaches under one roof, and an opportunity to examine how different tools can work together to create an effective, integrated marketing program.
As always, I look forward to hearing from you regarding anything I’ve missed or any refinements you might suggest.
Blind Salarying
It annoys me when people create new verbs like the radio ad we have down here announcing the dealership is "clearancing." But now I have my own -- salarying, which means making decisions about salaries.At my school we blind grade which does not mean we cannot see the papers but that we do not know whose they are. The idea is that you might be inclined -- consciously or unconsciously to grade some agreeable people higher and others lower. And then there is the halo effect that may influence the grade you give someone who was really great in class but did not do so well on the exam.
If you think law school Deans are unaffected by personal views and halo effects, you are asking too much and I have some swamp land for sale in Forida. Thus, shouldn't law schools consider blind salarying? There is a difference, though, between deans and graders. Deans are closer to elected officials than most other professionals I know of. For elected officials the first priority is to do what is necessary to keep the job or, in deanspeak, not have a "failed deanship." In the "what is necessary" department I have seen some doozies including the world record one that was in this very sentence until my better judgment, in one of its rare appearances, said "Don't do it."
Blind salarying would mean salaries would be based on an objective assessment of productivity. I don't think that could be achieved by blotting off the names on yearly reports because Deans -- unlike faculty grading papers -- will know who did what. So, the blind grading should be done by a third party -- say a special committee of the AALS that analyzes faculty performance from each school each year and files a report -- almost like a big arbitration but there are are no "sides."
I fear some readers may not know that I realize this is unworkable. In the last AALS listing that included a category for Objective Law Professors there were only 27 entries and that was in 1955. Can you imagine what would happen today with blind salarying. The quality of work would depend largely on whether the reviewer agreed (as it probably did in 1955).
Aside from the objectivity matter, how would we define productivity? Here this a little more hope because we could at least agree on what it is not. There would be no correlation between salary and:
1. Unquestioning loyalty to the dean whether in the form of formal membership in the administration or cheer leading.
2. Threats to leave when one has tried and can not scare up an offer.
3. Threats to leave that the dean feels would make him or her look bad. This is very different from a departure that would actually damage the law school.
4. Never having uttered a public word in opposition to the dean.
5. Whining, butt-kissing and office visits to the dean. In fact salaries would be inversely related to the amount of time in the dean's office or on the phone with the dean.
6. Ingratiating efforts in the form of "advising" the dean on what is really going on with the faculty that she should know about not because she needs to know but because you want her to know you are on her side. Yes, I am talking about the self-appointed confidants.
7. Complaining about how overworked you are. On this I have a story. One semester a few first year teachers were asked to teach two 4 credit sections of the same course in the same semester. So, 8 hours in the semester. I did it and and I have to confess it was the easiest teaching load I ever hand. Eight of my 9 hour yearly teaching load (actually 10 that year) was taken care of with one preparation that I had done for years. The howling in the halls from others was deafening and you can bet the Dean was reminded every week of how they were going beyond what is expected. Of course, maybe they were craftier than I think and they were pulling the old "briar patch" trick.
8. Race, gender or sexual preference.
Maybe I have this all wrong and what we need is not blind salarying but X ray salarying. Here the dean would be required not simply to assess what the faculty member does that is obvious but what good and bad things actually go on. Is the faculty member a constant source of stress by virtue of gossip, exaggerations, and unwanted office visits? Very often the ingratiator is also a stress producer because he is so self absorbed he is not content to let the teaching and writing speak for itself.
§ 10:49-14.5 Administrative charges/service fees
(a) A provider shall not pay nor require payment of an administrative charge or service fee for the privilege of doing business with another provider or for services for which reimbursement is included as part of the Medicaid or NJ FamilyCare fee.
1. An example of a prohibited practice is that a nursing facility may not require a pharmacy to pay an administrative charge or service fee to the facility for handling of the nursing facility resident's medications, drugs and/or related pharmaceutical records.
HISTORY:
Amended by R.1997 d.354, effective September 2, 1997.
See: 29 New Jersey Register 2512(a), 29 New Jersey Register 3856(a).
Deleted (a)2.
Amended by R.1998 d.154, effective February 27, 1998 (operative March 1, 1998; to expire August 31, 1998).
See: 30 New Jersey Register 1060(a).
In (a), inserted a reference to NJ KidCare.
Adopted concurrent proposal, R.1998 d.487, effective August 28, 1998.
See: 30 New Jersey Register 1060(a), 30 New Jersey Register 3519(a).
Readopted the provisions of R.1998 d.154 without change.
Amended by R.2003 d.82, effective February 18, 2003.
See: 34 New Jersey Register 2650(a), 35 New Jersey Register 1118(a).
(a) A provider shall not pay nor require payment of an administrative charge or service fee for the privilege of doing business with another provider or for services for which reimbursement is included as part of the Medicaid or NJ FamilyCare fee.
1. An example of a prohibited practice is that a nursing facility may not require a pharmacy to pay an administrative charge or service fee to the facility for handling of the nursing facility resident's medications, drugs and/or related pharmaceutical records.
HISTORY:
Amended by R.1997 d.354, effective September 2, 1997.
See: 29 New Jersey Register 2512(a), 29 New Jersey Register 3856(a).
Deleted (a)2.
Amended by R.1998 d.154, effective February 27, 1998 (operative March 1, 1998; to expire August 31, 1998).
See: 30 New Jersey Register 1060(a).
In (a), inserted a reference to NJ KidCare.
Adopted concurrent proposal, R.1998 d.487, effective August 28, 1998.
See: 30 New Jersey Register 1060(a), 30 New Jersey Register 3519(a).
Readopted the provisions of R.1998 d.154 without change.
Amended by R.2003 d.82, effective February 18, 2003.
See: 34 New Jersey Register 2650(a), 35 New Jersey Register 1118(a).
§ 10:49-14.6 Contracts with county welfare agencies | ||||
Payment shall be made by the Department of Human Services/Division of Medical Assistance and Health Services to the CWA for conducting investigations and for determining whether applicants qualify for benefits under the New Jersey Medicaid or NJ FamilyCare program. | ||||
HISTORY: | ||||
Amended by R.1997 d.354, effective September 2, 1997. | ||||
See: 29 N.J.R. 2512(a), 29 N.J.R. 3856(a). | ||||
Amended by R.1998 d.154, effective February 27, 1998 (operative March 1, 1998; to expire August 31, 1998). | ||||
See: 30 N.J.R. 1060(a). | ||||
Inserted a reference to NJ KidCare. | ||||
Adopted concurrent proposal, R.1998 d.487, effective August 28, 1998. | ||||
See: 30 N.J.R. 1060(a), 30 N.J.R. 3519(a). | ||||
Readopted the provisions of R.1998 d.154 without change. | ||||
Amended by R.2003 d.82, effective February 18, 2003. | ||||
See: 34 N.J.R. 2650(a), 35 N.J.R. 1118(a). | ||||
Amended by R.2008 d.230, effective August 4, 2008. | ||||
See: 40 N.J.R. 984(a), 40 N.J.R. 4531(a). | ||||
Section was "Contracts with county boards of social services". Substituted "CWA" for "county boards of social services (CBOSS)". | ||||
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)