One thing that parents from all walks of life can commiserate over is the struggle to find child care. If you are a new parent, expecting your first child, new to the area, or just considering a change in care, there is a lot to consider when choosing a child care provider. There are several crucial criteria to keep in mind when searching for a daycare or preschool: curriculum, ratings, and your gut. Continue reading →
Behind the Bar: “Getting What You Want” – Rule 37. Failure to Make Disclosures or Cooperate in Discovery
“Behind the Bar” is a multi-part blog series that will focus on specific aspects of the practice of law ranging from the Rules of Evidence, Rules of Civil Procedure, and other important legal practice technicalities in an effort to provide readers a better understanding of regularly overlooked and misunderstood concepts that lawyers are faced with on a day-to-day basis. Continue reading →
Rules 4 and 5 of NC Civil Procedure – Spotting the Differences
Whether you are a North Carolina law student, newly admitted to the practice of law, or a layperson involved in a civil lawsuit, you will hear quite a bit about service, service of process and certificates of service. In previous blogs, we have reviewed the basics of Rules 4 and 5 of The North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure, but for those just becoming acquainted with the Rules, it ‘s hard to differentiate which rule applies, and when. For those who are involved in a lawsuit, it is always best to hire an attorney who can answer your questions fully and advise you of your rights. However, as a way to learn more about Rules 4 and 5 let’s look at some scenarios, and how these Rules regarding service are applied. Continue reading →
Behind the Bar: Signed, Sealed, Delivered – Rule 5
While Rule 4 of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure proscribes the method for the filing and service of the original complaint in an action, Rule 5 deals with the filing and service of orders, pleadings, and other documents that follow that initial complaint. Continue reading →
Behind the Bar: You’ve Been Served- A Lesson on Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (pt. 2)
“Behind the Bar” is a multi-part blog series that will focus on specific aspects of the practice of law ranging from the Rules of Evidence, Rules of Civil Procedure, and other important legal practice technicalities in an effort to provide readers a better understanding of regularly overlooked and misunderstood concepts that lawyers are faced with on a day-to-day basis. Continue reading →
Behind the Bar: You’ve Been Served- A Lesson on Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (pt. 1)
“Behind the Bar” is a multi-part blog series that will focus on specific aspects of the practice of law ranging from the Rules of Evidence, Rules of Civil Procedure, and other important legal practice technicalities in an effort to provide readers a better understanding of regularly overlooked and misunderstood concepts that lawyers are faced with on a day-to-day basis. Continue reading →
When Stock Options Aren’t an Option in Divorce
Family Chiropractic Sports Injury & Rehab Clinic, v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 2016-10, 2016 WL 234515 (2016)
Facts: Husband and wife operated a chiropractic The practice had an Employee Stock Ownership Plan (“ESOP”). Husband and wife were the only participants. Continue reading →
The Waiting Game Can be a Dangerous One
Dahl Aerospace Employees’ Ret. Plan of Aerospace Corp., 122 F. Supp. 3d 453 (E.D. Va. 2015)
Facts: A Virginia divorce decree, incorporating a settlement agreement, gave each spouse the option to elect survivor benefits under the retirement plan of the other. This provision was not immediately stated in a DRO or qualified by the plan. Continue reading →
Playing the Blame Game
In recent legal news, the Mississippi state Senate has passed new legislation that will have citizens of Greensboro and divorce attorneys alike glad that we live in North Carolina. Continue reading →
It takes Two to Tango…..but Maybe it Shouldn’t (Belot v. Comm’r)
Belot v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 2016-113, 2016 WL 3248031 (2016)
Facts: During their marriage, the parties operated a dance studio. The business consisted of an S corporation which was the actual studio, an LLC which operated a boutique selling dance clothing, and another LLC which owned the real estate on which the studio operated. The parties owned each of these entities in different percentages. Continue reading →