Your search for ‘Miller Nash LLP’ returned 30 results

Ever since the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in Griggs v. Duke Power Co. in 1971, the law relating to the concept of "disparate impact" in employment cases has been fairly clear and predictable. However, the Court's recent decision in Ricci v. De Stefano, has cast the area into doubt and presented employers with a difficult dilemma.

One of the more disheartening events in the land development process is the survey that reveals an encroaching use by an adjoining property owner. In a residential setting, this may be something as minimal as landscaping. In other settings, it may be much more significant and include buildings or parking areas.

A colleague of mine once described attorneys as falling into one of two categories—we are either architects or historians. That is, either we help our clients design and build or we help our clients recreate the past when things fall apart.

In an eight-page letter of advice to the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), Oregon's attorney general took the position that when a local government decides to modify, remove, or not apply (i.e., waive) a land use regulation under Measure 37, that waiver is personal to the owner making the claim and does not run with the land.

A former Circuit City retail associate is entitled to a jury trial in a dispute against his former employer despite having signed an agreement to resolve all employment-related claims through arbitration, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled recently. In Al-Safin v. Circuit City Stores, Inc., the Ninth Circuit upheld the invalidation of an arbitration agreement, explaining that it was overwhelmingly biased in favor of the employer and unconscionable under Washington law.

This past summer, the Internal Revenue Service announced that it will be implementing a "Tax-Exempt Compensation Enforcement Project" to identify and halt abuses by tax-exempt charitable organizations that award excessive compensation and benefits to officers and insiders. IR 2004-106 (Aug. 10, 2004).

It is often assumed that if a taxpayer receives cash in a tax-free exchange, the cash must be boot. It can be quite frustrating when a replacement property-lender requires that reserves be funded at closing, and funding those reserves with cash creates taxable boot. Strategies that fund the reserves without creating taxable boot are discussed below.

On January 12, 2005, the Oregon Court of Appeals considered whether an employer must accommodate an employee's request to use medical marijuana and whether mitigating measures should be considered to determine if an employee is "disabled." Washburn v. Columbia Forest Products, Inc. No. A11664 (Or Ct App, January 12, 2005).

Few callings have as many rules and guidelines as ours when it comes to professionalism. Think of it as consumer protection for clients, who deserve to see lawyers on both sides of an issue behave professionally.

Company holiday celebrations have a well-deserved reputation for resulting in employer headaches. Alcohol consumption at parties, gag-gift exchanges, questionable wardrobe choices, dirty dance moves, excluded spouses and significant others, and a host of other factors have made the office party the most wonderful night of the year for plaintiffs' employment lawyers. A bit of commonsense advance planning will ensure that the holidays are fun, safe, and professional.