Focus on . . . Attorney's Fees in ERISA Litigation
In: Vol. 24 (no. 2) Journal of Pension Benefits 9 (Winter 2017)
86 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Vol. 24 (no. 2) Journal of Pension Benefits 9 (Winter 2017)
SSRN
In: 27 Touro L. Rev. 113 (2011)
SSRN
In: Yale Law Journal, Forthcoming
SSRN
In: Journal of Passthrough Entities, p. 39, September-October 2014
SSRN
In: Journal of drug issues: JDI, Band 18, Heft 3, S. 421-436
ISSN: 1945-1369
In the past two years since the passage of 1984 amendments as part of the Comprehensive Crime Control Act, government prosecutors have included defense counsel fees as forfeitable assets stemming from drug trafficking and organized crime prosecutions. This development has been described by affected defense counsel as having an "arctic" effect upon their relationships with clients, as an abridgement of Sixth Amendment right to counsel, and as a deterrent to effective lawyering in this field. Prosecutors, on the contrary, have argued that a person can neither purchase a Rolls Royce nor a "Rolls Royce class of attorney" with proceeds of criminality. This paper delineates the issues in this debate, and their genesis, as articulated injudicial opinions; interviews with prosecutors and leading defense attorneys in Los Angeles, Miami, and New York City; published articles; and transcripts of hearings held by bar associations. In addition to the fees issue, similar controversial issues, such as grand jury subpoenas of attorneys and cash reporting requirements placed on attorneys, are addressed. Particular attention is paid to the increased adversariness in this stratum of the criminal justice system, and to the impact these developments have and will have on the quality of justice in major drug trafficking and organized crime cases.
In: ICSID review: foreign investment law journal, Band 18, Heft 1, S. 109-129
ISSN: 2049-1999
In: Internationales Handelsrecht: IHR ; Zeitschrift für das Recht des internationalen Warenkaufs und -vertriebs = International commercial law, Band 15, Heft 2, S. 58-59
ISSN: 2193-9527
In: The urban lawyer: the national journal on state and local government law, Band 37, Heft 4, S. 691-714
ISSN: 0042-0905
In: Yale law & [and] policy review, Band 23, Heft 2, S. 601
ISSN: 0740-8048
In: Georgia Law Review, Band 18, Heft 83
SSRN
In: Southern Methodist University Law Review, Band 65, Heft 1
SSRN
In: The urban lawyer: the national journal on state and local government law, Band 37, Heft 4, S. 663-690
ISSN: 0042-0905
In: 61 Me. L. Rev. 171 (2009)
SSRN
In: http://hdl.handle.net/2027/pur1.32754076882632
At head of title: 94th Congress, 2d Session. Committee print. ; Cover title. ; Includes bibliographical references. ; Mode of access: Internet.
BASE
H.R. 1987, 106th Congress, the Fair Access to Indemnity and Reimbursement (FAIR) Act, which was reported by the Committee on Education and the Workforce on October 14, 1999, would make it easier for small businesses and labor organizations that prevail against the NLRB or OSHA, in administrative or court proceedings, to recover their attorneys' fees from the government. It would do so by requiring fees to be awarded automatically in cases to which it applied, instead of only when the government's position was not substantially justified.
BASE