Please note: The material in these articles, provided by Chauvel & Glatt, is designed to provide informative and current information as of the date of the posts. The articles should not be considered, nor are they intended to constitute, legal advice. For information on your particular circumstances, please contact Chauvel & Glatt at 650-573-9500.
In our review of estate plans that predate 2011, many trusts for married couples consist of a survivor’s and decedent’s trust at the death of the first spouse. Prior to 2011, this set up was necessary to protect the deceased spouse’s federal estate tax exemption. However, since 2011, an individual’s federal estate tax exemption is portable to his or her spouse. Therefore, there is no longer a necessity to create the decedent’s trust at the first death.
The California Supreme Court ruled on December 22, 2016 in Augustus v. ABM Security Services, Inc. that employee rest breaks must be “off duty”—which means not even the remote possibility that work could occur. In other words, even being “on call”, having a pager or radio that could “interrupt” your rest break constitutes work now under California law and can trigger excessive penalties for employers.
Lawsuits can take a long time to resolve, sometimes years depending on a variety of factors. They can be costly and cause a lot of stress for the parties involved. Lawsuits can also take away time and resources from businesses involved in a lawsuit due to the time it takes to address the issues that arise as a result of the lawsuit. Mediation can be an effective way to resolve a lawsuit expeditiously so the parties can move on with their lives and control the outcome of the matter.
On November 9, 2016, Chauvel & Glatt partner, April Glatt appeared as a guest lecturer in a Business Law course at Skyline College to discuss Employment Law. April introduced the students to the basics of employment law focusing on important issues and situations to consider for employers and employees.
Two of our attorneys recently negotiated the resolution of a difficult dispute among four owners of a limited liability company stemming from differences in opinion about how to run the business. This led one of the owners to shut the other three out of the company operations. When the three owners came to our firm, it became apparent that no operating agreement had been signed by the owners and there were other corporate irregularities.