Brinkley Morgan Sponsors Stephen R. Booher American Inn of Court Presentation

Posted on May 15, 2012 by admin

Brinkley Morgan is proud to have sponsored a recent legal luncheon that featured guest speaker Florida Supreme Court Justice Jorge Labarga. The luncheon was presented by the Stephen R. Booher American Inn of Court, an organization of judges, lawyers and law students dedicated to ethical practice for the benefit of the bench and the bar.

At the luncheon, Justice Labarga discussed his time on the court and experiences as a judge prior to his appointment to the Florida Supreme Court by Governor Charlie Crist in 2009.

He began his career in 1979 when he served as an assistant public defender in West Palm Beach, later joining the State Attorney’s Office. He then entered private practice before his appointment to the 15th Judicial Circuit of Florida, followed by an appointment to the Fourth District Court of Appeal. He currently sits as the 84th Justice to take office at the Florida Supreme Court.

On behalf of the Stephen R. Booher American Inn of Court, we want to thank Justice Labarga for speaking at this event, as well as all of the luncheon’s sponsors, including the Broward County Bar Association, Nova Southeastern University Law School, and St. Thomas University School of Law, among others.

Brinkley Morgan is committed to furthering the legal profession through sponsorships of events and organizations such as the Stephen R. Booher American Inn of Court. Additionally, the firm has created a campaign called Brinkley Morgan Cares to help local, charitable non-profits. It is our hope that by assisting charitable groups and professional organizations, we can help make South Florida a better place to live and work.

Kenneth J. Joyce, Esq., is a partner with Brinkley Morgan, where he represents businesses and individuals in commercial and business matters, and serves as treasurer of the Stephen R. Booher American Inn of Court.  He may be reached at ken.joyce@brinkleymorgan.com.

Remember that the hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.

The material appearing on this blog is meant to provide general information only and is not a substitute for nor is it legal advice to you. With regard to specific law issues, readers of this article should seek specific advice from legal counsel of their choice. Articles may not be reprinted without the express permission of Brinkley Morgan.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

Innocent Infringement Is Still Copyright Infringement

Posted on May 9, 2012 by admin

In the age of the Internet, many small businesses and individuals seek images online and use them for a variety of purposes in their own online marketing and advertising. Without realizing it, these individuals and small businesses may be committing copyright infringement. In this blog post, Brinkley Morgan attorney Stacy Schwartz shares information to help avoid copyright infringement online.

 

What is copyright infringement?
Copyright infringement occurs when a copyrighted work is reproduced, distributed, performed, publicly displayed, or made into a derivative work without the permission of the copyright owner.

How can copyright infringement occur?
Copyright infringement often occurs when individuals copy and paste photos or images from the Internet for use in their own materials, such as websites, blogs and online advertisements. Moreover, many web designers use images from the Internet to create websites on behalf of their clients, without first determining whether such materials are protected by copyright. The ultimate or end user of a copyrighted work without authorization can be subject to liability even if the copyrighted material was placed by a third party, such as a web designer.

Can copyright infringement happen mistakenly?
The fact that the infringement was unintentional does not absolve one from liability. Individuals and small businesses may be liable for copyright infringement without realizing it. Unfortunately, innocent infringement is still copyright infringement, and a copyright holder can sue an innocent infringer for money damages.

How can copyright infringement be prevented?
Before using photos or images you find on the Internet, check to see if the materials are copyrighted. Also, if you use a web designer to develop your website, you must ask the designer for documentation that the materials are not subject to copyright or that the materials are authorized for use by you pursuant to a license. Before hiring a web designer or third party to create a website, consult an attorney who can advise you on appropriate language that can be included in the contract for services to protect your interests. Do not assume that your web designer obtained permission to use and reproduce images and photos on your website. Under the law, it is your responsibility to protect yourself from committing copyright infringement.

If I am accused of copyright infringement, what are my options?
You should immediately seek specific advice from your legal counsel of choice. An attorney can advise you on possible defenses to the claims and options to try and resolve the claim.

Stacy Schwartz’s practice focuses on complex commercial and intellectual property litigation, trademark and copyright registrations. Stacy has been recognized for three consecutive years as a Rising Star by Florida Super Lawyers. She is admitted to practice before all Florida state courts and the U.S. District Court for the Southern, Middle and Northern Districts of Florida. You can reach Stacy at stacy.schwartz@brinkleymorgan.com.

The material appearing on this blog is meant to provide general information only and is not a substitute for nor is it legal advice to you. With regard to specific law issues, readers of this article should seek specific advice from legal counsel of their choice. Articles may not be reprinted without the express permission of Brinkley Morgan.

Remember that the hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.

Posted in Copyright, Intellectual Property | Comments Off

Complex Family Law Case Sets Legal Precedent in Florida

Posted on April 10, 2012 by admin

As relationships and family issues become increasingly complex, the law often must play catch-up to remain relevant. Recently, the 5th District Court of Appeals had to determine the custodial rights of two lesbian partners who decided to have a child together. In this blog post, Marissa Pullano, an attorney with Brinkley Morgan’s family law practice group, explains the significance of this case of first impression and how it differs from rulings in the past.

According to Florida law, courts have no authority to compel visitation between a child and person who is neither a parent, grandparent, nor great-grandparent. Furthermore, Florida’s appellate courts have consistently held that parental rights cannot be extended or established based upon the emotional or psychological bond that develops over time when one treats a child as his or her own, even with the legal parents’ knowledge and consent. For instance, because courts lack the inherent authority to award visitation rights to “psychological” parents, in 1994, the 5th District Court of Appeals denied a man’s request for visitation with a child he had raised for six years while living with the child’s mother.
—————
As such, in the state of Florida, if two women decide to raise a child together as partners and later separate, the non-birth mother can be denied access to the child. The state holds that the non-birth mother legally cannot be considered the child’s parent, because there is no biological connection. For example, in a 1st District Court of Appeals case from 1995, two women in a lesbian relationship decided to raise a child together. One partner was artificially inseminated. The other went to prenatal classes, was present during the birth, and cohabited with the birth mother and the child, who was given the non-birth mother’s surname until the child was 3 years old. After the relationship ended, the birth mother denied the non-birth mother any access to the child, and a trial court ruled in her favor. The non-birth mother appealed, but her appeal was denied.

Case of First Impression

On December 23, 2011, the 5th District Court of Appeals made a ruling that sets a legal precedent in the State of Florida. The case involved two lesbian partners who decided to have a child together. One partner donated her egg to be implanted into her partner via in-vitro fertilization. Accordingly, the partner who donated her egg is the child’s biological mother, and the partner who gave birth to the child is the child’s birth mother. The women lived together and used funds from a joint bank account to pay for a reproductive doctor and the in-vitro fertilization process. The women represented to the doctor that they intended to raise the child as a couple. Additionally, they went for counseling with a mental health professional to prepare themselves for parenthood. They gave the child a hyphenation of their last names, sent out birth announcements, had a baptism, and each took an active role in the child’s early education.

Two years later, the women separated after being partners for more than 10 years. Eventually, the birth mother severed the biological mother’s contact with the child. The birth mother quit her job and moved to an undisclosed location. Eventually, the biological mother located the birth mother and the child in Queensland, Australia.

The biological mother served the birth mother with a law suit to determine parental rights and responsibilities regarding the minor child. The birth mother argued that the biological mother had no parental rights based on the donation of her ovum. The biological mother argued that existing law does not contemplate the situation of a dispute between a biological mother and a birth mother and that there is nothing in Florida law that would apply to deny her parental rights to her child. The trial court ruled in favor of the birth mother and held that under Florida law, the biological mother had no rights.

The biological mother appealed to the 5th District Court, arguing that there is nothing in Florida’s statutes that addresses a situation where a child has both a biological mother and a birth mother who were engaged in a committed relationship for many years and who had decided to raise a child together as equal parental partners.

The 5th District Court of Appeal held that there was no legally valid reason to deprive either woman of parental rights to the child. The court found that the biological mother had constitutionally protected rights as a genetic parent who had established a parental relationship with her genetic offspring. The appellate court also stated that the trial court would have to determine such issues as custody, visitation and child support based on the best interests of the child. They also certified the constitutional issue to the Florida Supreme Court.

During the case, both the trial and appellate courts recognized that these two women presented a unique situation never before defined by Florida case law or in state statutes. The trial court judge stated that it was his belief that “the law is not caught up with science nor the state of same-sex marriages,” while the appellate court stated, “This is a unique case and the appellate courts in Florida have never before considered a case quite like it.”

Because there are many different types of families, it is wise and prudent to seek legal counsel when contemplating and before entering into agreements that could impact your future or when faced with a possible or real dispute.

Marissa Pullano concentrates her practice in the area of marital and family law with emphasis in dissolution of marriage, alimony, parental responsibility and timesharing, equitable distribution, child support, adoption and other family law matters. She is admitted to practice before all Florida state courts. You can reach Marissa at marissa.pullano@brinkleymorgan.com.

The material appearing on this blog is meant to provide general information only and is not a substitute for nor is it legal advice to you. With regard to specific law issues, readers of this article should seek specific advice from legal counsel of their choice. Articles may not be reprinted without the express permission of Brinkley Morgan.
—————————–
Remember that the hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.

Posted in Marital & Family Law | Comments Off

Expansion of Exemptions to Government Contracting In the Sunshine

Posted on April 3, 2012 by admin

In this blog post, Quentin Morgan, an attorney with Brinkley Morgan’s local government law and relations practice, informs readers about state laws affecting procurement services in Florida’s cities and municipalities, particularly, public record and public meeting Government-in-the-Sunshine exemptions.

Florida’s Government-in-the-Sunshine law guarantees the public’s right to access state and local government records and meetings. Specifically, Florida’s constitution states:

“Every person has the right to inspect or copy any public record made or received in connection with the official business of any public body, officer, or employee of the state, or persons acting on their behalf, except with respect to records exempted pursuant to this section or specifically made confidential by this constitution.”

Exemptions must be approved by no less than a two-thirds vote of both Florida’s House of Representatives and the Florida Senate. Additionally, the public necessity justifying an exemption must be stated, and the exemption must be no broader than necessary to accomplish its stated purpose.

Expansion of Exemptions

In 2011, state legislators passed a bill, later signed into law by Governor Rick Scott, that expands the public records exemption for the competitive selection process of municipalities. The 2011 law addresses two primary areas: public records, such as sealed bids or proposals from vendors looking to do business with a city or municipality, and city and municipal meetings where:

  • a vendor is making oral presentations or answering questions about a sealed bid or proposal;
  • solicitation team members are gathering to strategize for vendor selection.

Regarding public records, the 2011 statute expands the exemption for sealed bids and replies from 10 days to 30 days, and the exemption for sealed responses from 20 days to 30 days. Additionally, should a city desire to reject all bids and concurrently issue intent to rebid, the rejected bids are exempt up to one year from public inspection. This change also applies to any materials handed out during oral presentations to the selection committee. However, records such as bid tabulation sheets, communications among City staff, and staff written analysis of the project, are not covered under the exemption.

The 2011 statute also precludes public attendance at any portion of a municipal meeting:

  • at which a negotiation with a vendor is conducted pursuant to a competitive solicitation;
  • at which a vendor makes an oral presentation as part of a competitive solicitation;
  • at which a vendor answers questions as part of a competitive solicitation;
  • at which negotiation strategies are discussed by a city-established team as part of a competitive solicitation.

All exempt meetings must be recorded and all information and discussion must be a part of the record. Like the bid documents themselves, the 2011 statute expands the public record exemption for recordings and documents presented at exempt meetings from 20 days to 30 days.

What this means is that if a city is going to hear from contractors, that portion of the meeting can be held privately. The meeting’s proceedings still must be recorded in full, but those recordings are exempt from disclosure under public record requests until a decision or intended decision is posted, or until 30 days after the responses are opened, whichever occurs earlier.

Senate Bill 704 was recently passed during the 2012 Legislative session and removes the names and bid amounts for bidders on procurement for construction or repairs on a public building or public work from the 2011 public records exemption.  Bidders for these projects will have their names and bid amounts read aloud at a public meeting.  The substance of the bids and all other information contained in the bids with remain exempt pursuant to 2011 law

Potential Impact on Contractors
The exemptions make it more difficult for contractors to observe the bid evaluation process as it occurs. As the local and judicial interpretation of these Sunshine Law exemptions continues to evolve, contractors should consult legal counsel as they bid for public construction contracts to determine the potential impacts of the exemptions. Contractors should also closely monitor the bidding process with the assistance of legal counsel to determine quickly after the award whether there is a legal or procedural basis to protest the award.

Quentin Morgan focuses his practice on public procurement, local government law, land development,  estate, business and financial transactions, litigation, and wills, trusts and probate proceedings. He is a member of the American, Florida and Broward County Bar Associations and is admitted before the Florida State Courts and U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida.

The material appearing on this blog is meant to provide general information only and is not a substitute for nor is it legal advice to you. With regard to specific law issues, readers of this article should seek specific advice from legal counsel of their choice. Articles may not be reprinted without the express permission of Brinkley Morgan.
—–
Remember that the hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.

Posted in Local Government Law and Relations | Tagged | Comments Off

Social Media and Legal Liability

Posted on March 26, 2012 by admin

In this blog post, attorney Thomas Tatum, a Brinkley Morgan partner and member of the firm’s business litigation practice, informs readers about how organizations can best manage risk caused by the use of social media.

Every new frontier has its marvels and its pitfalls. While the astronomical growth of social media offers businesses and professional organizations new and exciting ways to connect with clients and the public, it opens up a number of liability concerns.

Social media, as the term implies, are inherently social. Business transactions typically are not, and therein lies the hazard. One of the most worrisome challenges of social media is the way in which they may blur the line between an employee’s professional and personal activities. Posting comments on blogs, Facebook, Twitter and other social media platforms, often in the relaxed comfort of our homes and coffee shops, encourages us to drop our guard and overlook serious liabilities that may include copyright infringement, slander, deceptive advertising, tortious interference, sexual harassment and other legal issues.

As the social media landscape continues to grow, it is important for businesses to understand the liability issues facing their organizations and how to minimize these risks.

Citizen Journalists
Blogs and other social media platforms have empowered everyone to become a citizen journalist. That’s a great thing, as it supports our democratic commitment to self-expression and the free exchange of ideas. However, unlike newsroom reporters, armchair bloggers typically don’t have trained fact checkers and editors who review their stories for accuracy, attribution and potential legal challenges. This can put both the individual writers and their companies at risk.

Controversy over copyright violations, for example, has been one of the most visible debates in the evolution of social media, whether the dispute is over uploading and sharing music owned by recording companies or posting material that was published in the news media. Other types of disputes involve sexual harassment, privacy, defamation, deceptive advertising and fraud. Of additional concern to employers is the easy availability of cameras and video cams in cell phones, adding potentially damaging graphic components to employee posts.

The risk to employers does not end with their employees’ participation in social media during the work day as part of their jobs. The inter-connected, 24/7 nature of social media tends to blur the line between professional and personal. Writing or responding to other people’s comments in a non-work setting on our mobile phones or tablets, we are far more likely to let down our guard and cross the line between what is well-advised and what is not. While our attitudes may relax, our liabilities may not.

Managing Risk
There is no substitute for good judgment. We’ve all seen public examples of the misuse of social media ranging from just plain stupid to outright offensive (think Domino’s Pizza and Anthony Weiner). But given the subjective nature of good judgment, employers may want to consider creating educational and risk management programs for social media usage while at work and beyond the workplace, addressing the issues below. Beyond these basics, it may be wise to consult an attorney who focuses on these issues and also find out what the company’s liability insurance covers, and importantly, what is not covered.

• Bring to employees’ attention that social media activity potentially makes everyone subject to legal liabilities including slander, liable, deceptive advertising, copyright and trademark infringement, harassment and other serious legal concerns. Explain the meaning and application of each of these terms.

• Outline in detail the approved roles that social media play in the company’s marketing, networking and human resources programs. If social media have no sanctioned functions, make that point clear.

• Be sure they understand that company policy refers to all social media properties, including blogs, chat groups, networking sites, e-mail, platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and YouTube as well as any other less known sites. The policy should apply to all employees, including top management.

• If an employee creates a personal blog, make sure there is an explicit and prominent note that the content and opinions on the blog are strictly personal and do not reflect their employer’s opinion. Personal and professional don’t mix.

• Instruct employees never to reference clients or business relationships. The results could be catastrophic for everyone involved.

• Indicate whether employees are allowed to identify themselves as employees of the company on their private social media accounts, such as Facebook. If they may do so, remind them to represent the company and themselves professionally. Don’t assume that the distinction is clear to them.

• Caution them about airing grievances and making derogatory remarks about the company, other employees, customers, vendors or anyone else involved in the organization’s business. In the heat of the moment, social media provide an easy place to vent, but inflammatory remarks never can be recalled and may have terrible consequences.

In addition, it’s advisable to understand your insurance coverage regarding the potential liabilities posed by the social media activities of your company and its employees.

Even if a company does not participate on social media platforms, its employees’ activities in and out of the workplace may put the organization at risk. There is no substitute for good judgment, but in the real-time universe of social media, it’s best to have a clear, written policy in place.

By: Thomas R. Tatum, Esq.
Contact Thomas R. Tatum at (954) 522-2200
tom.tatum@brinkleymorgan.com

The material appearing on this blog is meant to provide general information only and is not a substitute for nor is it legal advice to you. With regard to specific law issues, readers of this article should seek specific advice from legal counsel of their choice. Articles may not be reprinted without the express permission of Brinkley Morgan.
—–
Remember that the hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.

Posted in Social Media | Comments Off

Global Positioning Systems and Invasion of Privacy

Posted on February 7, 2012 by admin

With recent advances in technology, many companies are considering the use of Global Positioning System (GPS) technology to assist in tracking company assets, which can affect employees and broach invasion of privacy issues. In this blog post, partner Ken Joyce sheds some light on the legality of monitoring employee whereabouts using GPS devices.

 

Is it legal to monitor employees’ whereabouts through GPS technology?
GPS tracking provides businesses real time monitoring that can insure better logistical performance and accuracy in gauging time spent in the field. While there is rarely a concern when using GPS technology to track company equipment and vehicles, use of GPS devices to monitor employees’ whereabouts can pose a problem. There is no outright prohibition to the use of GPS to track employees; however, the situation becomes hazier as an employer’s monitoring of employees extends to capture non-work related activities.

For example, a company could have an employee who regularly made doctor visits for medical treatment during his or her lunch hour. The employee did not disclose these doctor visits and had no intention of allowing the employer to know about these visits. Discovery of this information through non-consensual monitoring could make the employer susceptible to a claim of invasion of privacy.

When does GPS invade employees’ privacy?
Whether you are implementing a GPS tracking system to monitor company assets or employees, including, but not limited to, asking an employee to carry a personal GPS unit, smart phone GPS application or connection to their personal vehicle, there are legal concerns that you must be aware of and guard against. A primary concern is invasion of privacy claims. The law will protect employees from an employer’s invasion through the use of GPS technology when an employee has a reasonable expectation of privacy, including their off-duty whereabouts and other off-duty activities.

How can companies avoid invading employees’ privacy?
There are certain actions employers can take to help minimize company risk. For instance, new GPS devices permit employees to disconnect from the system so that they can control their privacy when off-duty.

Even if employers are utilizing GPS devices that have the ability to turn off, companies still should develop a sound policy to address the scope and parameters of GPS tracking. Additionally, employers should notify all affected employees and have employees sign an acknowledgement of the GPS tracking. An informed consent may serve as a defense to a claim of invasion of privacy, but the employer would still need to prove that the employee consented to the GPS tracking at the time and place alleged to have been an invasion of privacy.

It is important to disclose the use of GPS tracking to all affected employees, so that they are on notice that the system is capable of tracking their movement, including during off-duty time, if GPS is not disconnected. A legitimate business reason to track employees, coupled with a written acknowledgement, can help establish that there is no expectation of privacy while performing during work hours.

To help minimize company risk when using GPS technology, it is recommended that employers seek specific advice from legal counsel of their choice.

Kenneth J. Joyce’s practice focuses on representing businesses and individuals in business litigation. Ken has extensive experience handling contract disputes, complex corporate litigation, business torts, shareholder and partner disputes, and employment law litigation.  Ken is rated AV® Preeminent® by Martindale Hubbell and selected as Florida Legal Elite® by Florida Trend (July 2011) and Florida Super Lawyer® (July 2011) He is admitted to practice before all Florida state courts, the U.S. District Court for the Southern and Middle Districts of Florida and the U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. You can reach Ken at ken.joyce@brinkleymorgan.com.

The material appearing on this blog is meant to provide general information only and is not a substitute for nor is it legal advice to you. With regard to specific law issues, readers of this article should seek specific advice from legal counsel of their choice. Articles may not be reprinted without the express permission of Brinkley Morgan.
—–
Remember that the hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.

Posted in Business Law | Comments Off

Brinkley Morgan Gives Back

Posted on January 4, 2012 by admin

The attorneys and staff at Brinkley Morgan are committed to helping those in need and continually seek out opportunities to do so. Recently, we teamed up with several organizations to give back to the community.

For Thanksgiving, the Brinkley Morgan team donated more than 300 pounds of food to Kids In Distress of Broward and Palm Beach County to help make holiday meals special for more than 500 under-served children and their families. Attorneys and staff collected a wide variety of food items including stuffing mix, mashed potatoes, canned green beans, canned corn, cake mixes and pie mixes. Kids In Distress of Broward and Palm Beach counties is a licensed nationally accredited agency working for prevention of child abuse, preservation of the family, and care and treatment of abused and neglected children. For more information, visit Kidinc.org

Brinkley Morgan also sponsored the grand opening event of Funky Flamingo 2nds Furniture Resale Store. Located at 1234 NE 6th Ave. in Fort Lauderdale, the store offers the community the opportunity to purchase gently used furniture at reasonable prices while H.O.M.E.S. (Housing Opportunities, Mortgage Assistance and Effective Neighborhood Solutions, Inc.) and its charitable initiatives in Broward County, including its housing project and programs for youth formerly in the state’s foster care and relative care system. The mission of H.O.M.E.S. is to create quality community and economic development benefiting at-risk and disadvantaged lower income Broward residents and neighborhoods. For more information, visit funkyflamingo2nds.com or homesfl.org.

Additionally, for the holidays, 10 Brinkley Morgan employees helped decorate SOS Children’s Village in Coconut Creek, and the firm adopted a family through the Boys and Girls Club of Broward County.

We are honored to be associated with Kids In Distress, H.O.M.E.S., SOS Children’s Village and the Boys and Girls Club of Broward County. In 2012, we plan to strengthen our community involvement, and we look forward to working with more of Broward’s many wonderful non-profits.

The material appearing on this blog is meant to provide general information only and is not a substitute for nor is it legal advice to you. With regard to specific law issues, readers of this article should seek specific advice from legal counsel of their choice. Articles may not be reprinted without the express permission of Brinkley Morgan.
—–
Remember that the hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.

Posted in Community | Comments Off

Mental Health Professionals Attend Brinkley Morgan’s Divorce Law Seminar

Posted on December 29, 2011 by admin

Professionals from all fields of mental healthcare, including psychologists, psychiatrists, therapists, clinicians, social workers, marriage and family counselors, clergy and pastoral counselors, attended Brinkley Morgan’s complimentary divorce law seminar Dec. 2 at the Wyndham Garden Hotel in Boca Raton. During the seminar, the firm’s family law practice provided attendees with a wealth of information on pertinent legal issues that affect patients during the divorce process.

Jodi Furr Colton’s legislative update covered changes in alimony and child support laws, new parenting plan requirements, and new court confidentiality rules. Colton explained the four types of alimony, which are permanent, durational, rehabilitative and bridge-the-gap, and how to determine which type is appropriate.

Kim Nutter welcomes attendeesYueh-Mei Kim Nutter and Jonathan Schiller covered alternative help and alternatives to the courtroom which included mediation, joint experts, divorce planners, and the benefits and pitfalls of collaborative law. Collaborative law is a process for the dissolution of a marriage that avoids the emotional and financial battles of litigation. Nutter and Schiller explained when collaborative law is appropriate and how to successfully start this process.

Roberta Stanley and Kenneth Gordon covered the topic of gathering information during the divorce process including the use of technology. This self-help versus self-destruction seminar covered educating clients on proper collection of data, professional duties and ethical responsibilities, and client conduct during divorce proceedings. Stanley and Gordon touched upon joint financial information, records in the home, business records, electronic communications, computer violations, and spy and surveillance equipment.

The Q&A Session lead by Marissa Pullano and John Lambros allowed for interactive conversation on the many aspects of the topics presented at the seminar along with other family law issues and concerns.

Divorce can be extremely difficult on individuals and families, and we are proud to provide resources for mental health professionals to help their clients through this process.

The material appearing on this blog is meant to provide general information only and is not a substitute for nor is it legal advice to you. With regard to specific law issues, readers of this article should seek specific advice from legal counsel of their choice. Articles may not be reprinted without the express permission of Brinkley Morgan.
—–
Remember that the hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.

Posted in Law Seminars, Marital & Family Law | Comments Off

There’s nothing fair about dividing assets during a divorce

Posted on December 8, 2011 by admin

Kenneth Gordon is board certified by the Florida Bar as a specialist in marital and family law. Mr. Gordon’s emphasis is in handling complex family law matters including dissolution of marriage, alimony, parental responsibility and timesharing disputes, business valuation, prenuptial and postnuptial agreements, equitable distribution, adoption, domestic partnership agreements, appeals, and all other family law related matters. Today’s post talks about the hardships and issues related to dealing with divorce.

Special to Florida Weekly

In most divorce cases money is the centrally disputed issue. In any given divorce case the issues of equitable distribution of assets and liabilities, alimony, child support, and of course who’s going to pay for the attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by both sides, are all about money.

When dealing with financial issues in a divorce people usually have two distinct points of view. I affectionately label these points of view as the “Stickler” and “Adjuster” perspectives.

Sticklers want to make sure that no stone is left unturned so they get every penny they’re entitled to. They are less concerned with the final result than with making certain that they are not taken advantage of.

Alternatively, the Adjuster wants to find an expedited “big-picture” solution, and is more interested in a reasonable settlement. The Adjuster is generally willing to take less to avoid confrontation.

There are plenty of people who occupy the middle ground between these perspectives, however most people tend to trend one way or the other.

While there is nothing wrong with either point of view, as a general rule the Stickler should be prepared to spend substantially more money on a divorce.

As a divorce lawyer it is my job to act as a human barometer in the initial consultation, predicting what is likely to happen if the case was to go to trial. This is important because if you do not know what is likely to happen in court, you do not know what would be a reasonable settlement. Pay close attention, I used the word reasonable, not fair.

One of the biggest hurdles for most people is the exclusion of the word fair from their divorce vocabulary. Webster’s defines the word fair as, “free from bias, dishonesty, or injustice; legitimately sought done, given, etc.; proper under the rules.” The reality is that people going through a divorce rarely share the same perspective about much of anything, particularly about money.

Fairness is completely subjective, and as such is not a realistic goal in divorce. Realism on the other hand contemplates an objective look at one’s situation.

It has been said that money is the root of all evil. It has also been said that money makes the world go round. Either way, there is no question that money is a deeply important part of all of our lives.

But there is more to money than just the obvious. Somehow money seems to touch almost every aspect of our lives. There is no end to facets of the human condition that we can tie to money issues: joy, expectation, worry, anger, love, hate, confusion and motivation.

To quote Cyndi Lauper, “money… changes everything.” In the context of a divorce, the financial issues of the case end up being a battlefield for many of the longstanding psychological and emotional issues that divided the couple to begin with.

Alimony is one of the most contentious issues. One of the reasons it is so contentious is that there are no specific guidelines as to whether alimony is appropriate, how much alimony should be paid, and for how long.

When alimony might be appropriate in a case there are two absolutes, which are that no one wants to pay it and everyone wants to receive it.

Equitable distribution, or dividing stuff in layperson’s terms, is a different animal altogether. In this instance people are arguing about the division and value of assets and liabilities. In Florida while there is a presumption that assets and liabilities should be divided equally, the courts do have the ability to divide them unequally. It is important to remember that we are still essentially talking about money. Most things are replaceable, and while it shouldn’t matter whether you get a particular asset or its financial equivalent, somehow it does.

Once while attending mediation, my client sent word to her husband that she would either buy or sell a particular asset for a particular price. At the time I recall thinking that she had just indisputably set the fair market value.

When her husband refused the deal, I realized what the true lesson was. Sometimes, it just isn’t about the money and sometimes it is.

Kenneth A. Gordon is a partner in the law firm Brinkley Morgan. He can be reached at kenneth. gordon@brinkleymorgan.com.

The material appearing on this blog is meant to provide general information only and is not a substitute for nor is it legal advice to you. With regard to specific law issues, readers of this article should seek specific advice from legal counsel of their choice. Articles may not be reprinted without the express permission of Brinkley Morgan.
—-
Remember that the hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.

Posted in Marital & Family Law | Tagged , | Comments Off

Meet Yueh-Mei Kim Nutter

Posted on November 29, 2011 by admin

Brinkley Morgan is known for its diverse practice areas and outstanding attorneys and staff. To help provide a more in-depth look at the attorneys who make our firm successful, we created a “Meet the Attorney” blog series. Today’s post introduces partner Yueh-Mei Kim Nutter, who spearheads the marital and family law practice at the firm’s office in Palm Beach County.

Kim is Florida Bar board-certified as a specialist in marital and family law. She concentrates her practice in the area of civil litigation with a particular focus on family law and also handles collections, probate and estate matters. She is admitted to practice before all Florida state courts, the U.S. District Court for Southern and Middle Districts of Florida and the U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. Kim received her Juris Doctor from Nova Southeastern University Law School in 1987 and her Bachelor’s degree from Florida Atlantic University in 1981.

Q: As a legal specialist in marital and family law, what related organizations are you involved in?
A: I have been serving as a Guardian Ad Litem in family law and dependency cases for more than 19 years, and I am the current chair of the Attorney Ad Litem and Guardian Ad Litem Ad Hoc Committee of the Family Law Section of The Florida Bar.  Also, I am a certified Family Law Mediator, a certified Appellate Mediator, co-chair of the Mediation Committee of the South Palm Beach County Bar and a founding member of the Collaborative Family Lawyers of South Florida, Inc.

Q: What have you learned serving as Guardian Ad Litem?
A: I believe that every child deserves love and needs a family and home where he or she can feel nurtured and cared for. Children are in foster homes through no fault of their own and deserve the opportunity to flourish in a stable, loving environment.  Many of the children in foster homes already have experienced tragedy and seen the worst of life and they need stability and love to overcome their belief that no one wants or loves them, as well as the chance to feel good about themselves and to trust other people. Children whose families are going through bitter divorces find themselves to be the pawns and feel that they have no voice. A voice is what a Guardian Ad Litem gives a child. I believe it is in society’s best interest to take care of all of its children and help them grow up to be productive, contributing members of society.

Q: What recent accomplishment are you most proud of?
A: In an effort to provide guidance for people seeking to be appointed as a Guardian Ad Litem in family law proceedings, my committee created  a training program that is being rolled out statewide in the coming year. The training program consists of a manual and a four-hour DVD that includes a mock court examination and video examples for interviewing children.

Q: What was the motivation behind creating the training program?
A: In family law proceedings, Guardians Ad Litem are appointed to advocate for children in the middle of a messy divorce or family dispute. Previously there wasn’t an organization that provided training to Guardians Ad Litem in family law cases. Even attorneys who are appointed by a judge to serve as Guardian ad Litem in a family law case do not always have the right training to interact with children and recognize family needs. The training program paves a path for more people, such as attorneys, stay-at-home moms or new retirees, to become a Guardian Ad Litem in family law proceedings.

Q: How has your work been recognized?
A: I was honored to receive the Chair Award presented by the Florida Bar Family Law Section for my leadership and dedication in the creation of the training program. Also, I have been recognized by Florida Super Lawyers in 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 and named one of The Best Lawyers in America® in 2011 and 2012 in the field of family law. My inclusion in Florida Super Lawyers and The Best Lawyers in America were especially meaningful to me because I was nominated and selected by my peers for my professional achievements in my designated field.

Q: Is there anything else you would like to share?
A: On Friday, Dec. 2, Brinkley Morgan is hosting a complimentary divorce law seminar for mental health professionals. My colleague Jonathan Schiller and I will be speaking on alternatives to the courtroom in divorce, including mediation, joint experts, divorce planners and the benefits and pitfalls of collaborative law. Other seminar topics include legislative updates such as changes in alimony and child support laws; new parenting plan requirements; new court confidentiality rules. Regarding helping clients through the legalities of the divorce process, we will cover proper collection of data, professional duties and ethical responsibilities, and client conduct during divorce proceedings. There will be an interactive conversation on the many topics presented at the seminar along with other family law issues and concerns.

Contact Kim Nutter at (954) 522-2200
kim.nutter@brinkleymorgan.com

The material appearing on this blog is meant to provide general information only and is not a substitute for nor is it legal advice to you. With regard to specific law issues, readers of this article should seek specific advice from legal counsel of their choice. Articles may not be reprinted without the express permission of Brinkley Morgan.
—-
Remember that the hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.

Posted in Meet The Team | Comments Off

Brinkley Morgan Hosting Complimentary Divorce Law Seminar Dec. 2 For Mental Health Professionals

Posted on November 22, 2011 by admin

On Friday, December 2, Brinkley Morgan is hosting a free divorce law seminar for mental health professionals at the Wyndham Garden Hotel in Boca Raton, Florida.

Psychologists, psychiatrists, therapists, clinicians, social workers, marriage and family counselors, clergy and pastoral counselors are invited to attend to learn about the legal issues that may affect patients during the divorce process.

The seminar is approved for three hours of continuing education credit by the Florida Board of Psychology, and for three hours of continuing education credit by the Florida Board of Clinical Social Work, Marriage and Family Therapy, and Mental Health Counseling. Brinkley Morgan is an approved provider for the Florida Board of Psychology and for the Florida Board of Clinical Social Work, Marriage and Family Therapy, and Mental Health Counseling.

Topics that will be covered at the seminar include:

  • Legislative updates by Jodi Furr Colton, which will cover changes in alimony and child support laws, new parenting plan requirements, and new  court confidentiality rules. Brinkley Morgan Associate Jodi Colton concentrates her practice in the area of marital and family law with emphasis in dissolution of marriage, alimony, parental responsibility and timesharing, equitable distribution, and other family law matters.
  • Alternatives to the courtroom by Yueh-Mei Kim Nutter and Jonathan Schiller, which will cover mediation, joint experts, divorce planners, and the benefits and pitfalls of collaborative law. Brinkley Morgan Partner Kim Nutter is Florida Bar board-certified in marital and family law, a Supreme Court certified family law mediator, and a founding member of the Collaborative Family Lawyers of South Florida, Inc. Brinkley Morgan Partner Jonathan Schiller is Florida Bar board-certified in marital and family law and focuses his practice on dissolution of marriage, alimony, parental responsibility and timesharing, equitable distribution, and other matters.
  • Helping clients through the legalities of the divorce process by Roberta Stanley and Kenneth Gordon, which will cover educating clients on proper collection of data, professional duties and ethical responsibilities, and client conduct during divorce proceedings. Brinkley Morgan Partner Roberta Stanley is Florida Bar board-certified in marital and family law, AV-rated by Martindale Hubbell, and a fellow of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers. Brinkley Morgan Partner Kenneth Gordon is Florida Bar board-certified in marital and family law and a frequent lecturer and author on various topics relating to marital and family law.
  • Q&A Session with Marissa Pullano and John Lambros, who will a conduct an interactive conversation on the many aspects of the topics presented at the seminar along with other family law issues and concerns. Brinkley Morgan Associate Marissa Pullano concentrates her practice in the area of marital and family law with emphasis in dissolution of marriage, alimony, parental responsibility and timesharing, equitable distribution, child support, adoption and other family law matters. Brinkley Morgan Partner John Lambros concentrates his practice in the area of marital and family law including dissolution of marriage, alimony, child support, parental responsibility, timesharing and equitable distribution, post-dissolution matters, prenuptial and postnuptial agreements, and other related matters.

The Wyndham Garden Hotel is located 1950 Glades Rd. in Boca Raton, Florida. To register for the event, please call us at (954) 522-2200.

The material appearing on this blog is meant to provide general information only and is not a substitute for nor is it legal advice to you. With regard to specific law issues, readers of this article should seek specific advice from legal counsel of their choice. Articles may not be reprinted without the express permission of Brinkley Morgan.

Remember that the hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off

What Every Seller Should Know About Warranties

Posted on November 22, 2011 by admin

Kenneth J. Joyce is a partner in Brinkley Morgan’s business litigation practice where he represents businesses and individuals in a abroad array of commercial matters. In this post, Ken outlines basic areas of warranty laws that sellers of  products should know.

A warranty can be an excellent tool to promote your product; however, to be effective, your warranty must comply with the law.  The failure to comply with warranty laws can have serious consequences for sellers and void warranty limitations you rely on to protect your business.  This article addresses areas of warranty law that sellers should consider when issuing a warranty for a product or engaging in regular sale of a product.

A warranty is a manufacturer’s or seller’s promise to stand behind a product and correct problems if the product fails.  A warranty can relate to any aspect of the product, including materials, workmanship, performance or remedial measures.  It is not necessary to use the words “warranty” or “guaranty” to make an affirmation of warranty, nor is it required to be in writing.  However, if you do provide a written warranty for a product costing more than $15.00, that promise is regulated by a federal law known as the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (“MMWA”).  The stated purpose of the MMWA is to establish standards for written warranties on consumer goods with its goal to make warranties easier to understand and more readily enforceable.  It also provides the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) with the means to protect consumers.  Additionally, each state has their own laws on warranties.

The law recognizes two kinds of warranties – implied warranties and express warranties.  Sellers need to be familiar with both in order to maximize your opportunities and understand your exposure.

Implied Warranties

Implied warranties are promises that arise by operation of law. There are two particular implied warranties that deserve a seller’s attention:  1) the implied warranty of merchantability, and 2) the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.

The implied warranty of merchantability is the seller’s promise that the products sold have nothing wrong with them, are fit for their ordinary purpose, adequately packaged or labeled and will conform to any promises as labeled.  For sellers who regularly sell a product, the warranty of merchantability is implied each time they sell the product.

The implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose is a promise you make when your customer relies on your advice that a product can be used for some specific purpose. For example, suppose you are a retailer of paint and a customer asks for a paint that will adhere to plastic.  If you recommend a specific paint and the customer buys that paint precisely because of your recommendation, the law says you have made a warranty of fitness for a particular purpose. If the paint recommended turns out to be inappropriate for the use, you have breached an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.

If you do not offer a written warranty, the law in some states may allow you to disclaim implied warranties.  However, specific disclosure must occur before an implied warranty can be disclaimed.  In other states, implied warranty obligations cannot be avoided.  Implied warranties can be problematic and impose substantial economic consequences.  Make sure you review all warranties offered with legal counsel familiar with the law of warranties so you know your exposure and plan accordingly.

Express Warranties

Express warranties are the seller’s spoken or written descriptions or promises regarding the goods which become part of the basis for the sale.  Typically, express warranties include promises of quality, materials, workmanship, performance and available remedies in the event of product failure.

Express warranties may be offered in various forms, including formal warranty certificates and claims made in advertising.  They may be presented in writing or orally; however only written warranties on consumer products are covered by the MMWA.

The MMWA requires all written warranty provisions be “fully and conspicuously” labeled.  The FTC mandates disclosure of the following information in all warranties on consumer products costing more than $15.00 at retail:  (1) an explanation of warranty coverage; (2) a statement of warranty remedy; (3) a statement of how long the warranty lasts; (4) an explanation of how a customer gets warranty service; and (5) a prescribed statement concerning legal rights.

Under the MMWA, a warranty can be designated as “Full” of “Limited”.  These are the only designations permitted under the MMWA.

If a warranty meets the “federal minimum standards” for warranty, then it is to be designated a “Full” warranty.  Conversely, if a warranty does not meet the “federal minimum standards”, then it must be conspicuously designated a “Limited” warranty.

The federal minimum standards for warranty can be summarized as follows:

(1) The seller must, as a minimum, remedy such product within a reasonable time and without charge, in the case of a defect, malfunction, or failure to conform with a written warranty;

(2) The seller may not impose any limitation on the duration of any implied warranty on the product;

(3) The seller may not exclude or limit consequential damages for breach of any written or implied warranty on such product, unless such exclusion or limitation conspicuously appears on the face of the warranty; and

(4) If the product (or a component part thereof) contains a defect or malfunction after a reasonable number of attempts by the seller to remedy defects or malfunctions in such product, the seller must permit the consumer to elect either a refund for, or replacement without charge of, the product or part (as the case may be).

If your warranty does not meet these minimum standards, it must be clearly designated as “Limited”.  Covered warranties must also contain other applicable information if relevant, including:  limitations on who is covered; availability of an informal dispute settlement mechanism; any limitations on the duration of implied warranties; or any limitations or exclusion of incidental or consequential damages.

Understanding the complexities of warranties is smart business.  Every seller should know what implied and express warranties are offered, how to properly disclaim warranties, if applicable, and what limitations or conditions can be imposed in a warranty.  This article raises important topics for manufacturers and sellers, but is not a substitute for seeking legal counsel.  Consulting a business attorney can help you learn how to best use warranties to strengthen your product.

Contact Ken Joyce at (954) 522-2200
ken.joyce@brinkleymorgan.com

The material appearing on this blog is meant to provide general information only and is not a substitute for nor is it legal advice to you. With regard to specific law issues, readers of this article should seek specific advice from legal counsel of their choice. Articles may not be reprinted without the express permission of Brinkley Morgan.

Remember that the hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.

Posted in Business Law | Comments Off

Florida Power of Attorney Act: Understanding Recent Changes

Posted on November 17, 2011 by admin

Shayna Reitman is a member of Brinkley Morgan’s business law practice with special emphasis on business and real property litigation and representing clients in the buying and selling of businesses, the formation of corporations, partnerships and limited liability companies, contracts and tax matters.  In this blog post, Shayna outlines recent changes to the Florida Power of Attorney Act.

Many new laws went into effect in the State of Florida on October 1, 2011, including a new version of the Florida Power of Attorney Act.

A power of attorney is a document that grants authority to another person, called an agent, to act in the place of the principal – the person executing the document.  The Legislature enacted an updated version of Chapter 709 in an effort to address what some perceived as defects in the previous version of the law.  The new version differs significantly in some respects, and applies to any power of attorney signed on or after October 1, 2011.

Here is a general overview of some basic  but noteworthy differences:

1.  Execution of the Power of Attorney:  The new law contains stricter execution requirements than previous versions.  Under the new law, in order for a power of attorney to be effective, it must be signed before two witnesses and acknowledged in front of a notary.

2.  Springing Powers of Attorney No Longer Recognized:  Springing powers of attorney are no longer recognized if executed on or after October 1, 2011.  Prior to the new Florida Power of Attorney Act, powers of attorney could be written to “spring” into effect at a predetermined time or upon the occurrence of a specific event (such as incapacity).  This usually was done to prevent the attorney-in-fact from using the powers while the principal was able to exercise them on his or her own.  These springing powers are no longer permitted, and powers of attorney must now be effective as of the time they are executed.

3.  Agents: The principal can designate a single agent or two or more persons to act as co-agents.  Under the previous version of Chapter 709, there was a default rule that when co-agents were designated, a majority of co-agents was required to act in exercise of the power.  Now, unless the power of attorney provides otherwise, each co-agent may exercise their authority independently.

4.  Duties of Agents: The duties of agents are also more specifically delineated in the new statute.  The new version of Chapter 709 divides the duties of agents into two categories.  The first are mandatory duties – those duties that apply notwithstanding a contrary provision in the power of attorney.  The others are default duties – ones that apply absent a contrary provision in the power of attorney.

5.  Authority of Agents: There are also changes with respect to what authority can be exercised by the agent.  Under the new law, the agent can only exercise the authority specifically granted by the Power of Attorney, which also  can include underlying powers that would be reasonably necessary to carry out the authority delegated by the principal.  Further, certain powers and authorities require the principal’s signature or initials next to the specific enumeration of the authority, or else they are ineffective.

What do these changes mean for existing powers of attorney executed before October 1, 2011?  They will remain valid as long as the execution complied with the laws of Florida at the time the document was executed.  However, there may be some practical reasons to consider updating your existing documents.

Versions executed prior to October 1, 2011, may cause some to encounter hurdles, including delays in determining whether the document was properly executed in accordance with Florida law at the time of execution.  Further, under the new statute, it is more difficult for a third party to refuse to honor the power of attorney if executed after October 1, 2011.  This is because the new version of Chapter 709 sets forth a specific process requiring a third party to specify the reason for not honoring the power of attorney.  If that reason is not legally sufficient, the agent can file a legal action challenging the third party’s refusal to honor the power of attorney, and if they prevail, the court is given the authority to award damages (including attorney’s fees) to be paid by the third party for causing the need for legal action.

Contact Shayna M. Reitman at 954.522.2200
shayna.reitman@brinkleymorgan.com

The material appearing on this blog is meant to provide general information only and is not a substitute for nor is it legal advice to you. With regard to specific law issues, readers of this article should seek specific advice from legal counsel of their choice. Articles may not be reprinted without the express permission of Brinkley Morgan.
—-
Remember that the hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.

Posted in Business Law | Comments Off

National Adoption Day Raises Awareness of Foster Children

Posted on November 15, 2011 by admin

The purpose of National Adoption Day is to draw special attention to foster children waiting for permanent families and to celebrate all the loving families that adopt.

This year, the National Adoption Day Coalition expects 4,500 foster care children to be adopted on this special day. As November 19 approaches, it is important for all of us to remember why adopting is so important.

Every child deserves love and needs a family and home where he or she can feel nurtured and cared for. It is impossible to fully comprehend the plight of foster children and the challenges they must overcome in order to lead what most of us are fortunate enough to consider a normal life. These children are in foster homes through no fault of their own and deserve the opportunity to flourish in a stable, loving environment.  Young as they may be, many of the children in foster homes already have experienced tragedy and seen the worst of life. They need stability and love to overcome their belief that no one wants or loves them, as well as the chance to feel good about themselves and to trust other people.

It is in society’s best interest to take care of all of its children and help them grow up to be productive, contributing members of society.

Yueh-Mei Kim Nutter, Esq.
Chair of Florida Bar Family Law Section Guardian Ad Litem Ad Hoc Committee
Partner in the law firm of Brinkley Morgan

The material appearing on this blog is meant to provide general information only and is not a substitute for nor is it legal advice to you. With regard to specific law issues, readers of this article should seek specific advice from legal counsel of their choice. Articles may not be reprinted without the express permission of Brinkley Morgan.
————
Remember that the hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.

 

Posted in Marital & Family Law | Comments Off

Meet Shayna M. Reitman

Posted on November 11, 2011 by admin

Brinkley Morgan is known for its diverse practice areas and outstanding attorneys and staff. To help provide a more in-depth look at the attorneys who make our firm successful, we created a “Meet The Attorney” blog series. Today’s post introduces associate Shayna M. Reitman, who recently joined Brinkley Morgan and practices with the firm’s tax, corporate and business litigation group.

Reitman handles business and real property litigation as well as the representation of businesses, entrepreneurs and individuals in business transactions including the buying and selling of businesses; the formation of corporations, partnerships and limited liability companies; contracts and agreements; and tax matters. She is admitted to practice before all Florida state courts.

Q: What are three of your professional goals for the coming year?

A: I am aiming to be admitted to the Southern District in the coming year, and I plan to continue to grow the success of the Broward County Bar Association Young Lawyers Section Judicial Reception. Additionally, I would like to present a lecture to the South Florida legal community.

Q: What are some “hot issues” in your practice area?

A: Amazon.com vs. New York is one of the “hot issues” in my practice area. The State of New York Assembly requires that out-of-state retailers, like Amazon.com, collect a tax from in-state consumers if the retailers have marketing affiliates in the state. Amazon.com challenged this and the case is currently pending on appeal. It has far-reaching effects because of the constant and exponential expansion of cyberspace, as well as commerce over the Internet. It is a case we are following closely in the firm’s tax, corporate and business litigation group.

Additionally, a new Florida Power of Attorney Act went into effect on October 1, 2011 to address perceived defects in the previous version of the law. The new law differs significantly from the previous one in some respects, and applies to any power of attorney signed on or after October 1, 2011. Powers of attorney executed before October 1, 2011 will remain valid as long as the execution complied with the laws of Florida at the time the document was executed.  However, there may be some practical reasons to consider updating existing documents, which should be discussed with your attorney.

Q: What are some of the organizations that you are involved with?

A: In addition to my work at Brinkley Morgan, I am involved in several organizations in the community. Since 2008, I have served on the Board of Directors for the Broward County Bar Association Young Lawyers Section, an organization for lawyers under the age of 36 in their first five years of practice that provides great opportunities to network and partake in a variety of activities and social events. I have also served as the chairperson for the Broward County Bar Association Young Lawyers Section Judicial Reception since 2008. Additionally, I have previously served as an Advisory Board Member for the Boys and Girls Club of Broward County: Harold “Hackie” Reitman Unit, and I am member of the Federal Bar Association and Broward County Bar Association.

Q: Where did you receive your education?

A: I received my Bachelor of Business Administration from the University of Miami in 2003 and my Juris Doctor from Nova Southeastern University Law School in 2006. Pursuing a long-held interest in tax law, I received specialized legal training from the University of Alabama School of Law and graduated with an LL.M in Taxation in 2011. Additionally, I am a LEED Accredited Professional, a certification that demonstrates my advanced knowledge in best environmental building practices and allows me to better serve clients with a stake in being environmentally friendly.

Q: What hobbies or interests do you enjoy in your free time?

A: I enjoy photography, skiing and boating.

To contact Shayna Reitman, please call 954.522.2200 or e-mail her at shayna.reitman@brinkleymorgan.com.

The material appearing on this blog is meant to provide general information only and is not a substitute for nor is it legal advice to you. With regard to specific law issues, readers of this article should seek specific advice from legal counsel of their choice. Articles may not be reprinted without the express permission of Brinkley Morgan.
————
Remember that the hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.

 

Posted in Meet The Team | Comments Off