2008
Showing 561–576 of 608 results
-
Brace yourself – Pay for performance will change your professional life
Winter 2008
Newsletter: Rx for Practice Management / Practice Management Advisor
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 1017
Abstract: Like it or not, pay for performance (P4P) is here to stay, and physicians need to face that reality by preparing themselves both operationally and psychologically. This article gives an update on where the health care system is today in regard to P4P programs, and offers some interesting statistics on how these programs are being administered. Finally, the article provides timely tips to help prepare your practice for P4P. An informative sidebar discusses the Physician Quality Reporting Initiative, Medicare’s first step toward P4P.
-
How can information technology improve your practice?
Winter 2008
Newsletter: Rx for Practice Management / Practice Management Advisor
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 676
Abstract: Information technology (IT) solutions are rapidly transforming medical practices and the delivery of health care. This article explores the many ways that IT can help practices gain a competitive edge by streamlining their operations. It also offers practical suggestions for developing a strategic IT plan to assure the solutions support the practice’s long-term goals.
-
The digital detective: Using statistics to uncover fraud
January / February 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 335
Abstract: This article explains how Benford’s Law can help uncover financial fraud by examining patterns in tabulated data. It’s almost impossible for someone to manipulate digits so that they appear to conform to Benford’s Law, so analysts use the technique to find suspicious numbers that merit further investigation. (Updated 5/7/12)
-
Growing pains – Patent case expands definition of “reasonable royalty”
January / February 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 941
Abstract: In the recent case Monsanto Co. v. McFarling, a Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision has significant implications for patent infringement damage calculations. This article describes the case’s background and explains the court’s reasoning in the case, which provides plaintiffs with additional ammunition for building a reasonable royalty claim. The decision also requires plaintiffs on both sides of patent infringement cases to look beyond “established” royalty rates at other economic factors that affect the amount to which the parties would agree in a hypothetical negotiation. Citation: Monsanto Co. v. McFarling, 488 F.3d 973 (Fed. Cir. 2007).
-
Are you up-to-date on the AICPA’s new valuation standards?
January / February 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 807
Abstract: Last summer, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) finalized Statement on Standards for Valuation Services (SSVS) No. 1, which applies to CPAs who perform business valuations in engagements accepted on or after Jan. 1, 2008. This article explains the types of engagements SSVS No. 1 covers and the extent of information a valuation analysis performed by a CPA should contain. The article notes that it’s useful for attorneys and others to become familiar with these and other professional organizations’ valuation standards to ensure their experts’ methods and conclusions meet all relevant requirements.
-
Hope for the best, prepare for the worst – Avoiding valuation disputes in buy-sell agreements
January / February 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 1210
Abstract: If a buy-sell agreement fails to clearly spell out a valuation method to be used in the event of death, disability or divorce, the door is open for disputes. This article explains the steps to take in setting up a buy-sell agreement’s valuation provision, including selecting the appraiser and defining key terms. (Updated 5/7/12)
-
Reverse religious discrimination alleged
January / February 2008
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 701
Abstract: The question before the Ninth Circuit was whether a plaintiff could maintain her claim of reverse religious discrimination for her employer’s failure to promote her. Reversing a grant of summary judgment, the Ninth Circuit held that the plaintiff had presented evidence showing that she was more qualified for the job than the promoted person and that a reasonable fact-finder could find that her evidence made the employer’s proffered reasons “unworthy of credence.” Noyes v. Kelly Services, 488 F.3d 1163 (9th Cir. 2007)
-
ADA interactive process clarified
January / February 2008
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 819
Abstract: The Americans with Disabilities Act requires an interactive process between an employer and an employee who requests an accommodation because of a disability. This article reports the Eighth Circuit’s detailed description of the process. The article also discusses, in a sidebar, why the ADA doesn’t require an employer to reassign a qualified disabled employee to a vacant position if that would violate the employer’s legitimate nondiscriminatory policy to hire the most qualified candidate. EEOC v. Convergys Customer Management Group, 491 F.3d 790 (8th Cir. 2007) Huber v. Wal-Mart Stores, 493 F.3d 1002 (8th Cir. 2007)
-
Employer’s harassment liability when victim fails to follow report procedure
January / February 2008
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 803
Abstract: The Seventh Circuit answered this question in the affirmative. The court reinstated the employee’s suit, finding that a jury could reasonably find that the employer had acted negligently in discovering or remedying the alleged harassment. Bombaci v. Journal Community Publishing Group, 482 F.3d 979 (7th Cir. 2007)
-
Punitive damages require malice or reckless indifference
January / February 2008
Newsletter: Employment Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 709
Abstract: The Sixth Circuit ruled that an employer wasn’t off the hook for punitive damages for sexual harassment, even though it claimed that it hadn’t acted with the requisite malice or reckless indifference. This article explains why the court reinstated a jury’s $75,000 punitive-damages reward to an employee. Parker v. General Extrusions Inc., 491 F.3d 596 (6th Cir. 2007)
-
For what it’s worth: Valuation in the courts – Cherry-picking trumps splitting the difference
Winter 2008
Newsletter: Valuation Concepts
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 579
Abstract: In this issue’s “For what it’s worth: Valuation in the courts,” we discuss divorcing couples and their unresolved valuation differences. To wit, disputing parties cannot expect judges to simply split the difference and average opposing expert opinions. Rather, courts will more than likely take in the science underlying each business appraisal and then “cherry pick” the most sensible portions of each expert’s analysis. A recent Florida case demonstrates just such a scenario. Citations: Augoshe v. Lehman, (2007 Fla. App., No. 2D05-2034, August 10, 2007); Solomon v. Solomon, (861 So. 2d 1218, 1221, Fla. 2d DCA 2003).
-
IRS cracking down on inaccurate appraisals
Winter 2008
Newsletter: Valuation Concepts
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 756
Abstract: Although the Pension Protection Act of 2006 (PPA) may seem like old news, its repercussions are still being felt in the valuation community. Namely, the IRS is using provisions of the act to rein in abusive appraisal practices. This article tells how and why taxpayers and appraisers alike may be subject to sanctions for valuation misstatements related to noncash charitable contributions.
-
Discounts for lack of marketability – 4 FAQs on these critical valuation adjustments
Winter 2008
Newsletter: Valuation Concepts
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 766
Abstract: One of the most significant — and subjective — valuation adjustments is the discount for lack of marketability (DLOM). This article answers four frequently asked questions regarding this critical valuation adjustment. (Updated 11/14/12)
-
Goodbye averages, hello analyses – Supporting FLP discounts isn’t getting any easier
Winter 2008
Newsletter: Valuation Concepts
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 1164
Abstract: A difficult task to begin with, supporting discounts for family limited partnerships (FLPs) isn’t getting any easier. More specifically, judges are looking beyond the magnitude of discounts to examine precisely how appraisers are arriving at their opinions. This article provides some legal cases in point and goes on to explain what makes for a well-supported FLP discount. Citations: Peracchio v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo 2003-280. Berg v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo 1991-279.
-
Criminal actions: An extreme case of kiting funds
January / February 2008
Newsletter: Construction Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 285
Abstract: This brief article notes the criminal dangers of kiting funds — a practice that often violates the terms of any standard construction contract. United States v. Munoz-Franco, 487 F.3d 25 (2007) Puerto Rico 1st Circuit (2007).
-
Got insurance paperwork? Don’t let it slide
January / February 2008
Newsletter: Construction Law Briefing
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 516
Abstract: Any principal on a construction project probably knows the importance of accurately completing any insurance paperwork involved. But neglecting to follow up with an insurance agent or provider after requesting coverage could create problems as well. This article looks into a recent case that provides a prime example. Adams v. Western States Insurance, 2007 WL 2071548 (D. Ore. 2007).