Massachusetts court ups Duane Morris partner s suspension for overbilling at ex-firm reuters.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from reuters.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
In a long-anticipated move, the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) launched a national emphasis program (NEP) on March 12, 2021, which is aimed at protecting workers.
Warren | Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr
SCRANTON – Lackawanna County has brought litigation against the City of Scranton, seeking a refund of more than $200,000 in building permit fees it paid in connection with an administrative building renovation.
The County filed suit in the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas on March 3 versus the City. Both parties are of Scranton.
According to the County, it renovated the former Globe store located in downtown Scranton for use as an administrative building. The City assessed two fees related to the building permit for the project, for a total of $208,157.04: 1) A lump sum building permit fee in the amount of $107,815.50 and 2) A fee of $100,341.54 for third-party inspections. In accordance with City Ordinance Section 187-7, the fees assessed were calculated on the basis of construction cost.
At these top law firms, profit boosts followed layoffs of lawyers and staff members
Image from Shutterstock.com.
Some of the nation’s top law firms posted substantial boosts in profits last year after laying off attorneys or staff members, according to an analysis by Law.com.
According to financial numbers reported to Law.com so far, at least 15 of the nation’s 200 highest-grossing firms posted revenue or profit increases of more than 5% last year, even after layoffs. Most were among the nation’s top 100 firms.
Some law firm leaders who spoke with Law.com said layoffs were needed to keep their firms healthy. Some said decisions were made before they saw an increase in demand for legal work later in the year. And some said layoffs were already planned, but the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the timeline.
Tuesday, March 2, 2021
The recent decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Steves & Sons, Inc. v. JELD-WEN, Inc., 2021 WL 630521 (4th Cir. Feb. 18, 2021), is noteworthy for its affirmance of the trial court’s unusual grant of the equitable remedy of divestiture in a private antitrust suit brought by a customer challenging a merger of competing suppliers. That challenge was brought under Section 16 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 26, and followed a merger consummated four years before the plaintiff’s complaint.
While divestiture is a commonly sought remedy in government enforcement actions brought by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), the Fourth Circuit observed that “private suits seeking divestiture are rare and, to our knowledge, no court had ever ordered divestiture in a private suit before this case.” Steves & Sons, Inc., 2021 WL 630521, at 5; see also id. at