|
Report
From Counsel - Winter
2005/2006 ISSUE:
AN
INTRODUCTION TO COLLEGE SAVINGS PLANS
GOLF
BALLS CAN BE TRESPASSERS
FLSA
OVERTIME UPDATE
"POP-UPS" ANNOY
BUT DON'T INFRINGE
JUNK FAX PROTECTION ACT
CONTRACTOR SHIELDED FROM LIABILITY
DO
YOU HAVE RESIDENCES IN MORE THAN ONE STATE?
- Fall, 2005 issue: Careful!
New Rule Affects the Disposal of Credit Information;
Gifting as an Estate Planning Tool; Safeguards for
Electronic Banking; Retirement Guide for Small Businesses;
Protect Your Home with Title Insurance; Taster's Choice
Model Wins Big
- Summer,
2005 Issue: Business
Start-Up: Should You Be a Franchise Player?; Veterans' Benefits
Improve Act; Environmental Law Update; New Tax Deposit
Rules for Small Businesses; Family Limited Partnerships Draw
Irs Scrutiny
- Spring,
2005 issue:
Real Estate Roundup; Pregnancy Discrimination at Work;
Minimize Your Risk of Identity Theft; More Businesses
Eligible for C-EZ; Business Liable for Not Investigating Credit
Complaint; FDIC Insurance for Revocable Trusts
- Winter,
2004/2005: Take the Time to Update
Your Will; Telecommuters
and the Home Office Tax Deduction; Email
Privacy in the Workplace; Oscar
Wilde and the Copyright Law;
New Banking
Rules Affect Checking Accounts
- Fall,
2004: Business
Alert: New Overtime Regulations; Real Estate Letters
of Intent; Technology and the Law; IRS Gets Tough on
Estate Tax Fraud; Withdrawal Rules for Inherited IRAs.
- Summer,
2004: Innocent
Spouse Tax-relief; Rough Day at the Golf Tournament;
Family and Medical Leave Act Update; Development Ditched;
Medicaid and Nursing Home Benefits; Reverse
Piercing of Corporate Veil.
- Spring,
2004: Buy-sell Agreements for Small Businesses;
Review Your Credit Report; When Noncompetition Agreements Cross
State Lines;
Commercial Landlord Must Mitigate Damages; New Identity Theft
Disclosure Law.
- Winter,
2003-2004:
- Wills & Trusts
Seminars
- Legal
News
|
AN
INTRODUCTION TO COLLEGE SAVINGS PLANS
The steady
rise in the cost of attending college may have become one of
those few absolute certainties in life, along with death and
taxes. Tuition and fees for public and private institutions alike
can seem overwhelming, especially if parents have done little
financial preparation ahead of time. Some solace can be taken
in the fact that there is a wide variety of approaches for saving
for college. For parents who have some foresight, the use of
a plan that is tailored to their circumstances can at least soften
the blow of financing a college education.
529 College
Savings Plans
With mutual
funds as the primary investment option, state 529 plans are best
for those looking to contribute substantial amounts to a college
fund. Earnings are tax-free, as are later withdrawals for qualified
education costs. These plans generally are in the parents' names,
which means that the plans have minimal effects on the family's
eligibility for financial aid. The drawbacks are limited investment
options and relatively high fees.
529 Prepaid
Plans
A prepaid tuition
plan makes the most sense for families that are reasonably certain
that their child will attend one of the schools in a state's
plan, and that are satisfied with a rate of return that equals
the inflation rate for the costs of schools in the plan. Under
prepaid tuition plans, you are buying future tuition at a state's
public colleges at today's prices. On the downside, payouts from
these plans reduce eligibility for financial aid on a dollar-for-dollar
basis. In addition, states dealing with especially tight budgets
have been raising the costs of participating, and in some cases
have been temporarily closing off enrollment.
For a group
of approximately 250 private colleges, there are independent
529 plans. They work like state prepaid plans, including the
dollar-for-dollar reduction in financial aid eligibility when
funds are distributed. Money from such a plan can be rolled over
to a state 529 savings plan or a state prepaid plan without penalty.
Coverdell
Education Savings Accounts
If you want
the most variety in investment options and lower fees, a Coverdell
account may make sense. Joint income tax filers with adjusted
gross incomes of up to $220,000 can save up to $2,000 a year,
tax-free, for education expenses. No plan is without its weaknesses,
and for the Coverdell accounts it is the adverse effect on financial
aid eligibility because the accounts are in the student's name,
not the parents' names.
Custodial
Accounts
A custodial
account is appropriate for those who want to transfer assets,
including securities, to a young beneficiary in order to reduce
taxes. However, be forewarned that the beneficiary will have
control over the account upon reaching the age of majority. Funds
can be taken from the account at any time and for any purpose
benefiting the child, not just educational expenses. Withdrawals
are taxed at the child's rate.
Savings
Bonds
If the 529
plans are the showhorses of financing in higher education, savings
bonds are the workhorses. Returns on savings bonds are usually
modest, but the investment could not be safer. Savings bonds
may be especially attractive to middle- and low-income households
that fall within certain income restrictions. For Series EE bonds
issued after 1989, and all Series I bonds, at least some of the
interest earned on the bonds is tax-free if used for higher education
expenses.
These approaches
to saving for college are not exhaustive, and the descriptions
here only scratch the surface. Professional advice can help a
family craft a plan that is best suited to its needs and priorities.
|
GOLF
BALLS CAN BE TRESPASSERS
Joyce had nothing
against golf or golfers. In fact, she was a regular golfer herself
and a member of two different golf clubs. But when her home in
a subdivision adjoining a private golf course was continuously
pelted with errant golf balls, she and a neighbor with the same
predicament eventually took the matter to court and won.
The golf course
began operating in the late 1980s, and Joyce moved into her home
in the late 1990s. But the fact that she "came to the problem" did
not prevent Joyce from winning an injunction to stop, or at least
minimize, incoming golf balls and the golfers in search of them.
No doubt the court was impressed by the evidence showing the
extent of the problem, which went well beyond an occasional Titleist
in the flower bed. Among other effects, there were five damaged
window screens, one large broken window, dented siding, and a
dimpled car hood (only the golf balls are supposed to have dimples).
At least one wayward shot struck the house hard enough to trigger
a burglar alarm. It got so bad that Joyce all but gave up on
using her rear deck, and her young son was instructed to play
only in the part of the yard that was shielded from the golf
course by the house. The clincher piece of evidence may have
been the 1,800 golf balls that Joyce had retrieved from her yard
during the five years she had lived in her house.
The winning
legal theory for Joyce was continuing trespass. The common conception
of a trespass is of someone walking across another's property
without permission, but the concept is broader than that. A trespass
is any invasion of a landowner's interest in exclusive possession
of the property. Propelling physical objects onto someone's property
regularly, frequently, and without the owner's consent is a continuing
trespass.
As for the
appropriate remedy, the court in Joyce's case offered some guidance.
If the golf course operators were determined to keep the course
as it was, they either would have to acquire the adjacent land,
or the right to use such land, for the purpose of accommodating
all of those wayward golf shots. More realistically, the defendant
could solve the problem by shortening the hole that adjoined
Joyce's property, thereby removing the property from the landing
area for all those bad shots. This would be somewhat burdensome
for the golf club, but it was not such a hardship as could relieve
the club of its obligation to end the continuing trespass and
give Joyce back the "exclusive possession" of her home.
|
|
|
FLSA
OVERTIME UPDATE
Unless an employee
falls within an exempt category of workers, the federal Fair
Labor Standards Act (FLSA) requires the employer to pay the employee
overtime at a rate of one and one-half times the regular rate
of pay, for hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week. To be
exempt is to be ineligible for overtime. The exemption commonly
called the "white collar" exemption is for professional employees.
Federal regulations
in place since August 2004 have simplified the test for determining
which employees come within the white collar exemption. An employee
is a professional if each of the following elements is present:
(1) The employee
has the primary duty of performing work requiring advanced knowledge,
that is, work that is mainly intellectual in nature and which
includes the consistent exercise of discretion and judgment;
(2) The employee
has advanced knowledge in a field of science or learning; and
(3) The employee
has advanced knowledge that is customarily acquired by a prolonged
course of specialized intellectual instruction.
Recent
Cases
In one recent
case, a company refused to pay overtime to some of its employees
who were licensed pharmacists. Much to the dismay of the employees,
the company's reliance on the white collar exemption held up
in federal court. All of the parties agreed that the second and
third parts of the exemption test were met by the pharmacists,
leaving a dispute only over whether the pharmacists' work required
the consistent exercise of discretion and judgment. The court
found that this element also was present.
The pharmacists,
with little supervision, routinely made discretionary decisions
about dispensing prescribed drugs to patients, and sometimes
the process required consultation with the physicians who prescribed
the drugs. The only factor suggesting a lack of discretion was
the fact that the employees, as a rule, were expected to follow
standard operating procedures from their employer. But this argument
by the pharmacists was undermined by the fact that they regularly
were asked to consult with the employer about the standard procedures
and to review them for any suggested improvements. The pharmacists
also had the employer's blessing to stray from the procedures
if, in their judgment, it was necessary for a patient's health.
Assuming an
employee is eligible for overtime pay, questions can arise as
to what comprises an employee's regular rate of pay for purposes
of calculating the overtime obligation. It is not always as simple
as using an employee's base hourly rate or salary. For example,
in another recent case, a federal court ruled that the regular
pay of municipal firefighters included payments made to them
under a city's sick leave buy-back program. A firefighter who
had built up a certain amount of sick leave had the right to "sell" it
back to the city for a lump-sum payment. Whenever this happened,
the employer effectively was paying the firefighters a bonus
for good attendance and for work they had already done. It was
as much a part of the firefighters' regular compensation as their
base hourly wage, so it had to be taken into account in calculating
overtime wages.
|
|
|
"POP-UPS" ANNOY
BUT DON'T INFRINGE
An Internet
marketing company provided a free software application that keeps
track of computer users' activity on the web in order to deliver
targeted advertising for its clients. The software uses an unpublished
internal directory with thousands of website addresses and keywords
for particular interests of consumers. When the computer user
types in particular terms in a browser or search engine, a relevant "pop-up" ad
is delivered to the computer.
A company in
the contact lens business learned that its website was in the
internal directory and that the software caused pop-up ads for
competing contact lens retailers to appear on the screens of
individuals who visited the company's website. The contact lens
company sued the marketing firm on the theory that the marketing
firm had infringed upon a trademark in violation of federal law.
From the plaintiff's standpoint, the actions of the marketing
firm were allowing competitors to take a free ride on the plaintiff's
website.
A federal court
ruled against the plaintiff contact lens company. A successful
trademark infringement lawsuit requires a showing of a protected
trademark and a use of that trademark in commerce in connection
with the sale or advertising of goods or services, without the
plaintiff's consent. The use of the mark by the defendant also
must be such as to likely cause confusion between the plaintiff
and the defendant. The action brought by the plaintiff failed
primarily due to the court's ruling that the defendant had never "used" the
plaintiff's trademark in a manner like that in a typical infringement
case. First, the defendant reproduced the plaintiff's website
address, which was similar, but not identical, to its trademark.
In addition, the pop-up ads, which appeared in a separate window
prominently branded with the marketing company's mark, had no
discernible effect on the functioning of the plaintiff's website.
It was not
enough for a successful claim that the defendant and its clients
were trying to take advantage of the plaintiff's goodwill and
reputation, which had led people to the plaintiff's website in
the first place. What the defendant was doing was no more legally
objectionable than the low-tech counterpart of chain drug stores
placing their own store-brand products on shelves next to the
higher-priced and trademarked versions of the same products,
so as to capitalize on their competitors' name recognition.
Top
of page |
JUNK
FAX PROTECTION ACT
There may be
some finality to the formerly unsettled picture on federal regulation
of junk fax transmissions. Since the first federal legislation
on the subject, in 1991, there has been an "established business
relationship" exception allowing the sending of commercial advertising
by fax under certain conditions. In 2003, the Federal Communications
Commission issued a regulation that would have effectively removed
the exception, requiring express written permission from the
recipient for sending any commercial ads by fax. Opposition from
business groups prompted the FCC to put off enforcement of that
rule three times.
Before the
restrictive FCC regulation ever became effective, new legislation
has reinstated the established business relationship exemption.
It is still illegal to send unsolicited fax advertisements to
anyone who has requested that they not be sent. However, unsolicited
faxes can be sent if the sender has an established business relationship
with the recipient and the fax itself has a conspicuous notice
on its first page informing the recipient that it can request
not to be sent more such faxes. To combat the sale of fax lists
to mass marketers, the law requires businesses to obtain fax
numbers either directly from the recipient or from a published
source, such as a directory, an advertisement, or a website.
Top
of page
|
CONTRACTOR
SHIELDED FROM LIABILITY
A business
hired architects for a renovation project involving a parking
lot, a retaining wall, and a loading dock. The plans, as drawn
up by the architects, did not call for a guardrail along the
top of the retaining wall. A construction firm completed the
project according to the architects' plans. The contractor had
not broken ground until a building permit was in hand, and when
the work was done a building inspector gave it his blessing with
a certificate of occupancy.
When a pedestrian
fell from the retaining wall and injured his knee, he sued the
contractor for negligently failing to put up a guardrail. The
issue for the court was whether the contractor could defend against
liability on the ground that it was "just following orders (or
plans, in this case)." A state supreme court sided with the contractor.
The court reasoned that builders and contractors are justified
in counting on the experience and skill of architects and engineers.
To subject contractors to liability under the circumstances of
this case would be to unfairly require contractors to follow
architectural plans at their own risk and, in effect, to ensure
the correctness of specifications given to them, not just their
own workmanship.
Of course,
there are limits on the extent to which contractors can use the
plans as a shield from liability. If the results called for by
the plans are so obviously dangerous that no competent contractor
would follow them, the contractor can be held liable for building
according to those defective plans. The individual who fell off
of the retaining wall made this argument, but the court concluded
that there was not enough evidence that the wall, even though
it had no guardrail, was obviously dangerous.
|
DO
YOU HAVE RESIDENCES IN MORE THAN ONE STATE?
If you spend
time in any given year in residences in different states, somewhere
in your travels you also may want to schedule an appointment
with your professional tax advisor. One topic for discussion
would be the legal concept of domicile.
In simplest
terms, a person's domicile is the place where he or she intends
to return after leaving another location. The special significance
of where a domicile is established is in tax planning. An individual's
domicile determines which state's income, gift, and estate tax
laws apply, and in which state or states a person, trust, or
estate is taxable. The rules that will govern the administration
of an estate also depend on the state of domicile. Inadequate
attention to establishing and documenting an intended state of
domicile could mean that even the best-laid estate plan might
go awry because the laws of a different state could apply. The
end result could be an unexpected tax burden that otherwise could
have been avoided.
Although the
basic definition of "domicile" is simple enough, many different
criteria may be taken into account in pinpointing a state of
domicile. No one factor is controlling, and the states differ
in the criteria that they use. The address included in a person's
will may be a good indicator of the person's domicile. A nonexhaustive
list of other factors would take into account in what state a
person votes, registers an automobile, has a driver's license,
keeps important personal property, pays state and local income
and personal property taxes, last applied for a passport, and
keeps the bulk of his or her money. Contrary to the old saying,
you can go home again, and it is a good idea to make sure that
you and the government agree on where that home is.
|
Actual resolution of legal issues depends upon many factors, including
variations of facts and state laws. This web publication in not intended
to provide legal advice for specific subjects, but rather to provide
insight into legal developments and issues that we feel could be useful
to our clients and friends.
Do you have a question for the Lawyer? Use this contact form
at: http://www.hoyweb.com/dh/contact.asp
or
if you live in the Chicagoland area call Mr. Hoy for a consultation
at 1-708-386-8030.
Top
of page |
© 1998
- 2006 HoyWeb.Com All rights reserved. Unauthorized reproduction
prohibited
by law.
updated
Jan. 1, 2006
|