Legal Intelligencer Tag Archives — Page 4 of 10

Legal Intelligencer: Internal Investigations in the NFL: Lessons for Organizations Large and Small

January 20, 2022 | Edward T. Kang

For practitioners, these Daniel Snyder events provide helpful tips relating to how organizations both large and small should conduct internal investigations.

In the January 20, 2022 edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Edward T. Kang of Kang Haggerty co-authored “Internal Investigations in the NFL: Lessons for Organizations Large and Small.”

Daniel Snyder, the embattled owner of the Washington Football Team, has been in the news again recently for all the wrong reasons. No stranger to scandal, Snyder has now been accused of interfering with the 2021 investigation into the workplace environment of his organization. This is just another in a long list of controversies Snyder has found himself embroiled in, which include suing financially distressed season ticket holders during the Great Recession, banning fans from bringing signs to FedEx Field, and rebranding his franchise after its former namesake was retired. This, coupled with Washington’s lack of success during his tenure, has led some to label him the worst owner in all of professional sports. Continue reading ›

Legal Intelligencer: Self-Funded Employer Health Plans: Benefits, Pitfalls and Strategies

December 3, 2021 | Edward T. Kang

This column will focus primarily on self-funded plans, the types of disputes that often arise relating to these plans, and suggestions for avoiding or resolving these disputes.

Business-Reports-1024x576-2

In the December 2, 2021 edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Edward T. Kang of Kang Haggerty co-authored “Self-Funded Employer Health Plans: Benefits, Pitfalls and Strategies.”

The majority of Americans receive their health coverage through some type of employer-based insurance, and there are two main types of plans: fully insured and self-funded. Fully insured plans offer health insurance in the more conventional sense, where an employer and its employees pay monthly premiums to an insurer, who then covers the cost of medical treatment provided by its network of professionals. Continue reading ›

Legal Intelligencer: Qui Tam Suits and Veil Piercing: A Powerful Combo for Combating Health Care Fraud

November 4, 2021 | Edward T. Kang

Scale with medication on one side and money on the other

This article will discuss briefly the history of qui tam litigation, its interplay with piercing theories and the particular utility of these types of suits in the health care context.

In the November 4, 2021 edition of of The Legal Intelligencer, Edward T. Kang of Kang Haggerty co-authored “Qui Tam Suits and Veil Piercing: A Powerful Combo for Combating Health Care Fraud.”

In 2019, the United States federal government spent $1.1 trillion, or approximately 25% of the overall federal budget, on just four government health care programs; Medicare, Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) and the Affordable Care Act (ACA). In addition to these well-known programs, the Department of Defense spends tens of billions of dollars every year providing health care to service members, veterans and their families through programs like TRICARE. Likewise, all states administer their own Medicaid programs and typically match the funding provided by the federal government, pumping even more public money into this sector. Continue reading ›

Legal Intelligencer: Significant Recent Changes to the Delaware Limited Liability Company Act

October 14, 2021 | Edward T. Kang

Illustration showing four people in a bsuiness meeting.

This column examines these amendments, the history behind Delaware’s prominence in the realm of corporate law, and discusses some key differences between LLCs and corporations.

In the October 14, 2021 editions of The Legal Intelligencer and the Delaware Business Court Insider Edward T. Kang, managing member of Kang Haggerty wrote “Significant Recent Changes to the Delaware Limited Liability Company Act.”

Delaware Senate Bill 114, recently enacted and effective as of Aug. 1, includes substantial additions and amendments to the Delaware Limited Liability Company Act (the LLC Act). In addition to several amendments meant to supersede recent case law, these amendments also contained further guidance regarding the operations of a Delaware public benefit LLC. This column examines these amendments, the history behind Delaware’s prominence in the realm of corporate law, and discusses some key differences between LLCs and corporations. Continue reading ›

Legal Intelligencer: Enterprise Liability and When to Seek Piercing the Corporate Veil

September 9, 2021 | Edward T. Kang

In this column, we discuss Mortimer, the enterprise theory of liability generally, and the common sequencing decisions plaintiffs need to make when bringing a veil piercing claim.

In the September 9, 2021 edition of The Legal Intelligencer, Edward T. Kang of Kang Haggerty co-authored “Enterprise Liability and When to Seek Piercing the Corporate Veil.” Continue reading ›

Legal Intelligencer: ‘Cosby’ and the Use of Prior Bad Acts in the Civil Litigation Context

July 22, 2021 | Edward T. Kang

Long scroll with lines simulating text on golden backround. In the July 22, 2021 edition of The Legal Intelligencer Edward T. Kang of Kang Haggerty co-authored “‘Cosby’ and the Use of Prior Bad Acts in the Civil Litigation Context.”

On June 30, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court authored another chapter in the saga of Philadelphia native Bill Cosby. With a career spanning the better part of a century, Cosby had successful forays into music, literature film, television and comedy. In recent years, however, Cosby has been famous for all the wrong reasons. Once known as “America’s Dad,” Cosby has been accused of a crushing deluge of graphic sexual assault allegations. These claims date back to the earliest days of Cosby’s career, span multiple jurisdictions, and have been levied by dozens of women of varying backgrounds and circumstances. Continue reading ›

Legal Intelligencer: Protective Orders in the Age of E-Discovery

July 8, 2021 | Edward T. Kang

Data-Transfer-1024x576 In the July 8, 2021 edition of The Legal Intelligencer Edward T. Kang of Kang Haggerty co-authored “Protective Orders in the Age of E-Discovery.”

Electronic discovery and its transformational consequences have been a defining feature of 21st century litigation. The sheer proliferation of data and associated complexity has necessitated the development of specialized software to manage and catalog this information. Data have become so complex that protocols surrounding metadata, i.e., data about data, have become a regular aspect of the discovery process. Agreements regarding the use and discoverability of electronically stored information (ESI) are commonplace in any case with a sufficiently large volume of documents. Continue reading ›

Legal Intelligencer: A Primer on Pennsylvania’s Participation Theory

June 24, 2021 | Edward T. Kang

Three coworkers collaborating. In the June 24, 2021 edition of The Legal Intelligencer Edward T. Kang, managing member of Kang Haggerty, wrote “A Primer on Pennsylvania’s Participation Theory.”

One of the primary benefits of organizing a business as a corporation (or similar entity) is limited liability protection. By establishing the corporation as a separate legal entity, its actions become distinct from the individuals running it. For the corporation’s shareholders, this provides downside certainty; the maximum liability exposure they face (in general) is the value of their investment. Since the losses stemming from personal liability are theoretically infinite, investors relish the corporate form’s ability to mitigate risk. Continue reading ›

Legal Intelligencer: Expert Witnesses in Pa.—What Materials Matter in Forming an Opinion?

May 20, 2021 | Edward T. Kang

Over both of counsel’s objections, the judge allowed the witness to continue with his testimony, in accordance with Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence 702 and 703 and the general acceptance test. This scenario raises the question: what materials can an expert witness rely on in Pennsylvania courts, which follows the Frye standard? And has this changed in recent years?