Rogers & Tartaro On Main Street

For a Good Cause: Thirty Restaurants at Rotary's 14th Taste of Ridgefield

Angelo Tartaro — Mon, 21 Jan 2013 16:21:00 -0500

T he 14th annual Taste of Ridgefield at the Ridgefield Community Center on Sunday, Jan. 27, will offer fare from over 30 local restaurants, caterers and wine shops in and around the town. A complete list of participants is available here,

An article in the Ridgefield Pressprovides details of the Rotary Club of Ridgefield’s major event to raise funds that help support dozens of local organizations.

he first serving is from 12:30 to 2:30 and the second, from 4 to 6. Tickets are $40 in advance and $45 at the door. This year there is a special price of $20 for age 12 and under accompanied by an adult.

Tickets are available at Squash’s on Main Street, the Ridgefield Community Center on Main Street, Ridgefield Chamber of Commerce on Bailey Avenue, or any Rotary Club of Ridgefield member, including me at angelo@rt-llp.com and online at ridgefieldrotary.org.

Legal Project Management: Relevant for the Small Firm?

Angelo Tartaro — Fri, 07 Sep 2012 07:40:00 -0500

Can a small firm take advantage of the same practice management efficiencies adopted by large firms that have greater resources to invest in innovative technologies and methods?

When established clients started to make for the door, six law firms started to innovate according to Law Technology News. To find more efficient ways to do their work, author Alan Cohen writes that the six firms have taken the lead in developing the techniques of "legal project management."

If legal project management were to be described in a single sentence, it might be: A great deal of data is generated (often from billing records already maintained) and analyzed to develop expected time and resource requirements for legal matters and tasks; The data are collected and analyzed to develop a resource budget and plan (often conforming to pre-determined process maps) for a given legal matter which is then monitored (often with sophisticated software tools) for variances from the plan. Generally, a large firm has completed dozens, if not hundreds, of similar matters in a relatively short period of time. Thus, the data, if usefully analyzed and understood, provide reasonable guidance for developing standard time, resource and process requirements, budgets and "maps" for future matters of the same type.

Clearly, this is what the LTN article was describing when highlighting the six leaders in legal project management. Lessons learned included "tie it to the data," create 'springboard maps'" (documentation of standard processes), "look to [software] tools you have," and "debrief and debug."

A small firm, however: (a) may not have enough data, (b) what data it has may be locked in a system that is relatively inflexible for analytical purposes, (c) the "resources" for any given matter may consist of a fraction of the working time of one attorney and one assistant, (d) there may not be time to develop process maps, and (e) there may not be anyone to debrief except oneself.

So, is there anything to learn from the project management innovations of larger firms? I think there is.

First, the single lawyer or small firm often does take on larger or more complex cases which call for the coordination of resources (and often the resources are from outside the firm: co-counsel, contract attorneys, independent paralegals, consultants, experts, printers). Moreover, the small firm may have more at stake in a given matter because there is more of a "make or break" factor when resources are limited and the matter is complex. Pressure to cap fees or use alternative fee arrangements may be even greater on a small firm (or a preference for the practitioner). And, the ability to anticipate timing and resource requirements may better allow the smaller firm to make a competitive assessment and bid to actually be engaged for a complex matter, especially if it calls for some sort of alternative billing.

Or, looking at it another way, project management concepts and techniques may present opportunities to the small firm that would be impractical using casual practice management methods.

Second, although data may be limited, the small firm has another resource that is actually an advantage: the direct experience of the principals with each matter. Where the larger firm has more abstract statistical data, the small firm practitioner may have more of the back story as to what the data really means. Moreover, too much data may be overkill. The time-honored yogic principle is "enough is necessary."

Third, software tools, for analysis or monitoring, do not necessarily have to be expensive, sophisticated or difficult to learn. The right tool for the right job has always been an applicable principle since before the industrial age, let alone the information age.

Fourth, certain issues just will not arise. In a small firm, the project or matter will always be managed and monitored by a principal. There is no question of "what level" should be assigned project management tasks. The small firm is almost by definition decidedly flat in organization structure.

Although, project management techniques may have to be adapted and carefully thought through for the smaller firm, that is not necessarily a unique requirement. The LTN article makes clear (and common sense confirms) that each of the larger firms had to carefully adapt and think through its techniques to account for its own organization, culture and practice.

Mu conclusion: both for defensive reasons (survival) and to exploit opportunities, legal project management is a concept worth the effort to research, learn and adapt for a firm of any size. Comments, even expressions of a contrary opinion, are welcome.

Image: Wikimedia Commons, Copied under GNU Free Documentation License, Author: Alpahmu57.

Implied Contract: When Actions Speak Louder than Written Words

Beverley Rogers — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 15:35:00 -0500

If you think you are not contractually bound to follow-through on a business deal because you did not sign a contract, you need to educate yourself about the legal theory of "Implied contract." An "Implied contract" describes a set of circumstances in which a court can determine there is a binding, enforceable contract based upon the course of conduct of the parties.

There are circumstances where the course of conduct of the parties speaks louder than any agreement on paper. A written contract can be ambiguous (resulting in contentious litigation in court over what the intentions of the parties were as reflected in the written contract). An "Implied contract" lies with what the parties did to facilitate and perform a contract in addition to what the parties said in the course of their dealings.

Sometimes, actions really do speak louder than words.

We represented a Connecticut non-stock corporation (not-for-profit organization) in the collection of a debt. The defendant owed our client money for services rendered to a family member. The defendant induced our client to provide services to his relative based upon the defendant's repeated promises to pay our client. When services were no longer needed, the defendant decided he didn't need to pay our client.

Prior to suing, our client made numerous attempts to reach an amicable settlement. The defendant rebuffed all attempts to settle. The defendant challenged our client to sue him. He stated that his attorneys "would welcome testing [our] legal theory of 'Implied contract' in court." Reluctantly, our client sued the defendant.

After the defendant's attorneys tested our legal theory of "Implied contract" in court, the defendant settled the case for 96.5% of the debt.

It turns out that the defendant and his attorneys were not the only ones who welcomed testing our legal theory of "Implied contract" in court. Our client was ecstatic with the settlement and that, for once, justice did prevail.

Image: A Handshake; from Wikimedia, Public Domain

Fighting Back Against Abusive or Harassing Collection Practices

Angelo Tartaro — Thu, 23 Aug 2012 17:20:00 -0500

How can you fight back against abusive, harassing or misleading collection practices? In Connecticut, an aggrieved debtor might turn to the state's abusive collection practices statute.

A debtor who proves his or her case may be entitled to actual damages, additional damages up to $1,000 and costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees. Or, the abusive creditor may be persuaded in a proper case to negotiate a settlement.

In a recent case, our firm negotiated a favorable settlement on behalf of a client with the credit card subsidiary of a major national bank. In addition to receiving money to settle the case, the client recouped all of his attorneys' fees and expenses. Names are omitted here to preserve confidentiality.

The client had moved out of the country for a job opportunity. He sent a change of address letter to the bank. He engaged a third-party debt-settlement firm to negotiate the satisfaction of a credit card debt. He agreed to pay the negotiated settlement amount to satisfy the credit card debt and he did pay the settlement amount. He was sued anyway. When commencing the suit, the bank directed a State Marshal to serve a summons and complaint at the client's vacant house in Connecticut -- literally thousands of miles from his then actual home.

The Marshal was following the procedure for service at a defendant's "actual place of abode" according to statute.

Despite efforts to have the suit withdrawn -- service was improper and he was satisfying the debt anyway -- the bank's collection law firm continued the suit. The client counterclaimed under the abusive practices statute.

That statute, in this case, was a useful tool for solving the real problem: getting the bank's (or its attorneys') attention. There was not a lot of money involved, especially for a national bank. And, the client intended to -- and did -- satisfy the debt. There should have been no dispute. Ultimately, the bank, through its attorney, did pay a bit of attention -- enough to settle the case "amicably."

Image: Google Images, Public Domain, Boxer John Lawrence Sullivan

Office Share or Strategic Partnership

Angelo Tartaro — Mon, 02 Jul 2012 15:00:00 -0500

Our small, congenial law firm is interested in connecting with a professional whose practice is complementary to ours. Recently, we posted, on several sites, the availability of a furnished office, without a long-term lease, in our condominium suite. The relationship, however, can potentially develop beyond office sharing to a strategic partnership. With no commitment or obligation up front (other than paying month-to-month rent), further development would depend on mutual interest and creative thinking.

We think the potential would be most obvious for a solo personal injury or matrimonial attorney, a CPA or an independent paralegal. We are open to other ideas.

If you think you know a qualified professional who might be interested, please forward this post. Information about our firm's practice can be found on our website, www.rt-llp.com and this blog. Information bout the available space can be found, among other places, at:this site.

Lessons from Small Business to Small Law Firm - - Hiring and Firing

Angelo Tartaro — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 09:45:00 -0500

A small business owner lamented The High Cost of Bad Hiring a few weeks ago in an article in the New York Times "You're the Boss" series. Small law firms are also small businesses. The solo practitioner or small firm partner is also a "boss."

Lawyers tend to be notoriously poor managers. Don't interpret that last comment as entirely negative. Lawyers simply prefer to practice law, not interviewing new hires, training office staff or giving performance feedback. This same tendency might be observable among other professionals and even in some businesses where the principals would prefer to focus on their particular expertise (for example design, cooking or merchandising) rather than manage their business.

There are exceptions in the legal profession. Some excellent managers, even CEO's of substantial businesses, are legally trained. But, let's focus on the more general case. Most of us can benefit by thinking through the lessons offered by The New York Times' once-frustrated-but-now-enlightened business owner:

1. It's worth taking the extra time to thoroughly screen candidates to find the "right" one;

2. Training is essential. So is supervision. As our now-enlightened owner put it: "I was not delegating. I was relegating.

3. Tenacity is important. It may take a while and multiple tries to find the "right" person for the job.

I would add that effective hiring is especially critical for the small law firm. There is simply no one around to pick up the slack for a bad hire. By the way, a "bad" hire can mean a bad hiring decision or bad supervision by the manager or partner, not just an underperforming employee.

My bottom line: if staff is necessary for the delivery of professional services, legal or otherwise, a well-balanced approach with due attention to managerial issues, such as hiring, can only benefit the practice.

Our New Connecticut Office Address

Angelo Tartaro — Tue, 27 Mar 2012 12:20:00 -0500

As of March 29, 2012, our Connecticut office will have a new address:

Rogers & Tartaro, LLP

158 Danbury Road

Suite 8

Ridgefield, Connecticut 06877

Our telephone number, fax number and e-mail addresses remain unchanged.

This blog will continue to comment on topics of interest to the small business community. Thus, metaphorically this blog continues to be "On Main Street."

Firm Update: Successes in Employment; Trusts & Estates

Angelo Tartaro — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 16:19:54 -0500

We're back. After an unavoidable hiatus, we're posting again. Although we regret our absence from the blogosphere, we were not idle. We begin by updating clients and friends with summaries of some our recent accomplishments:

Employment Law - Reinstatement of Government Employee

We helped a hard-working federal government employee win reinstatement to her job and achieve vindication after a premature suspension. Our client was accused -- but not tried, let alone, convicted -- of a serious crime. We worked in coordination with criminal defense counsel to prevent the loss of pay, job status and morale while charges were appropriately addressed.

We are pleased to report that both the criminal charges and the employment issues were resolved satisfactorily for our client who is back at work without loss of pay or status.

Trusts and Estaes - IRS Audit

We are in the final "winding down" stages of representing the Executors of a 20 million dollar estate through an IRS audit of the estate tax return. Working with the Estate's accountant and a co-counsel, we established a professional working relationship with the auditor and were able to fully document and explain all aspects of the tax return. This matter presented a significant issue when we discovered a consultant had over-valued an asset and the Executors had to file an amended return to claim a refund. The IRS agreed with us on that issue and we were able to resolve other issues raised by the audit to the satisfaction of our clients, the Executors -- and the IRS.

Trusts and Estates - Undoing a 20-year Error

We drew on our expertise in both New York and Connecticut law to help a family undo a 20-year error in two deeds and quiet title to a Connecticut real estate property. The property had been in the family even longer, more like 40 years. But, over 20 years ago, when a parent tried to pass the property to the next generation, a New York lawyer drafted two deeds, each with a provision that would have been legally sufficient in New York but not in Connecticut -- we'll spare you the technicalities but attorneys and others who are curious can send us an inquiry through the "Comments" feature of this blog or drop us an e-mail.

As a result, we had to go back 15-20 years to research the history of two closed estates. Clearing title involved researching the status of estate tax and succession tax laws over the last 15-20 years (which have done nothing but change over that time), determining the value 20 years ago of a property that had not sold for about 40 years and commencing an appropriate proceeding in Probate Court.

Happily, with the assistance, patience and cooperation of the clerks of a New York Surrogate's Court and of a Connecticut Probate Court, title was cleared, title insurance was issued and the family was able to sell and transfer the property as planned.

Attorney (and Client) Expectations

Beverley Rogers — Wed, 27 Apr 2011 19:41:12 -0500

As a private firm with a civil litigation practice in a mid-sized town, we receive inquiries from potential clients looking for information and wondering if they “have a case.” We are often surprised by the expectations of many of these individuals, including the assumption that a retainer or initial consulting fee will not be charged.

An attorney’s inventory consists of his/her time, expertise and judgment. An evaluation of a case draws on all three, and fair compensation is appropriate. Consulting and retaining an attorney requires a substantial emotional and financial commitment.

Since a litigation practice inherently involves helping clients to resolve disputes or controversies, the stress level is always high, even before the first introduction. We found that the following suggestions can help both potential clients and attorneys (no matter what the size of the firm) navigate through the beginning of the process.

Communication is key. An important element to a successful outcome is the attorney - client relationship and the sharing of knowledge. Be sure you are comfortable with one another. Both parties should be reasonably available.

Be realistic. Both client and attorney need to be sensible about whether a case is viable. Many potential litigants mistakenly believe that hiring a lawyer will easily resolve their problems. Clients should also understand the potential extent of time (and inherent costs) for litigation.

Be wary. Litigation is inherently risky. Any attorney who guarantees a particular result should be avoided.

Agreements should be formal. The attorney’s terms of representations should be in writing and explained to a client’s understanding and satisfaction. Be honest and make sure each party knows what is expected of the other.

Fee arrangements should be written out in detail and signed by both parties.

Clients have work to do, too. Clients are responsible for gathering relevant materials in a timely manner.

Experience counts. Make sure that the firm or attorney you are considering is experienced in the area in which you are dealing.

Be open to a fair settlement. The goal should be a satisfactory, reasonably economical resolution of the dispute. “Go for broke” -- and you just might get there.

Support Your Local Food Pantry

Beverley Rogers — Tue, 19 Apr 2011 10:44:59 -0500

Signs of the recession are apparent in downtown Ridgefield. There are vacant storefronts downtown when, a year ago, there were none. The vacant storefronts evidence the fact that, indeed, Ridgefield is not immune to feeling the pinch of the economic downturn in our state and country.

As a community, however, we don’t see the evidence that many of our neighbors struggle to feed their families. The Ridgefield Food Pantry, located in Town Hall, reports that as the effects of the Great Recession linger, more and more Ridgefielders turn to the food pantry to supplement the food they can buy to place on their family table. Many Ridgefielders need the Food Pantry’s assistance now, whereas a few years ago, they were among the many people donating food to the Food Pantry.

Please consider making a donation of food or a supermarket gift card to the Ridgefield Food Pantry. A donation of $5.00 is not diminished by administrative fees; and, a jar of peanut butter will help fill a child’s hungry tummy. Even the smallest donation to the Food Pantry makes a huge difference in whether our neighbors go to bed hungry or are able to feed their families during this very difficult time.

Anti-social media: Troublesome Tweets

Angelo Tartaro — Tue, 22 Mar 2011 10:26:09 -0500

This blog has featured several entries about controversial Facebook posts and the troubles they can cause employees, but it seems that saying something in 140 characters (or less) may be even more damaging. Careless Twittering has been in the news and cost several people their jobs or business ties as of late. For example:

• Insurance giant AFLAC fired comedian Gilbert Gottfried for tweeting about the devastation in Japan (Gottfried is the voice of the trademark Aflacduck). Gottfried, known for his offhand and often vulgar comedy, posted some insensitive tweets about the tsunami. AFLAC immediately broke their ties with the comedian.
• The New York Times reports that an employee of New Media Strategies, an agency handling the Twitter account for Chrysler brand, commented on his Twitter account that “I find it ironic that Detroit is known as the Motor City and yet no one here knows how to [expletive] drive.”
• Even law officials are not immune. Indiana Deputy Attorney General Jeff Cox was fired for remarks he made on Twitter, suggesting riot police in Wisconsin should use live ammunition when clearing protesters out of the Wisconsin Capitol building.
• Last year, CNN said it dismissed a senior correspondent who used her Twitter account to praise a Muslim cleric associated with the terror group Hezbollah (removing any sense of objectivity to her reporting).

We lean towards the point of view that one should not blame the tool when it has been misused (like a Little League shortstop throwing down and kicking his glove when he makes an error). Twitter (and similar social media tools) can be a very effective tool for marketing, building relationships and communications. Social Media tools can also create serious issues for employees and their employers. The New York Times reports that George E. Belch, a marketing professor at San Diego State University, reminds employers that “there are people in your company who forget when they post on a blog, on Twitter, on a Facebook page, that it’s out there — and it’s out there at warp speed.” In other words, messages can go “viral” and cause havoc (as in the cases above).

As we’ve said before, it’s important to think carefully about online postings, especially if you’re being paid to represent an organization. And, don't forget: in many ways we all represent our organizations and we do so 24/7. We should all practice being responsible, and being prepared to be accountable for what we write.

2011 Tax Laws: Good News, Bad News

Angelo Tartaro — Tue, 01 Mar 2011 09:20:12 -0500

A First Look at the New "Temporary" Federal Estate Tax Law

Throughout 2010, several of our posts noted that the federal estate tax had expired but that under then-current law, the estate tax was due to come back in 2011 as a more onerous tax. We commented and provided links, for example, discussing the George Steinbrenner estate, some $600,000,000 that would not be subject to the federal estate tax because he died in 2010 instead of 2009 or 2011. Then, in the last days of 2010, a deal was cut between the President and Congress as part of a broader tax package. The estate tax came back but in a (relatively) more benign form.

At this point, we have been able to analyze at least some of the specifics of the new estate tax. It was an interesting compromise. First, the good news: estates worth up to $5,000,000 are excluded (are not taxed) and the highest bracket, at 35%, is significantly lower than the highest bracket of the old tax (45% in 2009 but once as high as 55%). More good news, the $5,000,000 exclusion amount is "portable" which means that a married couple can more easily shelter $10,000,000 from the tax (without the necessity of a special trust).

That "portability" provision is especially interesting. Congress was able to determine that you should be able to "port" only the unused portion of the exclusion of one spouse. You can't accumulate unused exclusions from serial marriages.

But, yes, there is some bad news. The new estate tax is also temporary and will expire in 2013. And, the new estate tax is retroactive - - in a way. Executors of decedents who died in 2010 may elect to have 2010's rules carried over to 2011. Why wouldn't all executors so elect? There is a complex interplay with the capital gains tax and the determination of the cost basis of assets. Some executors will have to perform a careful analysis before deciding how they want to proceed.

These changes apply only to the federal estate tax. States have their own estate tax laws. Connecticut taxes estates over $3.5 million. New York taxes estates over $1.0 million. In both cases, the tax rates are not anywhere near the federal rates but can apply to estates that are excluded from the federal estate tax.

The discussion above is somewhat simplified and we will return to each in future posts to explain these provisions in a little more detail. For now, here are some general takeaways:

• Most estates will not be taxed at all and the focus of most people's estate planning should be on what they want to accomplish with their assets, not on tax avoidance;
• The temporary nature of these provisions keeps the premium on flexibility for those estates that might be on the cusp of the taxable thresholds;
• As always, life insurance, 401(k) plans, jointly owned real estate and other "non-probate" assets can put an estate over the taxable threshold - - people tend to be unaware how "non-probate assets" can build up their taxable estate;
• It may be a good time to review your asset and your will with an estate planning attorney - - if you haven't done so in the last three to five years, it's probably overdue.

Condition of Employment: Facebook Login and Password?

Angelo Tartaro — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 14:09:35 -0500

You have the right to remain silent … about some things . . . when interviewing for a job. It's well known that some questions are off-limits because, for example, they could imply a discriminatory intent. But, do you have the right to keep your Facebook password and login info to yourself when you’re applying for a job? The ACLU says that you do, and they’re going after the Maryland Division of Corrections (MDOC) over the issue.

According to the ACLU, the Division of Corrections “has a blanket requirement that applicants for employment with the division, as well as current employees undergoing recertification, provide the government with their social media account usernames and personal passwords for use in employee background checks.”

An NBC report states that the MDOC simply wanted to make sure that their employees are not engaged in any illicit activities. The MDOC has issued their own statement, defending and explaining their actions: “DPSCS reserves the right to inquire about a possible candidate's Facebook account during the hiring or re-certification process. However, it does not require/demand it as stated in the ACLU release. A candidate's refusal is not grounds for disqualification.”

The motives of the ACLU and plaintiff are not our concern. Neither is MDOC’s claim that a candidate or current employee will not be prejudiced by failing to disclose his or her Facebook information. What we do find interesting is that once again, the issue of electronic privacy within the workplace has arisen, and the courts are being forced to examine how far employers can go, and what liability the employee has.

The latest news is that the MDOC policy has been pulled for the next 45 days as it goes under review. However, as we have said in these columns before, there should be no realistic expectation of privacy anywhere on the internet. Facebook, currently popular and with a high profile, tends to be in the middle of these controversies but the concern should not be limited to this one service.

What's In a Name? It Should Be The Truth

Angelo Tartaro — Mon, 31 Jan 2011 15:05:11 -0500

"Branding" is a hot buzzword these days. Consultants try to teach organizations that are new at it (like small law firms, such as ours, and small businesses in general) how to establish a "brand." More experienced organizations understand the value of their established brands and will vigorously defend them with all the legal means available. Two recent examples involve the State of Vermont and the Taco Bell fast food chain.

The State of Vermont recently directed its legal ire against hamburger giant McDonald’s for the use of the word “maple” in the name of their new breakfast offering, McDonald's Fruit and Maple Oatmeal. According to Bloomberg news reports, Governor Peter Shumlin said the only actual maple ingredient in the product was extracted from the bark of a bush that is a distant relative of the maple tree. The MacDonald's product allegedly did not comply with Vermont's maple laws, which are very specific in the way in which the word “maple” is allowed to be used: Vermont is very protective of its " maple" brand. As Kelly Loftus of the Vermont Agency of Agriculture said, "It is illegal to use the word 'maple' for a product unless the sweetener is 100 percent pure maple. Artificial maple flavoring should be clearly and conspicuously labeled on the principal panel with the term 'artificial flavor'."

McDonald’s reportedly has acquiesced. Bloomberg reports that as of February 1, Vermont customers (and only Vermont customers) can now request that maple syrup or sugar be added to the oatmeal.

Taco Bell has also had to defend a cherished brand. This time, it's not the use of the brand that is at issue; rather, the issue involves the sullying of a valuable brand name. An Alabama law firm has filed a class action lawsuit against Taco Bell. The company is being sued for false advertising for referring to its "seasoned ground beef" in its products. The law firm has alledged that only 35% of the product is beef; the rest is filler, including something called “anti-dusting agent.” MSNBC states that the lawsuit does not seek monetary damages, only that Taco Bell stop claiming that what they are selling is beef.

A statement on the Taco Bell website responds: “Unfortunately, the lawyers in this case elected to sue first and ask questions later -- and got their ‘facts’ absolutely wrong. We plan to take legal action for the false statements being made about our food." While they refer to defending their food, they are really defending their Taco Bell brand.

I find these "brand battles" to be interesting and compelling. I also find the legal and business lessons of these larger, more experienced organizations (whether a state or business entity) to be highly relevant and timely for all of us.

From Soup to Nuts

Beverley Rogers — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 21:23:17 -0500

In addition to its small-town charm and sense of community spirit, Ridgefield is fortunate to have an abundance of excellent restaurants.

Many of these wonderful eateries will offer some of their finest fare at The 12th Annual Taste of Ridgefield. Held at the Ridgefield Community Center on Sunday, Jan. 30, the event will feature offerings from 30 restaurants and businesses in town.

The “Taste” raises funds for the Rotary Club of Ridgefield, which uses the money to support dozens of local charities. My partner Angelo Tartaro and I are proud to be members of this worthwhile organization, which provides many admirable services for the Town.

The first serving is noon to 2:30 p.m., $35 advance, $40 door; second serving is 4 to 6:30 p.m., $40 advance, $45 door.

Whether you're a true "foodie," or someone who just enjoys a pleasant meal out, The Taste offers something for everyone, including a fun (and delicious) opportunity to support the community. Please contact our office if you are interested in attending.

It's A Dog's Life

Angelo Tartaro — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 16:02:10 -0500

I'd like to start the New Year off on a lighter note. Even for lawyers there is more to life than "The Law."

Bringing a dog into your home requires a true commitment of time, energy and patience. But, it's a true joy to dog lovers. And there’s something very special about the bond between a shelter pet and its owners.

In addition to saving a life (many rescue or shelter animals are often scheduled to be euthanized), the pet you bring home often enriches yours. Our family dog has a special role for a disabled family member - - not quite a therapy dog, but close. It's fascinating to watch as genuine, lasting bonds are formed based on canine instincts and human patience.

Bev and I have both had the pleasure – and challenges – of opening our homes more than once to rescued pets. My family and I recently added Maggie, a lab mix, to our family.

There’s been an interesting learning curve for all parties involved, with the rules and regulations for Maggie clearly laid out. There is a consensus ad idemof our unspoken contract; we assume Maggie knows she will have to accept the repercussions from any damages (for example, to the carpet or, in our case, to a remote laid carelessly on a table).

Interested in learning more about pet rescue and adoption? Visit petfinder.com

Toby Rogers

Caveat Emptor (and the Reader, too)

Angelo Tartaro — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 16:10:17 -0500

Do you remember that commercial that opens with a man saying, “I’m not a doctor, but I play one on TV”? It appears that now we could have that type of disclosure with online reviews.

The Federal Trade Commission recently passed regulations that state that advertisers “must disclose any material connection between a person endorsing a product and the company selling the product.” In other words, if you’re being paid to endorse or review something, you’ve got to make that clear from the outset.

This is a good general rule for those writing a blog, Facebook page or “tweeting” on behalf of a company. But it will be interesting to see how this can be enforced with online review sites such as Yelp, Chowhound and even iTunes. The New York Times reported that the FTC had settled charges with a California marketing company that had been alleged to engage in deceptive advertising by having its employees write and post positive reviews of clients’ games in the Apple iTunes Store, without disclosing that they were being paid to do so.

This can also work the other way, with negative reviews. With the loss of inhibition and sense of anonymity that people experience online, reviews may be vicious and can even be defamatory. Additionally, rival companies can post negative “anonymous” reviews about competitive businesses, a practice that’s unethical, but legal (at least superficially, but such reviews can also be defamatory ). Defamatory reviews or comments may not attract the attention of any governmental agencies but can involve significant liabilities through "self-enforcement" (civil lawsuits).

Employers and employees need to be aware of the disclosure rules and the potential costs to their reputation and the business' bottom line. Last year, the Times reports, the State of New York had reached a $300,000 settlement with Lifestyle Lift, a cosmetic surgery outfit, over faked reviews of its products on the Internet.

Whether you call it “astroturfing,” propaganda, or even if you think it's outright fraudulent, the practice falls into an ethical gray area and, in some cases, could ultimately be illegal.

p.s. This Just In: The Wall Street Journal Law Blog reports that a lawsuit involving singer Courtney Love will be tried in February and explores whether defamatory "tweets" can give rise to liability.

Stay tuned....

image courtesy reviewcrew.org

Teach Your Children (using social media...sometimes)

Angelo Tartaro — Wed, 15 Dec 2010 20:45:37 -0500

In a post in this week’s Connecticut Employment Law Blog, Dan Schwartz brings up some compelling points. He notes that while it is legal to “friend” a student or subordinate, it may not be prudent for a teacher or supervisor.

I am in full agreement. But, I would like to point out that there may be some limited instances (“limited” being the key word here) where involving students or subordinates with social media projects might make sense. For example, a site allowing students to share research results for a class project need not contain highly personal material. A site set up for school (or company) alumni to share photos of their reunion also need not include highly personal material. The question is: can limits be maintained on the use of the tools so that the constructive purposes are not canceled out by the downside risks?

CNN recently featured a report about an elementary school in Iowa that uses Facebook to keep in touch with parents and let them know what’s going on in the classroom. Facebook statuses are updated daily, often by the children. A teacher featured in the story remarked that she wanted to show children that “social networking can be a positive tool.”

Teachers shouldn't necessarily shun social media if they can identify projects relevant to the educational goals of their students, who spend a great deal of time online. However, choosing the right tools such as district chat sites or blogs may be a safer option.

As we’ve said before, paraphrasing and extending a recent court decision, no reasonable person can have an expectation of privacy regarding material published on the internet.

* photo courtesy mediabistro.com

Does Social Media Open New Doors for Attorneys?

Angelo Tartaro — Tue, 07 Dec 2010 17:13:45 -0500

There appears to be an emerging need for legal expertise in the areas regarding social media. Last week, the Connecticut Business Litigation Blog posted about this trend. Author N. Kane Bennett states that “as the use of social media continues to grow and involve massive numbers of users, so does the risk of litigation and potential for numerous other legal issues.” Apparently businesses and law firms are recognizing this, too. The CT Business Litigation Blog points out that Citigroup is looking for a new attorney in its ranks, but in what may be a new trend, the Citi job is for Associate General Counsel-Social Media Attorney.

Clorox is also looking for a new attorney who focuses on social media. The publication Advertising Age quoted a Clorox spokesman’s e-mail: "As a newer communication channel, the application of existing laws to this medium is evolving. For those reasons and the rapid pace of communication in the Web 2.0 world, we're seeking an attorney to focus on social media as well as talent rights."

A quick search on an employment site for attorneys revealed at least four firms searching for legal professionals with social media experience. Because this is a relatively new legal area, there seems to be a large range of expertise required, indicating the breadth of impact.

In our firm, our interest tends to focus on employment law and the impact on evidentiary rules in litigation. But, many other issues are involved, especially, intellectual property, contracts and privacy issues.

All of this is good news for law students, who may be needed in newly created positions, but it also offers a lesson to those of us already in the legal profession: we must keep up with the times.

Speaking About Social Media

Angelo Tartaro — Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:48:50 -0500

Last week, I was invited to participate on a panel for a “Social Media Boot Camp.” I was asked to present material from my blog and answer appropriate questions from the audience. The event was jointly sponsored by the Ridgefield Chamber of Commerce and the Ridgefield Library.

Joining me on the panel were Maria Miranda of Miranda Creative, a social media-based advertising and branding agency, and Kerry Anne Ducey, the author of Talk of the Town, the popular blog about the town of Ridgefield.

I was pleased to learn that the turnout was the largest the Ridgefield Chamber had ever seen at an event like this. There was apparently great local interest in the topic of the escalating field of social media.

Although I was a featured guest on the panel, I learned a great deal that morning. There are scores of social media vehicles emerging every day, and the tools and methods available are overwhelming. As an attorney, however, I recognize that these amazing capabilities raise an array of issues that test our laws and create opportunities for conflict. Privacy issues are of course inherent with anything online, but there are questions about content control and ownership, defamation, litigation impact and employment practices, among others.

I understand that the attendees left with a great deal of knowledge and even more questions than we had time for. The one question most had was, “can you do this again?” My thanks to the Chamber and Library for giving me the opportunity to participate in a very educational and useful event.