Without notice to North Carolina or consultation with its Congressional delegation, Congress enacted, on Dec. 23, 2016, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (NDAA 17) and overrode North Carolina’s Seifert[1] formula and N.C.G.S. § 50-20.1(a)(3) and (d) for dividing pensions, as applied to military retired pay. With North Carolina’s substantial military population – the third-largest in the country – this means that many lawyers need to know how to present testimony and evidence in contested pension division cases, as well as how to prepare a properly worded military pension division order (MPDO).
This new rule will require a new set of skills for such lawyers.
https://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.png00NCBARBLOGhttps://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.pngNCBARBLOG2017-05-24 11:42:092017-05-24 11:42:09Congress Overrides Seifert Rule for Military Pension Division
What does a case involving a city council’s refusal to go forward with an economic development loan have to do with employment law? Plenty! In Woods v. City of Greensboro, ___ F.3d ___, 2017 WL 174898 (4th Cir. May 5, 2017), a 4th Circuit panel relied heavily on employment law and again indicated that weighing facts has no place in a Rule 12(b)(6) determination.
https://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.png00NCBARBLOGhttps://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.pngNCBARBLOG2017-05-18 15:43:372017-05-18 15:43:37City’s Renege On Economic Development Loan Insightful On Employment Issues
This is the second of two installments of this article. The first installment was posted on the Tax Section blog on Jan. 16, 2017.
I. Hobby Losses: Horse Breeder Had For-Profit Activity.
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the Tax Court and held Mr. Roberts engaged in his horse training activity “for profit.” Roberts v. Commissioner, 117 AFTR 2d 2016-629. The IRS disallowed certain horse breeding activity losses for 2005 through 2008. In reviewing all of the relevant facts, the Tax Court determined although Mr. Roberts did not engage in the activity for profit during the first two years, he was engaged in horse related activities for profit under Section 183 for the last two tax years.
https://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.png00NCBARBLOGhttps://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.pngNCBARBLOG2017-05-18 15:15:352017-05-18 15:15:35Federal Income Tax Update: Part 2
Edited by Anthony Rascati, Elon University School of Law Dec. ’17 and Mike Casterlow, Elon University School of Law Dec. ’17
North Carolina State Conference of NAACP v. McCrory, 831 F.3d 204 (4th Cir. 2016).
On July 29, 2016, the 4th Circuit struck down North Carolina’s Voter ID law, finding that the law at issue “target[ed] African Americans with almost surgical precision.”[2] This decision had an immediate impact, as it changed the rules for voting in the 2016 election. While elimination of the photo ID requirement was the most covered and discussed provision struck down by the court, other important provisions were changed by the court’s decision, such as the days allowed for early voting, the use of same-day registration, out-of-precinct provisional voting, and preregistration of 16- and 17-year-olds. To fully understand the gravity of this case, one must look first to the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that was passed to prohibit racial discrimination at the ballot box. Furthermore, it is important to understand the effect of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Shelby County[3] case, and how that case has since changed the political landscape for election legislation across the country. As is frequently now the case, North Carolina’s political climate is a microcosm of American politics, where partisanship plays an ever-increasing role. Republican-controlled legislatures across the country have made many recent attempts to change voting and election procedures in the wake of Shelby County, and North Carolina led the march. The 4th Circuit’s decision in this case illustrates how courts may interpret voting rights cases post-Shelby County, and provides insight that is very valuable for anyone interested in American election law and voting rights.
https://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.png00NCBARBLOGhttps://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.pngNCBARBLOG2017-05-18 10:27:562017-05-18 10:27:56Case Summary: NC State Conference of NAACP v. McCrory
Edited by Nate Cook, Elon University School of Law ’17 and Mike Casterlow, Elon University School of Law Dec. ’17
Raleigh Wake Citizens Ass’n v. Wake Cty. Bd. of Elections, 827 F.3d 333 (4th Cir. 2016)
Introduction and Background Information
This case involves the constitutionality of two session laws enacted by the North Carolina General Assembly, Session Law 2013-110 and Session Law 2015-4. On July 1, 2016, the 4th Circuit invalidated two laws passed by the General Assembly that established new districts for Wake County’s Board of Education seats and Wake County’s Board of County Commissioners, finding that the laws violated the one person, one vote principle under the Fourteenth Amendment. While district numbers may never be exactly the same in each district, the court’s decision in this case affirms the principle that “governments must ‘make an honest and good faith effort’ to construct districts as close to equal population ‘as is practicable.’”[1]
https://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.png00NCBARBLOGhttps://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.pngNCBARBLOG2017-05-18 10:26:582017-05-18 10:26:58Case Summary: Raleigh Wake Citizens Ass’n v. Wake Cty. Bd. of Elections
A malicious program called WannaCry has affected more than 200,000 people, businesses and institutions in 150 countries in recent days. Through a bit of luck, an antivirus professional found a kill switch for the primary program. But other variants are still working. Global attacks may have slowed, but they haven’t stopped. Your law firm needs to update its software and get prepared for the inevitable onslaught of similar programs in the future.
Here’s what we know about WannaCry, and what you need to know to stay safe.
Name and Aliases: WannaCry, WannaDecryptor, WCry and WannaCrypt
Operating Systems at Risk: Windows, Windows XP, and Windows Server 2003 and Windows 8. The latest version of Windows does not have the exploited vulnerability. If you are running any of the unsupported systems, or Windows 8, download the security patch immediately. You can find guidance from Microsoft here.
https://www.ncbarblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/1072645_98618032-e1489514705543.jpg9201592NCBARBLOGhttps://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.pngNCBARBLOG2017-05-16 11:04:552017-05-16 11:04:55Defend Your Firm Against WannaCry and Other Cyber Attacks
The original version of this column appeared in the newsletter of the Communications Section of the National Association of Bar Executives (NABE) as a tribute to the young professional women serving on the section’s executive council. The sentiments contained therein, however, also apply to the thousands of working mothers who count themselves among the membership and staff of the North Carolina Bar Association.
My first big boss was a woman. Her name was Elizabeth Swindell, and she owned The Wilson Daily Times. That is where I began my professional career as a sportswriter in 1974 – before many of the women I’m writing about in this column were born.
Miss Swindell, as we knew her, would never weigh more than 100 pounds, yet she remains to this day the toughest woman I ever met. In addition to her duties at the newspaper, she was also a mother, grandmother and, by the time I started working for her, a great-grandmother.
https://www.ncbarblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/workingmom.jpeg37445616NCBARBLOGhttps://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.pngNCBARBLOG2017-05-12 08:30:232017-05-12 08:30:23Ode To Working Moms, From a Guy Who Gets It
In the Eastern District of North Carolina, U.S. District Judge Terrance W. Boyle recently granted conditional class certification to call center employees in their FLSA dispute against BB&T. In that case, Sheffield v. BB&T et al. (case number 7:16-cv-00332) plaintiff and the conditionally certified class allege that BB&T failed to pay overtime.
Things have calmed down significantly since the crossover deadline on April 27, and there haven’t been a lot of status changes to the bills that survived. The Regulatory Reform Act (declaring franchisors NOT employers) is now law (S.L. 2017-10), but that’s the only significant change to the bills we’re following. Here’s the updated spreadsheet of legislation.
There likely won’t be another flurry of activity until the General Assembly starts to smell the end of the session looming sometime in June or July, but we will continue to update.
NCBA Health Law Section / N.C. Society of Health Law Attorneys
On behalf of the North Carolina Bar Association Health Law Section’s Legislative Committee, we are providing the following 2017 post-crossover legislative update.
The North Carolina General Assembly has been considering a substantial number of bills of potential relevance to health law practitioners this session. The Health Law Section’s Legislative Committee, with the help of NCBA staff, has been monitoring these bills on virtually a daily basis.
The General Assembly’s rules provide for a “crossover date” during the legislative session, which this year was April 27. The importance of that date is essentially that, with certain caveats, unless a bill has passed one chamber (House or Senate) by the crossover date, the bill will no longer be considered by the legislature. The following listing provides brief descriptions of current proposed legislation, in two categories.
https://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.png00NCBARBLOGhttps://ncbarblogprod.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Blog-Header-1-1030x530.pngNCBARBLOG2017-05-10 10:08:292017-05-10 10:08:29Legislative Update For May 10, 2017
Congress Overrides Seifert Rule for Military Pension Division
Family Law SectionThe New Pension Division Rule
Without notice to North Carolina or consultation with its Congressional delegation, Congress enacted, on Dec. 23, 2016, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (NDAA 17) and overrode North Carolina’s Seifert[1] formula and N.C.G.S. § 50-20.1(a)(3) and (d) for dividing pensions, as applied to military retired pay. With North Carolina’s substantial military population – the third-largest in the country – this means that many lawyers need to know how to present testimony and evidence in contested pension division cases, as well as how to prepare a properly worded military pension division order (MPDO).
This new rule will require a new set of skills for such lawyers.
Read more
City’s Renege On Economic Development Loan Insightful On Employment Issues
Labor & Employment LawWhat does a case involving a city council’s refusal to go forward with an economic development loan have to do with employment law? Plenty! In Woods v. City of Greensboro, ___ F.3d ___, 2017 WL 174898 (4th Cir. May 5, 2017), a 4th Circuit panel relied heavily on employment law and again indicated that weighing facts has no place in a Rule 12(b)(6) determination.
Read more
Federal Income Tax Update: Part 2
Tax SectionThis is the second of two installments of this article. The first installment was posted on the Tax Section blog on Jan. 16, 2017.
I. Hobby Losses: Horse Breeder Had For-Profit Activity.
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the Tax Court and held Mr. Roberts engaged in his horse training activity “for profit.” Roberts v. Commissioner, 117 AFTR 2d 2016-629. The IRS disallowed certain horse breeding activity losses for 2005 through 2008. In reviewing all of the relevant facts, the Tax Court determined although Mr. Roberts did not engage in the activity for profit during the first two years, he was engaged in horse related activities for profit under Section 183 for the last two tax years.
Read more
Case Summary: NC State Conference of NAACP v. McCrory
Constitutional Rights & Responsibilities SectionBy Nate Cook
Elon University School of Law May ’17[1]
Edited by Anthony Rascati, Elon University School of Law Dec. ’17 and Mike Casterlow, Elon University School of Law Dec. ’17
North Carolina State Conference of NAACP v. McCrory, 831 F.3d 204 (4th Cir. 2016).
On July 29, 2016, the 4th Circuit struck down North Carolina’s Voter ID law, finding that the law at issue “target[ed] African Americans with almost surgical precision.”[2] This decision had an immediate impact, as it changed the rules for voting in the 2016 election. While elimination of the photo ID requirement was the most covered and discussed provision struck down by the court, other important provisions were changed by the court’s decision, such as the days allowed for early voting, the use of same-day registration, out-of-precinct provisional voting, and preregistration of 16- and 17-year-olds. To fully understand the gravity of this case, one must look first to the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that was passed to prohibit racial discrimination at the ballot box. Furthermore, it is important to understand the effect of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Shelby County[3] case, and how that case has since changed the political landscape for election legislation across the country. As is frequently now the case, North Carolina’s political climate is a microcosm of American politics, where partisanship plays an ever-increasing role. Republican-controlled legislatures across the country have made many recent attempts to change voting and election procedures in the wake of Shelby County, and North Carolina led the march. The 4th Circuit’s decision in this case illustrates how courts may interpret voting rights cases post-Shelby County, and provides insight that is very valuable for anyone interested in American election law and voting rights.
Read more
Case Summary: Raleigh Wake Citizens Ass’n v. Wake Cty. Bd. of Elections
Constitutional Rights & Responsibilities SectionBy Anthony Rascati
Elon University School of Law Dec. ’17
Edited by Nate Cook, Elon University School of Law ’17 and Mike Casterlow, Elon University School of Law Dec. ’17
Raleigh Wake Citizens Ass’n v. Wake Cty. Bd. of Elections, 827 F.3d 333 (4th Cir. 2016)
Introduction and Background Information
This case involves the constitutionality of two session laws enacted by the North Carolina General Assembly, Session Law 2013-110 and Session Law 2015-4. On July 1, 2016, the 4th Circuit invalidated two laws passed by the General Assembly that established new districts for Wake County’s Board of Education seats and Wake County’s Board of County Commissioners, finding that the laws violated the one person, one vote principle under the Fourteenth Amendment. While district numbers may never be exactly the same in each district, the court’s decision in this case affirms the principle that “governments must ‘make an honest and good faith effort’ to construct districts as close to equal population ‘as is practicable.’”[1]
Read more
Defend Your Firm Against WannaCry and Other Cyber Attacks
Featured PostsA malicious program called WannaCry has affected more than 200,000 people, businesses and institutions in 150 countries in recent days. Through a bit of luck, an antivirus professional found a kill switch for the primary program. But other variants are still working. Global attacks may have slowed, but they haven’t stopped. Your law firm needs to update its software and get prepared for the inevitable onslaught of similar programs in the future.
Here’s what we know about WannaCry, and what you need to know to stay safe.
Name and Aliases: WannaCry, WannaDecryptor, WCry and WannaCrypt
Operating Systems at Risk: Windows, Windows XP, and Windows Server 2003 and Windows 8. The latest version of Windows does not have the exploited vulnerability. If you are running any of the unsupported systems, or Windows 8, download the security patch immediately. You can find guidance from Microsoft here.
Read more
Ode To Working Moms, From a Guy Who Gets It
Featured PostsThe original version of this column appeared in the newsletter of the Communications Section of the National Association of Bar Executives (NABE) as a tribute to the young professional women serving on the section’s executive council. The sentiments contained therein, however, also apply to the thousands of working mothers who count themselves among the membership and staff of the North Carolina Bar Association.
My first big boss was a woman. Her name was Elizabeth Swindell, and she owned The Wilson Daily Times. That is where I began my professional career as a sportswriter in 1974 – before many of the women I’m writing about in this column were born.
Miss Swindell, as we knew her, would never weigh more than 100 pounds, yet she remains to this day the toughest woman I ever met. In addition to her duties at the newspaper, she was also a mother, grandmother and, by the time I started working for her, a great-grandmother.
Read more
Fourth Circuit Updates
Labor & Employment LawLabor & Employment Law
In the Eastern District of North Carolina, U.S. District Judge Terrance W. Boyle recently granted conditional class certification to call center employees in their FLSA dispute against BB&T. In that case, Sheffield v. BB&T et al. (case number 7:16-cv-00332) plaintiff and the conditionally certified class allege that BB&T failed to pay overtime.
Read more
N.C. Legislative Update, 5-11-2017
Labor & Employment LawBy Laura Wetsch and Faith Herndon
Labor & Employment Law Section
Things have calmed down significantly since the crossover deadline on April 27, and there haven’t been a lot of status changes to the bills that survived. The Regulatory Reform Act (declaring franchisors NOT employers) is now law (S.L. 2017-10), but that’s the only significant change to the bills we’re following. Here’s the updated spreadsheet of legislation.
There likely won’t be another flurry of activity until the General Assembly starts to smell the end of the session looming sometime in June or July, but we will continue to update.
Legislative Update For May 10, 2017
Health Law SectionNCBA Health Law Section / N.C. Society of Health Law Attorneys
On behalf of the North Carolina Bar Association Health Law Section’s Legislative Committee, we are providing the following 2017 post-crossover legislative update.
The North Carolina General Assembly has been considering a substantial number of bills of potential relevance to health law practitioners this session. The Health Law Section’s Legislative Committee, with the help of NCBA staff, has been monitoring these bills on virtually a daily basis.
The General Assembly’s rules provide for a “crossover date” during the legislative session, which this year was April 27. The importance of that date is essentially that, with certain caveats, unless a bill has passed one chamber (House or Senate) by the crossover date, the bill will no longer be considered by the legislature. The following listing provides brief descriptions of current proposed legislation, in two categories.
Read more