Litigating Fee Disputes in Federal Court

$195.00

Live Broadcast on December 6, 2017

For lawyers in federal court, getting paid can sometimes be more difficult than the case they litigated. Whether the client discharges the lawyer or simply disputes the final amount owed, the lawyer may have to navigate the tangled, and often unsettled, web of fee dispute law. For instance: should the lawyer seek a charging lien or a plenary action? What is the appropriate measure of quantum meruit? Is the lawyer required to bring a brand new action or can the lawyer bring the fee dispute within the underlying case? How does this affect co-counsel? And how does the right to obtain statutory attorneys’ fees affect the outcome? This course will address these questions and more and serve as a helpful primer for lawyers who may be forced to fight for their fees.

This course is co-sponsored by Wolters Kluwer.

Key topics to be discussed:

•   Deciding between a charging lien and a plenary action
•   Understanding federal jurisdiction in fee disputes
•   Assessing the value of quantum meruit in a fee dispute
•   Discussing proper fee sharing arrangements between lawyers

Date / Time: December 6, 2017

•  10:00 am – 12:00 pm Eastern
•  9:00 am – 11:00 am Central
•  8:00 am – 10:00 am Mountain
•  7:00 am – 9:00 am Pacific

Choose a format:

•  Live Video Broadcast/Re-Broadcast: Watch Program “live” in real-time, must sign-in and watch program on date and time set above. May ask questions during presentation via chat box. Qualifies for “live” CLE credit.
•  On-Demand Video: Access CLE 24/7 via on-demand library and watch program anytime. Qualifies for self-study CLE credit. On-demand versions are made available 7 business days after the original recording date and are view-able for up to one year.

Clear

Live Broadcast on December 6, 2017

Tyler Maulsby, Esq. is an associate in the Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility and the Securities Fraud and White Collar Defense practice groups.

In his legal ethics and professional responsibility practice, he regularly represents clients in a wide variety of matters including: legal malpractice, conflicts of interest, lateral transitions, partnership disputes, disqualification motions, and the unauthorized practice of law. He also represents lawyers and law students in disciplinary and admissions proceedings.

As part of the Securities Fraud and White Collar Defense Practice Group, Mr. Maulsby represents clients at all stages of criminal and civil matters at the state and federal levels. Prior to joining Frankfurt Kurnit, Mr. Maulsby was a criminal defense attorney with The Bronx Defenders, where he gained significant trial experience.

Mr. Maulsby currently serves as Secretary of the Committee on Professional Ethics of the New York City Bar Association. He is also a member of the ABA Center for Professional Responsibility, the Association of Professional Responsibility Lawyers, the New York State Bar Association’s Committee on Professional Discipline, and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. He is a regular contributor to the New York Legal Ethics Reporter.

Mr. Maulsby is admitted to practice in New York state courts and federal courts in the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York.


Robert S. Barnett, CPA, Esq., is a founding partner of Capell Barnett Matalon & Schoenfeld LLP, Attorneys at Law. His practice is highly concentrated in the areas of taxation, trusts, estates, corporate and partnership law and charitable planning. His experience includes Surrogate’s Court practice, tax dispute resolution in both Federal and State jurisdictions, and Tax Court representation. Mr. Barnett frequently assists clients in structuring financial transactions and charitable gifts.

Mr. Barnett applies creative and practical solutions to estate and business planning.  He has served on many committees and is a frequent lecturer on numerous aspects of tax and business law. He is a member of the Professional Advisors Committee of the Long Island Community Foundation and of the American Heart Association and is active on both the estate and tax planning committees of the New York State Society of CPAs. Mr. Barnett has written articles on numerous aspects of estate and tax planning and is a frequent contributor to the New York State CPA Journal, The New York Law Journal, and other publications. His articles and lectures encompass a wide variety of topics, including business succession, estate planning, generation-skipping, stock options, effective strategies for removing tax liens, proper utilization of the marital deduction and utilization of partnership elections. Mr. Barnett serves on the Nassau County Bar Association’s Academy of Law and is Co-Chair of the Tax Committee. He is the Vice President and an Executive Board Member of the Nassau Chapter of the New York State Society of CPAs. He is President of the Educational Foundation of the Nassau/Suffolk Chapter of the National Conference of CPA Practitioners and Chairman of the Education Committee.

Mr. Barnett has extensive expertise representing clients with unreported foreign assets, including failure to file FBAR forms. He has advised clients in all facets of the Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program, including penalty minimization strategies and options.

Mr. Barnett received his juris doctor in 1986 from Fordham University, where he graduated cum laude and was a member of the Fordham Law Review.  He graduated magna cum laude from Hofstra University, where he received his Bachelor’s degree in accounting . Mr. Barnett holds a Master’s degree in taxation as the recipient of the highest dean’s award.   Mr. Barnett is admitted to practice law in New York, Virginia and Washington, D.C.

CLE Accreditation:
mylawCLE seeks approval in all states.

CLE 2.00 – AK
CLE 2.00 – AL
CLE 2.00 – AR
CLE 2.00 – AZ
CLE 2.00 – CA
CLE 2.40 – CO
CLE 2.00 – DE
CLE 2.40 – FL
CLE 2.00 – GA
CLE 2.00 – HI

CLE 2.00 – IA
CLE 2.00 – ID
CLE 2.00 – IL
CLE 2.00 – IN
CLE 2.00 – KS
CLE 2.00 – KY
CLE 2.00 – LA
CLE 2.00 – ME
CLE 2.00 – MN
CLE 2.40 – MO

CLE 2.00 – MP
CLE 2.00 – MS
CLE 2.00 – MT
CLE 2.00 – NC
CLE 2.00 – ND
CLE 2.00 – NE
CLE 2.00 – NH
CLE 2.40 – NJ
CLE 2.00 – NM
CLE 2.00 – NV

CLE 2.40 – NY
CLE 2.00 – OH
CLE 2.40 – OK
CLE 2.00 – OR
CLE 2.00 – PA
CLE 2.00 – PR
CLE 2.40 – RI
CLE 2.00 – SC
CLE 2.00 – TN
CLE 2.00 – TX

CLE 2.00 – UT
CLE 2.00 – VA
CLE 2.40 – VI
CLE 2.00 – VT
CLE 2.00 – WA
CLE 2.40 – WI
CLE 2.40 – WV
CLE 2.00 – WY

Accreditation Policy
myLawCLE will seek credit where attending attorneys are primarily licensed for all of its live webinars and live teleconferences, except in states which allow for reciprocity (see reciprocity section below). Credit for CLE in a self-study format is sought for in most states; however, some states do not allow for CLE credit to be earned in a self-study format (see the self-study section below). Many states typically decide whether a program qualifies for MCLE credit in their jurisdiction 4-8 weeks after the program application is submitted. For many live events, credit approval is not received prior to the program. Credit hours granted are subject to approval from each state.

Reciprocity
Additionally, some states allow for credit to be granted on a 1:1 reciprocal basis for courses approved in another mandatory CLE jurisdiction state. This is known as a reciprocity provision and includes the following states: AK, AR, CO, FL, ME, MT, ND, NH, NJ, NY, PR, and SD. myLawCLE does not seek direct accreditation of live webinars or teleconferences in these states.

On-demand CLE
myLawCLE will seek on-demand approval in all states except Virginia and Arkansas (outside reciprocal provisions stated above).


myLawCLE Credit Guarantee
myLawCLE offers a program and credit approval guarantee. If a registered attendee is unhappy with a CLE program they have attended, myLawCLE will offer that attended access to another complimentary CLE or a full refund in order to insure the attendee’s satisfaction.

Additionally, on all online CLE programs application for approval will be made in all states where attending attorneys are primarily licensed in. If a registered attorney does not receive credit from their state for any reason, a full refund will be granted.