News (All)

Liability for Linking to Copyrighted Material

Posted: August 26th, 2015

Tags: ,

Photo courtesy of PICJUMBO. By Viktor Hanacek
Photo courtesy of PICJUMBO. By Viktor Hanacek

These days, it is quite easy to provide links to other website’s content from your own.  Generally, linking to another website does not infringe the copyrights of the site.  However, different kinds of linking can give raise to different issues and may expose you to liability for copyright infringement.

Deep Link:  A deep link is any link that directs a user beyond the home page of another website.  This type of linking generally does not constitute copyright infringement.  However, there could be liability if you know or had reason to know that the work you are linking to was infringing and encouraged it.

Inline Linking:  A line link is the actual display of another site’s content on your own.  This involves embedding a line of HTML on your site.  An example would be embedding a YouTube video on your site.  Although there is not clear consensus on this issue, the majority view in the courts is that inline linking does not give rise to copyright infringement.  The exception is if you know or had reason to know the work clearly infringes somebody’s copyright.

Framing:  Framing is feature that allows a user to view contents of your website while it is framed by information from another site.  This involves using HTML code to pull content form different sources.  Instead of taking the user to the linked website, the information from that website is imported into the original page and displayed in a frame.   The case law on framing is not clearly developed, but a framer is more likely to be found liable of copyright infringement if the users are confused about the association between the two sites and if the framed material was modified without authorization.

The best way to avoid any risk of liability for copyright infringement is obtain permission or use disclaimers.   A simple linking agreement with the linked site is the simplest method to avoid any issues.  However, if you are unable to obtain permission, a prominently displayed disclaimer may reduce the likelihood of legal issues.  Although not a guarantee, such disclaimer may be taken into consideration by the courts.

The information contained in this article is provided for informational purposes only and is not and should not be construed as legal advice on any subject matter. The firm provides legal advice and other services only to persons or entities with which it has established an attorney-client relationship.

Medicaid Providers: Keep Your Money. Prepare For an OMIG Audit.

Posted: August 26th, 2015

Tags:

medical-563427_1280Governor Cuomo announced that New York recovered a record-breaking $851 for the Medicaid program in 2013, which led the nation.[1]  Lately, Medicaid providers have been receiving audit letters suggesting that collections will pick up again. New York’s chief Medicaid collection agent is the Office of the Medicaid Inspector General (“OMIG”), and this agency brandishes its auditing power like the Holy Lance of Longinus.  I had the privilege and good fortune to win a reversal of a $2.1 million OMIG audit finding against a client following a hearing in recent years,[2] but such results are not common.  New York has amassed considerable resources to combat fraud, waste, and abuse in the Medicaid program, and as a result a provider facing audit may feel like the Spartans at Thermopylae.

Medicaid providers who want to keep their money need to understand the OMIG audit process, and they need to work with counsel familiar with that process.  Three mistakes most Providers make when faced with an OMIG audit include:

  1. They begin communicating with auditors themselves, thinking that getting an attorney involved will annoy or anger the auditors. Providers who make this mistake often make admissions to auditors that will plague them in all future proceedings.  Having an attorney take over the communications at the beginning reduces the chance a provider will make harmful admissions, and it offers the opportunity to identify potential trouble areas early.
  1. They fail to ask for the auditors’ sampling plan at the beginning. Early disclosure offers a provider the opportunity to attack the overpayment extrapolation that can significantly increase what a provider will have to pay back.  Litigation attacking extrapolated audit findings is most effective when the provider can show that OMIG’s sampling plan is flawed.
  1. They fail to preserve the audit record. An attorney can create an audit record that will facilitate litigation later.   Too many times, providers fail to document records that they turn over to auditors, and they fail to preserve communications.  These failures make it difficult later to attack audit findings that erroneously claim a provider failed to cooperate or to provide records.  Any failure to provide records or cooperate results in audit findings demanding a refund of all reimbursements for the services at issue.

OMIG audits are governed by 18 NYCRR §§ 517.1 et. seq., and they often begin with a letter notification.  Providers should retain counsel as soon as they receive this initial notification.  Auditors introduce themselves in an entrance interview and outline the scope of the audit.

An audit usually focuses on 100 to 200 identified records.  These records are called the “sampling frame,” and the auditors will later extrapolate the error rate found in the sampling frame to calculate the total overpayment they will demand back from the provider. Following a Draft Audit Report detailing any overpayment findings,[3] the provider may submit written objections.  The audit concludes with a Final Audit Report,[4] detailing final overpayment findings.

OMIG calculates overpayments utilizing a statistical method called a mean per unit point estimate.  This method produces stratified findings expressed in confidence levels.  A typical report could express its finding that the mean per unit point estimate of the amount overpaid is $2,200,000.  The lower strata in the findings is called the lower confidence limit, which in this example could be $1,975,000.  OMIG’s report will say it is 95% certain that the actual amount of the overpayment is greater than the lower confidence limit.

Armed with this hi-low range, OMIG offers to settle for the lower confidence limit.  However, if the provider chooses to exercise its right to a hearing challenging OMIG’s findings,[5] then OMIG will seek to prove at the hearing that the mean per unit point estimate, the higher number, is the actual overpayment amount.

In audits with smaller overpayment findings, the incentive to settle is much stronger.  For example, I once had a client whose mean per unit point estimate was approximately $400,000, and the lower confidence limit was approximately $200,000.  This provider settled because if it challenged findings at a hearing and lost, it risked doubling its liability.

18 NYCRR § 519.1 et seq. govern the hearings challenging OMIG audits.  Hearsay is admissible, and OMIG’s own records are essentially self-authenticating.[6]  The provider bears the burden of proof to show that OMIG’s audit findings are wrong.[7]  This framework makes an OMIG hearing resemble a star chamber, and hearing success for the provider often relies upon avoiding the mistakes outlined above during the audit.  Counsel can help providers avoid making the three big mistakes outlined above, and those who go it alone in an audit often do so at their peril.

 

[1] http://www.governor.ny.gov/press/02032014-medicaid-recoveries
[2] http://www.health.ny.gov/health_care/medicaid/decisions/docs/christian_ambulette.pdf
[3] 18 NYCRR § 517.5
[4] 18 NYCRR § 517.6
[5] 18 NYCRR § 519.4
[6] See, e.g. 18 NYCRR §519.18(e) and (f)
[7] 18 NYCRR § 519.18

The information contained in this article is provided for informational purposes only and is not and should not be construed as legal advice on any subject matter. The firm provides legal advice and other services only to persons or entities with which it has established an attorney-client relationship.

Keeping Your Inheritance in a Divorce

Posted: August 26th, 2015

By: Martin Glass, Esq. email

Tags:

In past articles I’ve spoken about what documents you need to get rid of or update before, during, or after a divorce.  But what about your assets themselves?  For the happily wed, marriage should be about sharing everything, including gifts or inheritances given by parents, grandparents, or other relatives and friends.

But when a marriage ends in divorce, there usually is no longer any desire to share assets.  Unfortunately, at that point it may be too late to keep inherited assets such as vacation homes, rare collections, cash, and other gifts away from a former partner, even if those assets were never intended to go to that person.

What is considered separate versus marital property can vary, depending on the state in which a couple lives.  In New York, for the asset not to become a “marital asset,” it must be kept separate.  For things like a vacation home, when both partners pay for the upkeep, maintenance and possibly any mortgage on the home, it will quickly turn into a marital asset.

One of the best ways to avoid this problem is with a prenuptial or postnuptial agreement.  This is most often done when one or each of the couple is going into the marriage with their own substantial set of assets.  While not always airtight, agreements can help shield assets such as an inherited business, money, property or a rare art collection should a couple end up in divorce court.  The agreement usually states that each spouse will forgo his or her rights to any inheritance or major gifts given to the other partner before or during the marriage.

It also states what each spouse is bringing into the marriage and that the other spouse has no rights to it.  A prime example would be if one of the spouses is bringing in a family business that’s owned with multiple members of his or her family and wants to make sure that it stays with his or her family.

Of course many people don’t want to go to that extreme, or they receive a gift or inheritance after many years of marriage.  In that case, you need to at least maintain some paperwork showing where the gift or inheritance came from.  A letter from the donor explaining for whom the funds were intended or even a wedding card addressed to just one person also may help.  The more you have to show, the better your claim that it’s not marital property.

If you do get an inheritance, the simplest thing is not to commingle inherited money or other assets.  Do not put it in an account that also includes the other spouse’s funds.  Instead, should put it in a separate bank or investment account.  If it’s separate, you avoid the argument that it was gifted to the other spouse as well.  Of course, if you spend an inheritance while married, in most cases it will be considered gone.  You don’t get reimbursed on divorce because you spent a gift from your grandparents on a wonderful vacation.

Keeping the asset in just one spouse’s name usually works but has its drawbacks.  The biggest one is that your family is now forced into a probate situation upon your death (unless there’s a beneficiary on the account).  It also becomes difficult to pass that asset directly to the children or other family members instead of giving at least part of it to the surviving spouse.

Refinancing a mortgage and adding a spouse’s name to the deed at that time, or completing major renovations with funds that were jointly earned by a couple, could also jeopardize full ownership of a home.  It starts to become a gray area as to who has rights in the property.  As such, the titled owner should cover all renovation and refinancing cost and save documentation that proves it.

Similarly, if a gifted vehicle holds considerable value, as some vintage models do, the beneficiary should make sure only his or her name is on the title and registration and that he or she, not a spouse, is the primary driver.

The use of a trust is a great way to stop any assets from going to your child’s ex in the event of divorce.  You can put almost any asset, whether it’s cash or a vacation house, into a trust.  The asset does not go to that child directly and therefore normally would prevent it from becoming marital property.  A trust can be as broad or specific as someone wants.  You can state who gets to use the assets in the trust and where they go after your children.  Setting up a trust is usually more expensive than just gifting the asset directly, but the benefits almost always outweigh the expense.

The information contained in this article is provided for informational purposes only and is not and should not be construed as legal advice on any subject matter. The firm provides legal advice and other services only to persons or entities with which it has established an attorney-client relationship.

Supreme Court Preview

Posted: August 26th, 2015

Following an action-packed few weeks in June before summer break, the Supreme Court will begin its next session on October 5, 2015.  While the upcoming cases on the docket may not have generated the same attention as the major decisions reached at the end of the last term—when the Court weighed in the constitutional right to same-sex marriage and tax subsidies for the Affordable Care Act, among other headline-grabbing issues—below are summaries of cases we’ll be watching.

October 6, 2015
Ocasio v. United States
Ocasio will address a direct split among the Circuits as to extortion, specifically in the context of public officials.  Baltimore police officer Samuel Ocasio was indicted in connection with a plot to obtain payments in exchange for referrals to an auto repair shop.  The Supreme Court has previously held that a public official violates the federal Hobbs Act by obtaining “a payment to which he was not entitled, knowing that the payment was made in return for official acts.”  Officer Ocasio was convicted of conspiring to violate the Hobbs Act.  On appeal to the Fourth Circuit, he argued that he and the repair shop owners could not be guilty of conspiring to commit extortion because the shop owners were also victims of the conspiracy, and a Hobbs victim must be outside the alleged conspiracy.  The Fourth Circuit affirmed the conviction, but over in the Sixth Circuit, this argument may have prevailed.  The Supreme Court has agreed hear the question: “Does a conspiracy to commit extortion require that the conspirators agree to obtain property from someone outside the conspiracy?”

October 7, 2015
Kansas v. Gleason
A Kansas jury sentenced Sidney Gleason to death on a capital murder charge and life in prison for a variety of other charges including aggravated kidnapping, premeditated murder, and possession of a firearm.  The Kansas Supreme Court vacated the death sentence on the basis that the jury had not been properly instructed regarding how to factor mitigating circumstances into their decision.  The Supreme Court will decide whether the Eighth Amendment requires the affirmative instruction to a jury considering a death sentence that mitigating circumstances “need not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt,” as the Kansas court held, or whether the Eighth Amendment is satisfied by instructions that each juror must individually assess and weigh any mitigating circumstances.

October 13, 2015
Montgomery v. Louisiana
In 2012, the Supreme Court decided in Miller v. Alabama that mandatory sentencing “requiring that all children convicted of homicide receive lifetime incarceration without possibility of parole” violates the ban on cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment.  Following that decision, Henry Montgomery, who has been serving a life sentence in Louisiana since 1963 for a murder committed days after his 17th birthday, asked the state court to correct his sentence.  The trial court denied his motion, as did the Louisiana Supreme Court, citing Louisiana cases holding that Miller was not retroactive.  The Supreme Court is to decide whether Miller applies retroactively to individuals sentenced as juveniles to life in prison without parole.

Sources:

www.supremecourt.gov

Kansas v. Gleason. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 29 July 2015.

Ocasio v. United States. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 12 August 2015.

September 29: Senator Phil Boyle Fundraiser

Posted: August 24th, 2015

boyle_lawn-sign-24x36_NYS_prtPlease join us for a cocktail party in support of Senator Phil Boyle, New York State Senator on Tuesday, September 29th from 5:30 pm – 7:30 pm at our Ronkonkoma office located at 4175 Veterans Memorial Highway, Suite 400, Ronkonkoma, NY 11779.

To RSVP contact vtringone@cmmllp.com or mtussing@gmail.com.  

 

September 30: CMM Exec Breakfast: Execution – the art of getting things done! – NEW LOCATION

Posted: August 22nd, 2015

cmm exec breakfast

PLEASE NOTE THE NEW LOCATION!

September 30, 2015

Execution – the art of getting things done!
Presented by Joe Campolo, Esq.

With the summer behind us and four months left in 2015, it’s time for business leaders to put in the extra effort and make the final push across the finish line.  Join us as Joe Campolo speaks to today’s business leaders, encouraging them to finish the year strong. Following up on his popular “Bleed to Succeed” presentation in which he compels Long Island professionals to set goals and develop plans to reach them, it’s now time to look at the progress you’ve made and what is left to do to complete your plan for 2015.

EVENT DETAILS:

8:30am – 9:00am
Arrival and Breakfast

9:00am – 9:45am
Presenting Speaker

9:45am – 10:00am
Q&A and Discussion

REGISTRATION: All events are FREE but registration is required. Complimentary breakfast will be served.

LOCATION: Courtyard Marriott Ronkonkoma located at 5000 Express Drive South,  Ronkonkoma,  New York  11779. Our meeting will be located in the Fire Island Conference room downstairs.

Nov 10 – Joe Campolo on HIA-LI CEO Panel

Posted: August 16th, 2015

On November 10, 2015, the HIA-LI will be hosting a executive breakfast event entitled, “A CEO’s Perspective: What it Takes to Thrive in the LI Economy.” Joe Campolo will be moderating the panel of CEO’s who are also recipients of the 2016 HIA Business Achievement Awards. Visit hia-li.org for more details.

 

hia ceo 11.10.15

LIBN Q&A with Marc Alessi

Posted: August 14th, 2015

 

Q&A with Marc Alessi

By Joe Kellard, Long Island Business News

Marc Alessi keeps wearing many hats. A former state assemblyman and Long Island Power Authority board member, Alessi helped launch and finance startup companies across various industries, including the biotech, information technology, construction and real estate sectors. He co-founded the investment group Hampton’s Angel Network and is a past executive director of Long Island Angel Network. He helped establish Accelerate Long Island and serves as chairman and founding CEO of its portfolio company, SynchroPET. We spoke to Alessi after he joined the Ronkonkoma-based law firm Campolo, Middleton & McCormick in June as a member of its corporate and real estate practice groups.

 Why did you decide to join forces with Campolo, Middleton & McCormick? I decided to join Campolo, Middleton & McCormick because of their reputation as a firm that is entrepreneurial and flexible when dealing with startup enterprises. It is important to not only service companies that are more established with their needs, but we also need to help companies that are just starting out and are in their infancy. When a company is pre-revenue, you need to give them patient advice to help them grow. Sometimes you need to delay billing so that what little capital a startup has does not just go to initial legal fees. This firm has a track record of finding a way to make things work and to help companies at every stage grow.

How will you assist entrepreneurs of small to midsized companies in your new position with the firm? Entrepreneurs need a broad spectrum of support. An attorney is not just someone who drafts corporate documents or a contract. An attorney in this area needs to intrinsically understand the business and be able to act as a sounding board on a host of issues. So, primarily I act as a trusted adviser to entrepreneurs. Sometimes they call me when they just want to flesh out their thoughts, their long-term planning.

How did you get involved with tech startups? I have always been an entrepreneur and liked starting things, having started my first company at 19 years old: a painting franchise to help put me through school. I hired over 18 employees, ran payroll and taxes and marketing. In college, instead of pledging a fraternity, I started one. I love making something from nothing. However, I turned my attention to politics and, for 10 years, applied the skills of an entrepreneur to the political arena. While serving in the legislature, the consummate entrepreneur in me came out. I gravitated toward policy areas that would help create an incentive for investments in startup enterprises in New York State. I met with venture capitalists, angel investors, and tech transfer personnel at our state’s top research facilities and took their advice on what policies we could put in place at the state level to help grow an entrepreneurial ecosystem on Long Island and across the state. I then realized that I had no interest in staying in politics, and that I needed to get back into the private sector and be hands on in starting businesses, as an entrepreneur and as an attorney.

What are some of the businesses that you’ve helped launch and finance? SynchroPET, In Between Jobs, Buncee, and Grieve Your Taxes have been the most recent. I decided to launch SynchroPET, a biomedical device company that has licensed three patents from Brookhaven National Lab for a new way to build positron emission tomography devices for both small animal and human medical imaging. I raised the angel round of funding and built the team that is now bringing the company’s first devices to market. I don’t take a salary from SynchroPET; my job is to grow the company and increase the value of the company for both our employees and our investors. I still maintain my law practice and a consulting practice, where I help small to midsized companies with the experience I have gained within Long Island’s emerging startup entrepreneurial ecosystem.

Are there changes to laws or regulations that would help Long Island tech startups compete more effectively with their counterparts in New York City? I think there could be some changes at the state level that would benefit the entire ecosystem of our region including New York City, like founder’s tax credits. Instead of competing with New York City, we need to complement New York City. The one thing that every entrepreneur on Long Island needs is greater access to capital.

How has your involvement with various entrepreneurial endeavors made you a better attorney? I have first-hand experience with the everyday obstacles that an entrepreneur has to struggle through. Sometimes an entrepreneur does not need law advice. They just need advice from a good listener who takes the time to understand their business, and has been in their shoes before, as opposed to a service provider looking for more billable hours.

What have you learned as a three-term assemblyman that has helped your legal background? I learned not only how to argue the law, but how to change it. What people don’t realize is that our democracy still works, though of course, it can work better. A group of everyday people who have an issue with a law that is affecting their personal lives, their businesses or their community can band together and create change. I have seen it time and time again, and I have participated in it. It is very empowering.

Tell us about the civil legal services you provide as an adviser to the nonprofit Nassau/Suffolk Law Services. My first experience with Nassau/Suffolk Law Services was as a volunteer when I was attending law school. I realized that there were so many people in our community that did not have access to decent legal representation. Everyone thinks that if you are poor you can get a lawyer appointed to you. But that is only in criminal cases. There are so many people locked into bad situations, whose lives are close to ruin, that have to navigate the legal system alone. Nassau/Suffolk Law Services tries to change that. I joined their board of advisers because of the experience I had as a volunteer, and the need I witnessed as an elected official.

How did you end up working with the East End Arts Council? I became involved with the council first when I served in the state assembly. I felt a number of their programs had a very positive impact on the quality of life in our community, so I did everything that I could to support them. After I left office, they asked me to serve on their board. Now I serve as an adviser; I try to help them operate and fulfill their mission as efficiently as possible while finding new ways to spread the arts to all residents living on Long Island.

http://libn.com/2015/08/11/qa-with-marc-alessi/