Mary Cushing Doherty Testified at the PA House Judiciary Committee Informational Meeting on House Bill 380

NORRISTOWN, Pa. (September 30, 2015) – High Swartz family law attorney Mary Cushing Doherty testified for the Pennsylvania Bar Association (PBA) at the Pennsylvania House Judiciary Committee informational meeting on Tuesday, September 29, 2015. The purpose was to explain the reasons to pass House Bill 380 which would reduce the length of time for a no fault divorce based on separation, from two years to one year. Click here to watch the online recording of this meeting. Ms. Doherty, with Maryann Modesti and Arnold Shienvold, Ph.D. outlined the reasons and rationale for PBA’s support of HB 380. Mary referenced for the Judiciary Committee her involvement since 2004 as a member of the Joint State Government Commission Domestic Relations Advisory Committee which has reported to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees over the years.

Mary DohertyMary Cushing Doherty concentrates her practice on all aspects of marital dissolution, including divorce, child custody, spousal support and alimony, pre-marital and marital agreements, complex property division, and service as a private arbitrator. She is a member of the Montgomery County, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and American Bar Associations’ Family Law Sections, and served as chair of the PBA Family Law Section in 1999 – 2000.

Doherty is also active at the state and national level of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, serving as Pennsylvania’s governor. She is a frequent lecturer and author in the field of family law, and has served as course planner for programs sponsored by the PBI, PBA, and Montgomery Bar Association. She earned her J.D. from Villanova University School of Law and her B.A. from the University of Delaware.

Mary Cushing Doherty’s full attorney-profile can be viewed here.

IMG_2415 IMG_2406

How Will Divorce Affect My Business? Will I Lose My Livelihood as Well as My Marriage?

By Mary Cushing Doherty, Esq.

Successfully launching and running a business requires commitment and passion. It can be an exhilarating ride; the pride that comes from building something long lasting is hard to top. However, too often the journey never ends, and it can be all-consuming.

How Will Divorce Affect My Business?

Sometimes, despite the best efforts and intentions, the commitment and passion for one’s business can contribute to strains in other aspects of one’s life, leading to a struggling marriage.

When a person who is facing divorce owns a business, or is a co-owner, the question comes up whether the divorce will force the liquidation of the business. In most cases, the simple answer is “no.” That said, a business will likely be considered a marital asset that will be valued as part of the financial analysis in the divorce.

Assets (less liabilities) owned by both or either spouse during the marriage are generally considered part of the marital estate. This includes savings, real estate, debts and business ventures.

Four exceptions to what is considered marital are:

  • Gifts, Bequests and Inheritances: Any gifts/bequests/inheritances one party receives from a third party, which are kept in separate title, are not considered marital assets and are valued as of receipt. The increase in value is marital.
  • Acquired pre-marriage: An asset owned prior to the marriage which is kept in separate title is not considered marital. The increase in value during marriage is marital.
  • Acquired post-separation: Any asset acquired after separation with non-marital funds is not marital.
  • Protected by a prenuptial agreement: All assets acquired before and in some cases during a marriage can be protected by a well-drafted prenuptial agreements.

When looking at a business, if it was started and built during the marriage the business is considered a marital asset. Businesses began before the marriage, have a non-marital value at date of marriage. If the business grows during the marriage, the increase in value is marital.

If a business is identified as a marital asset, or with some marital component, the marital value of the business will need to be determined if a divorce is initiated. The non-owner spouse has the right to know if it is marketable, if the business has significant assets, if it successfully generates excess income to the owner. In some circumstances, however, a business succeeds due to almost entirely upon the personal goodwill of the owner; in such cases, it may have modest value to distribute. In most cases, the courts want the business to survive the divorce as an asset of the owner spouse, especially where the family has been relying on the business to produce income.

It’s unusual for a court to expect marital partners to become partners in a business interest. While the non-business-owner may have a claim to the value of the business, most judges and masters recognize that making an ex-spouse a partner in a business is a recipe for disaster. Instead, the courts will often accommodate a buyout over time of the non-owner’s economic interest in the business rather than trigger financial hardship for the business owner. The court should seek to mitigate financial strain on both parties and any children of the marriage.

If the non-owner spouse works in the business, the owner should be wary of the spouse/former spouse actively hurting the business. A spouse who calls customers or comes to the office and misbehaves may be found at fault for trying to retaliate against the business owner for personal reasons. This could hurt the value of the asset and the source of future income. If the spouse is employed and engaging in this type of behavior, he/she will be terminated.

Compensation generated from the businesses which is in savings is also considered marital property. Investments and retirement savings accumulated through date of separation will be equitably divided. Future child support and alimony will be based on the owner-spouse’s income. Beware: if the business is valued based on excess earnings, the business owner will argue the non-owner spouse cannot double-dip. If the non-owner is getting the value of the excess earnings in equitable distribution, those excess earnings arguably should be removed from income available for support.

The end of a marriage is stressful enough; the fear of potentially losing one’s livelihood at the same time can be frightening. Additionally, an important consideration is the toll of divorce litigation on one’s ability to keep up the same pace of work. The ability of the business to survive the divorce needs to be evaluated by the owner.

The owner will want to have an advocate who is in tune with the range of possible litigation. If the litigation becomes brutal, the non-owner spouse may doom the business, and the goose that lays the golden eggs.

For more information, please contact Mary Cushing Doherty at (610) 275-0700 or by email at Visit her attorney profile here.

Visit the Family Law page here.

The information above is general: we recommend that you consult an attorney regarding your specific circumstances.  The content of this information is not meant to be considered as legal advice or a substitute for legal representation.

Grab the Popcorn: Top 10 Legal Movies Worth Watching

September 29, 2015By James B. Shrimp, Esq.I have written a number of articles on business and legal concerns for readers – but now it’s time for some fun. Since everyone loves a list, below is what I believe to be the Top Ten Legal Movies post 1970.
  1. A Few Good Men – A movie with a unique crime and the focus of the drama being who is ultimately responsible for the crime. The courtroom scenes are dramatic and fairly realistic. This movie has it all, including great actors: Jack Nicholson, Tom Cruise, Kevin Bacon, and Demi Moore. A fantastic movie, but not for those that “Can’t Handle the Truth!”
  2. My Cousin Vinny – This movie is a rare combination of humor and courtroom drama. Putting the comedy aside, this movie includes good courtroom and cross-examination scenes. And I’ll never forget that a ’64 Buick Skylark does not have positraction – thank you Mona Lisa Vito!
  3. Presumed Innocent – Another movie that has it all. Great actors – Harrison Ford and Raul Julia, originality, dramatic and fairly realistic courtroom scenes, flawed heroes and a memorable twist at the end – “the destroyer is destroyed.” Yikes!
  4. Erin Brockovich – This movie represents accurately that lawyers are more often than not supported by dedicated, intelligent paralegals and staff and it accurately represents that there are bad people/industries out there looking to cover up liability. A great representation of the back room, after hours work that is necessary to successfully represent clients.
  5. Philadelphia – An Oscar winner that took on discrimination and stereotypes related to HIV and AIDS that stands the test of time. A great cast including Tom Hanks, Denzel Washington, Jason Robards, with a story loosely based on a discrimination case actually tried in Philadelphia.
  6. 12 Angry Men (new version) – The new version is nearly as great as the old – minus Henry Fonda. A look into the jury room and how bias and prejudice can affect the deliberation of a jury.
  7. The Verdict – Paul Newman, enough said. But a great movie regarding the redemption of a lawyer and the pursuit of justice in a medical malpractice case.
  8. Chicago – A musical that includes courtroom scenes. It does not get any more original than that. “Find a flask, we’re playing fast and loose and all that jazz…”
  9. Primal Fear – A terrific courtroom thriller with a great twist at the end, staring Richard Gere and Ed Norton. There are not many dramatic cross examinations better than this one.
  10. And Justice for All – Al Pacino, enough said. Pacino is forced to represent a guilty judge in a criminal trial. What lawyer hasn’t wanted to yell at some point in his or her career “You’re out of order! You’re out of order! The whole trial’s out of order!”
Feel free to disagree – this is just one guy’s opinion. Honorable mentions include Michael Clayton, A Civil Action, A Time to Kill, The People v. Larry Flynt, The Insider, and Kramer vs. Kramer.Republished with permission of the Local Living Magazine© 2015 Blue Water Media LLC. All rights reserved. Further duplication without permission is prohibited.

Fall Fantasy Football Frenzy and Federal Income Tax

September 29, 2015

By Stephanie A. Henrick, Esq.

Whether DeMarco Murray’s running game has plummeted your stats or Saquon Barkley’s stunning athleticism shot you into first place, any winnings you receive from playing Fantasy Football are considered taxable income by the IRS.


Under the Internal Revenue Code Section 183, you (the taxpayer) will be taxed as a hobbyist because you are participating in an activity that is not engaged in for profit, and your deductions will be limited to the extent of your gains. Which means that you may be able to deduct your expenses ($1,000 entrance fee) against your $2,000 win over Straight Outta Gronkton. But, if you lose or don’t report your winnings, then you can’t deduct your expenses against your other “day job” income, unless you can make a successful argument that this is a business activity and not a hobby.

Convincing the IRS that you have a bona fide profit motive in playing Fantasy Football and therefore not subject to the restrictions of Section 183, seems like a futile exercise. Courts look at multiple factors and individual circumstances to determine profit motive, not just net income. However, the fact that Fantasy Football was excluded from the treatment of gambling income under the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, because the “powers-that-be” convinced Congress that it is a game of skill, not chance, may weigh in your favor. Additionally, statistics do show that the average player spends about nine hours a week participating in Fantasy Football. Realistically, I don’t think the IRS will agree that your participation in Watt me Whip Watt me JJ is a business activity.

Since you will most likely be subject to the limitations of Section 183, I suggest that you keep track of all of your winnings, losses and expenses, whether you’re playing on FanDuel, DraftKings or in Joe’s basement. In addition, you should report all of your winnings (cash and noncash prizes), regardless of whether or not you received a 1099-Misc. If you itemize your deductions, you may be able to offset your miscellaneous hobby income. And if anyone gives you grief for the amount of time you spend playing Fantasy Football, just tell them you are trying to establish a bona fide profit motive for tax purposes.

Termination of Child Support in Pennsylvania

September 25, 2015

By Melissa M. Boyd, Esq.

When a family is going through divorce, the court aims to keep the children’s best interests in mind, as do most attorneys. There are legal orders in place to protect children— custody orders seek structure for children’s new living arrangements and child support orders ensure the noncustodial parent contributes financially so the children’s lifestyle is sustained as much as possible.

Child support payments contribute to a variety of expenses that fall to the custodial parent. These can include medical fees, school and activity expenses, and food and clothing necessities. These court-ordered payments commonly end when a child reaches the “age of maturity” but do parents know exactly when that is? And, are they adequately preparing for the termination of the order?

The end of an orderchild support order

The end of the child support order often catches parents by surprise, especially considering the order may have been in place for years. State law dictates when support orders should end. Most states, like Pennsylvania, will end the child support order when the child reaches the “age of maturity” which is typically when the child turns 18 or graduates high school – whichever comes later. In some states the “age of maturity” is 21.

The order can be terminated earlier if the child becomes emancipated. Through a court process, a child can be emancipated because they are able to support themselves. This can coincide with the child leaving the home, joining the military, or getting married. Alternatively, the order can be extended past age 18 or 21 to provide support while the child is in college or in cases where the child has special needs.

How to prepare

Even though the order may include a termination date, it does not end automatically. You must take specific steps to terminate the agreement. Until the order is actually terminated, the noncustodial parent is obligated to continue payment.

To anticipate the termination, the parent making payments should file a modification petition a few months in advance of the expected end date. In cases with multiple children, this must be done individually for each child.

What if money is still owed?

When the time comes to terminate a child support order, there may be a past due balance of payments. Money that is still owed is referred to as “arrears.” Arrears are owed even after the support order is legally terminated. Best practice is to try to get the arrear balance reduced prior to termination. The court will typically provide options such as making lump payments when possible, or reducing the amount of each payment to prevent skipping.

Custodial parents may land in a situation where they need legal assistance to collect the balance. In these cases, they may have to file a separate civil action to recover the credit.

Try as we might to stop time, children eventually grow up. In the rush that goes along with experiencing a big moment in your child’s life – turning 18, getting married, or graduating and going off to college or the military – pausing to accomplish your associated parental duties is just as important as taking time to enjoy the moment. For divorced parents, determining the future of the child support order is likely one of these duties. As a both a parent and a family law attorney, I hope this article provides guidance to separated parents.

Commercial Lease Agreements: Why You Need A Lawyer

September 24, 2015

By Kevin Cornish, Esq.

Small business owners spend significant time and money preparing to open and operate their businesses.  From market research to obtaining necessary equipment to securing inventory, the tasks are endless.  Small business owners must also secure facilities from which to operate.  Often, this means renting commercial space from a landlord.  Unfortunately, this aspect of operating a small business frequently is not given the appropriate amount of attention.

commercial lease

Here is how the process typically goes: the small business owner spends time researching appropriate locations in which to operate.  When the owner finds a suitable location, the owner inquires with the landlord about availability.  Understandably, owners focus their negotiations around the monthly rental amount and length of the lease agreement.  If the parties agree on these issues, the landlord will often present the business owner with a lease agreement that contains numerous provisions and legal issues over many single spaced pages.  Not wanting to incur additional costs, business owners often spend little time reviewing, negotiating, and understanding all of the terms of the lease agreement that the landlord has provided.

Landlord lease agreements often contain terms that are very favorable to the landlord and not as favorable to the tenant.  Commercial lease agreements also contain provisions that small business owners without legal training may not fully understand.  These issues can include confession of judgment, common area maintenance and how such charges are calculated, which party is responsible for repairs and improvements, legal options for the landlord and tenant in the event of a breach, legal requirements of the parties to act upon a breach, insurance requirements, indemnity and releases, subletting and assignment, acceleration of rent, and many more.

Many issues within a commercial lease agreement may not seem important at the outset of the lease, but could prove costly in the long term.  Frequently, the first time small business owners have an attorney review a lease is after an issue arises.  By that time, with the lease agreement signed, nothing can be done to change the lease terms.  After consulting with an attorney, business owners are surprised at what the lease means or the terms that are included.

While small business owners may not view legal review and negotiation of the lease agreement as an important investment, it can often prove indispensable in the future.  Small businesses can often secure more favorable terms with negotiations prior to signing of the lease.  At a minimum, having an attorney review and explain the lease terms greatly assists the business owner in understanding options and ramifications.

It is true that legal review of a lease agreement is another startup cost for a small business.  However, the benefits of reviewing the lease agreement before signing it are significant and can prevent headaches in the future. And that’s usually money well spent.

For more information feel free to contact Kevin Cornish at (610) 275-0700 or by email at Visit his attorney profile here.

The information above is general: we recommend that you consult an attorney regarding your specific circumstances.  The content of this information is not meant to be considered as legal advice or a substitute for legal representation.

Use of Credit Reports in Hiring Decisions

September 17, 2015

By James B. Shrimp, Esq.

This week Senator Elizabeth Warren penned an op-ed, with Representative Steve Cohen, wherein she opined that a person’s credit history has no correlation to his or her ability to succeed in the workplace. Senator Warren asserts, with no supporting data, that “many” employers are unfairly shutting the door on applicants with less than stellar credit, and she calls it discrimination. Warren and Cohen then baldly accuse employers to “discriminating against people who have fallen on hard times.”

equal employment

To address this “discrimination,” Senator Warren and Representative Cohen have re-introduced the Equal Employment for All Act (EEAA) which would amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) to prohibit employers from requiring prospective employees to disclose their credit history as part of the job application process. Given that Senator Warren and Representative Cohen see this as a matter of discrimination, there should be no exceptions to the rule – as there are no exceptions for other protected classes, such as race, sex, national origin, religion and disability, among others.

But, the EEAA contains exceptions. Specifically, if the job requires a national security clearance or if a credit report is required by state or local law, a credit background check is permitted.  This begs the question, why is a credit background report relevant to a national security clearance, but not to an employee that handles company checks or has access to other’s confidential financial information.

Senator Warren and Representative Cohen’s opinion might be more compelling if (1) there were no exceptions, or (2) employers utilized credit reports to judge a candidates ability to perform, or (3) employers abused the right provided to them in the FCRA.  However, employers do not use credit reports to judge ability, nor do employers abuse the right.

In a 2012 survey of human resource professionals, the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) found that 53% of employers DO NOT conduct credit background checks. Of the 47% that do conduct credit background checks:

  • 58% are conducted after a contingent job offer,
  • 33% are conducted after an interview.

Thus, over 90% of the time an employer has made a decision to hire, or feels positive about the candidates’ ability to perform the job. Of the 47% of employers that conduct credit background checks, they do so to reduce/prevent theft and embezzlement (45%) and to reduce legal liability for negligent hiring (22%). It’s clear that employers are not conducting credit background checks to measure the potential for performance.

Moreover, of the 47% of employers that conduct credit background checks, 80% have hired a job candidate whose credit report contained negative information, in part, because 92% of employers permitted the candidate to explain the negative information, negating the op-ed’s concern that employees cannot explain errors to the potential employer.

A credit background check is one of many valuable tools employers utilize to evaluate the benefit and risk of hiring a candidate. It is clear that employers in the United States are being prudent to not overly utilize credit background checks. It is equally clear that employers primarily utilize the credit checks to evaluate candidates who have applied for positions involving financial responsibilities, executive positions and those with access to highly confidential information.  Frankly, these are some of the very reasons why the Federal government would run a credit background check on candidates for positions requiring a security clearance.

The Equal Employment for All Act is an unnecessary bridge too far.

For more information feel free to contact James B. Shrimp at (610) 275-0700 or by email at Visit his attorney profile here.Visit the firm’s Employment Law page here.The information above is general: we recommend that you consult an attorney regarding your specific circumstances.  The content of this information is not meant to be considered as legal advice or a substitute for legal representation.

The Confrontation Clause: Should a 3 Year Old Have to Take the Stand?

September 15, 2015Lawyer or not, we’ve all learned the Amendments to the United States Constitution. The Sixth Amendment states that “in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to be confronted with the witness against him.” This has come to be known as the “confrontation clause” and it means that all defendants facing charges have the basic right to face those witnesses testifying against them, and to dispute the testimony. This amendment was part of the Bill of Rights and has been in effect since 1791. However, it has been challenged.confrontation clause childIn March, the Supreme Court of the United States presided over a case, Ohio v. Clark, in which the defendant, Darius Clark, was ultimately convicted of child abuse of his girlfriend’s three-year old son. The incident was reported by the child’s teacher when the child came to school with a black eye. In the case, the teacher served as a prosecution witness but the child never testified. Does this mean that the defendant was denied his basic right to face his accuser?In Pennsylvania, teachers are required to report to the Pennsylvania Child Line and Abuse Registry any instances of child abuse or suspected child abuse they discover. This responsibility is called being a “mandated reporter.” In this case, Clark’s defense attorneys argued that this responsibility makes the teacher an agent of law enforcement for purposes of the Confrontation Clause. If the teacher is considered an agent of law enforcement, they should then be prohibited from testifying to out-of-court statements. They also argued that any statements the child made to the teacher regarding the abuse should qualify as “testimonial” statements awarding the defendant the right to face the child as his accuser. The defense argued that they should have had the opportunity to interview the child, albeit benevolently.The prosecution argued that the responsibility to report, which is also mandatory of teachers in Ohio, does not make the teacher an agent of the government.Regardless, the conviction seems to go against a prior decision in the 2004 Crawford v. Washington case which decided that the prosecution cannot use out-of-court statements unless the witness who originally gave them is unavailable and the defense had a previous opportunity to cross-examine the witness. In this case, does the age of the victim make them an unfit witness, and is that the same as being “unavailable?” Even so, the Clark defense should still have been able to interview the child and test their reliability at some point, which they were unable to do.This case opens the door for the Supreme Court justices to look at where to draw the line for the Confrontation Clause. Child abuse cases can be complicated and are always difficult and traumatic for the young victim. In the case of a three year old victim, if that victim is too young to take the stand and be a competent witness, does that mean that victim does not get justice? Isn’t there a middle ground between bringing a three year old into court and relying on hearsay testimony? As a long time child advocate I have seen cases in Pennsylvania where children have been allowed to testify by video, in the court house, in a separate room. The defendant had the opportunity to cross examine and “confront” the accuser, and the trauma to the child was mitigated.The reality is child witnesses are not adult witnesses. Due to the changes in the Child Protective Services Law, more and more child abuse cases are being reported in Pennsylvania. Courts will need to be cognizant of the differences between child and adult witnesses. There need to be alternatives to live, in court testimony that do not violate the Constitutional rights of the accused. For more information feel free to contact us at (610) 275-0700 or by email at the firm’s Family Law page here.The information above is general: we recommend that you consult an attorney regarding your specific circumstances.  The content of this information is not meant to be considered as legal advice or a substitute for legal representation.

Right of First Refusal – Don’t Take It Lightly

September 9, 2015

By Arnold Heller, Esq.

It is not unusual for a landlord to grant a tenant a right of first refusal to purchase the landlord’s property if the landlord decides to sell. While this may be just the additional incentive needed to persuade a prospective tenant to sign a lease, rights of first refusal are property rights and can become a burden for the landlord/owner.

A “right of first refusal,” or “ROFR,” gives the tenant the right to match an outsider’s offer when the landlord/property owner puts its property up for sale. There are pitfalls that can hamstring landlords, and here are just a few of them that you should watch out for:

Right of First Refusal ROFR

Corporate mergers. Can property burdened by a right of first refusal be included  in the sale or merger of the owner? In one Pennsylvania case (Seven Springs Farm, Inc. v. Croker), the Superior Court decided that shareholders in a cash-out merger were not bound by first refusal rights held by other shareholders, finding that the merger was a corporate act, while the right of first refusal was only a shareholders’ act. This decision was affirmed by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, but drew sharp criticism from justices on both Courts and pointed up the importance of specifically addressing this potential scenario.

Package deals. Sometimes an owner who has granted a right of first refusal will decide to sell multiple properties at one time, including the burdened property. Often ROFR agreements won’t address this situation, even though it is not particularly unusual.

The Pennsylvania Superior Court has ruled (in Boyd & Mahoney v. Chevron) that as long as the tenant meets the conditions provided in the ROFR, an owner cannot nullify the right by packaging the property for sale together with other assets. In that case, Chevron purchased a gas station, and as part of the deal gave the seller a right of first refusal. Subsequently, Chevron sold the gas station to Cumberland Farms as part of a larger transaction that included real estate across the country. The court ruled that the right of first refusal was a valuable property right that Chevron had to honor by offering the property to the original owner at market value of $158,000. Then the Court went even farther, upholding the trial court’s award of damages against Chevron of more than $500,000! In a more recent case (Hahalyak v. A. Frost, Inc.), the Superior Court applied the same reasoning to prevent a landlord from circumventing the tenant’s right of first refusal by offering a package deal that included the ROFR premises to another tenant, conditioned upon the other tenant’s surrender of its existing space.

Gifts. Property owners will sometimes “gift” property to a friend, loved one, or colleague. If no money changes hands, it would be unreasonable for a party holding a right of first refusal to take advantage of this type of transaction. However, in such a case a new question arises – should the right of first refusal survive the transfer to the new owner? Proper drafting of the ROFR can address this situation.

Exercise of the Right. With a right of first refusal, the tenant gets to make a decision after the landlord has received an offer. The landlord does not want to have to wait too long for the tenant to respond, because it might jeopardize the sale of the property to the outside buyer. For the same reason, the landlord will want the tenant to quickly sign an agreement of sale and post a deposit for the property. While these risks can be mitigated by proper drafting, an alternative approach is to grant the tenant a right of first offer. In this scenario, the landlord/property owner gives the tenant the right to make an offer on the property before the owner takes the property to market. This can also help the landlord determine whether there is a viable market for the property, and alleviate potential snags with the eventual buyer.

For property owners, bestowing a right of first refusal often seems like a harmless way to close a deal and provide a potential exit strategy. But property owners must always remember that without proper attention, giving your tenant a right of first refusal may come back and bite you.

For more information, feel free to contact Arnold Heller at (610) 275-0700 or by email at Visit his attorney profile here.

Visit the firm’s Real Estate Law page here.

The information above is general: we recommend that you consult an attorney regarding your specific circumstances.  The content of this information is not meant to be considered as legal advice or a substitute for legal representation.