Tips & Traps

Tip:
Home Health Service Reimbursement.  If a claim for reimbursement for home health services between spouses is contemplated in an estate, then it is recommended that it be in writing with each spouse represented by separate counsel. A surviving spouse will generally be denied reimbursement from a decedent’s estate for home health services provided to the decedent before death. There is a presumption that services rendered for family members is gratuitous and not reimbursable if they are of a type which members of a family usually and ordinarily render to each other by reason of the family relation. This is especially true for care between spouses. The law presumes that one spouse provides care to the other spouse out of a marital obligation.  This presumption can be overcome in some family situations (e.g., father-daughter) but is more difficult to overcome between spouses.  To overcome the presumption it must be shown that the support was given with the intention of charging for it and that it was accepted with the understanding that it would be paid for. So was the ruling In re the Estate of Oscar Johnson, A04-1344 (Minn. App. 2005)(unpublished).

William Forsberg
Parsinen Kaplan Rosberg & Gotlieb
Minneapolis
wforsberg@parlaw.com 

 

Tip:
Deposing a Client. Preparing your client to give a discovery deposition is actually simple, and falls into two phases.

First, be sure your client understands the facts of the case, and particularly that your client knows the documents at issue.  And be sure you have fully and completely disclosed any requested documents to the other side in advance.  Review your complaint, your interrogatory answers, the medical records, and your client’s tax returns with the client in advance.

Second, teach your client how to be a deponent.  A discovery deposition is totally different than trial testimony.  In discovery, there are only four rules for the client to follow: (1) Tell the truth; (2) Listen to the question; (3) Answer the question (and not some other question that wasn’t asked); and (4) Stop talking. Do your best to dissuade the client who wants to argue the case, prove a point, or follow some other agenda; the four rules are the better path.

Finally, tell the client to stand up for her/himself and not be pushed around.  Be wary of questions beginning with “wouldn’t you agree with me that … .”  Think before agreeing, feel free to disagree, and stand your ground — even after opposing counsel has asked 13 different versions of the same question.  If the client won’t take a stand and defend his/her own position, there isn’t much that you as the attorney can do.

Steve Rufer
Pemberton, Sorlie, Rufer & Kershner
Fergus Falls
srufer@ferguslaw.com

 

Tip:
Client Relations. If you have clients that call several times each week, try some simple tactics to cut down on the amount of time you and your staff must spend while making sure the clients’ needs are met.  Suggest that the client keep a list of questions rather than calling each time a question occurs to him/her.  Remind clients paying an hourly rate that each contact costs them money.  Provide clients with envelopes already addressed to you (and stamped), including an invitation for the client to send you a note once a week or monthly if they have questions, concerns, etc. — and answer them.  Send copies of correspondence to clients with a brief note if necessary telling them what is happening or what this particular document means.  Client comfort makes you look good!

Ruth Harvey
Chesley Kroon Chambers Harvey & Carpenter
Mankato
rharvey@katolaw.com

Tip:
Unemployment Compensation. Although employees who quit their jobs generally are ineligible for unemployment compensation benefits, exceptions exist for those who quit due to sex harassment.  Minn. Stat. §268.095 subd. 1(1) provides that an employee who resigns for “good reason” attributable to the employer’s conduct, is eligible for unemployment benefits. Under Peppi v. Phyllis Wheatley Community Center, 614 N.W. 2d 750 (Minn. App. 2000), an employer’s failure to take timely and adequate action in response to an employee’s complaint about sex harassment can trigger the “good reason” provision.  But a claim for sex harassment that can justify resignation and receive unemployment benefits must satisfy a high threshold. A pair of recent cases concurrently-decided by the Minnesota Court of Appeals reflects this standard. In Anderson v. Shervey Agency, Inc., 2005 WL 1021261 (Minn. App. 2005) (unpublished), a boss’s rude remarks to a woman complementing her appearance were deemed insufficient to justify her resignation and receiving benefits.  Although the statements were “tactless and overly personal,” they were not “so offensive and egregious” to trigger the “good reason” statute. But the appellate court found “good reason” existed for a woman to quit and receive unemployment compensation in Munro Holding LLC v. Cook, 2005 WL 10200884 (Minn. App. 2005) (unpublished), based upon a male boss’s repeated and unwelcome physical contact with a woman employee.  The court deemed the “inappropriate touching” to constitute justifiable grounds to resign and retain eligibility for benefits, even though the conduct of the boss might not merit the “higher standard” for a civil lawsuit for damages.

Marshall H. Tanick
Mansfield, Tanick & Cohen, PA
Minneapolis
mtanick@mansfieldtanick.com