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 App. 2005)(unpublished).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
