Subscribe

Associate
215-230-7500, ext. 121
lbothwell@ammlaw.com

bio-icon-linkedinLINKEDIN PROFILE

bio-icon-vcardCONTACT CARD

Practice Groups

Education

  • Boston University School of Law, J.D., 2015
  • The Pennsylvania State University, B.A., History, Political Science & Latin American Studies, 2008

Bar Admissions

  • Pennsylvania
  • Massachusetts
  • United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania

Reprinted with permission from the June 21st edition of The Legal Intelligencer. (c) 2021 ALM Media Properties. Further duplication without permission is prohibited.

Since its enactment in 1986, employers have used the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 19 U.S.C. §1030 (“CFAA”) to vindicate violations of the employer’s workplace policies regarding use of computers, email accounts, and other electronic information by departing employees. The CFAA inevitably appeared as a claim in an employer’s complaint to address such conduct as downloading information from work computers and email accounts, or wiping devices and removing valuable information. The CFAA potentially provided relief where the information taken might not meet the definition of a “trade secret” in the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act (18 U.S.C. §1986), or Pennsylvania’s Uniform Trade Secrets Protection Act (12 P.S. § 5302). Further, and perhaps providing leverage for employers, the CFAA provided a criminal remedy for such violations. In Van Buren v. United States, 592 U.S. ___ (June 3, 2021), the United States Supreme Court may have eliminated that claim for wronged employers.

The CFAA prohibits intentionally accessing a computer with or without authorization or exceeding authorized access of a computer. The Act defines “exceeding authorized access” as accessing a computer with authorization and using that access to obtain information in the computer to which the individual is not otherwise entitled. The CFAA imposes criminal liability for violations of these prohibitions. It also imposes civil liability through a private cause of action if there is “damage,” meaning, an impairment to the integrity or availability of data, a program, a system or information.

Wednesday, July 21 2021 13:50

Pandemic Challenges for Employers

Written by Patricia Collins

Reprinted with permission from Lower Bucks Chamber of Commerce Outlook Magazine, July/August 2021 Edition

The pandemic changed the workplace dramatically, and perhaps permanently. COVID called upon employers to adapt to remote work with very little notice and preparation. Employers then adapted their offices and workspaces to allow employees to work safely in their facilities with masks and social distancing. And then, just as quickly, CDC modified its masking guidance. Employers are challenged to comply with changing guidelines and existing laws and a very competitive job market. Employers must consider new masking guidelines, vaccination mandates and remote work options, as well as the laws that apply to those considerations.

When the pandemic started, CDC guidelines presented a simple rule: In-person workplaces should require employees to wear masks, unless there was a health reason that prevented an employee from doing so. If an employee had a health reason not to mask, the employer could comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, by accommodating the employee who provided medical documentation of the health issue. The CDC recently changed its guidance to state that vaccinated people do not need to wear masks, and this is where it gets complicated.

Elizabeth Fineman, Family Law attorney and Partner with Antheil Maslow & MacMinn, LLP in Doylestown, participated in a Pennsylvania Bar Association Family Law Section Webcast on July 15 - 16.  Ms Fineman was one of the instructors for the program entitled "PFA in Real Time: From Interview to Courtroom". The PBA offered this continuing legal education program at their summer meeting,  The Family Law Section program speakers included experienced well known family law practitioners, as well as Judges and experts in a variety of fields. 

Elizabeth Fineman concentrates her practice on domestic relations matters and handles a variety of issues, including divorce, child support, alimony/spousal support, marital taxation, equitable distribution and child custody matters. She has handled many high-income support cases involving an intricate knowledge of both family law and complex financial issues.

Antheil Maslow & MacMinn, is pleased to announce that Melanie J. Wender has joined the firm’s growing Family Law practice group. Ms. Wender focuses her practice exclusively in all aspects of divorce and family law in Bucks, Montgomery, and Philadelphia counties. She is experienced in all issues surrounding the complexities of a divorce, such as equitable distribution, custody, spousal support, child support, and settlement agreements. Ms. Wender has successfully resolved complex custody cases ranging from unmarried same-sex couples to custody agreements between long-distance parents. She is also experienced in adoption issues and has assisted many clients in making this life-changing process as seamless and smooth as possible, allowing the family to focus on welcoming their new child.

Antheil Maslow & MacMinn, LLP is proud to announce that seven of our attorneys have been selected for inclusion again this year in the 2021 Thomson Reuters Super Lawyers and Rising Stars listing. Each year, no more than 5 percent of the lawyers in the state are selected by Super Lawyers to receive this honor.  Super Lawyers, a Thomson Reuters business, is a rating service of outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have attained a high degree of peer recognition and professional achievement. 

Three Partners of the firm were selected to the 2021 Super Lawyers List: Jessica A. Pritchard, Family Law, who was also selected for the Top 50: 2021 Women Pennsylvania Super Lawyers List”; Michael W. Mills, Business, Estates & Trusts & Tax; and Peter J. Smith, Business, Real Estate, Estates & Trusts and Nonprofit Law.

Four AMM attorneys were selected to the 2021 Pennsylvania Rising Stars list: Partner Elizabeth Fineman, Family Law; Stephanie Shortall, Corporate, Real Estate and Trust & Estates; Melanie J. Wender, Family Law and Elaine Yandrisevits, Estate Planning and Administration, with a focus on special needs trust planning.


For more information about Super Lawyers' methodologies, visit www.SuperLawyers.com.

Associate
215-230-7500, ext. 161
mwender@ammlaw.com

bio-icon-linkedinLINKEDIN PROFILE

bio-icon-vcardCONTACT CARD

Practice Groups

Education

  • B.A., cum laude, Kenyon College, 2006
  • J.D., Villanova University School of Law, 2011

Bar Admissions

  • Pennsylvania
  • New Jersey

 

Monday, May 10 2021 12:45

NAVIGATING THE NEW COBRA SUBSIDY

Written by Patricia Collins

 

Reprinted with permission from the April 16th edition of The Legal Intelligencer. (c) 2021 ALM Media Properties. Further duplication without permission is prohibited.

The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA), among other significant items, imposed new obligations for employers pursuant to the Consolidated Omnibus Reconciliation Act (“COBRA”). Specifically, ARPA requires employers to provide COBRA premium subsidies to certain employees from April 1, 2020 through September 30, 2021. The requirement comes with complicating definitions, retroactivity provisions, and new forms, creating a temporary compliance issue for employers. On April 7, 2021, the United States Department of Labor issued Model Notices and “FAQ’s” to assist with these compliance issues.

The COBRA subsidy is available from April 1, 2021 to September 30, 2021 to “assistance eligible individuals,” that is, individuals who are eligible for COBRA coverage as a result of an involuntary termination or a reduction in hours. The Act specifically excludes individuals who voluntarily terminate their employment. “Assistance eligible individuals” are not required to pay their COBRA premiums from April 1, 2021 through September 30, 2021. The employer or plan to whom the individual would normally pay premiums is entitled to a Medicare tax credit for the amount of the premium assistance. There is no guidance from the Department of Labor or the Internal Revenue Service regarding these tax credits.

 

Antheil Maslow & MacMinn, LLP partner Susan Maslow will moderate a panel CLE discussion: Model Contract Clauses in International Supply Contracts to Protect U.N. Acknowledged Human Rights: Review And Critique Of Version 2.O , Tuesday, April 20, 2021 during the American Bar Association (ABA) Business Law Section’s Virtual Spring Meeting. 

Ms. Maslow is Vice Chair of the ABA Working Group formed to draft human rights protections in international supply contracts.  The group’s 2021 Report and Model Contract Clauses, Version 2.0 (MCCs 2.0) are now finalized and can be found on the ABA Center for Human Rights site.  The MCCs 2.0 are one of several initiatives within the Business Law Section’s implementation of the ABA Model Principles on Labor Trafficking and Child Labor. The Model Contract Clauses will be thoroughly discussed at the CLE.

For over 30 years, Ms. Maslow has concentrated her practice primarily in general corporate transactional work and finance documentation in the areas of Business Transactions, Business Law, Private Finance, Real Estate, Contracts, and Non-Profit Law. She has enjoyed assisting entrepreneurial individuals and privately-held companies in their efforts to structure and implement a great variety of business transactions, including stock and asset acquisitions, banking negotiations, mergers, secured and unsecured financing, real estate and business acquisitions and leases, capital arrangements for hospitals and other health care providers, distributorships, software services and license arrangements and business separations and dissolutions. She received her law degree from Temple University cum laude in 1983 after graduating from Rutgers University (B.A. 1978). She is a member of the Pennsylvania and New Jersey Bar Associations.

 Ms. Maslow can be reached at smaslow@ammlaw.com or 215.230.7500 ext. 119.

Model Contract Clauses to Protect Workers in International Supply Chains, Version 2.0

A working group formed under the American Bar Association (ABA) Business Law Section has announced a revised set of model contract clauses for international supply chains. The 2021 Report and Model Contract Clauses, Version 2.0 (MCCs 2.0) from the Working Group to Draft Human Rights Protections in International Supply Contracts are now finalized and can be found on the ABA Center for Human Rights site.  The MCCs 2.0 are one of several initiatives within the Business Law Section’s implementation of the ABA Model Principles on Labor Trafficking and Child Labor. The MCCs 2.0 are offered as a practical, contractual tool to assist inside and outside corporate counsel in efforts to reflect their clients’ commitment to stated human rights policies and desire to abide by international human rights soft and evolving hard law. Given the likely European Union and United Kingdom implementation of mandatory human rights due diligence, the mounting number of Withhold Release Orders in US ports, and growing investor concern with respect to environmental, social and governance (ESG) liability, the Model Contract Clauses should be of interest to all companies with complex supply chains and those that provide such companies legal services. Designed as a modular, practical tool for corporate counsel, the 2021 MCCs 2.0 are the first model contract clauses to implement “human rights due diligence” obligations in supply contracts. They attempt to integrate the principles contained in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (the “UNGPs”) and the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct into international contracts. The MCCs translate these principles into contractual obligations that require buyer and supplier to cooperate in protecting human rights and make both parties responsible for the human rights impact of their business relationship.