The Benefits of Mediation

HON. EMIL GIORDANO (RET.)

NORRIS MCLAUGHLIN P.A.

While all citizens are entitled to pursue resolutions to their disputes in court, traditional litigation is expensive, emotionally taxing, and unpredictable and yields unstable results.

Additionally, litigated cases can take several years to resolve themselves. While some cases need to be tried in front of a judge or jury, many are tried due to the miscalculation of one of the sides and occasionally both. Mediation provides a chance for the parties to reach a consensus regarding the resolution of their case. Not only is mediation a less costly alternative to litigation, but it is also more flexible, less intimidating, and generally yields a resolution that satisfies both parties. Consider the following advantages of mediation:

It is more economical.

Litigation is very expensive; a sole court appearance can generate up to $10,000 in attorney fees. If your case is taken to trial, the costs accumulated over the entirety of the litigated matter can deplete any recovery that otherwise could be used to put your new life in order. Mediation is much less expensive, with an average overall cost of about $6,000. Since the price is split evenly between the two parties, most people are looking at a cost of about $3,000.

It is rapid and efficient.

Litigation is a long and exhausting process; it often takes up to a year to receive a court resolution. Furthermore, parties can always appeal if they are unhappy with the verdict, so it can take several more years to reach a final resolution. Mediated disputes are typically settled within days, allowing the parties to resolve their cases quickly and proceed with their lives without the burden of waiting for their case to be heard, let alone appealed.

It promotes healthier continuing relationships.

Disputes often arise among people whose relationships must endure over a number of years; in these cases, promoting amicability between the parties is essential. Mediation is effective at addressing both parties' key interests, helping to determine the best possible outcome for both sides, and preventing hostility from infiltrating their future interactions. Additionally, mediation can help promote the cordial dissolution of a relationship, which is virtually unattainable with litigation.

It has a high degree of compliance.

Because mediation is a collaborative means of dispute resolution, it addresses both sides' arguments and wishes. It aims to generate a solution that produces the maximum benefit for both parties. Although mediation offers only a non-binding settlement, the parties are more likely to comply with a mediator's decision than with a jury's verdict since both sides reap the benefits of a resolution founded on common ground. Thus, the mediator's decision is likely to be sustained over time.

It is personally empowering. Mediation gives people the power to negotiate their own settlements, granting them more control over the outcome of their dispute. This makes gains and losses more predictable and permits individuals to employ their personal authority in order to come up with a customized resolution.

It is effective.

Time and time again, mediation has been proven a highly successful method of dispute resolution. Because mediation allows people to exercise their personal influence and have their voices heard, mediators' decisions tend to be honored by the parties over time.

Hon. Emil Giordano (Ret.)

At the heart of it all, we’re more than just lawyers.

We are more than just a collection of lawyers who practice together. We are teammates, colleagues, mentors, and friends committed to a philosophy of service that delivers on promises of quality, integrity, and value. Our clients look to us as their trusted advisors and business partners and we are committed to their success, whether advocating for them in the courtroom, or by providing legal advice and counsel through the course of everyday business. Offering complete legal solutions for individuals, families, and businesses, we do what we love, and we are driven by a common interest: your success. Hon. Emil Giordano (Ret.), Co-Chair of the firm’s Litigation Practice Group, focuses his practice on estate and commercial litigation, and mediation and arbitration. He served as a presiding judge on the Court of Common Pleas of Northampton County, Third Judicial District, from 2004 through 2018. As an arbitrator and mediator, Judge Giordano is certified through Harvard Law School Negotiation Institute in Advanced Mediation and is a Member of the National Academy of Distinguished Neutrals.

We are Norris McLaughlin For more information, please visit www.morethanjustlawyers.com.

TAX FRAUD – The One Time You Should Not Live Like Martha Stewart

SARAH CHARETTE AND R. NICHOLAS NANOVIC GROSS McGINLEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW

Snow is melting, and the flowers are blooming. It is everyone's favorite time of year - tax season. Barry Goldwater once said, "the income tax created more criminals than any other single act of government." The Internal Revenue Service estimates that approximately 83.6% of taxes are actually paid voluntarily and on time each year. The remaining 16.4% amounts to roughly $441 billion of missing tax revenue. When all is said and done, after late payments and enforcement efforts are considered, the "tax gap" is estimated to be $381 billion. So – what should you do if you receive a Notice from the IRS? Panic and start planning the interior design of your prison cell? In most cases, you could be facing civil penalties for failure to pay your taxes. However, in some cases, the IRS may charge you with civil tax fraud (IRC §6663), criminal tax fraud (IRC §7206), and/or tax evasion (IRC §7201).

Civil Tax Fraud: So How Much Do I Owe?

For those of us who need a calculator to figure out the tip on your restaurant tab - the penalty for civil tax fraud is 75% of the portion of the underpayment that is due to fraud. In other words, if you report and pay $20,000 of taxes, but IRS discovers that you owe an additional $10,000 of taxes that were not reflected on the tax return due to fraud, then your fraud penalty would be $7,500 – in addition to paying the $10,000 in taxes you still owe. underpayment of tax and that the underpayment is due to fraud. Under these circumstances, fraud requires actual, intentional wrongdoing and the specific purpose to evade a tax believed to be owing. Because a person's intent can be difficult to establish on its face, courts have inferred fraudulent intent from various "badges" of fraud. In contrast to the accolades of a Girl Scout, these "badges" include: (1) understating income, (2) maintaining inadequate records, (3) failing to file tax returns, (4) providing implausible or inconsistent explanations of behavior, (5) concealing income or assets, (6) failing to cooperate with tax authorities, (7) engaging in illegal activities, (8) attempting to conceal illegal activities, (9) dealing in cash, (10) failing to make estimated tax payments; and (11) filing false documents.

If the IRS alleges civil tax fraud, you will receive official notice of such a charge – the mail no one wants to get. To defend yourself, you will need to prove the non-existence of as many "badges" of fraud as possible. The IRS has no magic number of "badges" of fraud that it must prove to assess the penalty for civil tax fraud. For example, proving a taxpayer's filing of false documents may be sufficient without any other "badges" to justifiably assess the civil tax fraud penalty. You may also avoid civil tax fraud penalties if you can prove that you justifiably relied on third parties (accountants, bookkeepers, etc.) when preparing your tax return.

Criminal Tax Fraud – Yikes – Did I Pull a Wesley Snipes?

The penalty for criminal tax fraud is a fine of no more than $100,000 a person ($500,000 in the case of a corporation), imprisonment of up to three (3) years, and payment of prosecution costs. In comparison to civil tax fraud, in this case, the IRS has to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt – a more difficult burden. The IRS generally prosecutes a taxpayer for criminal tax fraud when it is too difficult to prosecute the taxpayer for criminal tax evasion. To establish criminal tax fraud, the IRS must prove (1) the person believed that the tax return was not correct, (2) willful intent, (3) significance, and (4) the document in question was made under penalty of perjury. Additionally, if a taxpayer pleads guilty or is convicted of tax fraud– he or she is prevented from contesting the civil penalty, an additional liability that is compounded on top of the fines and costs already owed in the criminal matter.

Criminal Tax Evasion: What If I am in the Same Situation as "The Situation"?

The penalty for criminal tax evasion is a fine of no more than $100,000 per person ($500,000 in the case of a corporation), imprisonment of up to five (5) years, and payment of the costs of prosecution. Like criminal tax fraud, the IRS has the burden of proving tax evasion beyond a reasonable doubt. To be convicted of criminal tax evasion, the IRS must prove that the person willfully attempted in any manner to evade or defeat any tax. More specifically, the IRS must establish through evidence (1) the existence of a tax deficiency, (2) an affirmative act constituting an evasion or attempted evasion of tax, and (3) willfulness. Again, if an individual pleads guilty or is convicted of criminal tax evasion, that taxpayer cannot challenge the civil penalty and will be required to pay the civil fraud penalty in addition to the substantial fines and costs of your criminal case.

Tax fraud and evasion may be charged if you fail to report income, fail to provide information or provide incorrect information on your return, claim wrong or inflated deductions, partake in abusive tax shelters, and/or use an incompetent tax professional to prepare your return – but there are valid defenses that can be pursued on your behalf. In a nutshell, if you get a notice from the IRS – your first call should be to an attorney, not your mom, to see if she will still visit you in prison.

Your first wax is FREE*

Airport Road | 610 335 1124 Hamilton Crossings | 484 273 0255

Add It To The List: The Covid-19 Vaccine Conundrum

EDWARD J. EASTERLY

HOFFMAN HLAVAC & EASTERLY

Remember January of 2020? Everyone was blissfully ignorant that people apparently did not know how to wash their hands or cover their mouth if they sneezed. There were no arguments about masks or social distancing in the workplace. The good old days. Since March of 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has held the country hostage, caused heartbreak for families, and has altered the way people interact and conduct business. The COVID-19 vaccines, however, provide some semblance of hope that we can one day return to normal, both in our personal lives and in the workplace. With the vaccine comes various questions: Can an employer mandate that its employees receive the vaccination. The answer, not surprisingly, is not a simple "yes" or "no."

With regard to the question of "can" an employer mandate the vaccine, the answer is "yes, but." In December of 2020, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") issued Guidance addressing the issue of mandating the vaccination. According to the EEOC Guidance, employers can require workers to get vaccinated against COVID-19, with certain exceptions.

In this regard, employers must provide a waiver process for individuals who are unable to receive the vaccination for medical reasons or due to a sincerely held religious belief. Employers must adopt a written policy which informs employees of their rights to request a waiver, the time period to provide such a waiver request, the information which must be provided, and the consequences for failing to receive the vaccination if the waiver is not obtained.

By way of example, if an individual has a medical condition that may cause them to have a severe allergic reaction to the COVID-19 vaccine or a religious belief that precludes them from receiving the vaccine (i.e., certain Catholic leaders have raised concerns about the Johnson & Johnson vaccine), an employer cannot mandate that employee receive the vaccination. In such cases, the employer must offer a reasonable accommodation to the employee, such as working remotely or continuing to wear a mask, as long as the accommodation does not cause an "undue hardship" for the employer. If there is no accommodation possible, the employer will need to determine if the employee has other rights under federal, state, or local laws, including the ability to take unpaid leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act or the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA").

Employers must be mindful that if a religious belief is an issue, they should not act as if they are Magnum P.I. Unlike a medical inquiry, an employer should not generally

request supporting information or documentation to verify a sincerely held religious belief. If, however, there is an objective basis for questioning the sincerely held religious belief (think of George Costanza and the "Human Fund" in Seinfeld), an employer can request supporting information. Employers must err on the side of caution when questioning a religious belief and only do so if there is a legitimate reason based on the factors set forth herein.

Employers must also be mindful of the ramifications if an employee refuses to receive a COVID-19 vaccination and does not have a medical or religious reason for such a refusal. If the foregoing were to occur, the employer should discuss with the employee to determine the reason(s) for refusing the vaccination and attempt to clarify the issues. If the employee continues to refuse the vaccination, an employer can attempt to accommodate the individual; inform the individual that they are not permitted to work until they obtain the vaccine, or it is no longer a requirement of the workplace, or terminate the individual's employment. Employers must be consistent with their handling of these matters. As with any policy, an employer cannot treat employees dissimilarly, or it may open the door for a different type of discrimination lawsuit.

If an employer decides not to mandate the COVID-19 vaccine but merely recommends that workers receive the vaccination or provides some "incentive" to receive the vaccine, additional issues should be considered. Pursuant to the EEOC Guidance, employers are permitted to request that employees provide proof of the COVID-19 vaccination. However, employers should not extend any line of questioning beyond "did you or did you not receive the vaccine." If an employer requests information from its workers as to "why" an individual did not obtain the vaccine, it may elicit information on medical information and therefore come under the auspices of the ADA. If an employer wishes to provide an "incentive" to employees to receive the vaccine, it must ensure that any such incentive programs are in compliance with the applicable state, federal, and local laws to avoid claims of discrimination in the workplace.

No matter how an employer decides to proceed with regard to the COVID-19 vaccine, it is likely to cause issues in the workplace. As such, employers must be prepared with a well-written policy and the ability to answer questions on the vaccine. Hopefully, by January of 2022, we are back to in the realm of normal and dealing with regular workplace problems (but still questioning who knows how to wash their hands properly).

1605 North Cedar Crest Blvd., Suite 517 Allentown, PA 18104 (484) 408-6001 info@HHE-Law.com Hoffman Hlavac & Easterly represents private and public employers in all aspects of the employment relationship. The Firm’s clients include employers of all sizes in a broad industry range, including health care, banking, manufacturing, education, retail, hospitality, and car dealerships. HHE can help your company with all of its employment related needs and ensure that you are not the next target for an employee’s claims.