The Feldman Law Firm LLP

Add to Favorites

Attorneys, Accident & Property Damage Attorneys, Adoption Law Attorneys

Be the first to review!

CLOSED NOW

Today: 9:00 am - 5:30 pm

Tomorrow: 9:00 am - 5:30 pm

32 Years

in Business

(713) 850-0700Visit WebsiteMap & Directions1980 Post Oak BlvdHouston, TX 77056 Write a Review

Is this your business?

Customize this page.

Claim This Business

Hours

Regular Hours

Mon - Fri:	9:00 am - 5:30 pm

Places Near Houston with Attorneys

Bellaire (5 miles)
Alief (14 miles)

More Types of Legal Services in Houston

Elder Law Attorneys Divorce Assistance Divorce Attorneys Litigation Support Services Child Custody Attorneys Bankruptcy Law Attorneys Immigration Bonds Appellate Practice Attorneys Tax Attorneys General Practice Attorneys Franchise Law Attorneys Sex Offense Attorneys Bail Bonds Personal Injury Law Attorneys Legal Document Assistance Family Law Attorneys Commercial Law Attorneys Employment Discrimination Attorneys Juvenile Law Attorneys Federal Law Attorneys Legal Service Plans Insurance Attorneys Probate Law Attorneys Product Liability Law Attorneys Estate Planning Attorneys Immigration Law Attorneys Traffic Law Attorneys Attorneys Medical Malpractice Attorneys Personal Property Law Attorneys Business Litigation Attorneys Mediation Services Automobile Accident Attorneys Real Estate Attorneys Consumer Law Attorneys Business Law Attorneys Criminal Law Attorneys Medical Law Attorneys Legal Clinics Wrongful Death Attorneys Patent Agents Collection Law Attorneys Process Servers Paralegals Document Examiners

Gallery

Be the first to add a photo!

Reviews

Hi there!
Be the first to review!

Click to Rate

Details

Phone: (713) 850-0700

Address: 1980 Post Oak Blvd, Houston, TX 77056

Website: http://www.feldlaw.com

People Also Viewed

View similar Attorneys

Suggest an Edit

The Feldman Law Firm LLP

Adoption

Misdemeanors
Were the Osborn and Hoopeston cases and the bare bones of the McCarran-Ferguson Act our only criteria for decision, we would have presented the question whether three prior decisions—Allgeyer v. Louisiana, 165 U.S. 578, 17 S.Ct. 427, 41 L.Ed. 832; St. Louis Cotton Compress Co. v. Arkansas, 260 U.S. 346, 43 S.Ct. 125, 67 L.Ed. 297; Connecticut General Life Ins. Co. v. Johnson, 303 U.S. 77, 58 S.Ct. 436, 82 L.Ed. 673—have continuing vitality. The first two were distinguished in the Osborn (310 U.S., at 66—67, 60 S.Ct. at 763) and Hoopeston (318 U.S., at 318—319, 63 S.Ct. at 605—606) cases. The Allgeyer case held that Louisiana by reason of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment could not make it a misdemeanor to effect insurance on Louisiana risks with an insurance company not licensed to do business in Louisiana, where the insured through use of the mails contracted in New York for the policy. The St. Louis Cotton Compress case held invalid under the Due Process Clause an Arkansas tax on the premiums paid for a policy on Arkansas risks, made with an out-of-state company having no office or agents in Arkansas. The Connecticut General Life Insurance case held invalid under the Due Process Clause a California tax on premiums paid in Connecticut by one insurance company to another for reinsurance of life insurance policies written in California on California residents, even though both insurance companies were authorized to do business in California. The Court stated...

Business and Corporate Law

Corporate Law
This article discusses provisions of corporate law that may apply to transactions of large exempt organizations or related entities, especially hospitals. The purpose for discussing these provisions is to enable EO specialists to analyze cases and identify potential issues affecting the exempt organization or requiring referral to or coordination with Examination Division.
Mergers and Acquisitions
Mr. Kelly focuses his practice on business entity formation and governance issues, mergers and acquisitions, contractual matters, financial services, and employment law.
Business Transactions
1 ) following his completion of graduate business school. Mr. Feldman is able to draw upon years of experience on the substantive business side of transactions from both financial and the legal perspectives and as a principal in various business transactions.
Trade Secrets
Unfair Competition
In holding that the McCarran-Ferguson Act withdrew from the States the power to tax the ownership and use of insurance policies on property located within their borders merely because those policies were made by representatives of the insurer and the insured in another State, I think the Court places an unwarranted construction upon that Act which may seriously impair the capacity of Texas and other States to provide and enforce effective regulation of the insurance business. The Texas statute held invalid was enacted by the State Legislature in 1957 in order to protect the State's comprehensive supervision of insurance companies and their policies from being unercut by the practice of insuring Texas property with insurance companies not authorized to do business in that State. Prior to 1957, the whole cost of the Texas program had been placed upon those insurance companies which had subjected themselves to Texas regulation and taxation by qualifying to do business in the State. The 1957 statute was passed for the express purpose of equalizing that burden by placing a tax upon the purchasers of unregulated insurance roughly equal to that imposed directly upon regulated companies. In this way the State tried to protect its qualified and regulated companies from unfair competition by companies which could sell insurance on Texas property cheaper because they did not have to pay their part of the cost of the Texas insurance regulation program. The Court's construction of the McCarran-Ferguson Act bars Texas from providing this sort of protection to regulated companies. This holding seems to me to threaten the whole foundation of the Texas regulatory program for it plainly encourages Texas residents to insure their property with unregulated companies and discourages out-of-state companies from qualifying to do business in and subjecting themselves to regulation and taxation by the State of Texas.
Antitrust

Workers Compensation
Republic was incorporated in 1973. It is a third tier wholly owned subsidiary of AMERCO. It is a property and casualty insurance company, licensed in most states and the District of Columbia. Republic issued insurance policies to members of the AMERCO Group and to unrelated parties. Those policies were issued at normal commercial*164 rates and were divided into a number of categories by the Tax Court. They included: (1) corporate policies issued to members of the AMERCO Group; (2) workers' compensation policies issued to members of the AMERCO Group; (3) U-Haul rental system policies, which covered members of the AMERCO Group, independent fleet owners, and truck rental customers; (4) SafeMove and SafeStor policies, which covered U-Haul rental customers; and (5) policies which covered risks entirely unconnected with the U-Haul system.
Employment Contract

Real Estate Litigation
Engaged in the practice of law in Houston, Texas since 1978, concentrating on banking, commerical, corporate, employment, insurance and real estate law.
Property Damage
/10/ Each of the policies provided three types of coverage: Coverage A--personal injury; Coverage B--property damage; and Coverage C-- professional liability, including personal injury relating to certain professional services (i.e., malpractice). Each policy also included a "good samaritan endorsement" under which professional employees, acting outside of their capacity as employees, were covered for certain occasional professional services not rendered for their personal benefit.

Personal Injury
Contingency Fee Agreements. A contingency fee agreement is one in which the client and the Firm agree that legal services are provided to client but are not paid for unless or until there is an award made to client by the opposing party. The client usually does not wish to or perhaps cannot afford to pay an hourly fee for the necessary services as they are provided. In such instances, the Firm receives an assignment of the case proceeds for an agreed upon share of this amount in compensation for services rendered. Unless otherwise set forth in the engagement letter, the client usually deposits sufficient funds with the Firm as an advance to cover expenses for court filing fees, deposition and investigation expenses, and related litigation expenses. The contingency fee, again unless otherwise set forth in the engagement letter, is calculated on the gross proceeds. Contingency fee agreements are often used when a client has suffered some financial or personal injury, and where the financial strength of the opposing party and the sought after substantial monetary award are present in the case. When the client is a defendant or the subject of a counterclaim or is seeking non-monetary benefits from the litigation, a contingency fee arrangement is more difficult, yet sometimes still possible, to structure. Please note that all work done by the Firm is subject to the Firm's Administrative and Billing Guidelines.
Medical Malpractice
A consortium of the Vermont Captive Insurance Association, the Captive Insurance Companies Association and the National Risk Retention Association also agreed with the McIntyre White Paper. Captive insurance is a regulated form of self insurance that has existed since the 1960's, and has been a part of the Vermont insurance industry since 1981, when Vermont passed the Special Insurer Act. Captive insurance companies are formed by companies or groups of companies as a form of alternative insurance to better manage their own risk. Captives are typically used for corporate lines of insurance such as property, general liability, products liability, or professional liability. Growth sectors of the captive insurance industry include securitization, professional medical malpractice coverage for doctors and hospitals, and the continued trend of small and mid-sized companies forming captive insurance companies.

Trusts and Estates

Estate Planning
While the appropriate solution depends on the financial circumstances of each client, concern may be expressed by one spouse or the other regarding the loss of access to the gifted assets. Particularly in light of our recent economic experiences in the United States, the desire for greater flexibility and control is a natural response. The desire for flexibility among some clients has led to renewed interest in implementing a classic estate planning strategy known as the By-Pass Trust or Credit Shelter Trust.
Wills
Trusts
If a gift is appropriate, there are many forms the gift may take. Your gift may be an outright bequest, or it may be a gift in trust. You may create one of several different types of irrevocable trusts for your child's benefit depending upon the property to be transferred and your planning objectives. For a minor child, you may create a custodial account for his or her benefit.
Probate

Bankruptcy
Foreclosure
PMI Mortgage Insurance Company, another part of the Sears group, writes mortgage insurance. PMI Mortgage Insurance and its own subsidiary, PMI Insurance Company (collectively PMI), insure lenders against the risk that borrowers will not pay. The Tax Court's opinion marshals the facts, 96 T.C. at 73-85, which are unnecessary to recount at length. Two dominate: (1) The insured risk is a borrower's default in payment. (2) Mortgage insurers insist that the lender try to collect from borrowers or realize on the collateral; until the lender has foreclosed on or otherwise obtained title to the property securing the loan (which also fixes the amount of the loss), the insurer does not pay. The last statement is a simplification. Sometimes PMI compromises with the lender in advance of foreclosure, but the policy does not require PMI to pay until the lender has good title.
Tax Law
No judge of the Tax Court has ever embraced the IRS's "economic family" approach, which is hard to reconcile with the doctrine that tax law respects corporate forms. Molien Properties, Inc. v. CIR, 319 U.S. 436, 63 S.Ct. 1132, 87 L.Ed. 1499 (1943). Although the Commissioner may recharacterize intra-corporate transactions that lack substance independent of their tax effects, cf. Gregory v. Helvering, 293 U.S. 465, 55 S.Ct. 266, 79 L.Ed. 596 (1935); Yosha v. CIR, 861 F.2d 494 (7th Cir.1988)-which supports disregarding captive insurance subsidiaries-the "economic family" approach asserts that all transactions among members of a corporate group must be disregarded. Even the ninth circuit, which in citing Rev.Rul. 77-316 favorably has come the closest to the Commissioner's position, has drawn back by implying that subsidiaries doing substantial outside business cannot be lumped with true captives into a single pot. Carnation Co. v. CIR, 640 F.2d 1010 (9th Cir.1981); Clougherty Packing Co. v. CIR, 811 F.2d 1297, 1298 n. 1 (9th Cir.1987).

View All Services

Provided by