Melissa Yang

November 04, 2021 | New York Law Journal

This article explores the situations in which a plaintiff can shorten the process to challenge a denial of ERISA benefits and, at the same time, switch the court's standard of review from arbitrary and capricious to de novo.

By Michael C. Rakower and Melissa Yang

8 minute read

May 05, 2021 | New York Law Journal

Employment contracts typically involve a tension between an employer's desire for flexibility and an employee's desire for predictability. The key for enforceability is to make sure that the written agreement does not permit the employer to take that which it promises to give.

By Michael C. Rakower and Melissa Yang

8 minute read

October 09, 2019 | New York Law Journal

ERISA §502(g)(1) vests courts with discretion to award attorney fees and costs in an action brought by a plan participant, beneficiary or fiduciary. This article examines the standards courts apply when assessing motions for these discretionary awards.

By Michael C. Rakower, Melissa Yang and Dami Park

11 minute read

May 23, 2018 | New York Law Journal

Parties who wish to avoid unintended consequences – either paying for intra-party indemnification when it was not intended or being denied indemnification when intra-party indemnification was intended – should be explicit as to their intentions in their contract.

By Melissa Yang and Devin W. Ness

15 minute read

July 03, 2017 | New York Law Journal

Michael C. Rakower and Melissa Yang write: Not all benefit plans are treated equally under ERISA. Some are regulated less closely than others, such as "top-hat plans," unfunded employee benefit plans established principally to provide deferred compensation for "a select group of management or highly compensated employees." Although excluded from some requirements, top-hat plans are subject to ERISA's civil enforcement provisions.

By Michael C. Rakower and Melissa Yang

26 minute read

October 26, 2015 | New York Law Journal

Michael C. Rakower and Melissa Yang write that in New York, directors and officers sued for actions or inactions taken in connection with their corporate post have another avenue to seek relief from litigation costs if their corporation denies them indemnification: Courts have authority to award an advancement of litigation expenses or indemnification to directors and officers of for-profit and not-for-profit corporations.

By Michael C. Rakower and Melissa Yang

12 minute read

October 23, 2015 | New York Law Journal

Michael C. Rakower and Melissa Yang write that in New York, directors and officers sued for actions or inactions taken in connection with their corporate post have another avenue to seek relief from litigation costs if their corporation denies them indemnification: Courts have authority to award an advancement of litigation expenses or indemnification to directors and officers of for-profit and not-for-profit corporations.

By Michael C. Rakower and Melissa Yang

12 minute read