Christa Wittenberg Elected to the Firm’s Board of Directors

O’Neil Cannon is pleased to announce that Attorney Christa Wittenberg was recently elected to serve on the firm’s Board of Directors, beginning on July 1. Christa has been with the firm since 2014 as a member of the Litigation Practice Group, where she assists businesses and individuals with pursuing and defending a variety of complex civil litigation matters. Christa is the Chairperson for the Communications Committee at the State Bar of Wisconsin and is a member of the Boards of Directors of LOTUS Legal Clinic, the Association for Women Lawyers, and the Eastern District of Wisconsin Bar Association. She looks forward to applying her leadership skills and her passion for service to ensure that O’Neil Cannon maintains its status as a premier law firm and continues to serve its clients effectively and efficiently.

Christa will be filling the seat of Attorney Dean Laing, who will be stepping down from the firm’s Board of Directors after 33 years in that position. Dean is also the immediate past President and Managing Shareholder of the firm, having served in those roles from 2015-2020. He will continue with the firm as a shareholder. The firm is extremely grateful for Dean’s strong leadership over the years.


Super Lawyers Recognizes 25 O’Neil Cannon Attorneys

Each year, Super Lawyers surveys the State of Wisconsin’s 15,000 attorneys and judges, seeking the State’s top attorneys. Recently, Super Lawyers published its lists for 2022, which include the Top 10 Attorneys in Wisconsin, Top 50 Attorneys in Wisconsin, Top 25 Attorneys in Milwaukee, Super Lawyers (consisting of the top 5% of attorneys in Wisconsin), and Rising Stars (consisting of attorneys who are 40 years old or younger or who have been in practice for 10 years or less).

Twenty-five of our attorneys were recognized by Super Lawyers, which has referred to the firm as “the Milwaukee mid-sized powerhouse.” Those attorneys are the following:

  • Nicholas G. Chmurski:
    • Rising Stars
  • Douglas P. Dehler:
    • Super Lawyer
  • James G. DeJong:
    • Super Lawyer
  • Seth E. Dizard:
    • Top 50 Attorneys in Wisconsin
    • Top 25 Attorneys in Milwaukee
    • Super Lawyer
  • Peter J. Faust:
    • Super Lawyer
  • John G. Gehringer:
    • Super Lawyer
  • Joseph E. Gumina:
    • Super Lawyer
  • Jessica K. Haskell:
    • Rising Stars
  • Grant C. Killoran:
    • Super Lawyer
  • Dean P. Laing:
    • Top 10 Attorneys in Wisconsin
    • Top 50 Attorneys in Wisconsin
    • Top 25 Attorneys in Milwaukee
    • Super Lawyer
  • Trevor C. Lippman:
    • Rising Stars
  • Gregory W. Lyons:
    • Super Lawyer
  • Patrick G. McBride:
    • Super Lawyer
  • Britany E. Morrison:
    • Rising Stars
  • Joseph D. Newbold:
    • Super Lawyer
  • Erica N. Reib:
    • Rising Stars
  • Chad J. Richter:
    • Super Lawyer
  • John R. Schreiber:
    • Super Lawyer
  • Jason R. Scoby:
    • Super Lawyer
  • Steven J. Slawinski:
    • Super Lawyer
  • Kelly M. Spott:
    • Rising Stars
  • Christa D. Wittenberg:
    • Rising Stars

Super Lawyers is a national rating service that rates attorneys in all 50 states. The selection process utilized by Super Lawyers is multi-phased and includes independent research, peer nominations, and peer evaluations. One court recently had this to say about Super Lawyers:

“[T]he selection procedures employed by [Super Lawyers] are very sophisticated, comprehensive and complex.  It is abundantly clear . . . that [Super Lawyers does] not permit a lawyer to buy one’s way onto the list, nor is there any requirement for the purchase of any product for inclusion in the lists or any quid pro quo of any kind or nature associated with the evaluation and listing of an attorney or in the subsequent advertising of one’s inclusion in the lists.”

We are proud to be one of the few firms in Wisconsin that had more than 50% of its attorneys receive recognition by Super Lawyers.


19 OCHDL Lawyers Selected as 2023 Best Lawyers®; Another 4 Named Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch

We are pleased to announce 19 of our lawyers have been included in the 2023 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America, and an additional four have been selected as 2023 Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch.

The following are the O’Neil, Cannon, Hollman, DeJong and Laing lawyers named to the 2023 lists:

Best Lawyers in America

  • Douglas P. Dehler – Litigation – Insurance
  • James G. DeJong – Corporate Law, Mergers and Acquisitions Law, and Securities / Capital Markets Law
  • Seth E. Dizard – Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law and Litigation – Bankruptcy
  • Peter J. Faust – Corporate Law and Mergers and Acquisitions Law
  • John G. Gehringer – Commercial Litigation, Construction Law, Corporate Law, and Real Estate Law
  • Joseph E. Gumina – Employment Law – Management and Litigation – Labor and Employment
  • Dennis W. Hollman – Corporate Law and Trusts and Estates
  • Grant C. Killoran – Commercial Litigation and Litigation – Health Care
  • JB Koenings – Corporate Law
  • Dean P. Laing – Commercial Litigation, Personal Injury Litigation – Plaintiffs, and Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
  • Gregory W. Lyons – Commercial Litigation and Litigation – Insurance
  • Patrick G. McBride – Commercial Litigation
  • Joseph D. Newbold – Commercial Litigation
  • Chad J. Richter – Business Organizations (including LLCs and Partnerships) and Corporate Law
  • John R. Schreiber – Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law and Litigation – Bankruptcy
  • Jason R. Scoby – Corporate Law
  • Steven J. Slawinski – Construction Law

Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch

  • Trevor C. Lippman – Litigation – Trusts and Estates
  • Erica N. Reib – Labor and Employment Law – Management and Litigation – Labor and Employment
  • Kelly M. Spott – Trusts and Estates
  • Christa D. Wittenberg – Commercial Litigation

About Best Lawyers

Best Lawyers has published their list for over three decades, earning the respect of the profession, the media, and the public as the most reliable, unbiased source of legal referrals.

Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch recognizes associates and other lawyers who are earlier in their careers for their outstanding professional excellence in private practice in the United States.

Lawyers on The Best Lawyers in America and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch lists are divided by geographic region and practice areas. They are reviewed by their peers on the basis of professional expertise, and they undergo an authentication process to make sure they are in current practice and in good standing.


Determining the Citizenship of Businesses

People forming a new business and selecting between the different entity types may be unaware of the impact the formation choice can have on future lawsuits. In particular, the citizenship of the business can be critical to determining whether a case belongs in state court or federal court when a dispute involves over $75,000. With the many considerations business owners have to weigh when forming a new entity, the effect on hypothetical litigation is unlikely to be of primary importance, but it is useful to keep in mind.

The key inquiry when determining whether a federal court has jurisdiction over many business disputes, especially contract disputes, is whether the parties are citizens of different states—that is, whether there is diversity jurisdiction. A business’s citizenship for purposes of diversity jurisdiction often is not the same as where the business is registered, especially for limited liability companies (LLCs) and partnerships.

Corporations are citizens of both the state where it is incorporated and the state where its principal place of business is located. For an LLC, the analysis is more complicated, and depends on the citizenship of each member. For example, if an LLC has four members—two citizens of Wisconsin, one a citizen of Illinois, and one a citizen of Iowa—the LLC is a citizen of Wisconsin, Illinois, and Iowa. Occasionally, an LLC has so many members it is difficult to assess its citizenship, especially when any members are themselves LLCs or other corporate entities. Similarly, the citizenship of a partnership depends on the citizenship of each partner. That means an LLC or partnership with members or partners in multiple states may be more limited in the ability to invoke the jurisdiction of federal courts for ordinary contract disputes, because disputes with citizens of any of the same states that are not based on federal causes of action will not be within the jurisdiction of federal courts. Whether that is good or bad strategically depends in large part on the circumstances of the particular dispute.

Sometimes parties have tried to get around the complications of the citizenship analysis by appointing an agent to enforce their rights, often when there are many real parties in interest. Though cases have reached conflicting results, several courts have held that the citizenship of the agent does not control. Courts then analyze the citizenship of each represented business or individual.

For many businesses, planning for unforeseen litigation can be like planning to be struck by lightning—you never want to experience it, you can’t predict it, and if you’re lucky, you can avoid it. Even still, it can be useful to know what to expect if a lawsuit arises.

For more on jurisdictional issues or a variety of other legal matters, contact Christa Wittenberg at 414-276-5000 or christa.wittenberg@wilaw.com.


Can I really be sued there?

‘Can I really be sued there?’ If you have ever asked that question, you’re not alone—many defendants sued outside of their home state wonder the same thing. For example, if a small family-owned Wisconsin business is sued in a Nevada court, its owners may rightly question whether that is proper.

The answer likely depends on the jurisdiction of the court in question. Personal jurisdiction—that is, a court’s authority over parties to a lawsuit—can be broad, but it is not unlimited. Without jurisdiction over a party, the court does not have authority to decide the dispute. However, if a defendant does not challenge personal jurisdiction at the beginning of a case, that party may forfeit its right to do so, and the case may proceed anyway.

Whether a court has personal jurisdiction depends on an analysis of the United States Constitution, applicable statutes, and the many cases interpreting those sources. As a result, there is not always an easy answer to whether a given court has personal jurisdiction over a party.

In general, a court will typically have personal jurisdiction over an individual whose permanent residence is in the state where the court is located or a corporation incorporated in that state. Beyond those relatively straightforward situations, a court may still have jurisdiction over a party who has sufficient contacts with that state, which depends on many factors.

Because courts can dismiss lawsuits if they do not have personal jurisdiction over a party, this is an important consideration in the early stages of a dispute. Whether you’re contemplating bringing a lawsuit, defending a claim, or negotiating a contract and considering including a clause addressing where parties must resolve any disputes, it is important to keep the principles of personal jurisdiction in mind.

If you are faced with a lawsuit, or need an analysis of jurisdictional issues before a dispute arises, contact Christa Wittenberg at 414-276-5000 or christa.wittenberg@wilaw.com.


19 OCHDL Lawyers Selected as 2022 Best Lawyers®; Another 5 Named Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch

We are pleased to announce 19 of our lawyers have been included in the 2022 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America, and an additional five have been selected as 2022 Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch.

The following are the O’Neil, Cannon, Hollman, DeJong and Laing lawyers named to the 2022 lists:

Best Lawyers in America

  • Douglas P. Dehler – Litigation – Insurance
  • James G. DeJong – Corporate Law, Mergers and Acquisitions Law, and Securities / Capital Markets Law
  • Seth E. Dizard – Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law and Litigation – Bankruptcy
  • Peter J. Faust – Corporate Law and Mergers and Acquisitions Law
  • John G. Gehringer – Commercial Litigation, Construction Law, Corporate Law, and Real Estate Law
  • Joseph E. Gumina – Employment Law – Management and Litigation – Labor and Employment
  • Dennis W. Hollman – Corporate Law and Trusts and Estates
  • Grant C. Killoran – Commercial Litigation and Litigation – Health Care
  • JB Koenings – Corporate Law
  • Dean P. Laing – Commercial Litigation, Personal Injury Litigation – Plaintiffs, and Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
  • Gregory W. Lyons – Commercial Litigation and Litigation – Insurance
  • Patrick G. McBride – Commercial Litigation
  • Joseph D. Newbold – Commercial Litigation
  • Chad J. Richter – Business Organizations (including LLCs and Partnerships) and Corporate Law
  • John R. Schreiber – Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law and Litigation – Bankruptcy
  • Jason R. Scoby – Corporate Law
  • Steven J. Slawinski – Construction Law

Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch

  • Trevor C. Lippman – Litigation – Trusts and Estates
  • Erica N. Reib – Labor and Employment Law – Management and Litigation – Labor and Employment
  • Kelly M. Spott – Trusts and Estates
  • Christa D. Wittenberg – Commercial Litigation

About Best Lawyers

Best Lawyers has published their list for over three decades, earning the respect of the profession, the media, and the public as the most reliable, unbiased source of legal referrals.

Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch recognizes associates and other lawyers who are earlier in their careers for their outstanding professional excellence in private practice in the United States.

Lawyers on The Best Lawyers in America and Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch lists are divided by geographic region and practice areas. They are reviewed by their peers on the basis of professional expertise, and they undergo an authentication process to make sure they are in current practice and in good standing.


Health Care Law Advisor Alert: New Federal Regulations Take Aim at Health Care Provider Billing

Health care providers should be aware of new regulations the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and other agencies issued in July that relate to medical billing practices.

Part I of the long-awaited regulations to implement the federal No Surprises Act was published on July 13, 2021. The regulations are applicable for plan or policy years beginning on or after January 1, 2022. HHS, along with the Department of the Treasury and Department of Labor, issued rules that implement the statutory provisions in the No Surprises Act. This federal law, enacted in 2020, was discussed in an earlier blog article. The new regulations mirror the statutory provisions and provide guidance on interpreting and applying the No Surprises Act. In particular, the new regulations clarify the methodology for calculating the qualifying payment amount (QPA)—a calculation that will often be used to evaluate the amount health plans pay providers for treatment that falls under the No Surprises Act, including out-of-network emergency care. The regulations also outline requirements for certain health care providers to post and provide consumers with a notice related to balance billing restrictions, and the criteria for providers to obtain the consent necessary to balance bill for non-emergency out-of-network services.

The new regulations do not yet address the independent dispute resolution (IDR) process applicable when health plans and providers do not agree on the amount to be paid for out-of-network care that falls under the Act. This IDR process is an important aspect of the No Surprises Act, and the continued uncertainty may make it difficult for health care providers to plan for the coming year. Regulations on this topic are expected to be issued soon.

The federal government is accepting public comments through September 7, 2021, and may modify the regulations based on those comments.

The attorneys who contribute to the Health Care Law Advisor are available to assist health care providers with a variety of legal matters. Please contact us if you need assistance navigating the new regulations.


Attorneys Christa Wittenberg and Dean Laing Published in the Wisconsin Lawyer

Attorneys Christa Wittenberg and Dean Laing authored an article in the Wisconsin Lawyer magazine, entitled “A Litigation’s Reprise: Strategies for Requesting Attorney Fees.” Their article discusses strategy considerations for litigants requesting attorneys’ fees (or objecting to requests for attorneys’ fees) after the merits of the case have been resolved. As noted in the article, sometimes disputes over attorneys’ fees can be just as contentious as the underlying dispute, and strong lawyering can have a significant impact.

Read the full article here.

 


21 Firm Attorneys Recognized by Super Lawyers

Each year, Super Lawyers surveys the State of Wisconsin’s 15,000 attorneys and judges, seeking the State’s top attorneys. In November 2020, Super Lawyers published its lists for 2020, which include the Top 10 Attorneys in Wisconsin, Top 50 Attorneys in Wisconsin, Top 25 Attorneys in Milwaukee, Super Lawyers (consisting of the top 5% of attorneys in Wisconsin), and Rising Stars (consisting of attorneys who are 40 years old or younger or who have been in practice for 10 years or less).

Twenty-one of our attorneys were recognized by Super Lawyers, which has referred to the firm as “the Milwaukee mid-sized powerhouse.” Those attorneys are the following:

  • Dean P. Laing:
    • Top 10 Attorneys in Wisconsin
    • Top 50 Attorneys in Wisconsin
    • Top 25 Attorneys in Milwaukee
    • Super Lawyer
  • Seth E. Dizard:
    • Top 50 Attorneys in Wisconsin
    • Top 25 Attorneys in Milwaukee
    • Super Lawyer
  • Douglas P. Dehler:
    • Super Lawyer
  • James G. DeJong:
    • Super Lawyer
  • Peter J. Faust:
    • Super Lawyer
  • John G. Gehringer:
    • Super Lawyer
  • Joseph E. Gumina:
    • Super Lawyer
  • Gregory W. Lyons:
    • Super Lawyer
  • Patrick G. McBride:
    • Super Lawyer
  • Joseph D. Newbold:
    • Super Lawyer
  • Chad J. Richter:
    • Super Lawyer
  • John R. Schreiber:
    • Super Lawyer
  • Jason R. Scoby:
    • Super Lawyer
  • Steven J. Slawinski:
    • Super Lawyer
  • JB Koenings:
    • Rising Stars
  • Trevor C. Lippman:
    • Rising Stars
  • Erica N. Reib:
    • Rising Stars
  • Christa D. Wittenberg:
    • Rising Stars

Super Lawyers is a national rating service that rates attorneys in all 50 states. The selection process utilized by Super Lawyers is multi-phased and includes independent research, peer nominations, and peer evaluations. One court recently had this to say about Super Lawyers:

“[T]he selection procedures employed by [Super Lawyers] are very sophisticated, comprehensive and complex.

It is abundantly clear . . . that [Super Lawyers does] not permit a lawyer to buy one’s way onto the list, nor is there any requirement for the purchase of any product for inclusion in the lists or any quid pro quo of any kind or nature associated with the evaluation and listing of an attorney or in the subsequent advertising of one’s inclusion in the lists.”

We are proud to be one of the few firms in Wisconsin that had over 50% of its attorneys receive recognition by Super Lawyers.


Health Care Law Advisor Alert: Videoconferencing Considerations for Health Care Litigators

These days, litigators are routinely taking depositions and participating in hearings over Zoom or other videoconferencing apps and software. Frequently, these depositions and hearings are set up using videoconferencing systems chosen, hosted, and controlled by a court, an arbitrator, or a court reporter. There has been significant discussion and administrative guidance about the use of videoconferencing by health care providers since the pandemic began. Health care litigators should also consider the implications of video depositions or hearings on HIPAA security obligations.

Zoom reports that it is HIPAA compliant. However, these features must be requested by the subscriber, typically through a Zoom for Healthcare subscription. Microsoft Teams also reports it is capable of HIPAA compliance, as does Google Meet.

Litigators who anticipate protected health information (PHI) may be discussed or contained in documents shared through a videoconferencing platform for purposes of a deposition or hearing should inquire with the host about the type of subscription and system capabilities. Some court reporters offer special HIPAA-compliant rooms with certain features disabled.

With the rapid transition to videoconferencing to conduct a substantial amount of litigation tasks, guidance in this area is likely to continue to evolve along with videoconferencing system capabilities. Health care providers and their outside litigators should stay informed and be prepared to ask the right questions to ensure they are not overlooking HIPAA obligations.

The attorneys who contribute to the Health Care Law Advisor are available to assist health care providers with a variety of legal matters. Please contact us if you need assistance navigating the pandemic-related changes to health care litigation.