The Law Office of Eric Roper, P.A.

Legal Business 2010/12/26 14:38   Bookmark and Share

The Law Office of Eric Roper, P.A. is a litigation firm devoted to representing clients in the areas of criminal defense, military law, and maritime transportation.  As a former active duty Navy Judge Advocate, Eric Roper has 15 years experience in both prosecuting and defending criminal trials in Federal and military courts.  Mr. Roper presently holds the rank of Commander (O-5) in the Reserve Component of the Navy’s Judge Advocate General’s Corps.  The firm provides aggressive representation to anyone charged with a criminal offense in all Federal and military courts and in Florida state courts.  If you or someone you know has been charged with a crime or are under investigation, you need an experienced criminal defense attorney who will act now to protect your rights.   Call for a free, confidential consultation.

Mr. Roper also utilizes his years of experience as a trial attorney with the Bureau of Enforcement at the Federal Maritime Commission in representing Marine Terminal Operators (MTO), ports, non-vessel operating common carriers (NVOCCs), ocean common carriers, and ocean freight forwarders (OFFs).  Mr. Roper’s knowledge of the regulatory and legislative issues affecting the maritime transportation industry allows him to represent all manner of maritime businesses in antitrust and regulatory matters and in litigating disputes before courts and administrative agencies.  Whether you operate a terminal, provide logistics services in the maritime industry, or are seeking a license to perform such services, a lawyer with detailed knowledge of the regulatory environment and procedures is critical to the success of your business.

http://www.ericroperlaw.com


top

What is an Ocean Transportation Intermediary (OTI) license?

Legal Marketing 2010/12/16 14:40   Bookmark and Share

In the United States, the ocean transportation industry is one of the last transportation-related industries which has not been fully deregulated by the Congress. Beginning in the 1970‘s, Congress passed a series of laws which gradually removed regulatory oversight of other transportation industries (air, truck and rail). Although the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 1998 continued the trend of reducing regulatory requirements in the ocean transportation world, several important provisions of law were left intact, especially with respect to Ocean Transportation Intermediaries (OTIs). Three of the important provisions applicable to OTIs are the requirements be licensed, bonded and to publish rates in a tariff.

The Federal Maritime Commission (FMC or “the Commission”) is the independent regulatory agency responsible for regulating all ocean transportation in U.S. foreign commerce. An OTI may either be an ocean freight forwarder or a non-vessel operating common carrier (NVOCC). The distinction between a freight forwarder and an NVOCC is not always an easy one to make but both entities are required to have an FMC license before providing ocean transportation services in the United States. Freight forwarders dispatch shipments and book or arrange space for cargo on behalf of shippers while an NVOCC is a common carrier that holds itself out to the public to provide ocean transportation. The NVOCC issues its own house bills of lading but does not actually own or operate the vessels which carry the cargo. An NVOCC that is not based in the U.S. is not required to be licensed but may choose to obtain one since having a license results in lesser bond requirements. An entity can be both a freight forwarder and an NVOCC but is generally prohibited from receiving compensation for serving in both roles on the same transaction.

To obtain a license, a prospective OTI submits an application to the FMC. All applicants must designate a qualifying individual with at least three years of experience. This individual must be an officer, sole proprietor or partner in the applicant’s organization. After submission, the application is reviewed and an investigation is completed by the FMC. The applicant is also required to submit proof of financial responsibility, usually in the form a bond. The required bond amount depends on the type of license acquired ($50,000 for a freight forwarder or $75,000 for an NVOCC).

Once a license has been issued, NVOCCs are presently required to publish an electronic tariff which shows all of its rates and charges. Tariffs may, however, soon become a thing of the past. If you have ever attempted to locate a particular rate for a particular route and commodity in an electronic tariff, you know firsthand why many in the industry have questioned the continued utility of tariffs in today’s market environment. In 2010, the FMC responded to industry concerns by issuing a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would relieve licensed NVOCCs from the cost and burden of publishing a tariff so long as the NVOCC met certain conditions. The action comes following the petition of a national trade association and has the support of the U.S. Department of Justice. The Commission received comments in response to the Notice and a decision is expected sometime later this year.

Operating without a license, bond or tariff can result in significant civil penalties. If proven, each violation or shipment is subject to a maximum civil penalty of $30,000. In one recent case, a company paid a $25,000 penalty in a settlement with the Commission for acting as an NVOCC without a license and without proof of financial responsibility. If you have questions about whether any of these requirements apply to your organization, you should consult an experienced Florida maritime lawyer.

top

7th Circuit Will Not Allow You to Resign from Its Bar to Avoid Disbarment

Lawyer Blog Post 2010/12/10 23:01   Bookmark and Share
December 10, 2010

We here at the Indiana Law Update sincerely hope that none of our readers ever need to apply yesterday's decision from the 7th Circuit in In re Wick, Case No. D-10-0015 to their own practice. However, it is an interesting decision dealing with how the Court will treat a request to resign from its bar.
Lessons:
  1. The Seventh Circuit will not allow you to resign from its bar in order to avoid attorney discipline.

http://indianalawupdate.com/entry/7th-Circuit-Will-Not-Allow-You-to-Resign-from-Its-Bar-to-Avoid-Disbarment

top

Residential Real Estate Disclosures Must Be Made in Sale to Living Trust

Lawyer Blog Post 2010/12/07 23:02   Bookmark and Share
December 7, 2010

I.C. Chapter 32-21-5 abrogates the common law rule of caveat emptor with regard to representations made in a statutorily required Sales Disclosure Form. Yesterday, the Court addressed a related issue in Rex Breeden Revocable Trust v. Hoffmeister-Repp, Case No. 03A04-1003-CT-18 -- whether these rules apply to any residential real estate sale to a living trust. The Court found the statute ambiguous and limited its language to sales from one person to that person's own living trust.

In this case, a homeowner sold a home to a buyer. However, the buyer did not buy the property directly; rather, he purchased it using a living trust. A dispute arose concerning whether the seller had made misrepresentations about the residence and the buyers eventually brought suit. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment and the trial court granted the seller's motion. The buyers appealed.

At issue was whether I.C. Chapter 32-21-5 applied to the sale. I.C. § 32-21-5-1(b)(9) states that this Chapter does not apply to "[t]ransfers to a living trust." The buyer argued that this language clearly exempted this sale from the Act. The seller argued that this could be illogical. The Court found this language ambiguous -- arguably because the parties disagreed over its interpretation.

http://indianalawupdate.com/entry/Residential-Real-Estate-Disclosures-Must-Be-Made-in-Sale-to-Living-Trust
top









Disclaimer: Nothing posted on this blog is intended, nor should be construed, as legal advice. Blog postings and hosted comments are available for general educational purposes only and should not be used to assess a specific legal situation. Nothing submitted as a comment is confidential. Nor does any comment on a blog post create an attorney-client relationship. The presence of hyperlinks to other third-party websites does not imply that the firm endorses those websites.

Affordable Law Firm Website Design