It may seem obvious, but if you want to amend  your trust, you have to do it in precisely the right way, which in many cases, is spelled out exactly in the trust. Otherwise the courts may have no choice but to ignore your wishes.

A maintenance worker filed a lawsuit against his employer, alleging discrimination, unpaid wages and other violations of state labor laws. Shortly thereafter, at his employer’s request, he signed an agreement mandating arbitration of all employment-related disputes. Could he continue to litigate his claims, or did he have to submit them to binding arbitration?

It’s not uncommon for family members who are beneficiaries of a trust to squabble about how the terms of the trust should be interpreted. But what happens when a court decides to throw out part of a trust, and then has to figure out what the trustor intended?

Three people can keep a secret, declared Benjamin Franklin in Poor Richard’s Almanack – if two of them are dead. Lawyers are more optimistic, and believe those who sign a confidentiality agreement will keep their mouths shut. That includes attorneys.

California law requires most employers to give workers a 30-minute meal break during which they are “relieved of all duty.” In some jobs, such as when caring for the disabled, workers can be required to be “on duty” while they eat. But that doesn’t mean these employees get less than a full half hour for their meals.

Imagine you’ve been named as the beneficiary of a trust, but you haven’t received a dime from the trust and it’s not certain that you ever will – yet your state tax collector bills you $1.3 million. A North Carolina woman thought that was unfair, and the United States Supreme Court agreed with her.