Breaking for Biscotti

Last week I picked up a ginormous bag of cranberries at Sam's Club. Since these are perfectly fine to keep in the freezer, I love that I have them on hand for cranberry sauce and baking. It has been a while since I baked something to share with my coworkers, and I decided that fresh cranberry biscotti sounded great. Most recipes call for dried cranberries, which certainly have their merits, but I figured, with fresh cranberries in season, why not use them in all their glory?

I chose a Martha Stewart recipe to follow as a guideline, figuring Martha always knows best. But in this case, I'm not sure she does. I found the dough to be extremely wet and sticky. I know that biscotti dough is supposed to be sticky, but this was beyond workable. I found myself adding extra flour until it was manageable, and even then, I needed to spoon the dough onto the cookie sheet to gently form the logs, as it was not really possible to mold with my hands.

But in the end, the cookies were delicious, and even better once dipped in chocolate and crushed toasted hazelnuts. I can say with confidence that this treat was much appreciated by my coworkers. Personally, I set aside one biscotti for myself and kept it on my desk until after lunch, to enjoy with a cup of coffee. Though it took a lot of willpower to wait, it was totally worth it. If I could, I'd take a biscotti-and-coffee break more often!

Fresh Cranberry Biscotti with Chocolate and Hazelnuts

1 teaspoon baking powder
3 1/4 cups all-purpose flour
1 1/4 cups sugar
1 tsp cinnamon
sprinkle of ginger and cloves
1/8 teaspoon salt
3 large eggs
2 large egg yolks
1 teaspoon pure vanilla extract
1 cup fresh cranberries, chopped
about 6 oz semisweet chocolate
about 2/3 cup chopped, toasted hazelnuts*

Heat oven to 350 degrees.

In an electric mixer fitted with the paddle attachment, combine baking powder, flour, sugar, and salt. In a bowl, beat eggs, yolks, and vanilla. Add to dry ingredients; mix on medium low until sticky dough is formed. Stir in cranberries.

Gently spoon the dough onto a parchment-lined baking sheet to form two 9x3.5" logs. Bake until golden brown, 25 to 30 minutes. Let cool enough to handle, about 10 minutes. Reduce oven to 275 degrees.

On cutting board, using a serrated knife, cut logs on diagonal into 1/2-inch-thick slices. Return pieces cut side down to baking sheet. Bake until lightly toasted, about 23 minutes. Turn over. Bake until slightly dry, about 23 minutes. Cool on wire rack.

Melt chocolate in a double boiler. I find that I needed to add some shortening to thin it out a bit, to the consistency I prefer for dipping. Place the hazelnuts on a plate.

Dip one side of each biscotti first in the chocolate, then the hazelnuts. Place on wax paper or parchment paper to cool.

*To prepare hazelnuts, toast in a dry skillet over low heat, turning every few minutes, until skins are lightly browned on all sides, about 10 minutes. Then place the hazelnuts on a dish towel, fold over, and rub to remove the skins.

Senior QA Auditor - Devices, Switzerland - Swiss Francs 85,000

Job Reference	Job Title	Location	Basic Salary	OTE	For Further Information
7261	Senior QA Auditor - Devices, Switzerland	Switzerland	Swiss Francs85,000	Swiss FrancsNeg	Click Here
Broaden your GCP auditing experience with a move into the medical device field! An up and coming medical device specialist is looking to hire an experienced auditor in Switzerland! In this role you will conduct all aspects of internal and external auditing, to include sponsor and investigator audits, to ICH GCP and ISO14155. Audits will be system, process, facility, documentation and site focused, across Europe. In addition to your auditing duties you will have the chance to get involved in supervising a junior QA Auditor, with a view to taking on line management responsibilities and a QA Manager role in the near future. This is an excellent opportunity to gain QA expertise within another area of clinical product development, whilst at the same time gaining valuable leadership and management skills for the future! Who are we looking for? A scientific background is essential along with a proven track record of auditing to ICH GCP requirements. The ideal candidate would have some exposure to device trials and auditing to ISO 14155 requirements. Full training will be provided to candidates with strong ICH GCP auditing experience looking for a move into devices. Practical experience with all types of internal and external audit is essential. A competitive salary and remuneration package is available to the successful candidate. If you are looking to broaden your auditing experience within clinical trials then call Diane now on 01784 224358 for more information!

Dreier: Economic and legal ramifications

The troubles of Marc Dreier raise a lot of interesting questions about partnership law and the structure of law firms.

To begin with, what the heck was Dreier’s firm? The answer: It billed itself as “Dreier LLP” – i.e., a limited liability partnership. But as Marc Dreier wrote last year, this “partnership” had only one equity partner. Dreier himself got all the profits and had exclusive management rights. The other “partners” share in the fees they contribute to generating.

Partnership is generally defined as “an association of two or more persons to carry on as co-owners a business for profit.” See UPA Section 6(1), RUPA Section 101(6) and 202(a). Are non-equity “partners” carrying on the business as co-owners? If not, they’re not actually partners. Then Dreier LLP would not have “two or more” co-owners and would not be a partnership, in which case it couldn’t be an LLP (as to the latter point, see Bromberg & Ribstein on LLPs, Section 2.02).

Although profit sharing and control are very important to the determination of co-ownership it is not absolutely clear they are essential. See generally Bromberg & Ribstein on Partnership Section 2.07. It may be enough that the parties have clearly expressed the intention to be partners.

In Dreier’s case, the parties clearly intended not to have a “conventional” partnership. The website says:

Dreier LLP was founded in 1996 by Marc Dreier to be a more responsive and innovative alternative to conventional "large-firm" lawyering. . . . We are not just an association of attorneys but a collaboration of attorneys, who typically had built successful practices elsewhere but sought in Dreier LLP a more current, more resourceful, more supportive environment to maximize their abilities and results.

So is Dreier a “collaboration” or a “partnership” or both? 

Dreier is a NY-based firm, so NY law probably applies, and NY law is based on the UPA, whose definition of partnership is quoted above.

By comparison, Delaware would "clarify" that “[e]ach person to be admitted as a partner to a partnership formed under either § 15-202(a)(i) or § 15-202(a)(ii) of this title may be admitted as a partner without acquiring an economic interest in the partnership.” The cross-referenced section follows the UPA/RUPA definition of partnership except that it permits not-for-profit partnerships “when the persons intend to form a partnership.” So, basically, Delaware would return to the question discussed above of whether the non-equity partners were admitted as partners.

Note that the Dreier website linked above identifies people in the firm as partners, associates, of counsel, and one managing partner -- Marc Dreier. If Dreier is a partnership, then arguably those identified as “partners” would be vicariously liable unless Dreier was a limited liability partnership, which as discussed above and further below depends on its being a partnership.

Even if not vicariously liable, the members of the firm might be directly liable. As discussed in an AmLaw article today about this mess, relying on David Keyko, Pillsbury partner and former chair of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York's Committee of Professional Responsibility:

An aggressive client could claim, for instance, that a Dreier associate should have done a better job tracking the client's payments* * * If the firm files for bankruptcy, some lawyers may have to give back bonuses and other payments made outside the ordinary course of business -- especially if a court finds that Dreier used fraud to acquire the money to fund those payments * * * In simple terms, the level of the alleged fraud -- combined with the unique structure of Dreier's firm --puts the firm's other partners in wholly uncharted territory.

Yet another ripple (did we need another one?):  Dreier might not be an actual partnership, but it might be a purported or estoppel partnership on the basis that it held itself out as a partnership. Then it would not be clear if the purported partners would be protected by the LLP shield. But the holding out, including via an LLP filing, might be evidence of an intent to be a partnership.  So can an LLP filing bootstrap a non-partnership into a partnership and then into an LLP? Again, See Bromberg & Ribstein on LLPs, Section 2.02(b).

Finally, apart from the partnership issues, Dreier’s article from last year raises some interesting issues about law firm structure. He touted his firm's unconventional structure as a way that the lawyers could serve their own and clients' interests without a law firm getting in the way. His article resonated with rumblings about the current outmoded economic structure of the law business.

There is some perverse logic to his position. If the firm isn’t serving its purpose as a monitor and reputational intermediary, which I’ve argued it can’t effectively do under current ethical constraints, (see Ethical Rules, Agency Costs and Law Firm Structure, 84 Virginia Law Review 1707 (1998)) then maybe this is what it has to come to.

But as I've discussed, e.g, here (with Bruce MacEwen and Mitt Regan), I think there’s a better way.

Anyway, a lot to chew on. See also Gary Rosin.