Getting married is a significant turning point in life that can bring big changes for newlyweds well beyond their wedding day. After spending months (and maybe years) planning your dream wedding and after the excitement of the day subsides, it’s time to consider your newlywed estate plan. As a couple, there are new options and new concerns that you need to be aware of. Below is a summary of some of the estate planning items newlyweds should consider: Financial Accounts The following accounts can be updated to reflect a spouse as the new beneficiary or as transfer on death designated beneficiary: Existing Checking/Savings Account Life Insurance: Employer-based and stand-alone policy if you already have one Investments: Stocks, bonds, mutual funds, etc. Retirement Accounts: 401(k), IRA, Roth IRA, 403(b) Military Benefits Pension: SEP/SARSEP Property, titles, and assets that might currently name someone else as the beneficiary (e.g., you named a sibling to receive a benefit that your spouse should now be getting) Here are some other accounts that newly married individuals may consider creating or consolidating: Open Joint Banking Account/Credit Cards Health Insurance Car Insurance: Look into getting a family (a.k.a. umbrella) plan for the household Mobile Phone Plan: Look into getting a family plan for the household Re-Title Property Ownership Documents: This applies to homes, cars, or other titled assets Duplicate Accounts/Services: Consolidate accounts that each of you owned separately prior to getting married (e.g., Netflix), so you’re not paying for two separate accounts Last Will and Testament A last will and testament is a legal document that communicates a person's final wishes pertaining to their assets. It provides specific instructions about what to do with their possessions. It will indicate whether the deceased leaves them to another person, a group, or wishes to donate them to charity. If you currently have a Will, update it to account for your spouse. If there will be babies in your future, or you already have kids, this is where you designate the guardians for the minor children if you and your spouse pass away. Power of Attorney Your Power of Attorney (POA) has power over everything involving your finances. This includes paying bills, managing bank accounts, overseeing investments, signing contracts, and filing your taxes. Most spouses appoint each other as the primary agent, and it is prudent to name a successor agent as well. Health Care Proxy/Living Will A Health Care Proxy/Living Will is a document that authorizes an agent to make all health care decisions for a principal if he/she is unable to make them on his/her own behalf. This form also authorizes the agent to make decisions to remove or provide life-sustaining treatment, if you so desire. Life Insurance A spouse might already have life insurance through his/her job, but it likely will no longer be enough to support a new family if something happens to a spouse. Newly married individuals should meet with their insurance agent to discuss increasing the amount of the policy. Identification You accumulate a lot of identification and official documentation throughout your life. It is good idea to organize all documents in case you need it to buy a house, get insurance, or do other things. Here’s a rundown: Marriage Certificate Birth Certificate Social Security Card Passport Armed Forces ID/Discharge Papers Citizenship Documentation Prenuptial or Postnuptial Agreement Divorce Decree (from previous marriages) Documents related to any children you already have (e.g., adoption or legal guardianship papers) Digital Assets Sharing passcodes and passwords to the following devices and systems is extremely helpful: Mobile Phone(s) Computer(s) Tablet Home Security System WIFI Along these lines, there are many other digital accounts and online services that spouses will be sharing with each other to make sure the household runs smoothly. Here’s a handy list of such things: Password Manager: If you use a password manager, your master password is the most important one to share Home Utilities: Power, cable, phone, etc. Health/Medical: insurance provider, prescription services Financial/Money Management: Auto-payments, budgeting Entertainment: video, music, gaming Food/Shopping/Delivery Services Cloud Storage: Photos, media Travel/Ticketing/Rewards: frequent flyer miles, reward points Need Help with the Next Steps? Underberg & Kessler’s Estates & Trusts attorneys can work with you to formulate the best estate planning strategy to meet your goals — in all stages of your estate planning journey. For more information, contact Joshua B. Beisker at jbeisker@underbergkessler.com or 585-258-2879.

Merchant Cash Advances (“MCA”), which spawned from the 2008 financial crisis, offer an alternative method of short-term financing for cash-strapped small businesses who need a quick source of funds and may not qualify for a bank loan. MCA companies provide funds to struggling businesses in exchange for a percentage of the businesses’ revenue, which typically are repaid through daily or weekly automatic withdrawals from the business’s bank accounts. Frequently referred to as payday lenders for businesses, MCA companies tend to use high pressure sales tactics to entice unsuspecting small business owners into signing contracts that can be the gateway to financial ruin. These contracts of adhesion contain one-sided terms in favor of the lender, default provisions that are so restrictive a business is certain to default before ever contemplating the protections of bankruptcy laws, broad security pledges that encumber every asset and potential revenue stream, allow the lender unfettered access to the borrower’s bank accounts to monitor the financial condition of the borrower, and include mandatory personal guarantees of both performance and payment that can be invoked at any time. MCA companies employ a network of independent sales organizations (“ISOs”) who use leads purchased from online paid lead generators whose websites promise to match the consumer with reputable lenders along with website inquiries. The ISOs receive a commission or referral fee paid by the borrower from the funding proceeds. The MCA agreements mimic a traditional factoring transaction, but the reality is quite different. Factoring is a type of small business financing where a factoring company purchases accounts receivable at a discount from the invoice amount. In return for the right to collect on the invoice and retain the difference between the invoice amount and the discounted purchase price, the factoring company assumes the credit risk of the collectability of the accounts. As owner of the account, the factoring company is typically entitled to receive payment directly from the account debtor, and to undertake collection activities. In contrast, a loan is the exchange of a sum certain to a business, with a promise to repay the sum plus a rate of interest, presumably from the future operating revenues of the business. The lender does not assume the credit risk of any particular account or asset of the business and does not assume responsibility for the collection of any account. In New York, interest rates are capped at 25% and any lender who charges more than the statutory maximum will run afoul of the state’s usuary laws. Although MCA agreements state that they purchase accounts receivable and display a percentage rate that is at or below the statutory maximum, the effective rate of interest is significantly higher. The agreements do not identify any particular account purchased and require payments on a set daily or weekly schedule. Despite reconciliation provisions in the agreements that purportedly require the lenders to adjust the payments at the request of the borrower, the lenders rarely disclose how the payments are determined or under what circumstances a borrower would be entitled to an adjustment. In many cases, these lenders don’t have a reconciliation department and recent court cases have shown that certain lenders never intended to make the adjustments. With sham provisions and virtually no likelihood of adjustment, the agreements bear the hallmarks of a loan transaction: certainty of payment and a finite term. The characterization and type of the MCA transaction is critical and continues to be the subject of consternation of the New York Courts and the Bankruptcy Courts. MCA companies have a strong interest in ensuring that the agreements are interpreted as a sale of receivables and not a loan. If the agreements are said to be a loan, then the effective interest rates on the agreements, which can exceed 300% on an annualized basis, would exceed both civil and criminal usury laws and expose the lenders to the risk of criminal enterprise corruption statutes. Courts have struggled to develop any test that will uncover the true nature of MCA transactions. Civil Courts have defaulted to a three-prong test that does little to consider the overarching purpose and character of the agreements. Bankruptcy Courts fair slightly better, having developed a more fact intensive inquiry, however even that falls short of full discovery of the true nature of the predatory lending scheme. The terms and conditions of these MCA agreements are intentionally designed and/or used by the MCA companies to try to deceive courts and law enforcement into believing the agreements do not contemplate a loan transaction and thus do not trigger the usury or racketeering laws. A central component of the scheme includes pushing cash poor businesses to the point that they cannot meet their obligations under existing MCA agreements, at which point the lender offers new advances with even more onerous terms, trapping their victims into a negative feedback loop before pushing businesses (and their individual owners)towards a financial cliff. Eventually, the terms become too oppressive, small businesses default, and the MCA companies aggressively pursue small businesses and their individual owners for repayment of the amounts due under the loans. MCA companies often employ threatening, deceptive, and illegal collection tactics, impose unconscionable fees, file lawsuits in New York against businesses out of state, use unreliable methods of service designed to ensure defendants fail to answer, which then allow the MCA lenders to file uncontested default judgments. For nearly a decade, MCA companies have operated with impunity, unregulated and undeterred, compiling over tens of thousands of judgments against small businesses and their individual owners. In 2018, the tide began to slowly turn when Bloomberg News published a series of groundbreaking articles exposing the abuses of the MCA industry. The New York State Legislature enacted legislation extinguishing the lenders’ preferred weapon — the confession of judgment. On July 31, 2020, the Securities and Exchange Commission shut down an MCA company located in Philadelphia. On August 3, 2020, the Federal Trade Commission sued Yellowstone Capital, who paid more than $9.8 million to settle charges that it withdrew money from businesses’ bank accounts without permission and deceived them about the amount of financing and other features of its financing products. On December 23, 2020, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed into law the Small Business Truth in Lending Law, which is aimed at protecting small business owners and requires key financial terms to be disclosed at the time a credit provider or broker makes an offer of financing of $500,000 or less. In January 2023, the New Jersey Attorney General settled a case against an MCA company, awarding $27,375,000.00 in relief to its customers comprised of the forgiveness of all outstanding loan balances of those customers, as well as restitution, civil penalties, attorneys’ fees, and costs. On September 25, 2023, the New York State Attorney General struck another blow to the MCA industry with a decision against a group of lenders which deemed the agreements to be “criminally usurious loans,” ordering the recission of all of the subject agreements, a full accounting, vacating confessions of judgment, terminating liens, and compelling the return of all amounts collected by the defendant MCA companies dating back to June 10, 2014. While legislation and court decisions have begun to clamp down on MCA companies, they have done little to alter the landscape. The MCA companies and their legal counsel closely monitor court decisions and with each adverse decision they evolve, redrafting their agreements to eliminate terms found to be unlawful and add illusory “protections” for borrowers. Without sweeping reform of the MCA industry, small businesses remain at risk of falling prey to the insidious tactics of these enterprises, and until then let the borrower beware. Renee Segina Moore is an Associate in Underberg & Kessler LLP’s Litigation, Creditors’ Rights, and Tax Law Practice Groups. Drawing on her background as a CPA, Renee leverages her experience to provide clients with the unique perspective of an attorney who not only understands the legal side of disputes, but also any financial implications critical to achieving client objectives. She represents businesses and individuals in litigation, negotiation, and mediation. Renee can be reached at rmoore@underbergkessler.com. Reprinted with permission from The Daily Record and available as a PDF file here.

We were thrilled to support the Small Business Council’s (a Greater Rochester Chamber affiliate) Thanksgiving Appeal once again. This year, we doubled our goal and donated 10 boxes filled with Thanksgiving food items and gift cards. Cheers to our U&K team! Happy Thanksgiving to all - wishing you a harvest of blessings, good health, and good times!

The IRS recently published annual inflation adjustments for 2024 that relate to gift and estate taxes. Annual Gift Tax Exclusion Each year, the IRS sets the annual gift tax exclusion, which allows a taxpayer to give a certain amount (in 2024, $18,000) per recipient tax-free without using up any of the taxpayer’s lifetime gift and estate tax exemption (in 2024, $13.61 million). For married couples, this means that they can give $36,000/year per recipient beginning next year. For example, if a married couple has three children and five grandchildren, they may transfer $288,000 in 2024 to their descendants without touching their combined $27.22 million gift tax exemption, thus allowing them to transfer further substantial assets gift-tax-free. Not only are the assets removed from the taxpayers’ taxable estates, the assets’ future appreciation also avoids gift and estate taxes. In 2023, the federal gift tax annual exclusion amount was $17,000, or $34,000 for a married couple choosing to split gifts. The new exclusions go into effective on January 1, 2024. Lifetime Estate and Gift Tax Exemption If an individual gifts an amount that is above the annual gift tax exclusion, a portion of the individual’s lifetime gift tax exemption ($13.61 million in 2024) will be used. The gift and estate tax exemption are linked, meaning that the use of one’s gift tax exemption will reduce the amount one may leave at death estate-tax-free. If an individual makes gifts more than the annual gift tax exclusion, a gift tax return will be due on April 15 the following year to report the gift (and track the amount of the lifetime exemption that has been used). Notably, although the IRS has announced that the lifetime estate and gift tax exemption will increase to $13.61 million in 2024, under current law, that amount will be decreased by half at the start of 2026. Annual Gift Tax Exclusion for Gifts to Non-US Citizen Spouse Spouses who are both US citizens may usually transfer unlimited amounts to each other without incurring any gift tax, as any assets in excess of the couple’s combined estate tax exemption ($27.22 million in 2024) will be taxed at the death of the surviving spouse, and transferring assets to the survivor only defers the tax that the IRS will eventually collect. Gifts to a non-US citizen spouse, however, are limited. Since a non-US citizen spouse may not be subject to the US estate tax, one cannot transfer unlimited assets to a non-US citizen spouse because that transferred wealth could potentially avoid US estate taxation upon the non-US citizen spouse’s death. When the recipient spouse is not a US citizen, and regardless of whether the non-US citizen spouse is a resident or nonresident of the United States, the amount of tax-free gifts is limited to an annual exclusion amount. For 2024, the first $185,000 of gifts to a spouse who is a non-US citizen are not included in the total amount of taxable gifts. Underberg & Kessler’s Estates and Trusts attorneys can help you maximize these benefits and ensure you are getting the most value out of your estate and gifting plans. For more information, contact Joshua B. Beisker at jbeisker@underbergkessler.com or 585-258-2879.

Congratulations to Tom Knab for being selected to The Daily Record's 2023 Power 20 Litigation List for the third year in a row. The Power 20 list showcases power players in the Western New York legal community who are recognized as leaders in their area of practice. “The people on this list help their clients resolve complex legal matters that often have dire consequences for their financial well-being, whether the client is a business or an individual. These attorneys have also advocated for their clients during a time of unprecedented disruption due to the COVID-19 pandemic, social unrest and more. They have had to navigate new rules from federal and state government and the court system and have had to embrace new ways of practicing law,” stated Ben Jacobs, Associate Publisher and Editor of The Daily Record. Tom serves as Underberg & Kessler’s Managing Partner and Chair of the Firm’s Litigation Practice Group. He has practiced in the New York State and Federal Courts for over 35 years, handling jury and non-jury trials, appeals, arbitrations, and mediations. Tom is well-known in the legal community for his practical advice on negotiating and litigating contracts; construction and real estate disputes; drafting and litigating restrictive covenants and employment agreements; representing founders, owners, and executives in partnership, LLC, and corporate disputes; constitutional challenges to governmental actions; and defense of legal malpractice claims. Tom has been recognized in the 2021-2024 editions of The Best Lawyers in America® for his work in Commercial Litigation, Litigation-Construction, Litigation-Insurance, and Litigation-Labor & Employment. He was honored as the 2024 Best Lawyers® “Lawyer of the Year” for Litigation–Construction in Buffalo, NY. In 2022, Tom was also recognized by the Rochester Business Journal in the Power 50 in Law list.

We are pleased to announce that the Firm has been recognized for its professional excellence in multiple practice areas in the 2024 edition of Best Law Firms®. Best Law Firms rankings, awarded nationally and within 188 metropolitan areas across the United States, are determined by client/professional reference feedback, information provided by firms, industry leader interviews, and feedback collected through the Best Lawyers research process. Only 4% of firms in the United States are considered for a Best Law Firms ranking, which are based on input on expertise, responsiveness, civility, cost effectiveness, and understanding of the client’s underlying business. Underberg & Kessler received the following rankings in the 2024 edition of the Best Law Firms: Buffalo, NY Environmental Law (Tier 3) Legal Malpractice Law – Defendants (Tier 3) Litigation – Construction (Tier 2) Litigation – Insurance (Tier 1) Litigation – Labor & Employment (Tier 3) Real Estate Law (Tier 3) Rochester, NY Banking and Finance Law (Tier 1) Civil Rights Law (Tier 2) Closely Held Companies and Family Businesses Law (Tier 2) Commercial Finance Law (Tier 2) Commercial Litigation (Tier 2) Corporate Law (Tier 1) Elder Law (Tier 2) Health Care Law (Tier 1) Labor Law – Management (Tier 2) Litigation – Health Care (Tier 1) Litigation – Labor & Employment (Tier 2) Medical Malpractice Law – Defendants (Tier 2) Municipal Law (Tier 1) Real Estate Law (Tier 1) The 2024 Best Law Firms rankings can be accessed at www.bestlawfirms.com.

On October 12, 2023, the New York State Public Service Commission (“PSC”) issued a key decision denying petitions of offshore wind developers and a state trade association requesting billions of dollars in additional state money on four proposed offshore wind projects and 86 land-based projects. The PSC decision determined to preserve the competitive bidding process and deny the developers additional subsidies. Based on the reaction of green energy developers and climate change proponents, the decision may have long-range impacts on New York and the federal transition to renewable energy. As reported in past articles, New York’s Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (“CLCPA”) calls for greenhouse gas reduction from 1990 levels of 40% by 2030 and 85% by 2050. Consequently, New York is seeking a renewable energy generation target of 70% by 2030 and 100% emissions free by 2040. These targets are exceedingly ambitious and are rift with siting, approval, implementation, and reliability concerns. A Final Scoping Plan (“the Plan”) developed by the CLCPA Climate Action Council was approved by the Council on December 19, 2022, by a 19-3 vote. The Plan mandates transforming New York’s power system to meet the CLCPA standards. Although market changes with wind, solar, and hydropower have transitioned away from fossil fuel sources such as coal for electric generation and reduced emissions by 46% since 1990, the Plan aims to move rapidly beyond that. In particular, to meet the 2040 goal of an electric system that produces no emissions in 2040, it calls for the deployment of 6,000 megawatts of solar by 2025 and 9,000 megawatts of offshore wind by 2035. The Plan also calls for deploying 3,000 megawatts of energy storage by 2030 in an attempt to create more in-state power and flexibility. The petitions to PSC were submitted by Empire Offshore Wind LLC and Beacon Wind LLC, Sunrise Wind LLC, and the Alliance for Clean Energy New York (“ACENY”). The petitions sought adjustment to the Renewable Energy Credit (“REC”) and Offshore Wind REC purchase and sale agreements entered with New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (“NYSERDA”) to address recent inflationary issues impacting the proposed projects. In denying the requests, the PSC Commission Chair Rory M. Christian stated that “[t]he requested amendments to the contracts would have provided adjustments outside of the competitive procurement process; such relief is fundamentally inconsistent with long-standing Commission policy. The Commission has repeatedly stated that competition in the procurement process is necessary to protect ratepayers and provides the soundest approach to mobilize the industry to achieve our critical State goals dependably and cost-effectively, and we do so again through today’s action.” Significantly, the PSC found that the requested contract amendments sought by Empire/Beacon, Sunrise and ACENY “were not in the best interest of the State’s ratepayers.” In particular, “on monthly bill basis, granting the request to amend the executed contracts outside the competitive procurement process would have resulted in as high as 6.7 percent increases for residential customers and as high as 10.5 percent for commercial or industrial customers on a monthly bill depending on service territory and the level of relief provided ---above what has already been committed.” The four projects impacted by PSC’s decision, Empire Wind 1, Empire Wind 2, Beacon Wind, and Sunrise Wind, represent approximately half of the offshore wind capacity that New York State has committed to achieve by 2035. The four projects all remain in the proposed phase and were slated to enter operations between 2025 and 2028. The only other New York wind project in place, South Fork Wind, was approved by the federal government in 2021. The PSC decision was quickly criticized by clean energy groups. ACENY’s Executive Director, Anne Reynolds said that “[t]the decision is shortsighted. We were hoping the Commission would act strategically on behalf of ratepayers and the environment; instead, their decision will result in increased costs and greenhouse gas emissions.” Similarly, the American Clean Power Association CEO, Jason Grumet said that “[w]ith one shortsighted decision, the NYSPC has thrown New York’s environmental and clean energy future into peril. Absent robust offshore wind industry, it will not be possible for New York State to achieve its climate and environmental justice goals.” Following PSC’s decision, Governor Hochul announced a 10-point plan to expand and support large-scale renewable energy in the state. One of the action points is to expand offshore wind development through increased competition and a larger pool of developers. In the wake of PSC’s decision to deny the additional subsidies for the four projects, there are mounting concerns from green developers and climate change interest groups that the companies will cancel their contracts due to lack of profitability. NYSERDA has been charged with exploring expedited procurement process to meet the state’s lofty renewable energy goal of 70% by 2030. Until this point, the CLCPA and the Plan have moved forward with little resistance. PSC’s decision to raise issues about competitive bidding on large-scale wind and solar projects and protection of ratepayers is a significant first roadblock. While the CLCPA goals have been lauded by the state, green developers, and interest groups, there has been virtually no consideration of implementation costs and what will be passed along to New York consumers and taxpayers. The PSC decision should serve as an awakening that compels other agencies and elements of New York’s government to fundamentally consider whether the CLCPA goals and objectives are achievable. George S. Van Nest is a Partner in Underberg & Kessler LLP’s Litigation Practice Group and Chair of the firm’s Environmental Practice Group. He focuses his practice in the areas of environmental law, development, construction, and commercial litigation. George can be reached at gvannest@underbergkessler.com. Reprinted with permission from The Daily Record and available as a PDF file here.

Did you know the federal estate and gift tax exemption amounts are set to decrease at the end of 2025? Currently, an individual can make transfers by gift during life, and bequests at death, up to an aggregate of $12.92 million, with that amount increasing to $13.44 million in 2024, without incurring gift or federal estate tax. Similarly, the federal GST exemption is currently $12.92 million, increasing to $13.44 million in 2024. On January 1, 2026, these amounts are scheduled to “sunset” and revert back to the 2017 amount of $5 million, adjusted for inflation. With the scheduled sunset of the all-time-high unified estate and gift tax exclusion amounts, now is the time to address estate and tax planning updates and to consider the use of the gift and generation-skipping transfer exemptions. The estate planning attorneys at Underberg & Kessler LLP advise clients and utilize sophisticated estate planning strategies to preserve and enhance our clients’ wealth for current and future generations. For more information about our Estates and Trusts legal services, contact Joshua B. Beisker at jbeisker@underbergkessler.com or 585-258-2879.

When working with estate planning clients, I recommend that they talk with their family about their estate plan. It can be very beneficial for family members as it provides some peace of mind for them to know that a plan is in place and that things are in order. Ultimately, the level of detail that the client provides to his or her family members depends on the client’s comfort level. Some clients may want to discuss what they're trying to accomplish with their plan when talking with their children or family members. Many clients want to talk with their family about the details of the plan or share the actual plan itself, while others want to discuss the plan in more general terms to advise them that a plan is in place and advise them who to contact when and if that day comes to get copies of the documents. Every family situation is different, and it is important to remember that working closely with your counsel, doing as much planning as you can ahead of time, and giving yourself the time and focus that you need for this type of plan you envision is critical to the success in the end. That said, prior to discussing a plan with family members, it is prudent to first speak with an estate planning attorney to determine what information will be discussed, and which family members will be involved in the meeting. For more information about our Estates and Trusts legal services, contact Joshua B. Beisker at jbeisker@underbergkessler.com or 585-258-2879.

Estate planning is a crucial activity for people of all ages and all levels of wealth. When done properly, it can safeguard more than an individual’s finances, it can create a legacy. However, it is estimated that 67% of Americans do not have an up-to-date estate plan.* Estate planning aims both to allow individuals to pass their assets to beneficiaries as they see fit, and to minimize the state and federal taxes that accompany the transfer of significant wealth. Additionally, estate planning can enable individuals to decide which people and charitable organizations will receive their wealth at their death. The lack of estate planning may cause an individual’s assets to be distributed to unintended parties by default. Careful planning can also prevent family members or other beneficiaries from being subjected to complex legal and administrative processes requiring significant expenditure of time. The National Estate Planning Awareness Week, which runs from October 16th – 22nd, is an awareness week founded by the National Association of Estate Planners & Councils in 2008 with the goal of helping people understand the importance of having a plan in place to protect their assets and loved ones. Our Estates & Trust group can help ensure that your estate planning documents are correct and up to date! For more information, contact Joshua B. Beisker at jbeisker@underbergkessler.com or 585-258-2879. *2022 Caring.com survey

We are happy to announce that Ericka B. Elliott, Katherine H. Karl, Anna E. Lynch, and Andrew M. Washburn were selected as 2023 Legal Excellence Awards program honorees. The Legal Excellence Awards program was created by The Daily Record and the Rochester Business Journal to pay tribute to the ways legal professionals work to make the Greater Rochester community stronger. The honorees were selected based on their dedication to the legal profession, their commitment to their clients and the community, and letters of reference. Congratulations to our exceptional attorneys below who were profiled in The Daily Record and the Rochester Business Journal and celebrated during an event on October 5, 2023: Ericka B. Elliott, who focuses her practice mainly on health care and commercial litigation, was recognized in the Up and Coming Lawyers category. She also has experience advising clients on municipal law and creditors’ rights matters. Ericka earned her B.S. from Cornell University and her J.D. from the University at Buffalo School of Law. Katherine H. Karl was recognized in the Leaders in Law category. As Chair of Underberg & Kessler’s Commercial Lending Practice Group and a Partner in the Real Estate & Finance Practice Group, Kate’s practice covers commercial real estate transfers, development, and financing. She has broad experience representing commercial lenders, owners, developers, and businesses in all aspects of acquisitions, sales, construction, development, and lease negotiations. Kate is a cum laude graduate of Union University at Albany Law School and a magna cum laude graduate of Bucknell University, where she earned her B.S. Anna E, Lynch, recognized in the Lifetime Achievement category, is a respected advisor to the medical community. Anna served as Underberg & Kessler’s Managing Partner for almost two decades and is a Partner in both the Health Care and Corporate & Business Practice Groups. She represents hospitals, long-term care providers, physicians, and other providers throughout the Upstate New York region. A cum laude graduate of Syracuse University College of Law, Anna earned her A.B. from Georgetown University. Andrew M. Washburn, who focuses his practice on real estate law, was recognized in the Up and Coming Lawyers category. Andrew counsels clients on a variety of both commercial and residential real estate transactions. A summa cum laude graduate of Fordham University’s Gabelli School of Business, Andrew earned his J.D. from Fordham University School of Law.

We are pleased to announce that David M. Tang, a partner in the Firm’s Health Care, Litigation, and Creditors’ Rights practice groups, has been named the winner of the 4th Annual Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Vanguard Award by the New York State Bar Association Trial Lawyers Section. He received the award during a New York State Bar Association (NYSBA) virtual ceremony and CLE program held on October 3, 2023. The award, named in honor of the trailblazing Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, is presented to a trial attorney who has made extraordinary efforts in addressing and raising awareness about issues of equity, diversity, and inclusion. To qualify for the award, nominees need to practice substantially as a trial lawyer in state (or federal) courts in New York State, demonstrate a commitment to diversity and inclusion in the legal profession, and make an impact on the legal community by being a better ally and advocate through mentoring and providing opportunities to others. David represents and advises clients in business, health care, restructuring, and commercial litigation matters. At Underberg & Kessler, he serves as chair of the Health Care and Creditors’ Rights practice groups, and co-chair of the Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Belonging Committee. “David is a worthy winner of the Ruth Bader Ginsburg Vanguard Award,” said Richard Lewis, president of the NYSBA. “He is dedicated to promoting awareness of issues relating to diversity, equity, and inclusion at his firm, in his county bar association, and through his active board service. His clients and colleagues agree that he brings care and attention to everything he does – including his efforts to diversify and mentor the next generation of lawyers and to help his local community.” In his nomination letter, Underberg & Kessler managing partner Thomas F. Knab wrote, “David’s commitment to diversity in the legal profession, through his roles as past chair of the Monroe County Bar Association’s Diversity Committee and with mentoring programs such as Lawyers for Learning and the Law Explorers Mock Trial Team at School Without Walls, is indicative of the kind of passion he brings to his work and his willingness to invest his time and energy into worthy causes.” David, who earned his B.A. from Cornell University and his J.D. from Syracuse University College of Law, is active in several charitable organizations, consistently lending his leadership in many ways. He is the chair of the board of WXXI Public Broadcasting Council and The Little Theatre, chair of the St. John’s Foundation, a former trustee of the Monroe County Bar Association and a former director on the boards of the Center for Dispute Settlement and Providence Housing Development Corporation, which supports affordable housing in the Finger Lakes region. In his acceptance speech, David encouraged his colleagues to engage in equity and inclusion work, to continue to invest in others and to guard against the fatigue that sometimes sets in when facing the significant challenge of diversity work. He also shared a quote from the late Justice Ginsburg as a guiding principle, “Fight for the things you care about, but do it in a way that will lead others to join you.” For more information about the 4th Annual Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Vanguard Award, click here to view the NYSBA website.