Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Online
LexisNexis has a new service it calls “CourtLink” (http://www.courtlink.com/)
In “Avoiding Ambush: Tips for the Successful Preparation and Presentation of Witnesses,” August 2003 Product Liability Law & Strategy, author Kimberly D. Baker, Esq. suggested using Courtlink to ambush key adverse witnesses by “finding the dirt” on them through searching for divorce proceedings, custody issues, probate proceedings, property disputes, other business disputes and criminal matters such as driving under the influence of alcohol or acts of violence. Courtlink provides a new way to use court records. You can develop Strategic Profiles to gain insight into a public company's litigation history or attorney experience of a particular nature or on a particular type of suit, and map out federal litigation trends. Through CourtLink you can search the historical federal civil online records. The database of court records covers 10 to 20 years of cases to pinpoint relevant information and provides a Strategic Profile with graphs, data charts and facts. If you subscribe, you can retrieve dockets and documents from all federal and state courts directly, even if they are not available online. In addition, you can order dockets and documents from any court from one online source.
In the course of litigation, for example, you can get a company's profile and have access to a litigant's case history in a particular nature of suit. The Litigant Profile helps you identify litigation trends and the resolution of those cases. You can view the dockets to see patterns of settlements, mediation, etc., then update all cases identified at the bottom of the page as having “No defense Counsel assigned” to ensure that you see the most up-to-date view of the information.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.