Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In The Courts
Fifth Circuit Holds That Plea Agreement Defines Scope of Conduct for Restitution Purposes
In United States v. Adams, 2004 WL 435053 (5th Cir. Mar. 10, 2004), the Fifth Circuit held that the restitution properly awarded under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act should be defined by the scope of the conduct agreed to in the plea agreement rather than by the conduct charged in the indictment. In Adams, the defendant had been charged with conspiracy to mail fraud, wire fraud, and interstate carrier fraud after allegedly orchestrating car accidents to collect insurance proceeds. The defendant refused to agree that the accidents had been staged, but pleaded guilty to a narrower scheme of exacerbating the damage after accidents had occurred. The district court imposed restitution for the full value of the damage caused by the car accidents. The Fifth Circuit vacated the restitution order, and remanded the case to the district court with instructions to order restitution only for the amount of the value of the damage done to the vehicles after the accident. The court explained that for the purposes of punishment in the wake of a guilty plea, the scope of an underlying scheme should be defined by the parties themselves.
Ninth Circuit Holds District Court Need Not Make a Specific Findings to Reject Obstruction of Justice Enhancement
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.