Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
How Will It Play in New York?
Judge Marilyn O'Connor of Family Court, Monroe County, issued a controversial order in March barring a frequently homeless couple from having any more children until they can show that they will be able to care for the four children they already have. The case, Matter of Bobbijean P., N.Y.L.J. 5/17/04, Vol. 94; Pg. 20, came before the court after a child born to the couple in March 2003 was removed from their care 1 week after birth. The child was found to have cocaine in its system at birth, just like two of its older siblings; all four children, currently ranging in age from 1 to 6 years old, were placed in foster care soon after their births.
Neither parent chose to attend the hearing at which the order was issued, and neither of them was represented by counsel. The judge found, based on uncontroverted evidence, that the couple had abused drugs for years, had not supported their children, and that both parents were guilty of neglect. She then issued her order, which prohibits either parent from having more children, but does not require the couple to seek sterilization or impose any particular birth control method on them. Nevertheless, should the woman become pregnant or the man father a child following the date of the court's order, the respondents could be subject to sanctions for contempt.
As could be expected, advocates for the preservation of civil liberties are up in arms over the judge's order. As Anna Schissel, staff attorney for the Reproductive Rights Project of the New York Civil Liberties Union told Rochester newspaper The Democrat and Chronicle, she didn't “know of any precedent that would permit a judge to do this … The [U.S.] Supreme Court has ruled again and again that the right to have a child or not to have a child is at the heart of a cluster of constitutionally protected choices that stem from the right of privacy.”
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 Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?