Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
2004 e-Discovery Rulings Recap
The courts in 2004 issued a plethora of important rulings on e-discovery, most of which were not good for businesses. The rulings generally require companies to make greater efforts to protect potentially discoverable records, allow these records to be more easily obtained through discovery, and restrict the format in which these records must be produced.
Several of the year's most important court decisions concerned the use of records-retention policies in the face of potential lawsuits. The traditional rule was that a company that reasonably expects to be involved in a litigation could nevertheless allow records relating to that potential litigation to be destroyed pursuant to a properly adopted records-retention policy. See, Stevenson v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., 354 F. 3d 739 (8th Cir. 2004); Thompson v. HUD, 219 F.R.D. 93 (D. Md. 2003).
However, a federal appellate court has ruled that a records-retention policy may provide little protection if it's created or implemented in a suspicious manner. In United States v. Arthur Andersen, LLP, 374 F.3d 281 (5th Cir. 2004), the court affirmed Arthur Andersen's criminal conviction for shredding records immediately before being served with a Securities and Exchange Commission subpoena. The court noted that if a company suddenly implements or energizes a “lazy document retention policy” when some legal action looms, the company's conduct is “more easily viewed as improper.”
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
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.