Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In the few short years since Fuller-Austin was decided, the use of “prepack” bankruptcies has become a favored approach to resolving asbestos liabilities, often with the threat of a “Fuller-Austin result” as a hammer over the insurers asked to pick up the tab. Here's the drill: A policyholder uses section 524(g) of the Bankruptcy Code to channel its present and future asbestos liabilities to a trust; under policyholder's reorganization plan, the trust is funded in significant part with insurance rights; the insurers cannot object to the plan because it is said not to affect their interests; yet plan confirmation triggers coverage for the entire liability in an amount (often a nine or 10 digit amount) to be determined at a later date. See Fuller-Austin Insulation Co., 2002 WL 31005090 (Cal. Sup. Ct. Aug. 6, 2002) (appeal pending). The pressure this Fuller-Austin play puts on insurers leads many to settle their coverage obligations ' often a rational response to a high-stakes game in which insurers have few sources of leverage.
Seeking to expand both the scope of the 524(g) injunction and the pot of available insurance assets, proponents of some asbestos prepacks have moved to “bolt-on” to pending asbestos bankruptcies various non-debtor liabilities, accompanied by assignments of non-debtor policy rights to pay for them. Such “bolt-ons” were proposed in the Federal Mogul and Combustion Engineering prepacks. A somewhat similar approach emerged in the non-prepack Pittsburgh-Corning bankruptcy. Pittsburgh-Corning differs from the bolt-on prepacks in several important respects, including the broad consensual involvement of many insurers and a significant shared insurance program among the debtor and the non-debtors.
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.
There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.
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.
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.
The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.