Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Two New Angles on Custody Litigation
Custody litigators use expert testimony and tests to influence the court's decision about which parent should have custody of the child(ren). Psychologists and the MMPI2 test are two tools frequently utilized, but they should be viewed with caution. The American Psychology Association Guidelines for Use in Custody Cases (Guidelines), which were promulgated by the American Psychological Association in 1994, have been a source of discussion and controversy in the courtroom since they were first published. Are they guidelines or are they mandatory directives for the approaches to be taken by the evaluator in the custody evaluation process? For those of us who handle custody litigation, a recent case in Pennsylvania is instructive.
A Case in Point
In 2002, a PhD psychologist and attorney, Jan Grossman, was hired by a litigant mother who was embroiled in a contested custody matter. Grossman was ostensibly hired to review the report of the court-appointed expert. Not content simply to review the submitted report and comment on it, Dr. Grossman asked the mother's lawyer to get permission from the father for the doctor to see the child, which the mother had apparently failed to do. No notice, therefore, was given to the other side the first time Dr. Grossman saw the child, and Dr. Grossman did not check to assure that permission had been given.
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.