Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Law firms are spending more money on professional development and hiring more staff to oversee this area than ever before. In addition to substantive skills programs for the many different practice areas, internal programs have expanded to include leadership and business-development curriculums, deal and case management training, presentation skills, business development and client relationship training.
Fifteen years ago, the comment often made about professional development in law firms was: 'Why should we?' Now, if a firm admits that it does not have an institutionalized professional development program, clients and other firms tend to raise eyebrows and ask: 'Why not?' In fact, many RFPs or RFIs from clients and prospective clients now routinely ask for details regarding the training a law firm offers, both internally and for its clients.
This begs the question of how to get the highest and best use out of your firm's professional development investment, over and above the clear benefit to your own lawyers and staff. Odds are there is a huge amount of intellectual property already in existence as a result of your firm's internal programs. Consider turning what is a valuable cost center into an invaluable business development resource.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
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 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.
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.
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.
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.