Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Changes in Store for Same-Sex Couples?
The election of Eliot Spitzer to the office of Governor may signal a sea change in the progress of attempts to make gay marriage a reality in New York. Before voters went to the polls on Nov. 7, Spitzer made national headlines when, in an October speech at a dinner, he declared his intention to support passage of a same-sex marriage law, if elected. The speech was delivered at a dinner hosted by the Empire State Pride Agenda, a New York nonpartisan lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered civil rights organization.
Spitzer's stance was not wholly surprising, but it is ironic that in 2004, in his position as the State's Attorney General, Spitzer's counsel put a stop to the wave of statewide attempts by couples to enter into same-sex marriages. The movement began when the Mayor of New Paltz performed ceremonies for several same-sex couples who did not have marriage licenses. Those marriages were later deemed void. Spitzer, at that time, told New Yorkers that the language of the Domestic Relations Law did not authorize the issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples because it refers throughout to 'brides and grooms' and 'husbands and wives.' He therefore advised local officials to refrain from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples and from officiating at their weddings. Attorney General Issues Opinion On Same-Sex Marriage, http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2004/mar/mar03a_04.html. At the same time, however, he did proclaim that marriages of same-sex couples lawfully entered into in other jurisdictions should be recognized in New York.
The only hope Spitzer held out at that time for recognition of gay marriage in New York was through the courts. That avenue was closed when the Court of Appeals this July ruled in Hernandez v. Robles that it was not contrary to New York's Constitution for the state to limit marriage rights to opposite-sex couples.
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.