Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
'Animal Rights' Law?
I recently rode the commuter train with the father of a young associate attorney who was looking to make his name in his practice. The young lawyer had been hired by a large, prestigious firm, but was worried about being buried “among the hoardes,” unable to stand out and be noticed.It was right after the huge scare about possibly poisoned pet food, and my commuter friend was strongly urging his son to enter the relatively unknown field of what he called “pet law.” I explained that the recent food-poisoning cases would be rightly litigated under product liability suits, but this man was insistent that “pet law” would be the “med mal” of the future.Is he right?My first instinct was to warn the young attorney to stay with his firm, to stay with the tried and true, not to rock the boat with something so risky. But is that the right advice? Is there room for practice areas to expand with the times?Strangely enough, only one week later, I heard from a self-proclaimed “animal rights” attorney, wanting to write an article for us on the recent pet-food scare. When I talked to him, he said he was one of the few in the legal community, making a good living from all sorts of pet-related cases, from custody (which actually appears in family law cases) to accidental death, to owners distraught over sick puppies inadvertently bought from puppy mills, and so forth. He sounded completely happy and content with his practice, thrilled to be providing this service. Something to think about, maybe?Is “pet law,” or as he called it, “animal rights law,” the next big practice area? There are an awful lot of pets in this country; and as frequently stated on major Web sites, they are spoiled as never before (I count myself among the spoilers). Would I call an animal rights attorney if something happened to my beloved pets? I would if I knew where to find one. Would you?
I recently rode the commuter train with the father of a young associate attorney who was looking to make his name in his practice. The young lawyer had been hired by a large, prestigious firm, but was worried about being buried “among the hoardes,” unable to stand out and be noticed.It was right after the huge scare about possibly poisoned pet food, and my commuter friend was strongly urging his son to enter the relatively unknown field of what he called “pet law.” I explained that the recent food-poisoning cases would be rightly litigated under product liability suits, but this man was insistent that “pet law” would be the “med mal” of the future.Is he right?My first instinct was to warn the young attorney to stay with his firm, to stay with the tried and true, not to rock the boat with something so risky. But is that the right advice? Is there room for practice areas to expand with the times?Strangely enough, only one week later, I heard from a self-proclaimed “animal rights” attorney, wanting to write an article for us on the recent pet-food scare. When I talked to him, he said he was one of the few in the legal community, making a good living from all sorts of pet-related cases, from custody (which actually appears in family law cases) to accidental death, to owners distraught over sick puppies inadvertently bought from puppy mills, and so forth. He sounded completely happy and content with his practice, thrilled to be providing this service. Something to think about, maybe?Is “pet law,” or as he called it, “animal rights law,” the next big practice area? There are an awful lot of pets in this country; and as frequently stated on major Web sites, they are spoiled as never before (I count myself among the spoilers). Would I call an animal rights attorney if something happened to my beloved pets? I would if I knew where to find one. Would you?
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.
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.
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.