Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Everyone's an Expert
All of us who are interested in criminal law have seen the 'Battle of the Experts' ad nauseum. The prosecution trots out an 'expert' with enough acronyms after his or her name to impress the entire courtroom, and a CV extraordinaire, and that person, under oath, states his and her opinion with great authority.Next comes the opposing side's 'expert,' with an equal amount of acronyms and an equally impressive CV, who states the exact opposite under oath. Who do you believe? Who is truly an expert?With that kind of question in mind, The Matrimonial Strategist this month is running a provocative, thought-provoking article entitled 'The Failure of Peer Review,' by David A. Martindale and Jonathan Gould. The authors state, 'We hope to create for the reader a healthy skepticism about the process, and shed light on assumptions that we believe are often made by colleagues, attorneys and judges about the academic rigor and scientific integrity of [the peer review process].Although in this case the authors were aiming their warnings at matrimonial and family law attorneys, these same warnings apply throughout the area of law. Who really ARE your experts? Are they what they say they are? Do their CVs accurately reflect their careers in the field you are looking for? How do you know? Is there someone in your firm who has the time and the expertise to thoroughly search a potential expert's background, and to learn exactly how he or she performs in the courtroom?This is not meant in any way to demean a true 'expert' who has spent long years in his or her field of expertise. But it's easy to be fooled, and I wonder, as do the authors of the article mentioned above, whether in fact some attorneys and judges place too much faith in opinions that may not really be valid.Something to think about?
All of us who are interested in criminal law have seen the 'Battle of the Experts' ad nauseum. The prosecution trots out an 'expert' with enough acronyms after his or her name to impress the entire courtroom, and a CV extraordinaire, and that person, under oath, states his and her opinion with great authority.Next comes the opposing side's 'expert,' with an equal amount of acronyms and an equally impressive CV, who states the exact opposite under oath. Who do you believe? Who is truly an expert?With that kind of question in mind, The Matrimonial Strategist this month is running a provocative, thought-provoking article entitled 'The Failure of Peer Review,' by David A. Martindale and Jonathan Gould. The authors state, 'We hope to create for the reader a healthy skepticism about the process, and shed light on assumptions that we believe are often made by colleagues, attorneys and judges about the academic rigor and scientific integrity of [the peer review process].Although in this case the authors were aiming their warnings at matrimonial and family law attorneys, these same warnings apply throughout the area of law. Who really ARE your experts? Are they what they say they are? Do their CVs accurately reflect their careers in the field you are looking for? How do you know? Is there someone in your firm who has the time and the expertise to thoroughly search a potential expert's background, and to learn exactly how he or she performs in the courtroom?This is not meant in any way to demean a true 'expert' who has spent long years in his or her field of expertise. But it's easy to be fooled, and I wonder, as do the authors of the article mentioned above, whether in fact some attorneys and judges place too much faith in opinions that may not really be valid.Something to think about?
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.