Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In coverage litigation, insurers often treat extrinsic evidence as if it were radioactive material, and there is some justification for this instinct. Generally, consideration of extrinsic evidence connotes an ambiguity in policy language, and there are several reasons why insurers seek to avoid arguing, or even intimating, that the language at issue in an insurance policy is ambiguous. Most obvious, if consideration of extrinsic evidence cannot resolve the ambiguity, a finding of ambiguity sometimes leads courts to the doctrine of contra proferentum, the canon of contract construction that construes ambiguities in certain contracts against the drafter. See, e.g., St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Pryseski, 438 A.2d 282, 288 (Md. 1980). While not an inevitable result, application of the doctrine of contra proferentum most often inures to the insurer's detriment.
In addition, the notion of a potential ambiguity in contract language can lead to burdensome and expensive discovery into extrinsic evidence of intent, with much of the extrinsic 'evidence' sought in coverage litigation more noteworthy for its invasiveness than its actual or potential probative nature. Finally, as repeat players in coverage litigation, insurers must be wary of how an assertion or intimation that policy language is ambiguous will impact coverage disputes involving identical or similar language, even if the collateral effect of such an argument in the existing coverage dispute is insignificant. All of these considerations tend to make insurers reluctant to urge a court to consider extrinsic evidence in coverage litigation or to suggest that the policy language at issue is ambiguous.
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.
There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.
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 real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?