Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Fear and Loathing in Preservation
Most in-house counsel know the types of inquiries that should trigger evidence preservation or collection protocols. Once there is reason to believe there will be litigation or investigation, the duty to preserve kicks in immediately. But what's next? First, make a list of people who are likely to have control over potentially evidentiary documents and contact this long list of custodians. Then send out a document retention letter or request for documents and wait for your data to roll in, right? Wrong. Before sending any communication to your custodians, you should consider that they are not attorneys and are usually uncomfortable with the entire litigation process. Considering and having ready answers for the following ten questions'which your custodians are sure to voice ' will help to make your collection efficient and cost effective. It will avoid business interruptions and settle the fear and anxiety your custodian may be feeling. Being organized about these answers will inspire confidence and cooperation from your custodians and will be sure to make your job easier.
What Are the Issues Being Litigated and What Is Your Role in Their Resolution?
Attorneys deal with litigation matters every day so they tend to become common place. However, your custodian most likely has a very different role and is unfamiliar with discovery and the litigation timeline. When you approach a custodian, he or she will feel like he/she is under investigation. Collecting e-mail from a custodian puts her under examination. Litigation can be a frightening experience for people unused to it, so be patient and explain the case. Explain what you need from your custodian after he provides his documents. Let him know if he will be deposed, if they will need to testify or if they will need to sign an affidavit. Ease such fears up front for a smoother document collection process.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
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
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.