Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
NY High Court Upholds Consent-to-Settle Provision
The Court of Appeals of New York, applying New York law, has held that a policyholder was not entitled to coverage when it breached the consent-to-settle provision of its primary insurance policy, which required it to obtain the insurer's consent before entering into a settlement in excess of $5 million. Vigilant Insurance Co. v. Bear Stearns Cos., 2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 02080 (N.Y. March 13, 2008). This case is important because it reinforces that a policyholder cannot obtain coverage for voluntary out-of-court settlements it enters without its insurer's consent.
The policy at issue provided coverage for 'losses resulting from claims made against the insured for its wrongful acts' but 'excluded coverage for claims arising from investment banking work undertaken by' the policyholder. In addition, the primary policy stipulated that the policyholder would not to settle any claim over $5 million without the insurer's consent and that the 'insurer shall not be liable for any settlement … to which it has not consented.'
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 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.
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.
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.
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.