Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
TX High Court Rules on Federal Pre-emption
In an April 18 decision that could affect other kinds of cases involving a federal regulatory scheme, the Texas Supreme Court held that the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Act ('CPSA') pre-empts a tort claim brought against a cigarette lighter manufacturer.
The Case
The supreme court's decision in BIC Pen Corp. v. Carter leaves in limbo a judgment of more than $3.7 million favoring the mother of a child severely injured in a fire caused by a BIC lighter. Although the supreme court reversed the Thirteenth Court of Appeals' judgment with regard to the mother's design-defect claim against BIC, the high court remanded Carter to the Corpus Christi appeals court to address other issues, including a manufacturing-defect claim. The Thirteenth Court's opinion in Carter provides the following background on the case: In 1997, 6-year-old Brittany Carter sustained third-degree burns over more than 55% of her body when her brother accidentally set fire to her dress using a lighter manufactured by the BIC Corp. Janace Carter, the children's mother, sued BIC in 1998, alleging that manufacturing and design defects in the lighter caused her daughter's injuries.
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.