Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
LOUISIANA
Greek Shipping Company Sentenced for Pollution-Related Charges
On Dec. 9, 2009, in a New Orleans federal court, Greek-based shipping management company Polembros Shipping LTD was sentenced pursuant to the company's Sept. 30, 2009, guilty plea for multiple violations of anti-pollution and ship safety laws, as well as for making false statements during the related government investigation.
The charges against Polembros, which according to the DOJ include the first criminal prosecutions under the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act, stem from an investigation into conditions and record-keeping aboard the company's ship, M/V Theotokos.
Polembros' sentence included a $2.7 million criminal fine, a $100,000 community service payment to the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center, three years of probation ' banning all ships owned or managed by Polembros from U.S. territorial waters and ports ' and a $540,000 payment to nine members of the Theotokos' crew for cooperation with the government's investigation.
The master, chief officer, and chief engineer of the Theotokos were previously sentenced for their roles in related activities.
LOUISIANA
Greek Shipping Company Sentenced for Pollution-Related Charges
On Dec. 9, 2009, in a New Orleans federal court, Greek-based shipping management company Polembros Shipping LTD was sentenced pursuant to the company's Sept. 30, 2009, guilty plea for multiple violations of anti-pollution and ship safety laws, as well as for making false statements during the related government investigation.
The charges against Polembros, which according to the DOJ include the first criminal prosecutions under the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act, stem from an investigation into conditions and record-keeping aboard the company's ship, M/V Theotokos.
Polembros' sentence included a $2.7 million criminal fine, a $100,000 community service payment to the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center, three years of probation ' banning all ships owned or managed by Polembros from U.S. territorial waters and ports ' and a $540,000 payment to nine members of the Theotokos' crew for cooperation with the government's investigation.
The master, chief officer, and chief engineer of the Theotokos were previously sentenced for their roles in related activities.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
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 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?