Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Every first-year law student learns one of the canonical formulations of federal civil procedure: In order for a federal court to have subject matter jurisdiction over a case or controversy, the matter generally must either arise under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States (“federal question” jurisdiction); or the plaintiffs in an action based on state law must have complete diversity of state citizenship from all of the defendants, and the amount in controversy must exceed $75,000 (“diversity” jurisdiction). 28 U.S.C. ”' 1331; 1332. When the litigants are individuals ─ ”natural persons” ─ determinations of citizenship are simplified by the rule that a person has only one domicile, and by the well-tested standards that have evolved for identifying where that place may be. Where a corporation is a litigant, however, determinations of citizenship are complicated by the so-called “dual citizenship” doctrine, that holds a corporation is a citizen of both its state of incorporation and “of the State where it has its principal place of business[.]” 28 U.S.C. ” 1332(c)(1).
Exactly what this phrase means, however, has never been altogether clear since that second basis of state citizenship was codified in 1958. As the decades have progressed, the evolution of corporate structure and corporate commercial activity has rendered the application of this unarticulated standard a quagmire. What is the “principal place of business” of a multinational corporation that has corporate headquarters in New York, but enjoys relatively few sales in that state, and instead conducts business in all 50 states and 39 other nations? What about a corporation whose leadership team is spread across three offices in three separate states, and does roughly equal amounts of business in each of the states in which those offices are located? Is the proper locus of analysis whether there is a particular place within a state that can be said to be a corporation's “principal place of business,” or should a court look to which state has the greatest aggregate number of business-related contacts to the corporation in determining where the corporation's principal “place of business” lies?
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
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.
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.
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.
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.