Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In almost every respect, e-discovery falls squarely in the domain of attorneys ' inside counsel, outside counsel and experts. Essentially, it is the business process for litigation, regulatory matters and internal investigations. So why is IT involved in almost every situation? The answer is quite simple: because IT must be involved. Today, the information used and relied upon by attorneys is digital. Documents created by users (custodians) that are a part of litigation or regulatory matters live and die in electronic form and are stored on information systems ' managed, serviced and controlled in large part by IT.
But with law firms and corporations tightening budget belts, IT organizations that are supporting legal teams to preserve and gather (collect) data are tempted to perform those tasks in ways that do not meet the standards required by the current legal rules.
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
A federal district court in Miami, FL, has ruled that former National Basketball Association star Shaquille O'Neal will have to face a lawsuit over his promotion of unregistered securities in the form of cryptocurrency tokens and that he was a "seller" of these unregistered securities.
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
Blockchain domain names offer decentralized alternatives to traditional DNS-based domain names, promising enhanced security, privacy and censorship resistance. However, these benefits come with significant challenges, particularly for brand owners seeking to protect their trademarks in these new digital spaces.
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?