Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Insurer Is Not Barred From Relying on Policy Exclusions to Disclaim Indemnity to an Insured
On Feb. 18, 2014, in K2 Inv. Group, LLC v. American Guar. & Liab. Ins. Co., 6 N.E.3d 1117, 22 N.Y.3d 578 (N.Y. 2014) (hereafter “K2 ' II“), the Court of Appeals of New York vacated its prior decision and reversed the Appellate Division's Order in K2 Inc. Group, LLC v. American Guar. & Liability Ins. Co., 21 N.Y.3d 384 (2013) (hereafter “K2 ' I“), holding that its ruling in K2 ' I was irreconcilable with an earlier, established decision: Servidone Const. Corp. v. Security Ins. Co. of Hartford, 64 N.Y.2d 419 (1985).
In the K2 ' II decision, the Court of Appeals thus affirmed the proposition that an insurer is not barred from relying on policy exclusions to disclaim indemnity to an insured where the insurer earlier breached a contractual duty to defend the insured in a personal injury action.
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.
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?
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.