Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A Tenant's Perspective on SNDAs: Non-Disturbance Is Not Enough
Part One of this article, last month, outlined the basic elements of a subordination, non-disturbance and attornment agreement (SNDA), which regulates two competing interests in the same property — tenant's right to possess its premises pursuant to its lease and mortgage lender's security interest in that same premises. Part Two explains the differences between the concepts of "non-disturbance" and "recognition," while contending that lease recognition is more important to the tenant than not having its possession disturbed.
Personal Covenants vs. Real Covenants
A covenant is simply an agreement. An in personam covenant binds the person who grants the covenant, whereas an in rem covenant binds a thing. Black's Law Dictionary indicates that "in personam" is a Latin phrase meaning "against a person" and that "in rem" is a Latin phrase meaning "against a thing." In personam, and In rem, Black's Law Dictionary (9th ed. 2009). In the real property context, in rem covenants are sometimes referred to as "real covenants" whereas in personam covenants are "personal covenants." A personal covenant only binds the person who makes the covenant and any successor who expressly assumes that covenant. In contrast, a real covenant binds the real property itself and is sometimes said to "run with the land." Any person who succeeds to the ownership of the property will also be bound to honor the real covenant, whether or not he or she expressly agrees to assume it, so long as he or she has actual or constructive notice of the covenant.
This premium content is locked for Commercial Leasing Law & Strategy 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
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
Discovery of Claim Construction and Infringement Analysis May be Compelled Prior to a Markman Hearing
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.