Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
If at first you don't succeed, try again. In Maddox v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon Trust Co., N.A., the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit got it right by vacating its prior order in light of the Supreme Court's TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, 141 S. Ct. 2190 (2021), decision. 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 34056 (2d Cir. Nov. 17, 2021).
This appeal originated from an order of the United States District Court for the Western District of New York, holding Plaintiffs maintained Article III standing to seek statutory damages for Defendant's purported untimely violation of recordation requirements imposed by New York State's mortgage-satisfaction-recording statues in New York Real Property Law (RPL) §275 and New York Real Property Actions and Procedures Law (RPAPL) §1921. Initially, the Second Circuit held that, despite not having actual damages to title, reputation, or otherwise, Plaintiffs still maintained Article III standing based on alleging a violation of the mortgage-satisfaction-recording statutes because a mortgagee's delay in recording a discharge of mortgage: 1) creates a cloud on title to real estate; and 2) creates the false appearance that the mortgagor has not paid his/her debt, which can harm the mortgagor's reputation and make it difficult for him/her to obtain additional financing. Maddox v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon Trust Co., N.A., 997 F.3d 436, 446-447 (2d Cir. 2021). As a result, the Second Circuit held that Plaintiffs suffered material harm and an injury-in-fact. Id. at 448-449. Thus, the Second Circuit held that the violations of New York statutory law by itself constituted a particularized harm giving rise to Article III standing because the invasion of interests protected by state law support Article III standing and that the plausible inference that Defendant harmed Plaintiffs financial reputation created a material risk of particularized harm by impairing their credit and liming their borrowing capacity. Id. at 439-440.
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.
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.
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.
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.