Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Features
The California Court of Appeal, Second District, decided that the term 'Purchaser' in an agreement for 'Walt Disney Productions' to purchase rights in the novel 'Who Censored Roger Rabbit?' and its characters didn't apply to Disney's subsidiaries.
Features
Part One of this article addressed the roots of the subprime crisis and resulting litigation, and provided an overview of D&O coverage. This month's installment focuses on specific D&O coverage issues.
Features
The Ninth Circuit recently examined an antitrust issue with significant relevance to the equipment leasing industry. In <i>Newcal v. IKON Office Solution</i>, competitors of a copier equipment provider, IKON Office Solution, alleged that defendant IKON used 'fraudulent practices' to secure and lengthen its customer contracts, thus reducing the ability of competing copier equipment providers to contest for 'aftermarket' business.'
Features
In a pair of workplace discrimination cases, the Supreme Court on May 27 made it easier for workers to sue employers who retaliate against them for reporting bias.
Features
Everything contained in this issue, in an easy-to-read format.
Features
In-depth analysis of recent rulings.
Features
All companies must live with the risks and uncertainties inherent in their businesses. Doing business with Chinese manufacturers, however, recently has proven to be more risky than some companies had anticipated.
Features
The continuing economic crisis, driven in large measure by the subprime mortgage meltdown, is affecting major segments of the economy. Not a day goes by that there is not something in the press regarding the effects of billions of dollars of mortgage failures. Criminal investigations into all industries involved in the process are underway. The Department of Justice is considering creating a task force, much in the same way the Bush Administration created the Corporate Fraud Task Force in the aftermath of the Enron failure.
Features
On April 5, 2007, the Court of Appeals voided a decade-old court-ordered stipulation that had settled a contested litigation over a rent-stabilized apartment. The landlord in <i>Riverside Syndicate Inc. v. Munroe, et al.</i> 10 N.Y.3d 18, was allowed to renege on a settlement on the theory that the stipulation violated public policy and unlawfully waived the tenant's rights. The ramifications of this ruling are extraordinary. A party to a court ordered settlement can reap the benefits for as long as is opportune (the court ruled that there is no applicable statute of limitations).