Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Features
Absent policy language stating otherwise, "stacking" of policy limits is now the rule in California.
Columns & Departments
Highlights of the latest equipment leasing news from around the country.
Features
On Dec. 11, 2012, European Union Ministers in charge of competitiveness issues endorsed a legal package to create a Unitary Patent, which provides uniform legal protection in 25 European countries. On the same day, the Members of the European Parliament approved the European Union patent package including a Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court.
Features
Highlights of the latest franchising cases from around the country.
Features
Unlike patent, trademark and copyright law, rights of publicity are governed by a patchwork of state statutes and common-law decisions, rather than by a single federal statute. And unlike trade secret law, rights of publicity are not subject to a uniform state law adopted in the vast majority of states. But as with valuing other intellectual property assets, right of publicity (ROP) valuations need to consider the unique characteristics of the subject asset and the context of the valuation.
Features
What exactly can a state regulator do with respect to arbitration clauses in franchise agreements? The answer appears to be, "The regulator cannot do much."
Features
Highlights of the latest equipment leasing news from around the country.
Features
This is the second part of a three-part article designed to provide secured parties an overview of their enforcement rights and remedies as set forth in Article 9 of the UCC. This installment addresses the acceptance of collateral in full or partial satisfaction of debt, and the notice components of a commercially reasonable sale.
Features
This article discusses how counterparties, as well as courts, react to situations where a counterparty seeks protection from the risks inherent in continued performance under a Contract with a debtor in bankruptcy.
Features
Two conflicting California appellate court decisions issued this year highlight the difficulty of determining when an insurer owes a duty to defend disparagement by implication claims. This article discusses the two divergent California decisions, as well as fact patterns that courts have generally agreed are (and are not) implied disparagement claims triggering an insurer's duty to defend