The first part of this article, which appeared in the December 2008 Issue, discussed cases that address the preference for stability over sense, mitigation and interpretation of leases. The cases in Part Two herein address enforcement and violations.
Eli Lilly & Co. will pay a combined $1.42 billion, including the largest criminal fine in history ' $515 million ' to settle charges that it illegally marketed the anti-psychotic drug Zyprexa for off-label use, federal prosecutors announced on Jan. 15.
An appellate court recently ruled that an automobile dealership that could not file suit to enjoin an additional dealership under the statute's specific additional "add-point" statute could nevertheless file an administrative proceeding based on a "generic" statute that prohibits conduct by a manufacturer that is "capricious, in bad faith, or unconscionable."
The 2008 Kansas Legislature passed a statute that declares void as against Kansas public policy long-standing contract risk-allocation provisions in many commercial contracts ' including franchise and dealership contracts. The story begins in 2004, when the legislature enacted a prohibition against liability indemnity provisions in construction contracts.
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.
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 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.
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?
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.
