Features
Panel Finds International Custody Battle Belongs in NY
A Manhattan appellate court refused to relinquish jurisdiction over a custody case in which a mother fled with her 5-year-old son to Italy because she thought she was not getting a fair hearing in a New York Family Court. In an unusual ruling in late December 2007, the Appellate Division, First Department, reversed the conclusion of Manhattan Family Court that the case belonged in the Italian courts.
Features
International Custody Disputes
Family lawyers with cases involving application of Section 105(c) of the UCCJEA need to marshal Internet and other resources to determine whether the child custody law of a foreign jurisdiction violates a child's fundamental right to safety and protection. Although Section 105(c) does not provide a broad exception to the otherwise stringent standards of the UCCJEA, in cases where a child's welfare is threatened by deferral of jurisdiction to a foreign tribunal or enforcement of a foreign order, a trial court can invoke Section 105(c) to circumvent application of the UCCJEA's rigorous jurisdictional and enforcement provisions.
Features
'Loss' in the Air Will Not Do
Sky-high loss enhancements are increasingly scrutinized in a post-<i>Booker</i> world. Drawing on civil securities law, recent decisions in several circuits endorse an approach holding a defendant responsible for only the portion of victims' losses that was proximately caused by the offense. Some courts' critical analyses bode well for future sentencings.
Features
Supreme Court Handles Device Makers a Victory
The U.S. Supreme Court in February tackled an issue that has come up frequently in lawsuits brought by plaintiffs claiming they've been injured by medical devices: Do the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 preempt state law-based claims against device manufacturers? The Court had partially answered the question in <i>Lohr v. Medtronic</i>, but the fact situation in that case did not necessarily make its decision applicable to other cases against medical devices manufacturers.
Features
The FTCA and the Payment of Tort Damages
Federal government attorneys recently unsuccessfully attempted to convince a Federal District Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to rewrite the terms of the Federal Tort Claims Act ('FTCA') to allow the creation of a reversionary trust rather than give a lump-sum award to pay for a medical malpractice plaintiff's future medical expenses.
Features
Cameo Clips
FILM PRODUCTION/DEFAMATION<br>FILM PRODUCTION/TRADEMARKS, DEFAMATION<br>KARAOKE LICENSES/LANHAM ACT, COPYRIGHT CLAIMS
Features
GA Court to Rule on Suit over TV Show Interactive Element
Text messages, cell phones, TV game shows, Howie Mandel ' none of these could have been contemplated by Georgia's colonial lawmakers when they first passed a law allowing gamblers to recover their losses through lawsuits. The current version of the law is at the center of a case against NBC Universal and the producer of Mandel's hit show, 'Deal or No Deal,' now being considered by the Georgia Supreme Court.
Features
Fed Court Believes It Can't Consider Copyright Issue
The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California ordered defendant Artisan Pictures to show cause why a suit against it for payment of film-acquisition rights shouldn't be remanded to state court. The federal court noted it 'likely lacks' subject matter jurisdiction over the declaratory suit, even though the case involves whether copyright claims over licenses for film music were time barred.
Features
Exploring the Substantial-Similarity Test in Suits Alleging Breach of Implied Contract
Copyright-infringement cases alleging that a defendant improperly used a plaintiff's work for a movie or TV show often hinge on whether there's substantial similarity between the litigating parties' works. But substantial similarity plays a role in breach-of-implied-contract cases alleging defendants based their film or show on a plaintiff's work. A recent ruling by the California Court of Appeal serves as an informative review of California case law in this legal area and its current application.
Need Help?
- Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
- Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.
MOST POPULAR STORIES
- Strategic Uses of a Rule 2004 ExamWhile most bankruptcy practitioners are familiar with the basic concepts behind the Rule 2004 exam, some are less familiar with the procedural intricacies of obtaining, conducting, and responding to the exam ' intricacies that often involve practices and procedures adapted from civil discovery that are beyond the scope of pure bankruptcy practice. This article explains.Read More ›
- COVID-19: Economic Stimulus and SBA LoansA summary of information on the various provisions under the new federal economic stimulus package.Read More ›
- Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright LawsThis 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.Read More ›
- Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult CoinWith 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.Read More ›