Litigation

A compilation of commercial real estate rulings in courts across the country.

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York recently provided critical guidance on what the court observed as the "psychedelic confusion" surrounding the intersection of Bankruptcy Code §365, governing the assumption and rejection of executory contracts, and Bankruptcy Code §503, governing administrative priority.

In 2015, a group of music publishers sued the purchaser of the Bill Graham Archives — a repository that includes live performances staged by the late, legendary concert promoter of an array of musical artists beginning in the 1960s. Now, the Second Circuit has handed down its appellate opinion in the litigation, addressing the important compulsory licensing concerns as well as some of the additional issues in the case.

In a matter of first impression, the Sixth Circuit sided with a third-party sporting events distributor by finding the distributor has standing to sue a Kingsport, TN, bar under the U.S. Copyright Act for livestreaming a 2017 boxing match between Floyd Mayweather and Conor McGregor without the proper licensing.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut granted Friday the 13th screenwriter Victor Miller partial attorney fees totaling more than $886,564, in his long-running fight against the 1980 horror film's production outfit Manny Co. over proceeds from the film.

During the recent oral arguments before it, the U.S. Supreme Court sounded open to extending more fair use protection to an Andy Warhol painting of rock icon Prince than the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit did.

What Should Financial Institutions Do Now In Anticipation of a Potential (and Long-Awaited) Downturn What should a prudent lender be doing right now to "brace" itself for the coming financial uncertainty? Adopt a five-point "CAPER" strategy: Communicate, Analyze, Preserve, Execute, and Resolve.

"… [B]ecause Congress has not clearly abrogated the solvent-debtor exception," the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that a reorganized solvent debtor had to "pay what it promised now that it is financially capable."