Recently, a Louisiana Court of Appeal rendered a decision in what is believed to be the first state or federal appellate decision regarding insurance coverage for damages allegedly caused by Chinese drywall under a homeowners' insurance policy. In <i>Ross v. C. Adams Construction & Design</i>, the Louisiana Fifth Circuit affirmed the granting of a summary judgment in favor of the defendant insurer and held that the claims made by the plaintiff homeowners for damages as a result of Chinese drywall in their home were excluded from coverage.
On July 29, 2011, the Federal Circuit handed down its decision in <i>Ass'n for Molecular Pathology et al. v. U.S.P.T.O.</i>, (often referred to as the "<i>Myriad Genetics</i> gene patent" case). The divided panel's three opinions reveal areas of broad agreement and notable disagreement about patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. ' 101 of several categories of patent claims of interest to life sciences industries.
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.
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.
As consumers continue to shift purchasing and consumption habits in the aftermath of the pandemic, manufacturers are increasingly reliant on third-party logistics and warehousing to ensure their products timely reach the market.
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?
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.
