Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Features
In <i>Greenwood Land Co. v. Omnicare Inc.</i>, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania precluded a tenant from claiming negligence against its real estate management company under the gist of the action and economic loss doctrines as a result of a contract that existed between the parties.
Features
At a time when frugality is in vogue, risk managers acting for landlords and tenants need to be mindful of all elements that can affect the potential value of insurance coverage to be required pursuant to leasehold covenants.
Prior to consenting to a sublease, a landlord should be acutely aware of its rights and remedies against the proposed subtenant, and should negotiate a consent document that reinforces those principles.
Features
This article discusses opportunities that tenants should consider toward reducing fixed-rent costs, and obtaining more favorable lease terms.
In one of the first decisions of its kind, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, in <i>In re Innkeepers USA Trust, et al.</i>, ruled that a holder of commercial mortgage-backed securities ("CMBS") did not have standing to raise objections as a party-in-interest in a bankruptcy case.
Features
A report on the third annual Deal Makers' Summit, a private event hosted by Chicago law firm Levenfeld Pearlstein LLC, and the boutique special situations advisory group, Fuel Break Capital Partners, Weston, CT.
Features
The in-depth story of a successful reorganization endeavor.
The Supreme Court on June 20 handed a sweeping victory to Wal-Mart, the nation's largest employer, in the company's decade-long effort to thwart a discrimination class action filed on behalf of more than 1 million female current and former workers. The ruling is likely to hobble other large employment class actions as well.
In a rare and sweeping bankruptcy ruling, a federal bankruptcy judge backed by most of his colleagues in the Central District of California has held that the federal Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional.
Features
In a rare and sweeping bankruptcy ruling, a federal bankruptcy judge backed by most of his colleagues in the Central District of California has held that the federal Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional.
