Despite no seeming fundamental economic differences, there have been occasions where divorce courts in different states have reached different conclusions of value for the same type of business. These states reach such different conclusions as to what constitutes marital property because they have different views as to the meaning of the term 'value.' This article represents a summary of some of our findings concerning the application of the premises and standards of value in divorce matters.
- March 27, 2007William J. Morrison and Jay E. Fishman
Highlights of the latest intellectual property news from around the country.
March 27, 2007Matt BerkowitzThe first federal case to consider directly the intersection of copyright and trade dress rights arose from a dispute over the use of revealing photographs of a young Marilyn Monroe on labels of red wine. The case, Nova Wines, Inc. d/b/a/ Marilyn Wines v. Adler Fels Winery LLC, out of the Northern District of California, was decided on a preliminary injunction motion and involved two commercial wine merchants intent on capitalizing on Monroe's enduring marketability.
March 27, 2007Patrick EyersExpert analysis of the latest cases.
March 27, 2007ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.
March 27, 2007ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |Can a Notice of Opposition in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Trademark Trial and Appeal Board give rise to an actual controversy under the Declaratory Judgment Act to support a trademark Applicant's federal declaratory judgment action against the Opposer? Generally, it can't ' or more accurately, it doesn't. But in Neilmed Products, Inc. v. Med-Systems, Inc., the Northern District of California found that the Notice of Opposition pleaded detailed factors relevant to liability for trademark infringement and dilution.
March 27, 2007Jane Shay WaldIn-depth analysis of the latest rulings.
March 27, 2007ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently addressed the jurisdictional reach of U.S. courts to adjudicate patent disputes involving foreign patents. In Voda v. Cordis, a split panel held that even if the district court had the authority to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the foreign patent claims, the district court abused its discretion by exercising that authority. The court's opinion rests largely on comity and judicial economy considerations.
March 27, 2007Darryl J. AdamsEverything contained in this issue, in an easy-to-read list.
March 27, 2007ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |The First Department's recent decision in Pultz v. Economakis, N.Y.L.J., Feb. 22, 2007, at 18, col. 1, has garnered a remarkable amount of press coverage for what is a fundamentally unremarkable case. The decision primarily stands for the humble proposition that a court must interpret a statute in accordance with its clear and unambiguous language. Nevertheless, the First Department's steadfast defense of an owner's right to recover one of more apartments for his or her own personal use merits further analysis.
March 27, 2007Jeffrey Turkel

