An easy-to-read list of everything contained in this issue.

Features

Recent rulings of interest to you and your practice.

<b><i>Part One of a Two-Part Article.</i></b> The sensational, celebrity-filled Anthony Pellicano wiretapping case in California has been grabbing headlines for weeks now. Pellicano, a private detective, is accused, along with several others, of illegally listening in on the private conversations of some of Hollywood's elite in order to gain an advantage for his clients in legal and other matters. Wiretapping issues have also found their way into family law matters.

In last month's article, we explored the many issues that involve the court-appointed valuation/financial expert. Many of the problems such experts encounter are the result of a lack of clarity and specificity in the order appointing them, and a general lack of guidelines for the expert to follow. The Matrimonial Commission, appointed by the Chief Justice Judith Kaye and chaired by Justice Sondra Miller, undertook a detailed review of this area in an attempt to remedy the problem. This author served on the Commission as its only financial evaluation expert. After review, the Committee drafted a model order for the appointment of the valuation/financial expert, and published it in Appendix K of its report. Let us now look at the problems and issues related to the appointment of a valuation/financial expert, and focus on the resolutions recommended by the Commission.

European Music Industry Files 2000 Lawsuits in 10 Countries<br>Online Ad Revenue Grows For Third Year in a Row<br>Arkansas Judge Approves Google Settlement<br>NY Attorney General Sues Major 'Spyware' Internet Company

Features

Will New York residents who travel to Massachusetts lawfully be able to marry their same-sex partners there under Massachusetts law? For now, the question remains unanswered.

The patent dispute between online DVD rental rivals Netflix Inc. and Blockbuster Inc. not only pits two big-name competitors against each other, but it also highlights the ongoing debate over Internet business-method patents.

Features

Special Referee James A. Montagnino (Supreme Court, Westchester County) wrote an insightful Outside Counsel article for <i>The New York Law Journal</i> (a sister publication of this newsletter) in March 2002 concerning the crediting of college expenses against child support. (Montagnino, JA.: Crediting College Expenses Against Child Support. <i>NYLJ</i>, March 18, 2002.) As he explained in that article, under New York's Child Support Standards Act (CSSA), a noncustodial parent may be required to contribute to the costs of his or her child's college education, including room and board, above and beyond the basic child support obligation mandated by the CSSA. See Domestic Relations Law ' 240 [1-b] [b] [2]; Family Court Act ' 413 [1] [c] [7]. However, such contributions may lead to a double payment by the noncustodial parent for room and board, since the basic child support obligation as calculated under the CSSA guidelines includes the cost of food and shelter for a child.