Features

In the past, Business Intelligence occurred on an ad hoc and informal basis in the legal industry. Before the proliferation of a legal trade press, the Internet (and competitor's Web sites), and market intelligence services, information about clients, prospects, and competitors was likely gained on the golf course, at bar association functions, or through the occasional press release issued by a law firm that was an early adopter of marketing. <br>Now a cottage industry has sprung up to support the burgeoning efforts of law firms to understand how to remain competitive, profitable and viable. As evidence of this, within the past year there have been numerous conferences and seminars aimed at teaching law firm management how to appropriately develop and use Business Intelligence, and a number of products and services are being offered to aid firms in their quest for actionable intelligence.

Features

Highlights of the latest equipment leasing news from around the country.

The California Supreme Court has thrown a wrench into the California trial courts' long-accepted practice of enforcing contractual jury waivers by holding that such pre-dispute waivers do not effectively supersede a party's constitutional right to a jury trial. The court's conclusion is not surprising given the express provisions of the California Constitution, but it nonetheless sent a shockwave through the finance and leasing community.

Features

Expenditures to implement the provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act ("SOX") are staggering. For instance, <i>CFO</i> magazine recently reported that 225 companies surveyed planned to spend an aggregate $6.2 billion on SOX compliance. It is no wonder, then, that questions are being raised as to the cost of this legislation relative to its benefits. This article examines the proposition that, given proper perspective and attention, SOX compliance can in fact lead to tangible benefits for equipment lessors.

Features

Last month's newsletter contained an article on The Cape Town Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment ("Cape Town" or "CT") and the related Aircraft Protocol ("Protocol" and together with CT, "the Treaty") <i>www.unidroit.org/english/conventions/mobile-equipment/main.htm)</i> The Treaty is expected to raise many questions and present new risks before and after its expected effective date early in 2006. How do you answer these questions and prepare for the day the Treaty becomes effective? What options are available to a diligent and responsible lender, seller, buyer, lessor or lessee? How does one answer many of the questions posed in the October newsletter article? Two potential solutions lie in obtaining quality legal opinions and/or title insurance covering Cape Town risks.

Features

Unlike consumer lenders and real estate mortgage brokers, lessors of business equipment have generally enjoyed freedom from state licensing requirements. A survey of state laws presented at this year's Equipment Leasing Association Legal Forum, however, has revealed that certain state licensing requirements do exist for commercial lessors, especially where motor vehicle leasing is concerned. This article describes certain of these requirements and highlights some of the areas in which there are statutes pertaining to licensure; the reader is advised to check the law in each state where he or she is doing business and never take freedom from licensing for granted.

Features

Preconceived opinions, or prejudice, by inventors and clients can have a significant impact on the filing of patents and the development of intellectual property ("IP") strategy. Here we are talking about opinions that are formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge about a subject is obtained. This prejudice is common, ranging from the most basic tasks that IP professionals routinely handle to subtle prejudice in strategy development that goes undetected and that can permeate and derail the success of the technology development. It is useful to identify some of the types of these opinions and how IP professionals might handle them.

To model a multi-litigation enforcement let us play a simple game. The rules of the game are as follows: There are 10 closed boxes in front of us. There is a $10 bill on top of each box. For each box, there is a 50% chance that there is a $100 bill inside the box. We have two options with each of the boxes: 1) to play the game, which entails setting aside the $10 bill on top of the box and opening the box or 2) passing, which entails collecting the $10 bill on top of the box but leaving the box unopened. If we choose to play by opening the box and if there is a $100 bill inside, we can collect it and move to the next box. However, if the box is empty, the game is over and we do not get to play other boxes. The goal is to collect the maximum amount of money. What is the optimum strategy?