<b><i>Sets Standard that Potentially Relieves Municipalities from Liability for Denying Religious Uses</b></i><p>The broad and somewhat vague definition of religious exercise in The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) has invited much litigation over what constitutes a substantial burden and even what constitutes religious exercise.
The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware recently ruled that choice of law and venue selection provisions in a contract between a U.S. creditor and Italian debtor did not trump the debt restructuring plan approved by an Italian bankruptcy court.
AI solves real challenges and answers real questions that lawyers face every day. It can accomplish or facilitate these tasks more quickly, accurately and efficiently than even the most capable human experts — with the goal of augmenting their skills rather than replacing them.
Harry Sandick, Daniel Ruzumna
&
Jacqueline Bonneau
<b><i>Part Two of a Two-Part Article</b></i><p>In Part One, we discussed the public concern over unfairness in asset forfeiture and analyzed the Supreme Court case — <i>United States v. Bajakajian</i> — that looked to the Excessive Fines Clause to limit the government's authority to forfeit property. In Part Two, we consider possible reforms that would allow defendants to challenge forfeitures as disproportionate under a fairer and more appropriate analysis.
A lawyer can utilize the platform of media outlets to share insights that will develop business by attracting the attention of potential clients and referral sources.
Merger Defeats Single and Separate Ownership Claim<br>Failure to Refer to County Planning Board Invalidates Grant of Area Variance<br>Denial of Natural Resources Special Permit Upheld<br>Village Ratifies Extension of Lease to Cell Phone Provider
Brief Use of Graffiti Art in HBO's <i>Vinyl</i> Show Found <i>De Minimis</i><br>Chinese Film Company Subject to Personal Jurisdiction in Location Security Company's Colorado Lawsuit
In recent years, there has been a growing number of dry cleaners claiming to be "organic," "green," or "eco-friendly." While that may be true with respect to some, many dry cleaners continue to use a cleaning method involving the use of a solvent called perchloroethylene, commonly known as perc. And, there seems to be an increasing number of lawsuits stemming from environmental problems associated with historic dry cleaning operations utilizing this chemical.
This article reviews the fundamental underpinnings of the concept of insurable interest, and certain recent cases that have grappled with the scope of insurable interest and have articulated a more meaningful application of the concept to claims under first-party property policies.
That the pace of change is "accelerating" is surely an understatement. What seemed almost a near certainty a year ago — that law firms would fully and permanently embrace work-from-home — is experiencing a seeming reversal. While many firms have, in fact, embraced hybrid operations, the meaning of hybrid has evolved from "office optional," to an average required 2 days a week, to now many firms coming out with four-day work week mandates — this time, with teeth.
This year at Legalweek, there was little doubt on what the annual takeaway topic would be. As much as I tried to avoid it for fear of beating the proverbial dead horse, it was impossible not to talk about generative AI, ChatGPT, and all that goes with it. Some fascinating discussions were had and many aspects of AI were uncovered.
RPAPL ' 1331 and RPAPL ' 1403 Notices of Pendency are requisite elements for foreclosing a mortgage. <i>See, Chiarelli v. Kotsifos</i>, 5 A.D.3d 345 (a notice of pendency is a prerequisite to obtaining a judgment in a mortgage foreclosure action); <i>Campbell v. Smith</i>, 309 A.D.2d 581, 582 (a notice of pendency is required in a foreclosure action under RPAPL Article 13). In contrast, an ex parte CPLR Article 65 Notice of Pendency (the "Notice") is not required but it is a significant tool in an action claiming title to, or an interest in or the use or enjoyment of, another's land. The filer does not have to make a meritorious showing or post a bond. Article 65 provides mechanisms for the defendant-owner to vacate the Notice that caused an unilaterally imposed restraint on its realty. But, recent case law establishes the near futility of such efforts if the plaintiff has satisfied the minimal statutory requisites for filing the Notice.
