Inconsistent Testimony Made Plaintiff Not Typical off Proposed Class <br>Franchisor Sanctioned For Failing to Prepare Its Representative for Corporate Deposition<br>Federal Court Enforces Franchisee Post-Termination Obligations
Bona fide intent was given new meaning by the TTAB. <i>Lincoln National Corporation v. Anderson,</i> exemplifies an apparent trend of the TTAB requiring greater proof of an applicant's "intent" as a jurisdictional prerequisite for filing an application or face a finding that the application is void <i>ab initio.</i> This is the paradigm of the "ticking time bomb" trademark nightmare with a very long fuse.
Although the "traveling employee" exception to the "going and coming rule" is strictly limited to workers' compensation cases, it has been widely applied to many cases that the exception has evolved into its own rule.
In a recent decision by the Fifth Circuit, the court held that a lender's pre-bankruptcy acceleration of a promissory note arising from a borrower's nonpayment default did not trigger provision for a prepayment premium in the absence of an actual loan prepayment.
The recent decision in <I>Sykes v. Sykes</I> sent shock waves reverberating throughout the New York matrimonial bar for its direction that during the pendency of a divorce litigation, the less monied spouse may be required to use a portion of her share of the marital estate to pay her legal fees, rather than continue to have such fees paid by the wealthier spouse.
The battles to land new clients and matters are fierce and the consequences of losing are far more damaging than ever. Nevertheless, there are times when the smart play is to decline, no matter how alluring the likely fees are.
Yahoo Inc. has filed a lawsuit accusing a former employee of lifting Yahoo's patents and confidential information, and taking them with him to his new startup.
Last month, we discussed the fact that some 84 million Americans work for companies that maintain ERISA-covered retirement plans that are divisible by QDROs, which guarantee the non-worker spouse (the non-owner) a share of the pension. We conclude the discussion herein.
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.
