If an entity claims a vested right pursuant to the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act ((SMARA) Pub. Resources Code, ' 2710 et seq.) to conduct a surface mining operation that is subject to the 'diminishing asset' doctrine, that claim must be determined in a public adjudicatory hearing that meets procedural due process requirements of reasonable notice and an opportunity to be heard. <i>Calvert v. County of Yuba'- County of Yuba.</i>
Predispute waivers of jury trials are unenforceable under California law, subject to certain limited exceptions. While the recent California Supreme Court case of <i>Grafton Partners v. Supreme Court</i>, invalidated such waivers, there remain two ways that parties can agree, predispute, to avoid a jury trial in commercial real property related transactions.
Supreme Court, King's County, erred when it vacated an award of child support arrears because the former custodial parent died and the children are now living with their father. <i>Dembitzer v. Rindenow.</i>
Just when we think that the practice of matrimonial law is as complicated as it can get, a case comes down which reminds us of another level of difficulty. <br>In <i>Musso v. Ostashiko</i>, New York Law Journal, Nov. 14, 2006, p. 23, col. 1, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit definitely resolved one of the many questions that arise from the interaction between matrimonial and bankruptcy law ' an interaction which has been occurring with ever greater frequency over the years.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The owner of a commercially successful patent may have competing desires. On one hand, the patent owner wants to protect the patent and secure its maximum benefit; on the other hand, the patent owner wants to avoid enforcement litigation with competitors because it is expensive and puts the patent at risk.
The doctrine of equivalents is a rule of equity adopted more than 150 years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court. Prosecution history estoppel is a rule of equity that controls access to the doctrine. In May 2002, the Court was called upon to revisit the doctrine and the estoppel rule in <i>Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co. Ltd.</i> Ultimately the Court reaffirmed the doctrine and expanded the estoppel rule, but not without inciting heated debate over the Court's rationale — especially since it included a new and controversial foreseeability test in its analysis for estoppel.
