The Class Action Fairness Act: What Is It All About?
November 03, 2005
On Feb. 18, 2005, after the first bill signing ceremony of the year, President Bush approved the Class Action Fairness Act ("CAFA") by signing it into law. CAFA is part of a goal to restore common sense and balance to America's legal system and end frivolous litigation which, President Bush stated, will include legislation to further reform tort law in the areas of asbestos and medical malpractice. "President Signs Class-Action Fairness Act of 2005," <i>www.white house.gov/news/releases/2005/02/20050218-11.html.</i>
News Briefs
November 03, 2005
Highlights of the latest class action cases from around the country.
An 'Electronic Data' Primer for Class Action Attorneys
November 03, 2005
The savvy class action lawyer needs to know how to retrieve electronic information from databases in order to form an intelligent approach to investigation and discovery in consumer class action cases and to be equipped to address jurisdictional, class certification and merits issues.
California Supreme Court Strikes Down Jury Waiver Clauses
November 02, 2005
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.
Sarbanes-Oxley: Bane or Boon?
November 02, 2005
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.
Legal Opinions and Title Insurance Mitigate Risk Under The Cape Town Convention
November 02, 2005
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.
In the Marketplace
November 02, 2005
Highlights of the latest equipment leasing news from around the country.
State Licensing: A Trap for the Unwary?
November 02, 2005
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.
Preconceived Opinions and IP Strategy
November 02, 2005
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.
Industrywide Patent Enforcement Strategies
November 02, 2005
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?
