Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Search


A Salacious Tale of Two Sites and a Lawsuit
Katy Johnson is a former Miss Vermont who operates a Web site on which she champions moral values such as abstinence from casual sex and alcohol consumption. Tucker Max is a former law student who operates a Web site on which he champions competing values, such as frequent indulgence in casual sex and excessive alcohol consumption. In the summer of 2001, Johnson and Max made brief physical contact in Boca Raton, FL.<BR>This is essentially all that the two parties agree upon. Johnson claims that the physical contact constituted common law battery by Max. Max claims that the contact was not only voluntary, but also voluntarily intimate, and that this allegedly intimate contact was only the starting point of a passionate affair.
Aggregate Limits: Addressing Arguments Advanced by Policyholders in Asbestos Claims
Now entering its third decade, asbestos exposures threaten the financial stability of numerous commercial entities. Asbestos manufacturers, distributors and installers have been forced to declare bankruptcy because of these exposures. RAND Institute for Civil Justice, "Asbestos Litigation in the U.S.A.: A New Look at an Old Issue" (Aug. 2001). Even companies with only a peripheral connection to asbestos &mdash; <i>eg</i>, car manufacturers that used asbestos-lined brakes &mdash; have been sued. Asbestos claimants continue to aggressively pursue any entity that had any involvement with asbestos. Indeed, the backlog of asbestos suits in the federal and state courts doubled from about 100,000 in 1990 to 200,000 in 1999. Asbestos Compensation Act of 2000, H.R. Rep. No. 106-782, at 18 (2000). Quite simply, absent federal legislative relief, asbestos cases will continue to clog U.S. courts. Moreover, asbestos litigation has and will continue to bog down a large segment of the U.S. economy. Studies are now projecting that asbestos lawsuits will continue until at least 2030.
Case Briefs
Highlights of the latest insurance cases from across the country.
Use and Misuse of Insurance Experts: Surviving the Admissibility Challenge
The use of expert testimony has dramatically increased over the past two decades, and insurance litigation has not been an exception. Experts have long been used in insurance cases to help the jury determine the facts surrounding the loss, such as in arson cases. But use of experts specializing in the field of insurance itself is becoming commonplace, as are challenges to the admissibility of their testimony.
Court Watch
Highlights of the latest franchising cases from across the country.
Love Thy Canadian Neighbor: Ontario Court of Appeal Addresses Franchisor's Duty of Good Faith Part Two of a Two-Part Series
The first installment of this series dealt principally with one of the issues before the Ontario Court of Appeal in <i>Shelanu v. Print Three</i>; namely, the unsuccessful attempt of the franchisor to exclude from enforceability an oral agreement made subsequent to a franchise agreement containing a comprehensive "entire agreement" clause. The other principal issue before the court was whether there was, at common law, a duty of good faith owed by a franchisor to its franchisee.
News Briefs
Highlights of the latest franchising news from across the country.
What's in a Name? Name Disputes in the Geographical Expansion of Franchises
The goal of most franchised businesses is to achieve household name recognition on a nationwide basis. Achieving that goal through nationwide expansion, however, is easier said than done. Expansion raises a number of significant issues, not the least of which is whether the name of the franchised concept is identical or confusingly similar to the name of a similar business in the geographic areas under consideration and/or in other remote areas where the franchisor is not currently operating, but may be so doing in the future.
Excuses, Excuses: FTC's Top Franchise Enforcer Has Heard It All
Steven Toporoff is the Franchise Program Coordinator at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and one of the key people working on Franchise Rule enforcement. At the International Franchise Association (IFA) Legal Symposium in May 2003, Mr. Toporoff provided an update on federal regulatory developments and shared insights about how franchise enforcers go about their work. He also compiled the following list of excuses that he and fellow examiners hear from franchisors and their legal representatives. As Mr. Toporoff observed, "franchise attorneys should know better.
A Tale of Two Cases: Mobile Goods Require Uniformity of State Statutes
Nationwide uniformity of commercial laws has always been a fundamental goal of the drafters of Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code. One area, though, that has continually eluded standardization is perfection of liens on mobile goods. Financiers of mobile goods, including vehicles, vessels, trailer homes and modular offices, must grapple with arcane certificate of title statutes that vary widely from state to state. Other state statutes that regulate title and lien interests in mobile goods can become a trap for the unwary. The nature of mobile goods makes uniformity among state statutes a compelling issue for financiers.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • The 'Sophisticated Insured' Defense
    A majority of courts consider the <i>contra proferentem</i> doctrine to be a pillar of insurance law. The doctrine requires ambiguous terms in an insurance policy to be construed against the insurer and in favor of coverage for the insured. A prominent rationale behind the doctrine is that insurance policies are usually standard-form contracts drafted entirely by insurers.
    Read More ›
  • Abandoned and Unused Cables: A Hidden Liability Under the 2002 National Electric Code
    In an effort to minimize the release of toxic gasses from cables in the event of fire, the 2002 version of the National Electric Code ("NEC"), promulgated by the National Fire Protection Association, sets forth new guidelines requiring that abandoned cables must be removed from buildings unless they are located in metal raceways or tagged "For Future Use." While the NEC is not, in itself, binding law, most jurisdictions in the United States adopt the NEC by reference in their state or local building and fire codes. Thus, noncompliance with the recent NEC guidelines will likely mean that a building is in violation of a building or fire code. If so, the building owner may also be in breach of agreements with tenants and lenders and may be jeopardizing its fire insurance coverage. Even in jurisdictions where the 2002 NEC has not been adopted, it may be argued that the guidelines represent the standard of reasonable care and could result in tort liability for the landlord if toxic gasses from abandoned cables are emitted in a fire. With these potential liabilities in mind, this article discusses: 1) how to address the abandoned wires and cables currently located within the risers, ceilings and other areas of properties, and 2) additional considerations in the placement and removal of telecommunications cables going forward.
    Read More ›