Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
CASE BRIEFS
Insurer Must Defend Class Action Alleging Cell Phone Radiation
In Northern Insurance Company of New York v. Baltimore Business Communications, Inc., No. 02-1358, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 12318 (4th Cir., June 19, 2003), the Fourth Circuit recently held in an unpublished decision that an insurance carrier has a duty to defend a class action suit seeking to require a cell phone retailer to supply headsets for its products.
The insured is a defendant in a class action suit asserting that the insured and other defendants supplied, sold or leased cell phones that emitted dangerous levels of radiation. The complaint alleges that radiation emanating from cell phones causes biological injury at the cellular level when the phones are used without headsets and that 'the biological injury caused by the cell phones creates an increased health risk that the [defendants] could have eliminated or significantly mitigated by providing cell phone purchasers with headsets and appropriate warnings.' For each cause of action, the complaint seeks 'compensatory damages including but not limited to amounts necessary to purchase a [cell phone] headset ' for each class member.'
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
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 Article 8 Opt In
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?