Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Second Circuit, in a rare venture into the realm of damages resulting from a breach of the duty of loyalty, has ruled that a “faithless servant” must surrender all income, including investment opportunities, after the date the disloyal acts began. Phansalkar v. Andersen Weinroth & Co., 2003 WL 22130902 (2d Cir. 9/16/03) (Jacobs and Straub, Cir. Judges and Wood, D.J., sitting by designation).
Rohit Phansalkar was employed as a nominal partner in the merchant-banking firm of Andersen Weinroth. As such, Phansalkar was paid a salary and received options and warrants, and “carried interest” in certain of the firm's investments. Phasalkar sat on various boards as the company's representative, was awarded stocks and options, and was paid director's fees. Under company policy, all director compensation belonged to the firm and therefore Phasalkar was obligated to disclose this compensation and turn it over. He did not do this. In turn, Phansalkar alleged that Andersen Weinroth converted his interests in various deals that he worked on for them.
Firm Brings Action
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
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.
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 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.
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?