Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Factual Issues Bar Summary Judgment in Lead Paint Claim
Two infants sued the past and present owners of the apartment in which their mother lived during her pregnancy and after their births. They sought compensatory and punitive damages for injuries allegedly caused by exposure to lead paint in the apartment. The original landlord sold the apartment about a month before the birth of the second infant, Amorie. The defendants moved to dismiss, and the plaintiffs moved for summary judgment on the issue of liability. The trial court granted the original landlord's motion as to Amorie, the infant born after the building was sold, and denied the plaintiff's motion as to liability. Both parties appealed.
The appellate court held that the dismissal of the complaint as to the infant Amorie was improper. The infant's expert opined that she had been subjected to lead toxicity in utero. There was an issue of fact as to whether the lead levels could be attributed to any exposure prior to the date that the original landlord sold the premises; Amorie's mother was exposed to the lead paint for eight months before the landlord transferred ownership, and the dangers of exposure to lead while in utero are widely recognized by both state and federal case law. Thus, summary judgment dismissing the complaint was reversed.
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.
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.
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?