Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Big Changes in Child Protection Policies?
On September 23rd, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit certified to the New York Court of Appeals three questions for clarification whose answer could become of major importance to New York child-welfare professionals and the families they work with. The responses to these questions and the ultimate decision in this case could have a significant impact on the way in which children can be removed from homes where one adult has domestically abused another.
In this interlocutory appeal in the case of Nicholson v. Scoppetta, N.Y.L.J. 9/23/03, DOI Pg. 26, the City of New York and its chief child-welfare administrator challenged the determination of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Weinstein, J.) that the manner in which they have chosen to carry out the task of protecting children against those who would harm them, intentionally or not, violates the U.S. Constitution. The District Court had found below that the city was at least inattentive to the custom or practice of its officers in removing children from the custody of a parent who had been battered by a spouse or paramour, based on the theory that the battered parent's failure to protect the child from witnessing the abuse was itself a form of child neglect. This practice, the District Court concluded, contravened protected substantive due process and procedural due process liberty interests of parents and children in staying together as a family. That court also held that the removals were unreasonable seizures, contrary to the safeguards of the Fourth Amendment.
The Case in Question
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.
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.
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.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
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.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.