Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Southern Wiretap Ruling May Affect New Yorkers
Because so many New York residents have strong ties to Florida and other southern states through second homes and relatives, New York family law attorneys should be aware that a recent decision in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has altered precedent concerning wiretap legality in Florida, Georgia and Alabama. The case, Glazner v. Glazner, No. 02-11799 (11th Cir. 10/16/03), involved an Alabama husband who, although he had filed for divorce, continued to live with his wife. Because he suspected her of having an affair, he put a recording device on the telephone in the family home. The wife discovered the device and later brought suit against her husband in federal court, claiming he violated her rights under the federal wiretap law by recording her telephone conversations without consent.
Until Glazner, the leading precedent on wiretapping of family telephones in Florida, Alabama and Georgia was Simpson v. Simpson, 490 F.2d 803. (Simpson did not apply to other states in the Eleventh Circuit because it was issued when Florida, Georgia and Alabama were still part of the Fifth Circuit, from which the Eleventh Circuit was formed in 1981. Fifth-Circuit decisions that predate creation of the Eleventh Circuit are binding on the Eleventh Circuit.) Simpson held that Congress, in enacting its 1968 anti-wiretap law, did not intend to prohibit family members from listening in to conversations on extension phones in the home, so absent promulgation of state law on the issue, such “eavesdropping,” was perfectly legal.
At the Glazner trial, a federal judge, relying on Simpson, ruled for the husband. In a unanimous reversal, the 11 judges of the Eleventh Circuit ruled not only that there was no marital exception to the wiretap laws, but that despite this defendant's possible reliance on Simpson, the law could be applied to him retroactively and he could be held pecuniarily liable to his now ex-wife for damages.
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.
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?
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.