Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Verbal Abuse Not a Family Offense
A man's temperamental outbursts toward his family were not severe or pervasive enough to rise to the level of a family offense under PL ' 240.26(3). In Matter of Dora v. Ramon, No. O-02666/03, 2003 NY Slip Op 51320U; 2003 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1288, (Fam. Ct., Queens Cty. 10/17/03) (Tallmer, J.).
Petitioner, a paraplegic who lives with respondent and their two children, alleged that respondent committed a family offense on Feb. 21, 2003, when he came home drunk, screamed at the children and threatened to spank them if they did not clean up the house. On several other occasions, he threatened to take the children away from petitioner and have her placed in a home. Although she heard him swear at the children, petitioner never saw respondent hit them, and he never stuck or threatened to strike her.
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?