Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Mediator Neutrality: Seeing Both Sides
The theory underlying our adversarial legal system is that each person will hire a bright, skilled warrior who will see the situation completely from the perspective of the client, then present the strongest case possible to the judge. The judge will get the best information from each side, but will be neutral. Then the judge will see the situation “from above” and will render a decision that metes out justice and wisdom. But because of our overloaded and burdened court system, most judges do not have the time to get to know the people behind the caseload. People who go through the court system often end up feeling the judge did not really hear their story, and that they were not given a chance to speak.
Mediation gives clients the chance to be heard. One of the underlying assumptions of mediation is that people are the experts about their lives, their families and their needs. No expert will ever know or care about their issues as much as they do – because only they and their family will live with any agreements made.
How a Mediator Works
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.
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.
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.
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?