Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
All states have adopted laws providing for the mandatory or discretionary appointment of an attorney to represent children in custody cases. However, not all jurisdictions have established standards of practice for such attorneys. Representation of a child in such cases presents unique challenges to lawyer/client communication and interaction not encountered in the adult-representation setting.
At its Annual Meeting in August 2003, the House of Delegates of the American Bar Association adopted Standards of Practice for Lawyers Representing Children in Custody Cases (Standards). These standards are the result of a 10-year project undertaken by the ABA Section of Family Law, involving lawyers, judges and legal scholars. Adoption of the Standards establishes clear ABA policy for lawyers representing children in custody cases. In 1996, the ABA adopted similar Standards of Practice for representing a child in Abuse and Neglect Cases.
Highlights of the Standards
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.
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?