Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
You see these power plays in your office every day: A divorcing couple owns a million-dollar house, and it makes sense to sell it and divide the assets. The wife refuses, saying, “I won't have a roof over my head without this house.” Or she wants to move, and he says, “I'm not going to give in to her the way I used to.”
Money is not seen by these people as the commodity it should be. Instead, it is fraught with feelings, messages and beliefs from family, society and personal experience. If money were seen as a commodity, your job would be much clearer.
Now, a new generation of therapists is emerging who are looking at money issues as an integral part of couples' problems with power and entitlement. The novel ideas being developed could be useful not only in the context of the therapy session, but also in the attorney's office, where it may sometimes be difficult to understand why a client or his or her spouse is making demands that seem to make little rational sense. In sharing some of these new therapeutic concepts with those in the legal profession, this article sets the stage for a better understanding of what may be behind a divorcing couple's outward behavior. From this understanding can come ideas on how to overcome the roadblocks to successful negotiated settlements.
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?