Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
'Practice By Ambush'
In their desire to zealously represent clients, practitioners may often attempt to rewrite the Bankruptcy Code or Rules in motions or reorganization plans. However, recent opinions have taken umbrage with these efforts to conduct “practice by ambush” that either propose provisions inconsistent with the Bankruptcy Code or seek to deprive parties in interest of due process, or both. After all, fundamental due process ” … is the cornerstone underpinning bankruptcy procedure…A creditor has the right to rely on the Bankruptcy Code and Rules and to expect to be accorded due process of law in accordance with the Bankruptcy Code and Rules, and the United States Constitution.” In re Whelton, 299 B.R. 306, 318 (D. Vt. 2004).
When a motion or plan attempts to rewrite the Code or Rules, due process is abused when parties in interest are left to the vagaries of fine print inserted into lengthy plans or seemingly routine and innocuous motions. Courts are, however, becoming more vigilant in their efforts to prevent these abuses. Several recent opinions draw attention to this issue in the context of motion practice and in Chapter 11 and 13 plans. The decisions almost uniformly reject the notion that creative counsel may dispense with the Code or Rules simply by saying so in a pleading.
Chapter 11 Plans
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
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
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.
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.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?