Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
There are significant differences in the rights afforded to an insured under a disability insurance policy depending upon whether the insurance is provided pursuant to an individual policy or under an employer-sponsored plan covered by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 USC ' 1001 et seq.
While individual policies are traditionally governed by applicable state common law contract principles, ERISA preempts any and all state laws “insofar as they may now or hereafter relate to” a covered disability plan, and such state laws encompass “all laws, decisions, rules, regulations, or other state actions having the affect of law, of any State” as well as statutory provisions and common law claims. See 29 USC '' 1144(a) & 1144(c)(1). Thus, disability insurance encompassed within ERISA carries with it a mass array of federal statutory and decisional law.
Important Guidance
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?