Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Supreme Court to Decide Limits of Law Enforcement Liability in Domestic Case
In March, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in a case brought by Jessica Gonzales against the city of Castle Rock, CO. Cert. granted by Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 160 L. Ed. 2d 316 (U.S. 2004). This civil rights case, which is being watched closely by municipal governments and women's rights advocates nationwide, asks whether a court-issued domestic restraining order, whose enforcement is mandated by a state statute, creates a property interest protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The district court held it does not, and dismissed the action under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
On appeal, a panel of the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's dismissal of Gonzales' substantive due process claim, but reversed as to the district court's procedural due process determination. Gonzales v. City of Castle Rock, 307 F.3d 1258 (10th Cir. 2002). The panel held the restraining order, coupled with the Colorado statute mandating the enforcement of such orders (see Colo. Rev. Stat. ' 18-6-803.5(3)), established a protected property interest in the enforcement of the restraining order which could not be taken away by the government without procedural due process. The panel concluded, therefore, that Gonzales' procedural due process claim could proceed against the town and the individual police officers who failed to enforce the order. On rehearing en banc, the Tenth Circuit agreed with the panel's decision regarding the city of Castle Rock, but held that the individual police officers were entitled to qualified immunity. Gonzales v. City of Castle Rock, 366 F.3d 1093 (10th Cir. 2004).
Gonzales' Complaint
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?