Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
[Editor's Note: Ed Wesemann developed this article for A&FP based on my inquiry about a Montreal conference he recently conducted on law firm capitalization. I think readers will find Ed's unusual analysis intriguing and valuable.]
When someone becomes an equity partner in a law firm, he or she becomes an owner of an institution that has a substantial value ' certainly greater value than is demonstrated on a cash basis balance sheet. Yet the majority of U.S. law firms admit partners with little or no requirement that they make a purchase of the firm's capital assets.
Apparently, the theory is that associates labored in the vineyards for a period of years and have earned their right to participate in the fruits of their labors. That may have made sense when the current law firm model evolved in the 1970s and associates worked for comparatively low wages in exchange for a shot at the brass ring of partnership. But with New York starting salaries topping $145,000, and, by trickle-down, the salaries of associates all over the country now on the rise, one has to ask: Is it rational to give away something that the existing partners have invested so much in, for such a small price?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?