Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Counsel Concerns
Malpractice/Venue Transfer
The U.S. District for the Western District of Wisconsin granted an entertainment attorney's motion to transfer a malpractice action to the Eastern District of Wisconsin. McCraw v. Mensch, 06-C-0086-S.
Members of the rock band the BoDeans had sued the group's long-time manager Mark McCraw. The parties settled following a trial and an order for retrial in Milwaukee County Circuit Court. The BoDeans then sued Illinois attorney Linda Mensch and her malpractice insurer in the Milwaukee court based on her representation of the band and McCraw in their business affairs. (The defendants had that case removed to the federal Eastern District of Wisconsin and the band has filed a motion to remand.) In the McCraw case, the Western District reached its decision to transfer McCraw's complaint to the Eastern District by noting:
'[N]either the Western District of Wisconsin nor the Eastern District of Wisconsin is the home forum of any defendant and they do not argue that it would be less convenient for them to litigate this action in Madison [Wis.] rather than Milwaukee. The convenience of the parties factor weighs against transfer.'
'[But a]ccording to the amended complaint filed in the Milwaukee [malpractice] action [BoDeans member Kurt] Neumann resides in Austin, Texas while [BoDeans member Sam] Llanas resides in Glendale, Wisconsin. Neumann is not subject to compulsory process in either the Western or the Eastern Districts of Wisconsin. However, the Eastern District of Wisconsin is Llanas' home forum and while he is also subject to compulsory process in the Western District of Wisconsin it would be clearly more convenient for him to testify in his home forum. Accordingly, the convenience of non-party witnesses [in McCraw] is best served by transferring this action to the Eastern District of Wisconsin.'
'Related litigation involving the same defendants is currently pending before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. Although the plaintiffs involved in the action pending before the Eastern District are different from the plaintiff involved in this action the underlying issues are essentially the same in each dispute. ' Accordingly, the efficient administration of the court system is best served by transferring this action to the Eastern District of Wisconsin, a district already familiar with the underlying dispute and the defendants involved.'
'Should the district court [in the BoDeans malpractice suit] grant plaintiffs' motion to remand this Court would continue to preside over the current dispute and affirms the trial schedule previously announced alleviating concerns that a transfer would delay the case and result in a later trial date.'
Rule 11 Sanctions
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 Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.