Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Pizza Hut's largest U.S. franchisee, NPC International, settled a complaint under the Americans with Disabilities Act ('ADA') on March 28 that will result in extensive remedial work at many of NPC's 775 franchised restaurants. Under the agreement, NPC will ensure proper accessibility of all of its Pizza Hut properties for parking lots, entrances, seating areas, bathrooms, self-service counters, and other spaces and elements. It will also survey and evaluate all NPC-owned facilities that are subject to the ADA's more stringent new construction and alterations standards at the time of their construction or alteration, bring them into full compliance, and incorporate training of personnel and store managers for future compliance.
Accessibility attorneys said that the settlement represents a rare situation in which the U.S. Justice Department ('DOJ') has stepped into an ADA Title III case in recent years. While the attorneys do not expect that the settlement is indicative of a new trend in compliance oversight, they say that it is a timely reminder for franchisors and franchisees that they do have obligations to make their facilities accessible.
'Most ADA Title III complaints are private litigation in which individuals sue for accommodations at a specific site,' said Kevin Zwetsch, a shareholder with Fowler White Boggs Banker (Tampa, FL) and member of its employment law practice group. 'DOJ generally becomes involved in higher-profile cases with a large scope and impact, and the potential for lots of publicity. The Pizza Hut case is a good example.'
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?