Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The California Supreme Court, in its recent 6-1 decision in Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth Inc. v. City of Rancho Cordova, 2/1/2007, concerning the Sunrise Douglas Community Plan, raised the number of hoops developers must leap through to ensure that their large-scale developments' future water needs will be met without too great an impact on the environment. The decision in Vineyard Area Citizens not only put a hold on a huge development planned for Rancho Cordova, but also placed other developers in the state on notice that certain shortcuts in water-use planning will not be accepted by the courts when challenged.
The Plan, and the Problem
The County of Sacramento approved a plan to build 22,000 residential units, a development expected eventually to house as many as 60,000 people. The development would also include schools, parks and commercial spaces.
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?