Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Insolvencies Created By Bad Actors
While the market is swimming with innovative and highly leveraged financial transactions, and many parties are enjoying sizeable gains, some of those involved in these enterprises ultimately will become insolvent. A fraction of these insolvencies will result from fraudulent investment schemes perpetrated by multiple parties acting in concert for their mutual benefit. Innocent victims, including creditors and investors, will bear the financial brunt of the insolvencies, and will be eager to recover from all parties that participated in the fraud.
These innocent victims are likely to weigh recovery options, including the alternatives of either filing a bankruptcy petition (whether voluntary or involuntary) or seeking the appointment of a receiver to obtain recovery on their behalf. Before such actions are taken, careful consideration should be given as to whether the defense of 'in pari delicto' will preclude the ability of the bankruptcy estate or the receiver from pursuing such recovery.
Application of the in pari delicto defense can bar recovery for claims asserted by an insolvent corporation on behalf of its estate. The defense, however, does not apply in all circumstances, and it does not apply to all actors involved in a proceeding to recover property lost in a fraudulent scheme.
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.