Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Permanency Hearing Will Be Closed to Protect Traumatized Children
After balancing the interests of the public in having the courtroom open to the press in a sensational child custody permanency hearing against the interest of the subject children's privacy rights, Family Court, Richmond County, determined that allowing press coverage would serve no purpose other than to impede the children's attempts to recover from the tragic events surrounding their case, that it would humiliate and embarrass them, and that there was no less restrictive method other than full closure of the courtroom to protect the needs of the children.
By decision March 9, 2007, this Richmond County Family Court found that the Administration for Children's Services proved at trial that a father neglected his children when, on June 15, 2006, he drove them to Bear Mountain State Park to witness what he believed would be their mother's suicide. He allegedly did this so that the children could serve as alibi witnesses should he be accused of killing his wife.
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.
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?