Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
What's New in the Law
Graham v. Dunkley, 2008 WL 269527 (N.Y.A.D. Feb. 1, 2008). An Appellate Division reversal of a notorious lower court decision which held the Graves Amendment (the federal statute preempting state laws holding motor vehicle lessors to be vicariously liable for injuries caused by their lessees) to be contrary to the U.S. Constitution as a violation of the commerce clause. Consistent with a number of other listed decisions and contrary to the holding below, this court finds that the New York vicarious liability statute has a substantial effect on interstate commerce and that the federal statute preempting it is a legitimate exercise of federal power to govern interstate commerce.
'There can be no real dispute that the rental and lease of vehicles, and the conditions under which such transactions occur, are economic activities which impact the national market ' As detailed in amicus briefs, vicarious liability laws caused lessors to either cease leasing cars in states having them, opting for more expensive balloon note structures, or spread the cost of higher insurance premiums to lease customers nationwide.'
Kumarsingh v. PV Holding Corp., 2008 WL 238955 (Fla.App. Jan. 30, 2008). A brief decision affirming the holding of a lower court that the Graves Amendment supersedes and abolishes the Florida statute governing vicarious liability of auto lessors as of the federal statute's effective date (Aug. 10, 2005). In this case, the appellate court agreed with the trial court's determination that the defendant lessors were liable only up to the limits of the statutory self-insurance financial responsibility minimums set forth in the Florida statute ($10,000), the auto's lessee who caused the injuries having been uninsured.
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 Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
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?