Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Contracts, it is generally assumed, have to be “signed, sealed and delivered” to be deemed effective. The explosive growth of the Internet and the increasing use and prevalence of e-mail, however, have radically altered how those formalities can be fulfilled. As a number of recent decisions in New York and elsewhere make absolutely clear, for good or for ill, parties now can conclude a contract, or amend an existing contract, via e-mail. See, e.g., Seymour v. Hug, 413 F. Supp. 2d 910 (N.D. Ill. 2005) (parties reached enforceable settlement agreement by virtue of e-mails).
Consider, for example, the 2005 decision by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in Hostcentric Technologies Inc. v. Republic Thunderbolt, LLC, 2005 U.S. Dist. Lexis 11130 (S.D.N.Y. June 9, 2005), where, in a dispute over a commercial lease, the plaintiff tenant sought to enforce a settlement agreement documented in an e-mail exchange against the landlord defendant.
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.