Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
On the Move
Grant Thornton LLP has admitted Michael Imber and Jim Porter as new principals in its Corporate Advisory & Restructuring Services practice. Imber is based in New York and has recently completed a restructuring of an outdoor media company. He presently represents unsecured creditors in the Forum Health bankruptcy, and is currently serving as New York City Chapter President of the Turnaround Management Association. Porter is based in Charlotte, NC, and has a broad range of turnaround experience across a variety of industries, including manufacturing, automotive, retail and health care. He is currently working on the St. Vincent's Catholic Medical Center bankruptcy.
Lowenstein Sandler PC announced that Norman N. Kinel has joined the firm as a partner in its Bankruptcy, Financial Reorganization & Creditors' Rights Group. He will be resident in the firm's New York office. Kinel's experience includes representing debtors, creditors, bondholders, trustees and committees of creditors, equity holders and retirees. Most recently, Kinel represented the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in the high-profile Tavern on the Green case as well as creditors in the Lehman Brothers and Chrysler Corporation cases. He was formerly a partner at Duval & Stachenfeld LLP in New York.
Jennifer L. Nassiri has joined Venable LLP's Bankruptcy Practice Group in the firm's Los Angeles office. She will serve as of counsel to the firm. This announcement follows the addition of noted bankruptcy attorney Hamid R. Rafatjoo in May. Rafatjoo and Nassiri previously worked together at DLA Piper and Nassiri came to Venable to work with Rafatjoo again. Nassiri advises landlords and tenants in bankruptcy and potential bankruptcy situations, and has prosecuted more than 250 fraudulent transfer and preferential transfer actions. She has represented creditors and creditors' committees alike.
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
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?