Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Accounting and Financial Planning for Law FirmsLJN NewslettersNewsSections

Movers & Shakers

By ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
August 30, 2011

DLA Piper has announced that Sang Kim, a partner in the firm's International Tax group, has been named co-managing partner of the Silicon Valley office. In his new role, he joins co-managing partner Andrew Valentine in guiding the office's strategic growth and general management. Kim focuses his practice in international tax and operational structuring, global transfer pricing strategy, cross-border mergers, acquisitions, dispositions and joint ventures, post-acquisition integration and international tax controversy. He also serves as general international counsel for technology companies expanding their presence and operations around the world. Kim is currently a member of DLA Piper's Policy Committee as well as its National Diversity and Inclusion Committee.

DLA Piper has announced that Sang Kim, a partner in the firm's International Tax group, has been named co-managing partner of the Silicon Valley office. In his new role, he joins co-managing partner Andrew Valentine in guiding the office's strategic growth and general management. Kim focuses his practice in international tax and operational structuring, global transfer pricing strategy, cross-border mergers, acquisitions, dispositions and joint ventures, post-acquisition integration and international tax controversy. He also serves as general international counsel for technology companies expanding their presence and operations around the world. Kim is currently a member of DLA Piper's Policy Committee as well as its National Diversity and Inclusion Committee.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • 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

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

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 Image

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 Image

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? Image

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 Image

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.