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
Lessors' Damages: Measures and Entitlement
Andersons, Inc. v. Lafarge North America, Inc.
, 2012 WL 5259149 (U.S.Ct.App. 6th Cir. Oct. 25, 2012) (not for publication)
After a lessee returned 200 railcars to a lessor at the end of a 10-year lease, the lessor deemed the cars to require substantial repairs in order to bring them into the condition required by the lease and, after being unable to agree with the lessee as to the repair costs, sued the lessee for damages consisting of the cost of repair, holdover rent, prejudgment interest and attorneys' fees. The Court of Appeals affirms the District Court's awards of the cost of repair and holdover rent and its denial of prejudgment interest and attorneys' fees. Of greatest interest is the description of the District Court's reasoning regarding the cost of repairs (disregarding the highest and lowest estimates of repair costs and averaging the two intermediate estimates) and the discussion of the award of holdover rent. With respect to the latter, the lease gave the lessor the right to demand holdover rent at the rate of one and one-half times the lease rate if the cars were not delivered in the specified condition within 30 days of lease expiration.
The court finds that because the lessor did not have the use of the cars during the six-month period following lease expiration while it attempted a settlement with the lessee, the lessor was entitled to holdover rent for that period of time ' and that such amount was not unreasonable in light of the difficulty of quantifying the damage and did not constitute an unenforceable penalty as argued by the lessee. The court also agrees with the trial court's finding that the lessor was not entitled to holdover rent for the period beyond the six months in that the lessor should have realized that settlement with the lessee would not be achieved and should have taken steps to mitigate its damages.
Motor Vehicle Lessors' Liability for Equipment-Related Injuries and Damages
Khan v. MMCA Lease Ltd.
, 2012 WL 5870341 (N.Y.App.Div. Nov. 21, 2012)
This appellate decision reverses a trial court's denial of a motion by a motor vehicle lessor to dismiss the complaint of someone whose vehicle was struck by the vehicle owned by the lessor and operated by its lessee. The plaintiff alleged that the lessor had negligently maintained its vehicle and thus could be held liable under the negligence exception in the Graves Amendment (which generally bars recovery against lessors in the business of leasing motor vehicles on grounds of vicarious liability). The court finds that the lessor does not engage in the repair and maintenance of vehicles that it leases, but instead such maintenance was the sole responsibility of the lessee.
Whitmore v. American Dream Logistics, Inc.
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.
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?
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.