Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Counsel Concerns
Anti-Slapp Motion Involving Disclosure of ex-Miss California Suit Settlement Is Denied
The California Court of Appeals, Second Appellate District, denied a defense motion to dismiss an attorney's lawsuit that alleged breach of a confidential settlement he was involved in negotiating for his client Carrie Prejean, a former Miss California USA. LiMandri v. Wildman, Harrold, Allen & Dixon LLP, B234460. Prejean's title was taken away following public comments she made about same-sex marriage. She sued the pageant's executive directors and others but entered into a confidential settlement through mediation. The next day, however, the confidential terms were disclosed via TMZ, which reported that after the pageant's counsel brought forward a home-made sex video of Prejean, she “nets a big fat zero in her settlement with the folks at Miss California USA, sources tell TMZ.” TMZ also reported that LiMandri was entitled to $100,000 under the settlement deal.
LiMandri later sued in Los Angeles Court, alleging, among other things, breach of confidentiality. The defendants, who included the pageant's co-executive director Shanna Moakler and settlement lawyers, responded with an anti-SLAPP motion under Calif. Code Civ. Proc. '425.16 to strike the suit on the ground that Prejean was of public interest. The superior court dismissed a fraudulent inducement claim LiMandri had included in his complaint but otherwise allowed Limandri's suit to proceed.
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.
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?