Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The rights of a mortgagee with respect to property held by a married couple as tenants by the entirety engenders considerable confusion, sometimes leading to litigation even of easy cases, where there should be no dispute. The Second Department confronted such a case last year in Deutsche Bank Nation Trust Co. v. Feliciano, NYLJ 4/19/13, p. 33, col. 1. Unfortunately, not every case is so easy, and the treatment of mortgagee rights in the New York courts has been cryptic at best.
The Feliciano Case
In Feliciano, the subject property was owned by John and Sheila Ellerbee as tenants by the entirety. Five years after the Ellerbees acquired the property, John transferred his interest in the property to Jalloop Corp. Two years later, Sheila and Jalloop together transferred the property to Feliciano, who then mortgaged the property and, after executing the mortgage, transferred a 99% interest back to John and Sheila, as husband and wife, retaining a 1% interest for himself. When Feliciano defaulted on the mortgage, the mortgagee's assignee foreclosed. Sheila moved to dismiss, contending that the tenancy by the entirety created when she and John originally took title had never been terminated. Supreme Court denied her motion.
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.
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.
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.
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?