Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Contentious Litigation
As we discussed in the Part One of this article, available at http://bit.ly/1IRj11p, defense attorneys are increasingly finding themselves faced by opposing counsel bent on using any means possible to harass them and their clients, leading to a more contentious litigation environment than is really necessary. We continue herein with a review of some of those tactics, and we consider how they may be addressed.
File First, Investigate Later
Overly-aggressive opposing counsel may show their true colors as early as the pleading stage. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 requires an attorney to conduct an objective and reasonable inquiry into the facts and law before filing a complaint. Consequently, the “Rambo” attorney's complaint lies vulnerable to a motion to dismiss. A fine example of this arose in the Western District of Pennsylvania, where the court dismissed plaintiff's negligence action against multiple pain pump manufacturers as impermissibly speculative because her allegation only stated the “possibility” that her chondrolysis diagnosis occurred after a pain pump was implanted in her shoulder, and the plaintiff did not identify the actual manufacturer or product ID in her complaint. Kester v. Zimmer Holdings, Inc., No. 210-CV-00523, 2010 WL 2696467 (W.D. Pa. June 16, 2010). The Kester court determined that allowing the plaintiff to “file first and investigate later” was contrary to FRCP 11(b). Id. (internal citation omitted).
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?