Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Fed. Ct. Upholds Philharmonic's Firing of Musician
The Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra (BPO) had little choice but to fire its principal oboist for his repeated clashes with the symphony's conductor, other musicians and staff, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York found in upholding the “fair and just” findings of an arbitrator. Roy v. Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra Society Inc., 15-CV-0283.
District Judge Michael Telesca wrote that the arbitrator had ample evidence to justify the dismissal of oboist Pierre Roy in July 2012. It was the second time Roy had been fired in less than two years due to abrasive behavior. Fellow musicians complained that Roy played off-tempo or off-pitch at rehearsals to throw them off, mocked his colleagues and engaged in “intimidating, abusive and disruptive behavior” toward symphony staff and other musicians, according to Judge Telesca's decision.
The district judge also found there was no basis to support Roy's claim that the arbitrator gave “unfair weight” to the testimony of colleagues who said he engaged in unprofessional behavior: “Arbitrator Rabin did not exceed his authority by discussing the instances of alleged 'musical sabotage' in connection with the BPO's termination of Roy in the arbitration proceeding.” Instead, arbitrator Robert Rabin “carefully analyzed and discussed the evidence before him and delivered a thorough, well-reasoned and balanced 48-page decision” under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), Judge Telesca decided.
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.
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.