Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
For those who entered the United States in order to be married, the increasing U.S. emphasis on deportation of illegal immigrants has changed very little; the rules that apply to such cases are as they have been for many years. Still, there are nuances that sometimes confuse even the experts, and attorneys of divorcing immigrants should be aware of them in order to better advise their clients on what to expect if, because of the break-up of a marriage, they have to deal with immigration issues. A recent decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit explains one such obscure point of law — one that is giving a woman slated for removal from the United States a second chance to appeal an Immigration Judge's adverse decision. See Upatcha v. Sessions, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 3135 (4th Cir., 2/22/17).
A Short-Lived Marriage
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.