Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
CT Supreme Court Is Asked to Throw Out Sandy Hook Case Against Gun Manufacturers
Gun manufacturers Remington and Bushmaster have asked the Connecticut Supreme Court to throw out the case brought against them by the families of the victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre. In that incident, an emotionally disturbed young man, Adam Lanza, murdered his mother in their shared home, then travelled to the nearby school where he opened fire on children and teachers using an AR-15 rifle manufacturered by Bushmaster, which is owned by Remington.
The plaintiffs are suing under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUPTA) claiming negligent entrustment: essentially, that the manufacturers knew their product was a dangerous assault rifle meant to be used as a weapon in wartime, and that they aggressively marketed it as such to the general public.
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
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?