Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Substantive non-consolidation opinion letters have long been a regular “check-the-box” item in large commercial real estate transactions. While substantive consolidation jurisprudence has not changed materially over the past decade, these opinion letters should not be treated lightly by borrowers or their counsel.
Each loan transaction is unique, and each non-consolidation opinion letter should be given the same care and individualized due diligence to ensure that the opinion letter will serve its purpose. There are common issues and considerations arising in the substantive non-consolidation context that borrowers and borrowers' counsel would be well advised to anticipate. Failing to do so could delay the closing of the transaction, as lenders who require a non-consolidation opinion typically will not fund their loans without delivery of a satisfactory opinion.
The Role of Substantive Non-Consolidation Opinions
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?