Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Delaware Supreme Court Theater Ruling Addresses Party's Deposition Demeanor
It's a fight that pits Carole Shorenstein Hays, the owner of San Francisco's Curran Theatre, against San Francisco theater owner Robert Nederlander. He claims that Hays improperly competed to put on the musical Dear Evan Hansen and the play Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, in violation of an LLC agreement governing another theater company in San Francisco, Shorenstein Hays-Nederlander Theatres LLC (SHN), that the parties jointly own.
CSH Theatres L.L.C. and Nederlander of San Francisco Associates each own 50% of SHN. A dispute arose between the parties after CSH Curran LLC, an entity that Hays co-operates, bought the Curran Theatre. In 2014, CSH Theatres sued the Nederlander company in Delaware Chancery Court seeking a declaratory judgment that CSH Theatres wasn't obligated to renew SHN's lease with the Curran.
In a recent complex ruling, the Delaware Supreme Court in part reversed the trial court's findings by deciding that, under the terms of the SHN LLC agreement, Hays and her husband Jeffrey “cannot stage competitive productions (not falling within Section 7.02(b)'s [narrow] exceptions) at the Curran that violate its contractual duty [under §7.02(a)] to maximize SHN's economic success.” The supreme court went on to note: “Because Nederlander has not challenged the court's rulings in the Declaratory Judgment Action as to damages and other forms of relief, we decline to remand that action. Further, in view of our reversal of the trial court's interpretation of Section 7.02(a) in the Declaratory Judgment Action, we order remand of [Nederlander's related lawsuit] for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion.” In re Shorenstein Hays-Nederlander Theatres LLC Appeals, 596 (2019).
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?