Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth Appellate District, Cuyahoga County, recently affirmed a trial court's award of attorney fees to a commercial tenant because, although the tenant did not prevail on each and every aspect of the multiple claims, it did prevail on the main counts of the lawsuit. Simbo Properties Inc. v. M8 Realty LLC, 2019-Ohio-3091 (7/1/201).
Simbo Properties Inc. (Simbo) entered into a 18-month commercial lease with tenant M8 Realty LLC (M8) in December 2012. One of the lease's provisions stated: "If a lawsuit is filed with respect to this Lease, the prevailing party shall be entitled to collect all reasonable attorney's fees and costs." During the tenancy, Simbo claimed that M8 violated several provisions of the lease, leading the landlord to file a four-count complaint against M8 in January 2016. The landlord's complaint sought rent of approximately $150,000, real estate taxes of approximately $32,000, property damage compensation of approximately $30,000, and other non-specified damages. The tenant counterclaimed. After motions and trial, all liabilities were determined, with tenant M8 prevailing as to the rent, but landlord Simbo prevailing as to two of its claims and tenant's counterclaim.
The trail court also awarded tenant M8 attorney fees after determining that it was the "prevailing party" who, under the terms of the lease, was entitled to collect such fees. The landlord appealed.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.