Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Hoge v. Chautauqua County 173 A.D.3d 1731 AppDiv, Fourth Dept. (memorandum opinion)
In an action by former property owners for surplus moneys from a tax foreclosure sale, former owners appealed from Supreme Court's grant of the county's motion to dismiss. The Appellate Division affirmed, holding that former owners are not entitled to proceeds from a resale.
The county obtained title to the subject property by a default judgment of foreclosure pursuant to Real Property Tax Law article 15. The county then resold the property at auction. Former owner then brought this action for surplus proceeds. Supreme Court granted the county's motion to dismiss, and former owner 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.
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.
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?