Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
It's often said that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. But how does "eye of the beholder" apply to law clients for determining whether an attorney is representing more than one party to a negotiation? And how would attorney/client privilege work in such a situation? These issues have been raised in litigation involving sponsorship agreements for the Johnny Cash Museum in Nashville.
The back story: In January 2012, following discussions between the Wisconsin-based non-profit RDN Heritage — formed by Robert Nueske, who owned a meat products company — and Nashville businessman Bill Miller, manager of Second Avenue Museum LLC founded to operate a Johnny Cash Museum with the approval of the Cash estate, Miller sent Nueske a draft of a museum sponsorship agreement. Nueske forwarded the agreement draft to his Green Bay, WI-based, attorney Bert Liebmann for review. Liebmann in turn sent Miller a revised draft that, with some additional negotiations, resulted in a signed sponsorship agreement between Second Avenue and RDN.
Contract terms included RDN obligating to provide $50,000 to start the Johnny Cash Museum and to pay the rental fees for five years for the museum's location in downtown Nashville. In exchange, RDN received featured sponsorship branding rights for "Nueske Meats" and step-down income percentages from the museum's gross revenues, starting with 15% from the first $600,000 in annual gross income.
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
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.
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.
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?