Today’s WSJ has yet another article on digital real estate picking up steam (see https://www.wsj.com/articles/metaverse-real-estate-piles-up-record-sales-in-sandbox-and-other-virtual-realms-11638268380?mod=djem10point). This has been talked about for several years but Meta’s name change and announced focus on the metaverse has given the market a push. Watch the articles on this topic: https://www.realtor.com/news/trends/metaverse-digital-real-estate-land-rush/. Read More
Federal Real Property and Business Litigation Report Volume IV, Issue 48 November 27, 2021 Manuel Farach Mississippi v. Tennessee, Case No. 143, Orig. (2021). No State has a sovereign right to the water in an aquifer, and the Court’s Equitable Apportionment jurisprudence (each of the States has an equality right to use the...Read More
Florida Real Property and Business Litigation Report Volume XIV, Issue 48 November 20, 2021 Manuel Farach Mississippi v. Tennessee, Case No. 143, Orig. (2021). No State has a sovereign right to the water in an aquifer, and the Court’s Equitable Apportionment jurisprudence (each of the States has an equality right to use the water...Read More
Great opinion by Laurel Isicoff, Chief Judge of Southern District Bankruptcy Court in Florida. In short, Judge Isicoff explains a foreclosure sale is not a preference because the transfer (the foreclosure sale) is not on account of an antecedent debt, i.e., the credit bid is a “purchase” by the lender. See the opinion in Nunez,...Read More
Federal Real Property and Business Litigation Report Volume IV, Issue 37 September 11, 2021 Manuel Farach Harper v. Amazon.Com Services, Inc. Case No. 20-2614 (3rd Cir. 2021). State law regarding arbitration may still apply even if federal law does not apply because of an exclusion under the Federal Arbitration Act. Bash v. Textron Financial Corporation...Read More
Florida Real Property and Business Litigation Report Volume XIV, Issue 47 November 20, 2021 Manuel Farach Jackson v. Le Centre on Fourth, LLC (In re: Le Centre on Fourth, LLC), Case No. 20-12785. Notwithstanding that a hearing notice did not comply with Bankruptcy Rule of Procedure 2002(c)(3) (conspicuous language on a notice is required when...Read More
