Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Show Me The Money: Determining A Celebrity’S Fair Market Value In A Right Of Publicity Action, Cody Reaves
Show Me The Money: Determining A Celebrity’S Fair Market Value In A Right Of Publicity Action, Cody Reaves
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
As the power of celebrity continues to grow in the age of social media, so too does the price of using a celebrity’s name and likeness to promote a product. With the newfound ease of using Twitter, Facebook, and even print media to use a celebrity’s identity in conjunction with a product or company, right of publicity concerns arise. When a company uses a celebrity’s name and likeness without the celebrity’s authorization to market or sell a product, companies open themselves up to right of publicity suits. Many of these cases settle out of court. But when these cases do …
Nuisance-Liability For Injury Caused By Encroaching Tree Roots, L. B. Lea
Nuisance-Liability For Injury Caused By Encroaching Tree Roots, L. B. Lea
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff and defendant were ad joining landowners. Roots of poplar trees on defendant's land extended onto plaintiff's premises, clogging the sewage system and extracting such nutritional value from the land as to injure her lawn and flower garden. Plaintiff brought an action for damages and equitable relief. Judgment was rendered for defendant on demurrer. On appeal, held, reversed. The encroaching roots constituted an actionable nuisance. Plaintiff was not limited to the self-help remedy of cutting the roots at the boundary line. Mead v. Vincent, (Okla. 1947) 187 P. (2d) 994.
Equity- Declaratory Judgment -Injunction To Protect Right In Easement
Equity- Declaratory Judgment -Injunction To Protect Right In Easement
Michigan Law Review
Defendant owned a piece of land in a city block, and plaintiff owned an ad joining piece of land together with an easement for light and air upon a contiguous strip of defendant's land 4 feet wide and 90 feet long. Plaintiff's land alongside the strip was vacant, and he had no immediate intention of building thereon. Defendant erected an office building on his land, constructing an outside stairway on the 4 x 90 foot strip. Plaintiff asked for a mandatory injunction compelling defendant to remove the stairway, stating in his argument before the court that though he had no …