A California state appellate court’s January 7 decision in Lozano v. City of Los Angeles may have a somewhat unusual fact pattern, but the case raises interesting issues of data privacy law and how California—a state friendly to data privacy protections—defines “intentional eavesdropping,” especially when it comes to digital video systems used by police.
January 13, 2022 at 10:00 AM
9 minute read
If a robbery were in progress, and a police radio call requesting backup came, you might expect officers in a nearby cruiser to rush to the scene of the alleged crime. What if the officers in question failed to respond?
Better than that—what if they failed to respond because they were busy trying to capture Snorlax in the riveting augmented reality of Pokémon GO?
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Consulting Magazine recognizes leaders in technology across three categories Leadership, Client Service and Innovation.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Shipman is seeking an associate to join our Labor & Employment practice in our Hartford, New Haven, or Stamford office. Candidates shou...
Evergreen Trading is a media investment firm headquartered in NYC. We help brands achieve their goals by leveraging their unwanted assets to...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
The smartphone app “Pokemon GO” shows a Pokemon encounter overlain on a college campus in the real world. Credit: Matthew Corley/Shutterstock.com.
