Frequently in our column we report that the matter is determined by a motion for summary judgment.

In a recent case before the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, an interesting question arose as to whether the defendant, the company providing security, could be responsible for a decrease in value of the property because of a loss that the plaintiff contended was the fault of the security company.

An interesting case arose in the State of Florida involving the sale of assets of a security alarm company who was enjoined and prohibited from using certain sales profits.

A recent case decided in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida is worth discussing. The defendant produces, markets and sells medical alert systems. 

An interesting case arose in the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico.

In an interesting case regarding prohibited ordinances, plaintiffs operated a fleet of standalone trailers that were specially constructed to display signs or banners, which the company used to advertise its burglary alarm services, as well as other products and political causes.