Practice point: The Fee Dispute Resolution Program does not apply when the amount in dispute exceeds $50,000, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 137.1[b][2].
Case: Goldman & Greenbaum, P.C. v. Filippatos, NY Slip Op 05749 (1st Dept. 2008)
Click here for the opinion.
August 12, 2008
August 11, 2008
Filing retainer statements.
Practice point: An attorney’s belated filing of a retainer statement, pursuant to 22 NYCRR § 603.7(a)(3), is insufficient to preserve the right to recover legal fees.
Case: Fishkin v. Taras, NY Slip Op 06505 (1st Dept. 2008)
Click here for the opinion.
Case: Fishkin v. Taras, NY Slip Op 06505 (1st Dept. 2008)
Click here for the opinion.
August 8, 2008
Untimely pleadings.
Practice point: The City's excuse for its late answer, namely, that it receives thousands of summonses each month, is insufficient to compel plaintiff to accept the pleading, pursuant to CPLR 3012(d).
Case: Holloman v. City of New York, NY Slip Op 05480 (2d Dept. 2008)
Click here for the opinion.
Practice point: The City's excuse for its late answer, namely, that it receives thousands of summonses each month, is insufficient to compel plaintiff to accept the pleading, pursuant to CPLR 3012(d).
Case: Holloman v. City of New York, NY Slip Op 05480 (2d Dept. 2008)
Click here for the opinion.
August 7, 2008
Privileged statements.
Practice point: Statements made by parties, attorneys and witnesses will be absolutely privileged only if they are made in the course of a judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding and are material and pertinent to the issue in dispute.
Case: Ingber v. Mallilo, NY Slip Op 05481 (2d Dept. 2008)
Click here for the opinion.
Practice point: Statements made by parties, attorneys and witnesses will be absolutely privileged only if they are made in the course of a judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding and are material and pertinent to the issue in dispute.
Case: Ingber v. Mallilo, NY Slip Op 05481 (2d Dept. 2008)
Click here for the opinion.
August 6, 2008
Legal malpractice.
Practice point: An action alleging legal malpractice is deemed to accrue on the date the malpractice was committed, not when it was discovered.
Case: Hasty Hills Stables, Inc. v. Dorfman, Lynch, Knoebel & Conway, LLP, NY Slip Op 05479 (2d Dept. 2008)
Click here for the opinion.
Practice point: An action alleging legal malpractice is deemed to accrue on the date the malpractice was committed, not when it was discovered.
Case: Hasty Hills Stables, Inc. v. Dorfman, Lynch, Knoebel & Conway, LLP, NY Slip Op 05479 (2d Dept. 2008)
Click here for the opinion.
August 5, 2008
Rear-end collisions.
Practice point: A rear-end collision with a stopped or stopping vehicle creates a prima facie case of negligence, and the moving vehicle's operator is required to offer an adequate non-negligent explanation for the accident.
Case: Arias v. Rosario, NY Slip Op 05467 (2d Dept. 2008)
Click here for the opinion.
Practice point: A rear-end collision with a stopped or stopping vehicle creates a prima facie case of negligence, and the moving vehicle's operator is required to offer an adequate non-negligent explanation for the accident.
Case: Arias v. Rosario, NY Slip Op 05467 (2d Dept. 2008)
Click here for the opinion.
August 4, 2008
Tortious interference.
Practice point: An agreement terminable at will may be tortiously interfered with through malicious or wrongful conduct.
Case: Smith v. Meridian Tech., Inc., NY Slip Op 05677 (2d Dept. 2008)
Click here for the opinion.
Practice point: An agreement terminable at will may be tortiously interfered with through malicious or wrongful conduct.
Case: Smith v. Meridian Tech., Inc., NY Slip Op 05677 (2d Dept. 2008)
Click here for the opinion.
August 1, 2008
Retainer agreements.
Practice point: An attorney's failure to comply with the rules on retainer agreements, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1215.1, does not preclude the recovery of legal fees for services provided.
Case: Nicoll & Davis LLP v. Ainetchi, NY Slip Op 05763 (1st Dept. 2008)
Click here for the uncorrected opinion.
Practice point: An attorney's failure to comply with the rules on retainer agreements, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1215.1, does not preclude the recovery of legal fees for services provided.
Case: Nicoll & Davis LLP v. Ainetchi, NY Slip Op 05763 (1st Dept. 2008)
Click here for the uncorrected opinion.
July 31, 2008
Disability discrimination.
Practice point: A complaint states a prima facie case of disability discrimination under Executive Law § 296 if the plaintiff suffers from a disability and the disability engendered the behavior for which plaintiff was discriminated against in the terms, conditions, or privileges of plaintiff's employment.
Case: Staskowski v. Nassau Community College, NY Slip Op 06369 (2d Dept. 2008)
Click here for the uncorrected opinion.
Practice point: A complaint states a prima facie case of disability discrimination under Executive Law § 296 if the plaintiff suffers from a disability and the disability engendered the behavior for which plaintiff was discriminated against in the terms, conditions, or privileges of plaintiff's employment.
Case: Staskowski v. Nassau Community College, NY Slip Op 06369 (2d Dept. 2008)
Click here for the uncorrected opinion.
July 30, 2008
Appeals as of right.
Practice point: No appeal lies as of right from that part of an order which does not decide a motion made on notice, pursuant to CPLR 5701[a][2].
Case: Mohler v. Nardone, NY Slip Op 06361 (2d Dept. 2008)
Click here for the uncorrected opinion.
Practice point: No appeal lies as of right from that part of an order which does not decide a motion made on notice, pursuant to CPLR 5701[a][2].
Case: Mohler v. Nardone, NY Slip Op 06361 (2d Dept. 2008)
Click here for the uncorrected opinion.
July 29, 2008
Expert witness testimony.
Practice point: If the issue of an allegedly unsafe condition is within the common knowledge and experience of jurors, a plaintiff is under no obligation to rebut a defendant’s expert’s conclusions with expert testimony of its own.
Case: Infante v. Jerome Car Wash, NY Slip Op 05364 (1st Dept. 2008)
Click here for the uncorrected opinion.
Practice point: If the issue of an allegedly unsafe condition is within the common knowledge and experience of jurors, a plaintiff is under no obligation to rebut a defendant’s expert’s conclusions with expert testimony of its own.
Case: Infante v. Jerome Car Wash, NY Slip Op 05364 (1st Dept. 2008)
Click here for the uncorrected opinion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)