| Skip Navigation My NYSBA | | Join | Renew | Web Survey | FAQ | Online Store | Search | ||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
 |
Recent Law Watch ResultsLoislaw LawWatch is provided as a service of Loislaw.com, a division of Aspen Publishing. Loislaw LawWatch provides access to recent cases based on the search criteria provided by your section. The search criteria may be by area of practice, by court, and /or by date. The NYSBA also provides a basic level of free legal research to all members. You may access free legal research from Loislaw through your MyNYSBA page or through For Attorneys. franchise - franchiseBRUNJES v. LASAR MANUFACTURING CO., 95-21903 (7-5-2006) 95-21903. July 5, 2006. A large quantity of pork meat, up to 100 pounds, is put into the machine's tub, or bucket, which has rotary blades inside, and a lid on top that closes. The device operates electrically, and it is started by pulling a knob at the lower right part of the machine. It is designed so that the blades will not engage when the lid is open. Above that starter knob is another similar looking knob that, when pulled out, allows the operator to tilt the tub, or bucket, to the horizontal so that the minced meat, now... "In strict products liability, a manufacturer, wholesaler, distributor, or retailer who sells a product in a defective condition is liable for injury which results from the use of the product regardless of privity, foreseeability or the exercise of due care. The plaintiff need only prove that the... patent - patent QUINONEZ v. MANHATTAN FORD, 0108132/2005 (2-22-2008) 0108132/2005. February 22, 2008. The plaintiff Quinonez's complaint against Manhattan Ford and All Taxi Management, Inc. pleads a single cause of action for negligence. The third-party complaint by Manhattan Ford against Laz Parking sets forth causes of action for common-law indemnification/contribution (first), contractual indemnification (second and third), and for breach of an insurance procurement clause (fourth). The second third-party complaint by Manhattan Ford is for common-law contribution/indemnification against both the tax ... The proponent of a summary judgment motion must make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, tendering sufficient evidence to eliminate any material issue of fact from the case (JMD IIolding Corp., v Congress Fin. Corp., 4 NY3d 373 [2005]; Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68... banking law - banking law CREDIT SUISSE FIN. CORP. v. MARKSON, 10116/2007 (11-10-2008) 10116/2007. Decided November 10, 2008. The plaintiff's opposition papers consists of its attorney's affirmation and eighteen annexed exhibits marked A through R. Exhibit A and B are copies of two notes and mortgages made by the movant on August 31, 2006, in the respective amounts of $520,000.00 and $129,000.00. Exhibit C is a copy of the affidavit of service of the summons and verified complaint. Exhibit D is the loan application signed by the movant. Exhibit E is an unsigned document labeled Uniform Underwriting and Transmittal Summary. ... The focus of plaintiff's oral argument and opposition papers was that the loans in question Page 4 were not high cost loans. This left the court with a procedural dilemma. Is it appropriate to order a separate trial pursuant to CPLR 2218, to determine the limited issue of whether the... SEC - SEC STAEHR v. THE HARTFORD FINANCIAL, 06-3877-cv (2nd Cir. 11-17-2008) No. 06-3877-cv. Decided: November 17, 2008. On October 14, 2004, the Office of the New York Attorney General ("NYAG") filed a lawsuit against Marsh detailing "the undisclosed commission pay-offs and bid-rigging schemes that a cartel of large insurers and insurance brokers were using to prop up their businesses and cause customers to purchase insurance at higher prices and less favorable terms than the market otherwise would have dictated." (J.A. 2-3.) The complaint cited The Hartford for its role in paying undisclosed contingent commissions and ... Appellants filed their Consolidated Amended Complaint on April 12, 2005 (the "Complaint"). On June 10, 2005, Appellees moved to dismiss the Complaint for failure to state a claim on multiple grounds, including (1) the statute of limitations had run; (2) Appellees' alleged... bankruptcy - bankruptcy VNO 100 W. 33RD ST. LLC v. SQUARE ONE OF MANHATTAN, 078733/08 (10-7-2008) 078733/08. Decided October 7, 2008. All this is not to suggest that adherence to statutes and settled law is optional. And judicial discretion has its limits, witness the immutability of the Statute of Limitations (see CPLR 201). Nevertheless, judges need not be automatons. Along with the solemn obligation to "follow the law," we are invested with the latitude to interpret and apply it to a dynamic society populated by fallible parties represented by harried attorneys. Let justice, not formality, be our lodestar. The Statute of ... This Court completely disagrees. The plain meaning of Article 21(I) is that if there is to be a restructuring, and if landlord gives notice, at the end of the notice period the lease terminates (albeit landlord may have to pay tenant moving-out and moving-in expenses). First of all,... second circuit - second circuit FERRER v. WOLIVER, 05-3696-pr (2nd Cir. 11-20-2008) No. 05-3696-pr. November 20, 2008. In July 2003, plaintiff Anthony Ferrer, pro se and incarcerated, filed a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, against F. Tracy, T. Woliver, J. Mastandrea, D. Alston, J. McKenna, A. Jones, S. Jackson, and R. Martino (collectively "defendants") ? all employees of the New York State Department of Correctional Services ("DOCS") ? claiming damages for excessive use of force. See ROA doc. 2. Specifically, Ferrer alleged that in February 2003, defendants Woliver, Alston, and Mastandrea physically assaulted ... EEOC - EEOC BILLUE v. PRAXAIR, 07-2359-cv (2nd Cir. 11-20-2008) No. 07-2359-cv. November 20, 2008. Plaintiff Edward Billue appeals from a judgment of the District Court, entered on April 26, 2007, following a successful motion for summary judgment filed by defendant Praxair, Inc., plaintiff's employer. In his complaint, plaintiff alleged that defendant discriminated against him because of his race and retaliated against him because of previous complaints in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. ("Title VII"). (Plaintiff also alleged violations of other ... antitrust - antitrust SHADY GROVE ORTHOPEDIC ASSOC. v. ALLSTATE, 07-0141-cv (2nd Cir. 11-19-2008) Docket No. 07-0141-cv. Decided: November 19, 2008. If the state rule does not directly collide with the Federal Rule, the inquiry becomes whether the choice of rule would be "outcome affective" ? in other words, "[w]ould `application of the [standard] . . . have so important an effect upon the fortunes of one or both of the litigants that failure to [apply] it would [unfairly discriminate against citizens of the forum State, or] be likely to cause a plaintiff to choose the federal court'?" B. Does Application of CPLR 901(b) in Federal Court Serve the Twin Aims of Erie? C. Does Application of CPLR 901(b) in Federal Court Threaten Any Essential Characteristic of the Federal Court System? [fn4] This "outcome affective" test has evolved from the "outcome determinative" test set forth in Guaranty Trust Co. of N.Y. ... director corporation - director corporation BARNAN ASSOC. v. 196 OWNERS CORP., 4212 [1st Dept 11-18-2008] 4212. Decided on November 18, 2008. Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward H. Lehner, J.), entered May 15, 2007, which denied plaintiff's motions for summary judgment and to amend its complaint, and granted defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of granting plaintiff's motion for summary relief and denying defendant's cross motion, and otherwise affirmed, with costs. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of plaintiff against defendant in the... The subject of this litigation is a tax escalation clause set forth at Article VI of the parties' commercial lease dated August 31, 1979. Subparagraph (a)(i) of that Article defines "base assessed valuation" as "the total fully assessed valuation (made without regard or giving effect... |
||||||||||||
| About NYSBA | News Center | NYS Conference of Bar Leaders | Law, Youth and Citizenship | Contact Us | Site Map | ||||||||||||||
LOIS LawWatch
