Friday, October 15, 2010

New York Law Journal: Decisions of Interest October 15, 2010

U.S. Court Of Appeals, Second Circuit
Attorneys Fees
Law Firm That Claims It Was 'Solely Responsible' for Settlement Denied Additional $17 Million in Fees
In Re Adelphia Communications Corp, 08-4904-cv


Supreme Court, Nassau County
Legal Profession
Malpractice Suit Based on Cause of Action Pointed Out to Counsel by Client's Mother Proceeds
Eric Reisner v. Litman & Litman, P.C., 18527/07

NEW YORK COUNTY

Criminal Practice
Nod, Production of Drugs Ruled Non-Verbal Admission, Product of 'Miranda' Violation
People v. Crespo


NEW YORK COUNTY
Criminal Practice
Stalking Charge Is Dismissed; Fears Of Complainant Are Found Unreasonable
People v. Lewis


BRONX COUNTY
Family Law
Inquest Transcript States Intent to Cover College Tuition Without Age Limitation
Bracy v. Nibbs-Bracy


KINGS COUNTY
Criminal Practice
Defendants Cannot Receive Jail Credit On State Sentence While in Federal Custody
People v. Paccione


QUEENS COUNTY
Criminal Practice
Suppression of Guns Is Denied; Request to Exit Car Ruled de Minimus
People v. Hines and Thomas


QUEENS COUNTY
Juvenile Law
Juvenile's Placement With State Agency Found Least Restrictive Alternative
Matter of Naldo X.


U.S. DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Insurance Law
Insurer Is Not Obligated Under Plan To Conduct Independent Exam
Rotondi v. Hartford Life


U.S. DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Business Law
Securities Class Action Sufficiently Pleads Scienter for False, Misleading Statements
CLAL Finance Batucha Investment Management Ltd. v. Perrigo Co.


U.S. DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Employment
Fired Worker Who Discussed Retirement With Employer Fails to Raise Inference of Age Bias
Boston v. MacFadden Publishing Inc.


U.S. DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Criminal Practice
Ineffective Assistance Claims Is Dismissed; Court Notes Rapport Between Counsel, Client
Roman v. United States


U.S. DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Criminal Practice
Federally Protected Constitutional Right Ruled Not Implicated by 'Jury Note' Claim
Johnson v. Graham

No comments: