Search for: "Hagler v. State"
Results 1 - 14
of 14
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jun 2007, 11:01 am
State v. [read post]
13 May 2024, 4:54 am
Hagler is a complicated legal malpractice case arising from a $2 Million dollar demand note, sale of Apple stock, questions of usury and a few appellate decisions. [read post]
2 May 2018, 4:27 am
Hagler is a case which displays an unusual degree of latitude in denying a 3211 motion to dismiss. [read post]
20 Sep 2023, 5:29 am
In his opposition affidavit, David states that he has no recollection of receiving it, and Singer’s claim that the letter was mailed does not give rise to the presumption of receipt, as he does not present evidence of defendant firm’s office practices pertinent to mailing (see Lindsay v Pasternack Tilker Ziegler Walsh Stanton & Romano LLP, 129 AD3d 790, 793 [2d Dept 2015]; Morrison Cohen Singer & Weinstein, LLP v Brophy, 19 AD3d 161, 162 [1 st Dept… [read post]
19 Jul 2023, 4:30 pm
From New York trial judge Shlomo Hagler's opinion released today in Gu v. [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 6:08 pm
State v. [read post]
17 May 2019, 4:24 am
We reject defendant’s stated effort to shoehorn an alleged appeal from a January 2, 2019 order in Lipin v Danske Bank into this appeal. [read post]
9 Mar 2020, 4:18 am
We reject defendant’s stated effort to shoehorn an alleged appeal from a January 2, 2019 order in Lipin v Danske Bank into this appeal. [read post]
29 Jun 2012, 9:06 am
Shlomo Hagler, who has written on First Amendment cases in the past. [read post]
2 Jan 2008, 5:35 am
(Hagler, J.), also parted ways with the Superintendent. [read post]
11 Mar 2020, 8:26 pm
Auth. v State Div. of Human Rights, 78 NY2d 207, 216-217 [1991]; Batavia Lodge No. 196, Loyal Order of Moose v New York State Div. of Human Rights, 35 NY2d 143, 147 [1974]).The decision is posted on the Internet at:http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2020/2020_01252.htm [read post]
18 Nov 2024, 6:08 am
The Complaint states that “Ingargiola was one of-if not the onlyBoard member who had any idea” about an improper scheme by Lethem and Palleschi to issue undisclosed convertible notes (id ,i,i 56, 70). [read post]
27 Feb 2018, 4:15 am
Hagler discussed but did not decide what happens when law firm A is handling the case (using Attorney 1) and then Attorney 1 takes the case with him to law firm B. [read post]
6 Sep 2018, 4:18 am
Hagler reaffirms the widely understood principle that subsequent attorneys may not be held responsible for acts of prior attorneys. [read post]
