Search for: "Matter of Dept. of Insurance's Order" Results 241 - 260 of 434
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Jun 2010, 7:22 am by Nicole Vinson
National Fire Adjustment Co., 577 N.Y.S. 2d 998 (4th Dept.1991), the public adjusters had to litigate against the policyholder in order to receive their compensation. [read post]
1 Nov 2011, 11:29 pm by Joel R. Brandes
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Requires Reversal of Neglect Orders In Matter of Jaikob O., --- N.Y.S.2d ----, 2011 WL 4974840 (N.Y.A.D. 3 Dept.) the Appellate Division reversed an order which granted petitioner's application to adjudicate the children to be neglected. [read post]
9 Jan 2023, 6:12 am by Dan Bressler
” “Angelo Bagnara consented to discipline in the matter, filed by the Office of Attorney Ethics. [read post]
24 Apr 2013, 6:00 am by Michael B. Stack
 You have to be part HR dept, part adjuster, and 100% multitasker. [read post]
27 Mar 2020, 2:06 am by John Hochfelder
Thumser (2d Dept. 2019), upon plaintiff’s appeal that the damages award was inadequate, the appellate court ordered an increase in the damages verdict to $150,000 ($100,000 past, $50,000 future – 19 years). [read post]
11 Mar 2024, 4:51 am by Franklin C. McRoberts
In the end, bifurcation is “not an absolute given,” but a matter of discretion: it is the “responsibility of the trial judge to exercise discretion in determining whether bifurcation is appropriate in light of all relevant facts and circumstances presented by the individual case” (Rueda v Elmhurst Woodside, LLC, 187 AD3d 955 [2d Dept 2020]). [read post]
29 Jun 2014, 4:20 pm by Stephen Bilkis
An intoxicated person merely needed to be sitting around the wheel while the engine was running or had an intent to operate the vehicle in order to prove operation according to Matter of Prudhomme v Hults, 27 AD2d 234 [3d Dept 1967]. [read post]
15 Apr 2021, 12:40 pm by John Hochfelder
The trial judge ordered a reduction to $40,600,000 ($10,500,000 past, $30,100,000 future). [read post]
11 Apr 2007, 9:29 am
For publication opinions today (3): Cincinnati Insurance Company v. [read post]
16 Nov 2011, 11:08 am by Joel R. Brandes
Order of Protection Properly Denied Where Communications Sent with Legitimate Purpose of Attempting to Reconcile with Petitioner In Ovsanik v Ovsanik, --- N.Y.S.2d ----, 2011 WL 5433772 (N.Y.A.D. 4 Dept.) the Appellate Divison reversed an order of protection granted by the Family Court finding that Petitioner failed to meet her burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that respondent committed acts constituting a family offense. [read post]