Search for: "Lozada v. Lozada"
Results 21 - 40
of 54
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Jun 2018, 4:18 am
[FN2] Given the [*3]absence of detailed facts, the legal malpractice cause of action should have been dismissed (see Janker v Silver, Forrester & Lesser, P.C., 135 AD3d 908, 910 [2016]; Rodriguez v Jacoby & Meyers, LLP, 126 AD3d at 1185-1186; Kreamer v Town of Oxford, 96 AD3d 1128, 1128 [2012]; compare Soule v Lozada, 232 AD2d 825, 825 [1996]). [read post]
1 Jun 2018, 4:35 am
[FN2] Given the [*3]absence of detailed facts, the legal malpractice cause of action should have been dismissed (see Janker v Silver, Forrester & Lesser, P.C., 135 AD3d 908, 910 [2016]; Rodriguez v Jacoby & Meyers, LLP, 126 AD3d at 1185-1186; Kreamer v Town of Oxford, 96 AD3d 1128, 1128 [2012]; compare Soule v Lozada, 232 AD2d 825, 825 [1996]). [read post]
10 Nov 2017, 4:25 am
Given the [*2]absence of detailed facts, the legal malpractice cause of action should have been dismissed (see Janker v Silver, Forrester & Lesser, P.C., 135 AD3d 908, 910 [2016]; Rodriguez v Jacoby & Meyers, LLP, 126 AD3d at 1185-1186; Kreamer v Town of Oxford, 96 AD3d 1128, 1128 [2012]; compare Soule v Lozada, 232 AD2d 825, 825 [1996]). [read post]
17 Oct 2017, 4:01 am
Lozada (hereinafter the defendant), an attorney who represented her at a real estate closing. [read post]
26 Jun 2017, 4:00 am
Determining if a complaint alleging sexual harassment based a claim of a continuing violation of New York State's Human Rights Law is timelyLozada v Elmont Hook & Ladder Co. [read post]
8 Feb 2017, 8:17 pm
The petition of the day is: Sanchez de Lozada v. [read post]
29 Feb 2016, 2:41 am
Vázquez Lozada [read post]
7 Oct 2015, 6:00 am
Ene v. [read post]
15 Oct 2014, 8:13 am
Lozada v. [read post]
12 Oct 2014, 2:47 pm
Lozada v. [read post]
12 Oct 2014, 2:47 pm
Lozada v. [read post]
22 Jul 2014, 10:00 am
See Lozada v. [read post]
21 May 2014, 7:41 am
”); see also Lozada v. [read post]
6 Sep 2012, 1:06 pm
V. [read post]
20 Aug 2012, 2:48 pm
Div. 1992); Lozada v. [read post]
3 Sep 2011, 3:15 am
A civil suit captioned Mamani v. [read post]
31 Aug 2011, 8:43 pm
In a unanimous and somewhat impatient opinion by Judge James Edmondson, the Court concluded that the plaintiffs had made only “bare assertions” and “legal conclusions” about the conduct of Bolivia’s leaders, rather than the specific factual allegations required by the Supreme Court in Ashcroft v. [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 6:17 pm
Lozada v. [read post]
20 Nov 2010, 9:04 am
Sánchez de Lozada and Mamani, et al. v. [read post]
