Search for: "Rudolf v. Rudolf"
Results 41 - 60
of 185
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Dec 2007, 3:18 am
Grasso, P.C., 210 AD2d 671; see also Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d at 444 n 3; Meyer v Glynn, 278 AD2d 291; Butler v Brown, 180 AD2d 406). [read post]
14 Jul 2011, 3:12 am
Moreover, given the Plaintiff's arbitration award, the Plaintiff has suffered no damages proximately caused by the Defendant's purported malpractice (Rudolf v. [read post]
27 Apr 2023, 12:25 pm
Rudolf von Milena Ragaz, unter anderem Assistentin am Lehrstuhl Rudolf, auf Schweizerdeutsch interviewt.Inhaltlich findet die Episode eine gelungene Mischung aus Laientauglichkeit und Rechtskompetenz. [read post]
1 Dec 2010, 1:17 am
" To establish causation, "a plaintiff must show that he or she would have prevailed in the underlying action or would not have incurred any damages, but for the lawyer's negligence" (Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d at 442; see Kuzmin v Nevsky, 74 AD3d at 898; Rosenstrauss v Jacobs & Jacobs, 56 AD3d 453; Wray v Mallilo & Grossman, 54 AD3d 328, 329; Carrasco v Pena & Kahn, 48 AD3d… [read post]
8 Aug 2022, 5:46 am
” “The amended complaint states a cause of action for legal malpractice and the documents submitted do not utterly refute the factual allegations underlying that cause of action (see generally Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442 [2007]; Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994]; Goshen v Mutual Life Ins. [read post]
6 May 2022, 4:12 am
“The amended complaint states a cause of action for legal malpractice and the documents submitted do not utterly refute the factual allegations underlying that cause of action (see generally Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442 [2007]; Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994]; Goshen v Mutual Life Ins. [read post]
9 Jul 2018, 4:31 am
To establish causation, the plaintiff must show that he or she would have prevailed in the underlying action or would not have incurred any damages, but for the defendant attorney’s negligence (see Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d at 442). [read post]
13 Aug 2019, 4:34 am
“To establish causation, a plaintiff must show that he or she would have prevailed in the underlying action or would not have incurred any damages, but for the lawyer’s negligence” (Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d at 442; see Davis v Klein, 88 NY2d 1008, 1009). [read post]
10 Jun 2022, 3:31 am
Vioni v Carey & Assoc. [read post]
29 Mar 2021, 3:56 am
Furthermore, the third-party complaint sufficiently alleged the existence of an attorney-client relationship between Hobbick and the third-party defendants, as well as the other elements of legal malpractice, including damages, which “may include litigation expenses incurred in an attempt to avoid, minimize, or reduce the damage caused by the attorney’s” negligence (Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 443 [internal quotation marks… [read post]
30 Nov 2017, 3:53 am
Plaintiff failed to present any competent evidence to demonstrate that the firm that represented him in a real estate transaction, defendant Alouidor & Associates, P.C., did not exercise the ordinary reasonable skill and knowledge commonly possessed by a member of the legal profession and that the attorney’s breach of this duty proximately caused plaintiff to sustain actual and ascertainable damages (see Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438,… [read post]
4 Feb 2022, 4:40 am
The motion court applied the proper standard of care to defendants in this legal malpractice action (see Bassim v Halliday, 234 AD2d 628 [3d Dept 1996], appeal dismissed 89 NY2d 1001 [1997]; see generally Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442 [2007]). [read post]
22 Oct 2008, 11:28 am
To establish causation, a plaintiff must show that he or she would have prevailed in the underlying action, or would not have incurred any damages but for the attorney's negligence (see Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d at 442; Davis v Klein, 88 NY2d 1008, 1009-1010; Lamanna v Pearson & Shapiro, 43 AD3d 1111; Cohen v Wallace & Minchenberg, 39 AD3d 691). [read post]
1 Sep 2009, 4:39 am
To establish the element of causation, a plaintiff must show that he or she would have prevailed in the underlying action or would not have incurred any damages but for the attorney's negligence (see Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d at 442; Wray v Mallilo & Grossman, 54 AD3d 328, 329 [2008]; Carrasco v Pena & Kahn, 48 AD3d at 396). [read post]
15 May 2010, 8:25 am
Dirk Moses, Kriegsverbrecher- und Völkermordprozesse gegen pakistanische Soldaten in Bangladesch Jan Eckel, Die internationale Menschenrechtskampagne gegen ChileCelia Donert, Charta 77 und die Roma [read post]
30 Oct 2023, 5:01 am
In, Grace v. [read post]
28 Sep 2022, 2:06 am
Plaintiff must also “show that the attorney was the proximate cause of his or her conviction” (Britt v Legal Aid Socy., 95 NY2d 443, 446 [2000]; see Dombrowski v Bulson, 19 NY3d 347, 350-351 [2012]). [read post]
13 Apr 2009, 4:29 am
At the trial level one must prove the usual :"a plaintiff must demonstrate that the attorney failed to exercise the ordinary reasonable skill and knowledge commonly possessed by a member of the legal profession' and that the attorney's breach of this duty proximately caused plaintiff to sustain actual and ascertainable damages" (Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442, quoting McCoy v… [read post]
18 Aug 2023, 5:07 am
To establish causation, a plaintiff must show that he or she would have prevailed in the underlying action, or would not have incurred any damages but for the attorney’s negligence (see Rudolf v. [read post]
7 Jun 2021, 5:14 am
“”In an action to recover damages for legal malpractice, a plaintiff must demonstrate that the attorney ‘failed to exercise the ordinary reasonable skill and knowledge commonly possessed by a member of the legal profession’ and that the attorney’s breach of this duty proximately caused plaintiff to sustain actual and ascertainable damages” (Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442, quoting McCoy v… [read post]
