Search for: "Rudolf v. State"
Results 61 - 80
of 102
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Dec 2015, 3:10 am
Rudolf Dolzer, Local Remedies in International Treaties: A Stocktaking L. [read post]
8 Mar 2018, 4:02 am
“To state a cause of action to recover damages for legal malpractice, a plaintiff must allege 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 the plaintiff to sustain actual and ascertainable damages (see Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442). [read post]
1 Dec 2011, 2:40 am
"Accordingly, the Plaintiff is required to establish that the Attorney Defendants herein failed to exercise the ordinary reasonable skill and knowledge commonly possessed by a member of the legal profession and that the Attorney Defendants' breach of this duty proximately caused the Plaintiff to sustain actual and ascertainable damages (Rudolf v. [read post]
5 Feb 2021, 3:07 am
Accordingly, the complaint failed to state a cause of action to recover damages for legal malpractice and the defendants were entitled to dismissal of that cause of action pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) (see Janker v Silver, Forrester & Lesser, P.C., 135 AD3d at 909; Benishai v Epstein, 116 AD3d at 728). [read post]
20 Dec 2007, 3:59 am
(see e.g., Leder v Spiegel, 9 NY3d 836; Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438; AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428; Davis v Klein, 88 NY2d 1008; Carmel v Lunney, 70 NY2d 169). [read post]
28 Mar 2010, 9:17 am
(On this point, see Rudolf Schlesinger's book on Federalism in East Central Europe, at pp 47-66). [read post]
29 Apr 2019, 4:40 am
The complaint further alleges that the defendant’s negligence proximately caused the plaintiffs to sustain actual and ascertainable damages in lost rent and in settling the action brought by the Hive, and thus, validly states a cause of action to recover damages for legal malpractice (see Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d at 443; Bua v Purcell & Ingrao, P.C., 99 AD3d 843, 847; Wolstencroft v Sassower, 124… [read post]
29 Jun 2006, 7:59 am
R (Boughton and Ors) v. [read post]
13 Sep 2012, 2:56 am
To recover damages for legal malpractice, a plaintiff is required to show that the defendant 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 caused the plaintiff to suffer actual and ascertainable damages (see Dombrowski v Bulson, 19 NY3d 347, 350; Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442; McCoy v Feinman, 99… [read post]
17 Jul 2020, 6:08 am
To state a cause of action for legal malpractice, the plaintiff must allege that “the defendant attorney failed to exercise the ordinary reasonable skill and knowledge commonly possessed by a member of the legal profession,” and that the “breach of this duty proximately caused plaintiff to sustain actual and ascertainable damages” (Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442 [2007], quoting McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d… [read post]
23 May 2022, 3:58 am
In light of the discretion imparted by the consent form, “the plaintiff[s’] contention that the alleged malpractice resulted in legally cognizable damages is conclusory and speculative inasmuch as it is premised on decisions that were within the sole discretion of the [hospital]” (Bua v Purcell & Ingrao, P.C., 99 AD3d at 848; see AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428, 436; Dempster v Liotti, 86 AD3d at 180; Hashmi… [read post]
22 Aug 2014, 5:55 am
Growthpoint Properties office division director Rudolf Pienaar says the new Discovery head office will be one of the most environmentally sustainable and efficient buildings in Sandton. [read post]
8 Sep 2008, 4:00 am
He also relies on United States v. [read post]
18 Feb 2016, 6:17 am
Sarver v. [read post]
14 May 2010, 7:26 am
The IPKat has learned, via the UK Intellectual Property Office, of Case C-145/10 Eva-Maria Paine v Standard Verlags GmbH, Axel Springer AG, Süddeutsche Zeitung GmbH, Spiegel-Verlag Rudolf Augstein GmbH & Co KG and Verlag M. [read post]
22 Dec 2011, 3:10 am
Wald v Berwitz 62 AD3d 786 (2 Dept 2009), citing Rudolf v Shayne. [read post]
30 May 2012, 3:28 am
Div. 2011) (quoting Rudolf v. [read post]
18 Mar 2022, 3:32 pm
The Delaware case is Julia Haart v. [read post]
5 Aug 2013, 10:25 am
In Hart v. [read post]
14 Sep 2009, 5:51 am
(IPKat) United States US General Third IP cross-retaliation strike against USA at WTO (Excess Copyright) World Economic Forum survey: US 18th in global IP protection (Intellectual Property Watch) Funds for US State Department global IP enforcement training (Intellectual Property Watch) Changes in USPTO senior management (Patent Docs) US Patents PatentFreedom to offer subscription-based reexam service to attack NPE patents (Peter Zura's 271 Patent Blog)… [read post]
