Search for: "Bell v. Foster" Results 81 - 100 of 120
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Apr 2012, 8:58 am by Matthew Nelson
While the gaze of the eDiscovery community has been firmly transfixed on the unfolding drama in the Da Silva Moore, et. al. v. [read post]
20 Feb 2012, 2:57 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Verdi v Jacoby & Meyers, LLP ; 2012 NY Slip Op 01243 ; Decided on February 14, 2012 ; Appellate Division, Second Department  and Schurz v Bodian ;2012 NY Slip Op 01235 ; Decided on February 14, 2012 ;Appellate Division, Second Department  both tell us: "The Supreme Court properly, in effect, upon reargument, adhered to its original determination denying the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, since the defendants failed to make… [read post]
11 Nov 2011, 3:00 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
They failed to demonstrate that the appellants' alleged malpractice (the failure to tender written notice of cancellation of the contract of sale) was a proximate cause of their damages (see Bells v Foster, 83 AD3d 876, 877; compare Logalbo v Plishkin, Rubano & Baum, 163 AD2d 511). [read post]
25 May 2011, 6:02 am by John Elwood
Bell, 10-8629) for consideration at a future Conference. [read post]
17 May 2011, 12:39 pm by John Elwood
  A similar question is presented in the pending petition for rehearing in Foster v. [read post]
26 Apr 2011, 1:55 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
 Bells v Foster   2011 NY Slip Op 03195   Decided on April 19, 2011   Appellate Division, Second Department  say:  "Here, the plaintiff failed to establish her prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law because she failed to demonstrate that any negligence on the defendant's part in failing to timely cancel the contract of sale on her behalf was the sole proximate cause of her damages (see Snolis v… [read post]
21 Mar 2011, 3:00 am by Guest Blogger
I’ve recently started working on a book about reformers’ ideologies and strategies in Sheff v. [read post]
15 Dec 2010, 8:13 am by Adam Chandler
Souter in which Justice Souter cites and further explains his seminal decision in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. [read post]
15 Apr 2010, 2:19 pm by Jim Harper
The Supreme Court held that “one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties. [read post]
12 Apr 2010, 6:37 pm by Andrew Raff
Here are a few notable reactions to the DC Circuit's Comcast v. [read post]
14 Mar 2010, 12:30 pm by Howard Friedman
A number of other claims were dismissed.In Foster v. [read post]