Search for: "Kaufman v Kaufman" Results 101 - 120 of 611
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
25 Aug 2021, 9:03 pm by Aaron Kaufman
Supreme Court decision in Murphy v. [read post]
9 Aug 2021, 8:10 am by Kaufman Dolowich Voluck
  The Superior Court saw “no impediment […] The post Pennsylvania Superior Court Recognizes Employees’ Right to Sue Employers Under the Medical Marijuana Act appeared first on Kaufman Dolowich Voluck LLP. [read post]
15 Jul 2021, 2:54 pm by Kevin LaCroix
In its June 21, 2021 decision in Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Jun 2021, 3:45 pm by Kaufman Dolowich Voluck
On May 25, 2021, Richard Perr, Monica Littman, and Graeme Hogan of the Philadelphia office of Kaufman Dolowich & Voluck authored a Petition for Rehearing en banc in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals on behalf of Defendant Preferred Collection & Management Services, as well as the hundreds of entities in the Accounts Receivable Management (“ARM”) industry in the matter captioned Hunstein v. [read post]
21 Jun 2021, 3:33 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
  It rarely succeeds and in Kaufman v Moritt Hock & Hamroff, LLP  2021 NY Slip Op 01969 [192 AD3d 1092] March 31, 2021 Appellate Division, Second Department is denied outright. [read post]
7 May 2021, 3:58 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
  Kaufman v Boies Schiller Flexner, LLP  2021 NY Slip Op 31340(U) April 22, 2021 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 154149/2018 Judge: James E. d’Auguste not only cost a lot, it spawned multiple other litigations as well. [read post]
17 Mar 2021, 3:02 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
In any case, since RFL’s retainer was signed only on behalf of the LIMGA shareholders, not on behalf of any entity in which Gabay or LIMA had a legal interest, RFL did not have a duty to the plaintiffs (see Strujan v Kaufman & Kahn, LLP, 168 AD3d 1114, 1115; Betz v Blatt, 160 AD3d 696, 698), and the alleged conflict of interest did not arise. [read post]