Search for: "Carnevali v. Carnevali" Results 1 - 4 of 4
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Jun 2010, 2:39 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Thus the "pleading is sufficient to establish that the parties mutually contemplated that [Levinson's] work and representation for [the transaction] would continue after [the closing date] and, therefore, the continuous representation doctrine applies," and the statute of limitations was tolled (Symbol Tech., Inc. v Deloitte & Touche, LLP, 69 AD3d 191, 195; see Carnevali v Herman, 293 AD2d 698, 699; Khan v Hart, 270 AD2d 231). [read post]