Search for: "Finkelstein v Finkelstein"
Results 61 - 80
of 130
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Mar 2012, 3:30 am
On 13 March 2012, Bean J granted an injunction in the case of BUQ v HRE. [read post]
16 Mar 2012, 6:50 am
" pjblack.me/x9j9Yh #lwb486 #lws008 from @mashable: "Pinterest to Release New Profile Pages This Week" pjblack.me/zlrdkZ from the australian: "Sydney Uni before Fair Work Australia" pjblack.me/yi8TmO #highered good point: "It’s not curation or aggregation, it’s just how the Internet works" says @mathewi pjblack.me/ypzORr defending the finkelstein inquiry into the media: "Finkelstein gets a bad… [read post]
6 Mar 2012, 3:22 am
Jeff McMahan, The Ethics of Targeted Killing on a Moral Continuum Claire Finkelstein, Targeted Killing as Preemptive Action Richard V. [read post]
4 Mar 2012, 9:02 am
” Giles v. [read post]
29 Feb 2012, 8:25 am
Finkelstein, Basic Concepts of Probability and Statistics in the Law 65 (2009). [read post]
4 Feb 2012, 6:29 am
Milward v. [read post]
3 Feb 2012, 2:50 am
See also, Alvarez v Snyder, 264 AD2d 27 (1st Dept 2000), Iv denied 95 NY2d 759, cert denied sub nom Dim v Snyder, 531 US 1158 (2001); Finkelstein v. [read post]
1 Feb 2012, 11:53 am
With the addition of these 12 lawsuits, the grand total of law schools facing class actions over allegedly deceptive employment data is now 15 (let’s not forget about Alaburda v. [read post]
31 Jan 2012, 4:30 am
Unconvinced, the Australian government announced an independent inquiry into the print media, to be chaired by retired Federal Court Judge Ray Finkelstein QC. [read post]
29 Dec 2011, 11:58 pm
Finkelstein & Partners, LLP, NY Slip Op 09085 (2d Dept. 2011).Here is the decision.Tuesday’s issue: Bifurcated trials. [read post]
21 Dec 2011, 10:22 am
” Commonwealth v. [read post]
16 Dec 2011, 3:07 am
In Doviak v Finkelstein & Partners, LLP ; 2011 NY Slip Op 09085 ; Decided on December 13, 2011 ; Appellate Division, Second Department the Court has to decide whether a failure to report an offer by defendants to settle the case might be sufficient to demonstrate legal malpractice, as well as to forfeit legal fees which would otherwise be due to the attorneys. [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 7:13 pm
Allen v. [read post]
1 Nov 2011, 2:57 am
" However, the documentary evidence demonstrated that the plaintiff's individual liability on the notes was a matter outside of the scope of the defendants' representation of the plaintiff in her capacity as co-executor of the estate (see CPLR 3211[a][1]; AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428, 435; DeNatale v Santangelo, 65 AD3d 1006, 1007; Turner v Irving Finkelstein & Meirowitz, LLP, 61 AD3d 849, 850). [*2]" [read post]
2 Jul 2011, 10:32 am
Finkelstein, Basic Concepts of Probability and Statistics in the Law 54 (N.Y. 2009) (emphasis added). 2. [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 2:44 am
"Where an individual claim of breach of contract arises out of the same facts as an asserted legal malpractice cause of action and does not allege distinct damages, the breach of contract claim is duplicative of the malpractice claim (see Turner v Irving Finkelstein & [*2]Meirowitz, LLP, 61 AD3d 849, 850 [2009]; Garten v Shearman & Sterling LLP, 52 AD3d 207, 207-208 [2008]; Peak v Bartlett, Pontiff, Stewart & Rhodes, P.C., 28 AD3d 1028, 1031… [read post]
3 Jun 2011, 12:06 pm
"Thanks to the generosity of the Tolls, we have literally been able to double our student initiatives over the past several years," said Arlene Finkelstein, executive director of TPIC. [read post]
18 May 2011, 2:19 am
LED Technologies Pty Ltd v Roadvision Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 146 // [read post]
12 Apr 2011, 2:07 pm
In Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Allergy Pathway Pty Ltd (No 2) [2011] FCA 74 Justice Finkelstein of the Federal Court fined Allergy Pathway Pty Ltd (formerly known as Advanced Allergy Elimination) and its director, Mr Paul Keir, $7,500 each for contempt of undertakings made to the court following a successful 2009 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission action for false, misleading and deceptive conduct. [read post]
5 Apr 2011, 7:07 am
Pena-Vazquez v Beharry, 2011 NY Slip Op 02462 (1st Dept. 2011) “In any event, the settlement discussions between plaintiffs and defendants’ insurer constitute a reasonable excuse for defendants’ delay in answering (see CPLR 3012[d]; see also Finkelstein v East 65th St. [read post]
