Search for: "Northrop v Thorsen"
Results 1 - 13
of 13
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Jan 2008, 4:00 am
Here is an interesting case, Frances Northrop, respondent, v Eric Ole Thorsen, appellant. [read post]
23 Jan 2008, 3:33 am
Thorsen, AD3d , 2007 N.Y. [read post]
11 Nov 2010, 2:55 am
The controlling appellate authority on the facts presented is the case of Northrop v. [read post]
22 Feb 2021, 6:12 am
Defendant failed to provide any expert testimony (see Healy v Finz & Finz, P.C., 82 AD3d 704, 706 [2011]; Northrop v Thorsen, 46 AD3d 780, 782 [2007]) or to otherwise substantiate her claim of legal malpractice. [read post]
23 Dec 2009, 4:07 am
Northrop v Thorsen, 46 AD3d 780, 783; Johnson v Berger, 193 AD2d 784, 786; Sucese v Kirsch, 177 AD2d 890, 892), that argument is without merit. [read post]
12 Aug 2020, 4:32 am
·· Northrop v. [read post]
16 Jul 2012, 3:26 am
An attorney generally is not permitted to shift to the client the legal responsibility that the attorney was hired to undertake because of his or her superior knowledge (see Northrop v Thorsen, 46 AD3d 780, 783). [read post]
8 Apr 2011, 1:50 am
An attorney generally is not permitted to shift to the client the legal responsibility that the attorney was hired to undertake because of his or her superior knowledge (see Northrop v Thorsen, 46 AD3d 780, 783). [read post]
16 Jul 2010, 3:34 am
Here, in opposition to the plaintiff's prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the Meighan defendants failed to demonstrate the existence of any triable issues of fact with respect to their liability for legal malpractice (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324; Northrop v Thorsen, 46 AD3d 780, 784; Jampolskaya v Victor Gomelsky, P.C., 36 AD3d 761, 762). [read post]
22 Nov 2011, 3:03 am
Here, in opposition to the plaintiff's prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the Meighan defendants failed to demonstrate the existence of any triable issues of fact with respect to their liability for legal malpractice (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324; Northrop v Thorsen, 46 AD3d 780, 784; Jampolskaya v Victor Gomelsky, P.C., 36 AD3d 761, 762). [read post]
25 Apr 2011, 1:48 am
Finz & Finz, __ AD3d __ [2nd Dept., 2011]; citing, Northrop v. [read post]
31 Jul 2020, 6:14 am
In opposition, the sellers failed to raise a triable issue of fact, since they did not produce any expert evidence regarding whether Goodman’s conduct constituted malpractice and caused the sellers to incur damages, and under the circumstances of this case, such expert evidence was required for an evaluation of the adequacy and propriety of Goodman’s actions (see Healy v Finz & Finz, P.C., 82 AD3d 704, 706; Northrop v Thorsen, 46 AD3d 780,… [read post]
25 Feb 2010, 3:55 am
See, e.g., Northrop v. [read post]
