Search for: "Oppenheimer & Co. v. Oppenheim"
Results 61 - 80
of 83
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Nov 2011, 2:35 am
Defendant's motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) is also denied inasmuch as defendant's affidavit and the documents attached thereto do not definitively and "conclusively establish[ ] a defense to the asserted action as a matter of law" (Leon, 84 NY2d at 88); the documentary evidence merely raises numerous issues of fact, rather than finally dispose of them (see Bernstein v Oppenheim & Co., P.C., 160 AD2d 428, 435 [1st Dept 1990]). [read post]
17 Oct 2011, 10:00 pm
Tobacco Securities Trust Co. [read post]
14 May 2020, 7:32 am
A claim for legal malpractice can be viable “despite settlement of the underlying action, if it is alleged that the settlement was effectively compelled by [the] mistakes of counsel” (Bernstein v Oppenheim & Co., 160 AD2d 428, 430 [1st Dept 1990] [holding settlement of underlying action did not compel dismissal]). [read post]
7 Oct 2020, 11:04 pm
Thus, English courts allow a judgment debtor to raise fraud at the recognition and enforcement stage even if no new evidence is adduced and fraud had been considered and dismissed by the court of origin (Abouloff v Oppenheimer & Co (1882) 10 QBD 295). [read post]
23 Jan 2008, 3:45 am
Oppenheim & Co., 554 N.Y.S.2d 487 (N.Y. [read post]
30 Nov 2012, 12:57 pm
By Andrew DelaneyTaylor v. [read post]
19 Sep 2011, 11:05 am
In Lummus Co. v. [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 7:03 am
– Fisher v. [read post]
6 Feb 2009, 7:07 am
Co. v. [read post]
1 Feb 2012, 6:00 am
Co. v. [read post]
2 Nov 2009, 3:44 am
Defendant's motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) is also denied inasmuch as defendant's affidavit and the documents attached thereto do not definitively and "conclusively establish[ ] a defense to the asserted action as a matter of law" (Leon, 84 NY2d at 88); the documentary evidence merely raises numerous issues of fact, rather than finally dispose of them (see Bernstein v Oppenheim & Co., P.C., 160 AD2d 428, 435 [1st Dept 1990]). [read post]
5 Nov 2020, 6:45 am
(Bernstein v Oppenheim & Co., P.C., 160 AD2d 428, 434-35 [1st Dept 1990]; cf. [read post]
17 Jul 2017, 11:33 pm
Stewart Title Co. [read post]
15 Mar 2010, 12:09 pm
NEA v. [read post]
9 Oct 2007, 12:59 am
In its decision in Chrismon, et al. v. [read post]
28 Oct 2011, 7:00 am
SK & F Lab Co., 702 F. [read post]
23 Feb 2016, 7:36 am
No. 3-16976, for failure to comply with audit standards; its actions against broker-dealers such as Oppenheimer & Co. [read post]
14 Sep 2010, 8:06 am
No. 107-40, 115 Stat. 224 (2001); Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. [read post]
27 Sep 2010, 6:32 am
Source: New York Legislative Retrieval System (LRS), Search run September 26,2010.To retrieve the text of any of the New York Chapter laws listed below, go to http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/menuf.cgiChapter Bill No. 483 A924E DelMonte (MS) -- Authorizes the department of environmental conservation to promulgate standards authorizing hunting with a crossbow; repealer BLURB : En Con L. hunting w/crossbow Chapter Signed Date Effective Date 483 09/17/2010 takes effect 10/1/2010, except that… [read post]
19 Jul 2022, 2:59 pm
., Sarafin v. [read post]
