Search for: "SOMMER v. SOMMER" Results 61 - 80 of 177
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Feb 2018, 4:31 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
That is because, as the majority recognizes, a tort claim may be maintained in addition to a contract claim where there is a “breach of a legal duty independent of the contract” (see Sommer v Federal Signal Corp., 79 NY2d 540, 551 [1992]). [read post]
22 May 2008, 4:02 am
For example, no expert testimony was required when the attorney entirely failed to submit a legal argument in his client's defense, Sommers v. [read post]
4 Jun 2008, 1:51 pm
The Court of Appeals opinion shows that," Clinton County Prosecutor Tony Sommer said. [read post]
7 Apr 2023, 9:30 pm by ernst
  Georgetown Law observes the centennial of United States v. [read post]
23 Nov 2020, 4:00 am by Howard Friedman
Vasileía tou Theoú, (South Dakota Law Review, Vol. 65, No. 2, 2020).Brian Owsley, Is The Supreme Court Irrational: Trump v. [read post]
27 Jun 2011, 5:57 am by Walter Olson
“Electronic Arts Has Right to Refer to John Dillinger in Its Video Games” [Volokh] Fans of “Civil Gideon” (constitutional entitlement to publicly funded lawyers in civil cases) glum that SCOTUS didn’t give idea much of a boost in Turner v. [read post]
1 Jul 2022, 3:32 pm
However, in another decision made after these transactions, Sommerer v. [read post]
27 Dec 2017, 4:11 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
When, as here, the plaintiff is essentially seeking enforcement of her bargain, she should proceed under a contract theory (see, Sommer v Federal Signal Corp., 79 NY2d 540, 552, citing ClarkFitzpatrick, Inc. v Long Is. [read post]
6 Mar 2012, 3:18 am by Alfred Brophy
 There are a lot of the typical cases in recent property (such as Sommer v. [read post]
13 Jan 2010, 3:20 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
The action was commenced on August 14, 2008, and the three-year statute of limitations (see CPLR 214[6]) began to run on August 12, 2005, when the plaintiff signed a consent to change attorney form, relieving the defendant as counsel in the underlying action (see Frost Line Refrig., Inc. v Gastwirth, Mirsky & Stein, LLP, 25 AD3d 532, 532-533; Sommers v Cohen, 14 AD3d 691, 692; Marro v Handwerker, Marchelos & Gayner, 1 AD3d 488, 488; Daniels v… [read post]
14 Jun 2011, 8:29 am by Walter Olson
Chrysler seat back case (0) SCOTUS refuses to review Flax punitive damages (4) Potter v. [read post]