Search for: "Shivers v. State"
Results 1 - 20
of 52
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Nov 2024, 6:59 am
Accepting the allegations in the complaint as true and according the plaintiffs the benefit of every possible favorable inference, the complaint states a cause of action for legal malpractice (see Ofman v Tenenbaum Berger & Shivers, LLP, 217 AD3d 960, 962). [read post]
2 Jul 2024, 11:49 am
On June 28, 2024, the United States Supreme Court sent a long, cold shiver through the ranks of Federal agencies in its landmark decision in the case of Loper Bright v. [read post]
30 Jun 2023, 5:19 am
Ofman v Tenenbaum Berger & Shivers, LLP2023 NY Slip Op 03471 Decided on June 28, 2023 Appellate Division, Second Department is a case which reversed dismissal of a legal malpractice claim. [read post]
3 Dec 2021, 12:06 pm
Shivers v. [read post]
8 Jun 2021, 7:56 am
At the heart of the rule-resistant narrative is Graham v. [read post]
9 Feb 2021, 8:46 am
Plaintiffs Bradley Shivers, Scott Russell, and Mark Mead were on a fishing trip. [read post]
14 Sep 2020, 6:00 am
In Ofman v Tenenbaum Berger & Shivers LLP 2020 NY Slip Op 32828(U) July 23, 2020 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: 524482/2019 Judge: Richard Velasquez, Plaintiff alleged that had the attorney been quicker, the defendant would not have been able to leave the US and the judgment would have been collectible. [read post]
16 Jun 2020, 5:14 am
Lucy, an African American graduate student, enrolled at the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa, pursuant to a court order in the case of Lucy v. [read post]
28 Jul 2019, 3:30 pm
The volume’s editors (Arizona State University’s David H. [read post]
15 May 2019, 4:30 am
Inc. v. [read post]
7 Feb 2019, 9:17 am
Both place their faith in the state, and in the community, to be sure. [read post]
7 Jun 2018, 6:38 am
See Shivers v. [read post]
5 Jun 2018, 4:11 am
The first was Hughes v. [read post]
27 May 2018, 1:15 pm
In Commonwealth v. [read post]
27 May 2018, 1:15 pm
In Commonwealth v. [read post]
8 Mar 2018, 4:02 am
Those causes of action were duplicative of the legal malpractice cause of action because they arose from the same operative facts and did not seek distinct and different damages (see Thompsen v Baier, 84 AD3d 1062, 1064; Symbol Tech., Inc. v Deloitte & Touche, LLP, 69 AD3d 191, 199; Maiolini v McAdams & Fallon, P.C., 61 AD3d 644, 645; Gelfand v Oliver, 29 AD3d 736; Shivers v Siegel, 11 AD3d 447). [read post]
31 Dec 2017, 11:24 am
Both decisions are in the case United States v. [read post]
13 Dec 2017, 9:23 am
And in Yu v. [read post]
8 Jan 2016, 9:05 am
State, 2015 WL 8114247 (Fla. [read post]
26 Jun 2015, 1:30 pm
This morning the Court announced its decision in Obergefell v. [read post]
