Search for: "State v. Corker"
Results 61 - 80
of 109
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Mar 2018, 11:32 am
Bob Corker (R. [read post]
28 Sep 2022, 2:06 am
” “Here, because Brooks plead guilty to certain tax evasion counts, those convictions were not abated by the Second Circuit in United States v Brooks (872 F3d 78, 87-88 [2d Cir 2017)). [read post]
18 Dec 2023, 3:25 am
Conklin, who represented plaintiff in an underlying action alleging accounting malpractice, among other things, were entitled to dismissal of the complaint given that plaintiff failed to allege that defendants were negligent or that they proximately caused any damages (see Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442 [2007]; Fielding v Kupferman, 65 AD3d 437, 442 [1st Dept 2009]). [read post]
12 Oct 2022, 4:52 am
Supreme Court properly dismissed plaintiff’s legal malpractice cause of action in the original complaint because he failed to allege that “but for” defendant’s negligent conduct, he would have prevailed in the underlying action (Weil, Gotshal & Manges, LLP v Fashion Boutique of Short Hills, Inc., 10 AD3d 267, 272 [1st Dept 2004]; see Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442 [2007]). [read post]
7 Sep 2022, 5:32 am
The Second Circuit’s decision vacating his conviction was issued on September 20, 2017 (see United States v Brooks, 872 F3d 78, 96 [2d Cir 2017]) and this case was not commenced until September 2021. [read post]
16 Jun 2018, 7:30 am
They also discussed Doe v. [read post]
2 Oct 2018, 4:14 am
” (Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 443 [2007] (quotations omitted).) [read post]
28 Jun 2017, 1:03 pm
Andrew Kent examined the Supreme Court’s decision in Hernandez v. [read post]
20 Dec 2007, 3:59 am
(see e.g., Leder v Spiegel, 9 NY3d 836; Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438; AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428; Davis v Klein, 88 NY2d 1008; Carmel v Lunney, 70 NY2d 169). [read post]
5 Feb 2021, 3:07 am
Accordingly, the complaint failed to state a cause of action to recover damages for legal malpractice and the defendants were entitled to dismissal of that cause of action pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) (see Janker v Silver, Forrester & Lesser, P.C., 135 AD3d at 909; Benishai v Epstein, 116 AD3d at 728). [read post]
8 Mar 2018, 4:02 am
“To state a cause of action to recover damages for legal malpractice, a plaintiff must allege that the attorney failed to exercise the ordinary reasonable skill and knowledge commonly possessed by a member of the legal profession and that the attorney’s breach of this duty proximately caused the plaintiff to sustain actual and ascertainable damages (see Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442). [read post]
1 Dec 2011, 2:40 am
Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442 [2007]; Bilin v. [read post]
25 Apr 2020, 10:17 am
The content at issue here was provided by Nelson, in his capacity as a member of CGC, so CGC was both a service provider and a provider of the subject content, making the Act inapplicable. * Corker v. [read post]
2 Mar 2020, 4:51 am
Plaintiff’s assertion that, had Arenas been better prepared, the jury would have returned a favorable verdict is pure speculation (Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 443 [2007]; Bookwood v Alston & Bird, LLC, 146 AD3d 662 [1st Dept 2017]. [read post]
20 Jun 2015, 9:30 am
Senator Corker concludes his scathing remarks by warning the president that, “Walking away from a bad deal at this point would take courage, but it would be the best thing for the United States, the region and the world. [read post]
29 Apr 2019, 4:40 am
The complaint further alleges that the defendant’s negligence proximately caused the plaintiffs to sustain actual and ascertainable damages in lost rent and in settling the action brought by the Hive, and thus, validly states a cause of action to recover damages for legal malpractice (see Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d at 443; Bua v Purcell & Ingrao, P.C., 99 AD3d 843, 847; Wolstencroft v Sassower, 124… [read post]
13 Sep 2012, 2:56 am
To recover damages for legal malpractice, a plaintiff is required to show that the defendant attorney failed to exercise the ordinary reasonable skill and knowledge commonly possessed by a member of the legal profession, and that the attorney's breach of this duty caused the plaintiff to suffer actual and ascertainable damages (see Dombrowski v Bulson, 19 NY3d 347, 350; Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442; McCoy v Feinman, 99… [read post]
17 Jul 2020, 6:08 am
To state a cause of action for legal malpractice, the plaintiff must allege that “the defendant attorney failed to exercise the ordinary reasonable skill and knowledge commonly possessed by a member of the legal profession,” and that the “breach of this duty proximately caused plaintiff to sustain actual and ascertainable damages” (Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442 [2007], quoting McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d… [read post]
31 May 2014, 5:49 am
Mark Martins’ statements before a pre-trial motions hearing in the case of United States v. [read post]
16 Jun 2017, 2:54 pm
Newsom wrote a law review article comparing the reasoning of Roe v. [read post]
