Search for: "Wells v. Purcell" Results 1 - 20 of 82
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Mar 2014, 12:26 pm
 Because both under the Court of Appeal's reasoning as well as under the statute, it does seem like we may well be making it very difficult to enforce these types of settlement agreements. [read post]
1 Aug 2019, 4:05 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
  Leeder v Antonucci  2019 NY Slip Op 05898  Decided on July 31, 2019 Appellate Division, Fourth Department looks at the last of the elements – ascertainable damages, as well as examines continuous representation in a statute of limitations setting. [read post]
23 Jul 2019, 5:55 am by Second Circuit Civil Rights Blog
The Court of Appeals holds for the first time in a published ruling that a three year statute of limitation applies.The case is Purcell v. [read post]
5 Apr 2007, 4:57 pm
At the same time I'm very wary of Supreme Court intervention, particularly given its intervention in Purcell v. [read post]
28 Mar 2007, 11:46 am
It then uses the Supreme Court's recent opinion in Purcell v. [read post]
21 Aug 2008, 7:41 pm
The Herald had reported that Murphy was soft on crime and, well, nobody puts Baby in the corner. [read post]
15 Nov 2023, 5:43 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
” “”The plaintiff is required to plead actual, ascertainable damages that resulted from the attorneys’ negligence” (Bua v Purcell & Ingrao, P.C., 99 AD3d at 847; see Marinelli v Sullivan Papain Block McGrath & Cannavo, P.C., 205 AD3d at 716). [read post]
29 Oct 2019, 4:23 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
With respect to the biofuel cause of action, defendant met his initial burden on the cross motion by establishing that plaintiff’s allegations of damages are entirely speculative (see Lincoln Trust v Spaziano, 118 AD3d 1399, 1401 [4th Dept 2014]; Bua v Purcell & Ingrao, P.C., 99 AD3d 843, 848 [2d Dept 2012], lv denied 20 NY3d 857 [2013]), and thus plaintiff is “unable to prove at least one of the essential elements of [his] legal malpractice… [read post]
19 Aug 2022, 4:42 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
“Conclusory allegations of damages or injuries predicated on speculation cannot suffice for a malpractice action” (Bua v Purcell & Ingrao, P.C., 99 AD3d at 848; see Janker v Silver, Forrester & Lesser, P.C., 135 AD3d at 909). [read post]
26 Oct 2006, 8:32 am
Instead, the State relies on last Friday's opinion in Purcell v. [read post]
6 Jun 2010, 7:19 am by Anna Christensen
Commerce Energy has been updated to include the opinion and a recap by Stanford’s Annasara Purcell, and we have also updated the page for Carr v. [read post]
13 Feb 2017, 1:18 pm by Josh Blackman
(The state Solicitor General had planned this challenge well before the order was even signed). [read post]