January 18, 2023 | New York Law Journal
What Do Theodore Roosevelt, Socialite Lizzie Grubman, and Kathy Boudin Have in Common?A colorful examination of the fascinating jurisprudence relating to motions to change venue pursuant to CPLR §510(2), due to the fame and/or infamy of the litigants.
By Alan R. Levy
20 minute read
September 26, 2022 | New York Law Journal
Navigating the Minefield of Contacting Former Employees of Corporate PartiesAn in-depth review of the tricky situation when representing a witness' former employer. The author writes: "If you are counsel for a witness' former employer, and the ex-employee holds a grudge, is non-communicative, or has indicated they do not wish to speak with or cooperate with you, while that may be harsh, there is very little you can do about that. However, if you represent a former employer, and the former employee is willing to speak with you, one must often juggle somewhat confusing duties and ethical obligations."
By Alan R. Levy
13 minute read
April 08, 2022 | New Jersey Law Journal
NJ's Mode of Operation Rule Could Leave Both Sides With 'Sour Grapes'On March 17, the New Jersey Supreme Court rendered a somewhat contentious 4-2 decision in 'Jeter v. Sam's Club,' in the ongoing struggle to define the parameters of the controversial 'mode of operation' rule.
By Alan R. Levy
8 minute read
December 20, 2017 | New York Law Journal
Who Watches the Watchdogs? The Use of Non-Party IME WatchdogsAlan Levy discusses how New York courts have been struggling recently with what has become a commonplace use of non-attorney staff and outside legal service providers known as "IME Watchdogs" to accompany plaintiffs to their Independent Medical Examinations.
By Alan R. Levy
8 minute read
July 17, 2017 | New York Law Journal
Out-of-Possession Owners and Snow, Ice Liability: Appellate Courts Are SplitAlan R. Levy writes: Do "out-of-possession" commercial landowners, who have transferred possession and control of premises to a commercial tenant, retain the non-delegable duty to remove snow/ice from their abutting sidewalks? Can they be liable for injuries arising from an alleged failure to do so? The courts appear to be struggling with this question, as there appears to be a split among the First and Second Departments.
By Alan R. Levy
9 minute read
December 22, 2014 | New Jersey Law Journal
Applying Mode-of-Operation in Slip/Fall Cases at Retail StoresA case that is currently before the N.J. Supreme Court—Prioleau v. KFC—may dramatically impact the mode-of-operation doctrine, and defendant store owners could have a much more difficult burden defending such cases.
By Alan R. Levy
8 minute read
October 09, 2006 | New Jersey Law Journal
Lewdness Divides Along Delaware RiverHow can the word "lewd" be unconstitutionally vague in one state's statute, yet be constitutionally acceptable in another state?
By Alan R. Levy
9 minute read
April 08, 2010 | New Jersey Law Journal
The Door Is Open Once Again to Product Manufacturers Who Seek the Benefits of the Statute of ReposeThe impact of Miles is clear: manufacturers of products used in real property improvements continue to have a sympathetic ear in the judiciary in asserting that the SOR can be used as a basis for seeking summary judgment when the cause of action arises more than 10 years after the completion of a construction project.
By Alan R. Levy
8 minute read
May 10, 2010 | New York Law Journal
'Click It' or Waive ItAlan R. Levy, a partner at Buckley & Curtis, writes: In recent decades, one of the more relevant areas of plaintiff's mitigation is whether or not a person in an automobile accident was wearing a seatbelt. Defendants in most auto cases invariably raise the "seatbelt defense" as an affirmative defense. However, despite over 35 years of case law on the subject, there is still debate and confusion among attorneys as to how this defense is applied and utilized.
By Alan R. Levy
11 minute read
December 06, 2004 | New Jersey Law Journal
Court Deals Blow to Product ManufacturersA unanimous New Jersey Supreme Court delivered a stinging blow to manufacturers of products that are used as improvements to real property. In a case of first impression, the Court held that a swimming pool manufacturer was not entitled to the defense of repose when faced with a claim against it for personal injury.
By Alan R. Levy
8 minute read