Ben B Rubinowitz

August 21, 2006 | New Jersey Law Journal

A crucial, but often overlooked, part of trial advocacy is knowledge of the rules that govern the introduction of exhibits. The proper handling and introduction of exhibits can earn you the respect of the judge and jury.

By Ben B. Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan

13 minute read

June 07, 2007 | New York Law Journal

Ben B. Rubinowitz, a partner at Gair, Gair, Conason, Steigman & Mackauf and an adjunct professor of law at Hofstra and Cardozo schools of law, and Evan Torgan, a member of Torgan & Cooper, write that although passages from medical texts are normally excluded as hearsay, they can, in fact, be used in New York State Court for impeachment purposes by reading aloud a relevant passage after the expert recognizes the writing as authoritative. The key is to get the expert to concede the writing is authoritative.

By Ben B. Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan

13 minute read

May 05, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Ben B. Rubinowitz, a partner at Gair, Gair, Conason, Steigman & Mackauf, and Evan Torgan, a member of Torgan & Cooper, wrtite that although at one time, the law recognized a herniated disc for what it was � a significant and debilitating injury, today, with the statutory threshold requirements of Insurance Law �5102, the plaintiff is faced with a difficult task.

By Ben B. Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan

13 minute read

December 29, 2006 | New York Law Journal

Ben B. Rubinowitz, a partner at Gair, Gair, Conason, Steigman & Mackauf and an adjunct professor at Hofstra and Cardozo schools of law, and Evan Torgan, a member of Torgan & Cooper and an adjunct professor at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, write that although the Civil Practice Law and Rules do not require the use of hypothetical questions to elicit expert opinion, the use of such a questioning technique on direct examination serves two purposes.

By Ben B. Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan

11 minute read

October 25, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Ben B. Rubinowitz, a partner at Gair, Gair, Conason, Steigman & Mackauf and an adjunct professor at Hofstra and Cardozo schools of law, and Evan Torgan, a member of Torgan & Cooper and an adjunct professor at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, reveal several methods used by defense attorneys to mitigate their problem of speaking first in summation and how plaintiff's counsel can counter these tactics.

By Ben B. Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan

11 minute read

October 31, 2006 | New York Law Journal

Ben B. Rubinowitz, a partner at Gair, Gair, Conason, Steigman & Mackauf, and Evan Torgan, a member of Torgan & Cooper, write that without hypothetical questions attorneys would have more difficulty proving cases, more difficulty disproving opposing theories, and more difficulty convincing juries of the righteousness of their cause.

By Ben B. Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan

14 minute read

October 28, 2004 | New York Law Journal

Ben B. Rubinowitz, a partner at Gair, Gair, Conason, Steigman & Mackauf, and Evan Torgan, a member of Torgan & Cooper, write that an attorney selecting a jury on behalf of a plaintiff in a medical negligence case faces several obstacles to finding jurors who can hear the evidence and decide the case in a fair and unbiased manner.

By Ben B. Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan

12 minute read

September 14, 2007 | New Jersey Law Journal

The use of well-recognized, authoritative works is critical to effective cross-examination of expert witnesses.

By Ben B. Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan

13 minute read

July 27, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Ben B. Rubinowitz, a partner at Gair, Gair, Conason, Steigman & Mackauf, and Evan Torgan, a member of Torgan & Cooper, write that an exaggerating witness will invariably say something surprising and eminently attackable during direct examination. The well-prepared lawyer will begin to salivate in anticipation of cross-examination on that point.

By Ben B. Rubinowitz and Evan Torgan

9 minute read