Edward M Spiro

August 06, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Edward M. Spiro and Judith L. Mogul, principals of Morvillo, Abramowitz, Grand, Iason, Anello & Bohrer, write that courts do not enter protective orders lightly, and the party seeking a judicially imposed protective order should take the time to support its application with particularized arguments supporting its assertion of good cause.

By Edward M. Spiro and Judith L. Mogul

13 minute read

February 05, 2002 | New York Law Journal

A mong the decisions handed down in November and December in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York were Judge Shira A. Scheindlin`s decision refusing to consider expert affidavits that contained only legal opinions and Chief Judge Michael B. Mukasey`s opinion dismissing antitrust conspiracy claims for lack of personal jurisdiction. Judge John S. Martin Jr. required a settling tort plaintiff to notify an English court presiding over a claim against another tortfeasor, that it

By Michael C. Silberberg and Edward M. Spiro

13 minute read

February 07, 2008 | New York Law Journal

Edward M. Spiro, a principal of Morvillo, Abramowitz, Grand, Iason, Anello & Bohrer, writes that attorneys often conduct discovery based on habits and assumptions that generally go untested, some of which might not stand up under judicial scrutiny. For example: Can a defendant pose an interrogatory seeking all the facts upon which the plaintiff will rely to prove a particular claim?

By Edward M. Spiro

13 minute read

February 04, 2010 | New York Law Journal

Edward M. Spiro and Judith L. Mogul, principals of Morvillo, Abramowitz, Grand, Iason, Anello & Bohrer, write that, for the recipient, a 30(b)(6) notice carries with it substantial obligations to designate and prepare appropriate witness(es) - obligations the recipient ignores at its peril.

By Edward M. Spiro And Judith L. Mogul

14 minute read

February 01, 2007 | New York Law Journal

Edward M. Spiro, a principal of Morvillo, Abramowitz, Grand, Iason, Anello & Bohrer, writes that there is ample room for a district court to reach into other jurisdictions to prevent foreign litigation which frustrates its jurisdiction, particularly in the context of arbitration of international disputes. But, as the Second Circuit recently stressed, that authority should be used sparingly, and antisuit injunctions must be narrowly tailored to avoid unnecessary interference with foreign proceedings.

By Edward M. Spiro

13 minute read