Evan H Krinick

November 06, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Evan H. Krinick, a partner with Rivkin Radler, writes that as the economy continues to struggle, it is likely that employees of major companies may choose to engage in dishonest conduct. When that conduct is discovered, he asserts, companies that have purchased employee fidelity bonds will seek coverage, claiming that their losses were caused by their dishonest employees.

By Evan H. Krinick

11 minute read

July 02, 2010 | New York Law Journal

In his Insurance Fraud column, Evan H. Krinick, a partner with Rivkin Radler, writes: More and more often, federal and state authorities are bringing criminal actions in an effort to stem the multi-billion dollar tsunami of health care fraud, which affects the cost and availability of private and public insurance, that is facing the country and the nation's health care system.

By Evan H. Krinick

9 minute read

July 12, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Evan H. Krinick and Scott A. Eisenmesser, partners with Rivkin Radler, write that trusts and estates lawyers handle a broad range of legal matters that directly affect individuals, their families and their property. Recently, the Appellate Division, Second Department, resolved a number of important legal questions in trusts and estates cases arising on Long Island.

By Evan H. Krinick and Scott A. Eisenmesser

7 minute read

May 09, 2006 | New York Law Journal

Evan H. Krinick, a partner at Rivkin Radler, writes that interesting battles over Long Island real estate continue to reach the Appellate Division, Second Department. Recent cases include a dispute involving waterfront property, a question over whether the successful sale of surplus property at a county auction can be cancelled, and an action to recover damages for breach of contract between a property purchaser and its manager.

By Evan H. Krinick

9 minute read

January 11, 2002 | New York Law Journal

P LAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANTS can be victorious on substantive legal grounds. All too often, however, it seems as if litigants lose by failing to comply with the rules of litigation. Recent decisions by the Appellate Division, Second Department, illustrate how parties who fail to properly prosecute their cases or comply with discovery requests, or who simply default, can doom themselves. Some of these decisions also demonstrate the lengths to which the court system will go in an effort to avoid having a disput

By Evan H. Krinick

8 minute read

April 12, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Evan H. Krinick, a partner with Uniondale's Rivkin Radler, writes that disputes stemming from the proposed sale of Long Island real estate continue to reach the Appellate Division, Second Department, in large numbers.

By Evan H. Krinick

7 minute read

February 14, 2006 | New York Law Journal

Evan H. Krinick, a partner at Rivkin Radler, writes that a number of interesting decisions involving diverse real estate claims on Long Island have recently addressed easements, alleged fraud and forgery, constructive trusts, and specific performance.

By Evan H. Krinick

9 minute read

September 03, 2010 | New York Law Journal

Evan H. Krinick of Rivkin Radler discusses how the existing statutory provision requiring the payment of interest is a strong incentive for insurers to pay valid claims timely whereas the 30-day rule currently is not.

By Evan H. Krinick

11 minute read

December 14, 2004 | New York Law Journal

Evan H. Krinick, a partner with Rivkin Radler, analyzes decisions that resolve issues ranging from contract actions based on medical staff by-laws and standards for granting area variances to attorney's fees in divorce actions and interpretations of two different sections of state law.

By Evan H. Krinick

7 minute read

September 02, 2008 | New York Law Journal

Evan H. Krinick, a partner with Rivkin Radler, writes: If one had to summarize the past term's insurance law decisions in one word, it might be "diverse." The Court of Appeals explored a wide range of issues involving different types of insurance products; ruled in some instances for insurance companies and in others for policyholders; was mostly unanimous but had a number of dissents; affirmed and reversed the Appellate Division equally; and had more judges write more significant insurance law opinions than any term in recent memory.

By Evan H. Krinick

15 minute read