George Bundy Smith

October 19, 2012 | New York Law Journal

In their Commercial Division Update, George Bundy Smith, an arbitrator and mediator with JAMS, and Thomas J. Hall, a partner with Chadbourne & Parke, review recent Commercial Division cases that addressed the assertion of a champerty defense. While most have been cautiously avoiding finding claims champertous, one court recently held that champerty existed where a company and a law firm formed a partnership, the primary purpose of which was to acquire debt instruments and profit from the related litigation.

By George Bundy Smith and Thomas J. Hall

13 minute read

April 19, 2013 | New York Law Journal

In their Commercial Division Update, George Bundy Smith, arbitrator and mediator with JAMS, and Thomas J. Hall, a partner with Chadbourne & Parke, write that New York courts find that, despite a contrary choice of law provision, the law of New York as the forum state governs procedural issues, including statute of limitations, personal jurisdiction and motions for default judgment.

By George Bundy Smith and Thomas J. Hall

12 minute read

August 17, 2012 | New York Law Journal

In their Commercial Division Update, George Bundy Smith, an arbitrator and mediator with JAMS and a former associate judge of the New York Court of Appeals, and Thomas J. Hall a partner with Chadbourne & Parke, write that where an action for breach of contract is otherwise time-barred because the action accrued more than six years earlier, proof of written acknowledgement or partial payment of the underlying debt may renew the statute of limitations as of the date of that acknowledgement or payment.

By George Bundy Smith and Thomas J. Hall

13 minute read

October 18, 2013 | New York Law Journal

In their Commercial Division Update, George Bundy Smith, an arbitrator and mediator with JAMS, and Thomas J. Hall, a partner with Chadbourne & Parke, discuss recent Commercial Division decisions that have followed the First Department's shift toward dismissing unjust enrichment claims even where a contract governing the transaction is unenforceable.

By George Bundy Smith and Thomas J. Hall

12 minute read

February 17, 2012 | New York Law Journal

In their Commercial Division Update, George Bundy Smith, an arbitrator and mediator with JAMS, and Thomas J. Hall, a partner with Chadbourne & Parke, write that a party challenging the validity of a liquidated damages clause thus must prove either that: (1) the amount of anticipated damages was easily ascertainable at the time the contract was formed, or (2) at the time the contract was formed, the liquidated damages amount was grossly disproportionate to the anticipated damages that would be incurred in the event of a breach.

By George Bundy Smith and Thomas J. Hall

13 minute read

August 20, 2009 | New York Law Journal

George Bundy Smith and Thomas J. Hall, partners at Chadbourne & Parke, write that the Commercial Division appears to recognize that the presumption of openness in New York at times conflicts with legitimate needs of commercial litigants who may be required to place sensitive information in court records. The applicable standard, they say, may not fully appreciate that commercial cases usually do not have the broad social impact as do, for example, mass tort cases.

By George Bundy Smith and Thomas J. Hall

16 minute read

October 15, 2010 | New York Law Journal

In their Commercial Division Update, George Bundy Smith and Thomas J. Hall of Chadbourne & Parke write that a recent line of cases reinforces the principle that the New York statute of frauds generally will not bar enforcement of an oral joint venture agreement where the joint venture is terminable at will.

By George Bundy Smith and Thomas J. Hall

11 minute read

February 29, 2008 | New York Law Journal

George Bundy Smith and Thomas J. Hall, partners with Chadbourne & Parke LLP, write that though Stoneridge represents a victory for corporate advisors, it is likely to result in a significant increase in the number of scheme liability claims based on state law theories. While establishing liability under one of these state law theories is hardly impossible, significant obstacles place a heavy burden on New York plaintiffs at both the pleading and evidentiary stages.

By George Bundy Smith and Thomas J. Hall

17 minute read

February 26, 2009 | New York Law Journal

George Bundy Smith, a former Court of Appeals judge, and Thomas J. Hall, partners with Chadbourne & Parke, write that the broad language of CPLR �3213 allows proceedings thereunder to be brought in cases that do not neatly fit the "prototypical" action on a negotiable instrument. Courts are careful, they conclude, to balance the plaintiff's entitlement to this accelerated procedure to avoid protracted litigation, with the defendant's right to have viable defenses heard.

By George Bundy Smith and Thomas J. Hall

15 minute read

April 16, 2010 | New York Law Journal

George Bundy Smith and Thomas J. Hall, partners with Chadbourne & Parke, analyze two recent decisions showing that, despite the history of New York courts' disfavor of claims seeking to pierce the corporate veil, they may be reluctant to grant motions to dismiss such claims at the pleading stage before plaintiffs have the opportunity to seek discovery.

By George Bundy Smith and Thomas J.Hall

8 minute read