John R Higgitt

December 04, 2008 | New York Law Journal

Leon D. Lazer, a retired associate justice of the Appellate Division, Second Department and professor of law at Touro College Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center, and John R. Higgitt, law clerk to associate justice James M. McGuire of the First Department and an adjunct assistant professor of law at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, write that whether the burden of proof for establishing an award of punitive damages is "preponderance of the evidence," the general evidentiary standard of proof in civil actions, or "clear and convincing evidence," the heightened standard of proof that applies to certain issues in civil actions, remains mired in disagreement between the upstate and downstate departments of the Appellate Division.

By Leon D. Lazer and John R. Higgitt

17 minute read

November 01, 2006 | New York Law Journal

John R. Higgitt, law clerk to Associate Justice James M. McGuire, Appellate Division, First Department, reviews the applicability of CPLR 3216, CPLR 3404 and �202.27, examines the legal authority permitting vacatur of laxness dismissals and outlines the showing required to vacate dismissals rendered under each device. Additionally, special attention is paid to certain common deficiencies in papers supporting motions to vacate laxness dismissals.

By John R. Higgitt

14 minute read

October 17, 2005 | New York Law Journal

John R. Higgitt, law clerk to Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Joan B. Carey, reviews the provision of the Civil Practice Law and Rules that affords a party opposing a summary judgment motion the opportunity to obtain evidence that was unavailable by the time opposition papers were due, a seemingly simple provision, but one that can be dangerously seductive.

By John R. Higgitt

14 minute read

May 14, 2009 | New York Law Journal

John R. Higgitt, law clerk to Associate Justice James M. McGuire, Appellate Division, First Department, and an adjunct assistant professor of law at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, as a recent decisions demonstrates, the question of whether a particular action directly affects real property is not always an easy one. A plaintiff who wishes to use the notice of pendency must therefore take pains to draft a complaint that spells out the factual basis of a claim that would support the filing of a notice of pendency, he notes.

By John R. Higgitt

16 minute read