Joseph D Nohavicka

April 10, 2017 | New York Law Journal

Joseph D. Nohavicka discusses the recent Court of Appeals holding that broadly imposes an affirmative duty on individuals to speak when confronted with an accusation.

By Joseph D. Nohavicka

13 minute read

July 22, 2016 | New York Law Journal

Joseph D. Nohavicka of Pardalis & Nohavicka discusses 'Mazella v. Beals', in which the court determined that it was improper to admit a consent agreement between the defendant doctor and the Office of Professional Medical Conduct, which contained evidence of the doctor's negligent treatment of 12 unrelated patients.

By Joseph D. Nohavicka

26 minute read

March 07, 2016 | New York Law Journal

Joseph D. Nohavicka discusses a recent decision that makes it clear that the Second Circuit will reject the argument that a party has breached an agreement by seeking to vacate an arbitration award.

By Joseph D. Nohavicka

10 minute read

December 04, 2015 | New York Law Journal

Joseph D. Nohavicka analyzes the Court of Appeals' recent decision in 'People v. Durant', writing that because 'Durant' purposely did not decide whether a trial court has the power to deliver an adverse inference instruction to a deliberating jury based on the unique facts of a particular case, defense counsel should at least request an adverse inference instruction where the police have failed to record a custodial interrogation.

By Joseph D. Nohavicka

9 minute read

December 03, 2015 | New York Law Journal

Joseph D. Nohavicka analyzes the Court of Appeals' recent decision in 'People v. Durant', writing that because 'Durant' purposely did not decide whether a trial court has the power to deliver an adverse inference instruction to a deliberating jury based on the unique facts of a particular case, defense counsel should at least request an adverse inference instruction where the police have failed to record a custodial interrogation.

By Joseph D. Nohavicka

9 minute read

April 23, 2015 | New York Law Journal

Joseph D. Nohavicka discusses People v. Guthrie, a constitutional stop case recently decided by the New York State Court of Appeals, which held that mistakes of law by police in New York can provide the basis for a valid traffic stop so long as the mistake is objectively reasonable.

By Joseph D. Nohavicka

10 minute read

April 22, 2015 | New York Law Journal

Joseph D. Nohavicka discusses People v. Guthrie, a constitutional stop case recently decided by the New York State Court of Appeals, which held that mistakes of law by police in New York can provide the basis for a valid traffic stop so long as the mistake is objectively reasonable.

By Joseph D. Nohavicka

10 minute read

April 09, 2014 | New York Law Journal

Joseph D. Nohavicka, a partner in Pardalis & Nohavicka, analyzes a recent decision in which the Court of Appeals ruled that an employer's failure to consider the reasonableness of a proposed accommodation for a generally qualified employee's disability via a good-faith interactive process precludes the employer from obtaining summary judgment.

By Joseph D. Nohavicka

8 minute read

October 23, 2012 | New York Law Journal

Joseph D. Nohavicka, a partner at Mavromihalis Pardalis & Nohavicka, writes that, as advocates, attorneys are required to speak, or write, on behalf of their clients, and there are times when the opportunity for preparation is brief and the attorney is nevertheless thrust into emotionally charged and chaotic environments.

By Joseph D. Nohavicka

12 minute read

August 29, 2013 | New York Law Journal

Joseph D. Nohavicka, a partner at Pardalis & Nohavicka writes: The use of a control contract at trial, colloquially known as a high-low agreement, establishes concrete parameters of maximum exposure for the defendant and a minimum recovery for the plaintiff. However, if clear terms are not employed and the specific scope is not delineated, defined, and understood by all parties to the contract, chaos can ensue.

By Joseph D. Nohavicka

11 minute read